Tag: bigots

all about me, blog on blog, civil rights, is it just me?, listen up!, that is so gay, tragic, venting, well?, wtf?!

Yelp: a(nother) soapbox for bigots?

by  •  • 15 Comments

Imagine my surprise when someone requested to be friends with me on Yelp today, and I find out that he is writing extremely hurtful and bigoted remarks about me in one of his “reviews”. Not only did he post the review, but after it was taken down, he was allowed to remain member of Yelp, AND, re-posted a similar version of the review just a few minutes later.

Here’s what he said (the first time around), in “response” to my review of my experience at Green’s Liquor store:

After reading Duane M. review of Green’s Beverage Store, I had to fire back. I visit Green’s Beverage store once or twice a month. Everyone there has always been very nice and helpful.
However, I have never carried a purse and I don’t understand why a man would. You said you are not a woman, but after reading all your reviews you sure do act and bitch like a woman. Come on, we all know that someone that wants to homosexualize America likes to pretend that he is a woman. Perhaps Duane should take the dildo out of his ass!! Fucking pussys like you make me sick. When you choose to suck another man’s dick or take some guys cock up your ass, you become a 2nd class citizen. You have no right to ever bitch. Please keep your mouth shut and get back into the closet.
hmmmm, and you wonder why most of America hates gays.

So eloquent. Let’s look at the face of a true bigot, and oh so clearly one of the highest forms of complete and total asshole, Jake P. of Dacula, GA, shall we:


Just take it in… all that asshole-ishness is almost too much to contain. By the way, nice lip gloss, Jake.

Now, the review was flagged, and eventually taken down, and I didn’t even know about it until I randomly read this thread. However, Yelp allowed him to post another review, very similarly filled hate speech as the first one:

After reading Duane M. review that he likes to dress up like a woman and wants to homesexualize American, I had to do something. I go into Green’s a few times a month and everyone is very nice and helpful.
But, Duane with his fag bag is acting like a little bitchy woman.
Perhaps if Duane got his dildo out of his ass, all of America would be a better place to live in. Duane what you wrote about Green’s was pure hateful, you being a little light in the loafers should understand what is it to be hated.
You are not a woman, your worse. Your a 2nd class citizen, start acting like one.

That second review was even better, Jake flexes his superior knowledge of all things grammar (um, it’s you’re, sweetness, not your).

While this will probably be taken down as well (I’m fairly certain it has of this posting), I can’t help but question why Yelp would allow someone like this to remain a member of their site? As a member of Yelp for YEARS, I was honestly considering deleting everyone of my reviews and publicly declaring myself against their organization; especially because they did not initially seem to have much concern for their members (if only because this guy was allowed to go on posting hate speech, even after he was “punished” for doing it the first time). Not only am I extremely offended by the bigot that was allowed to spread his hate about me without any repercussion (on a public website that I am willingly a part of), but I am even more upset that they there was very slow response to one member of their site clearly gay bashing another (my point being that he was allowed to continue using the site with no restriction).

Well, I sent this post to the Atlanta Ambassador for Yelp, and I got an answer and a clear and expected response, and they are taking care of it. That is a major plus in the Yelp column. As I mentioned above, I considered severing ties with Yelp, because I have had enough people call me a faggot to my face during my lifetime, to continue supporting a web service that just gives someone the platform to do it to me on the internet. However, because of Yelp’s positive and proactive actions, I will not go that far. HOWEVER, and that is a BIG however, I still think that people like this should be banned from the site after a post as bad as his was; 3 strikes is clearly 2 too many with things like this. A first offense of this nature should not be tolerated. If you are clearly bashing another member of the site, do you really deserve a chance to keep contributing? It honestly destroys my hope for humanity when people like this rear their ugly heads, and spread their hatred for all to see.

UPDATE: BANNED. Yelp wins. AWESOME. Thank you YELP!!! I really makes me happy that Yelp takes things like this seriously.

Yeah, you’re right… being gay isn’t all that bad anymore. Being second class isn’t that big of a deal. Things are just swell for us, and we should stop complaining. RIIIIGHT.

hmm interesting, is it just me?, listen up!, mixed media, movie musings, that is so gay, venting, well?

family values, or neoconservative propaganda?

by  •  • 9 Comments

Yesterday morning, before work, I got a call from a solicitor. When I answered the phone, the lady on the other end asked for the woman of the house. I informed her there was no woman of the house, and that the man of the house was speaking. She then went into her scripted speech about her cause; the Dove Foundation. She asked me questions about whether I was concerned about the “lack” of “family” oriented movies that are being produced by Hollywood. I told her no. Shocked, because she said “oh”, she continues to throw “facts” at me about how many more R rated movies are produced, and how there aren’t enough “family” oriented films being produced at the same rates. She then asked if I was concerned that this gap was so disparate, and asked why I thought it was. I then told her that movies are made to make profits; Hollywood makes movies that will sell, and it is less about family entertainment, and more about profit margins. Again, I got an “oh”. All in all, I listened to her spiel, I was polite, and our call ended with the traditional no three times rule (which is really annoying by the way).

As I got to thinking about the call, and after investigating the foundation, I felt the need to post about it, because I had some thoughts I wanted to express. First of all, I thought it was odd that she would initially ask for the woman of the household. Perhaps this foundation believes that it is the mother, not the father, who has the job of protecting and representing the “family” values that the Dove Foundation so solidly wants? Or maybe she just wanted to talk to a woman, either way, it was something to think about.

After investigating the website, and their justifications for backing one film, and not backing another, I found it to be pretty inconsistent with regards to violence and representations of “family”. Take for instance, they approved Spiderman 3 (which is no doubt, a violent film), but did not approve Pirates of the Caribbean, citing that Pirates was too violent. Now, I don’t see a need for an organization to approve or disapprove a film because of the level of clearly fictionalized violence, because if you are a parent, you should be intelligent enough to know that each of these films holds the potential to be violent, and as such, may be inappropriate for children; especially considering that each of these films are rated PG-13. If you lack this sort of filtering mechanism, well, I don’t really know what to say other than, wow, you are pretty willfully ignorant, so it probably doesn’t matter to you what your kids watch, does it?

But the violence inconsistency wasn’t what got my goat; it was the disapproval for movies that represented anything that wasn’t the judeo-christian “norm” of family (again, with inconsistency). I looked up three films that I thoroughly enjoy and own, all of which are rated PG-13: Best in Show, Rent, and De-Lovely. I picked these films, because I had a hunch that a film that portrayed gays in a positive light would not be approved by the “family”-centered foundation. I was correct. Each film was shot down, and here are some of the descriptions that were used as to why they were not approved:

Best in Show:

Content Description: Sex: picture of gay man in strange outfit, baring his bare bottom; two men kiss briefly; two women, outing their attraction for each other, kiss passionately; one woman has been sexually promiscuous in her past; the discourse coming form the gay couple is peppered with references to homosexuality – three other sexually based dialogues.

Rent:

RENT As you can tell from the above synopsis, this is NOT a family-friendly film. Like it or not, it is a peek into the underground world of drugs and homosexuality among a group of friends on the streets of New York at the “End of the Millennium.” Don’t let the singing fool you, this is serious stuff. Be prepared to see same-sex kissing, crude and suggestive dancing, cross-dressing, prostitution, drug addiction and withdrawal, and the effects of AIDS. The homosexual lifestyle is portrayed as acceptable and supported by family and friends.

and finally, De-Lovely:

De-Lovely has much to offer both musically and dramatically. And in a day when Christians are faced with pressures to consider homosexuality an acceptable lifestyle, De-Lovely may be worth seeing and discussing simply because it approaches the topic without being terribly graphic. It includes males dancing and kissing as well as implied sexual encounters. The film promotes the claim that homosexuals, like heterosexuals, are simply searching for love in their own way. Unfortunately, appropriate moral commentary is absent from this film, making it impossibel (this was taken from the site, as is) for awarding it the Dove Seal. The film adds crude and profane language.

What I see as something that IS consistent, is a disdain for anything that portrays homosexuals in a positive manner, or anything that shows the acceptance of homosexuality as a part of someones life. That disgusts me, especially because they rest on the laurels of promoting “family” values. This says to me, as a gay man, that I do not represent family values because I am gay and proud of who I am. This says that my friends, who are a lesbian couple with three children, are not a family, because they represent a positive example of a homosexual couple successfully raising children. That is religious propaganda, and should be called out for what it is. If you want to say that you promote family values, then promote happiness, safety, love, compassion, togetherness, and other positive values that would be fitting for any family to strive for. If you want to prevent children from being exposed to these “crude” representations of actual life, that I totally understand, as I would never take my child to see any of these films. BUT, that doesn’t mean that these films don’t contain elements of normalcy, decency, and representations of family, love, happiness, and life. To deny that, and to say that you don’t approve, represents ignorance, and more importantly, participation in a neoconservative propaganda campaign against homosexuality, and frankly, sexuality all together. That is a scary thing, especially considering the rate at which young people are being affected by AIDS these days; ignorance will make it worse.

Finally, I also found it interesting how much praise was given to the story of a father and son, which begins with a pretty jarring representation of mass murder, where the mother and all but the one son are brutally killed (even though it is implied and not explicitly shown). What movie to I speak of? Why, Finding Nemo of course!! What I find disturbing about their strong approval of this film, is that I personally know that there are several children that are traumatized by the beginning scene that I speak of, so much so, that if they would have been taken to see this Dove approved film in the theater, the parents would have been forced to take them outside because of the trauma and crying that would ensue. Forgetting that intensely jarring detail that happens at the beginning of the film seems pretty negligent of this organization, in my opinion.

Perhaps this organization would be better served by trying to make more films that it deems positive, and spend less time trying to denigrate other films that represent alternative facets of society. By doing what they are doing, they are proving that not only are their “values” inconsistent in several cases, but they are taking a positive effort to provide “family safe” entertainment, and hiding it under a religious, neoconservative, hate-filled propaganda campaign. So I say, don’t turn your positive into a negative; if you really want “family safe” entertainment, exercise a level of intelligence when taking your kids to the movies. Unlike what they are saying, there isn’t a lack of “family” movies at all, and damning all the ones that they don’t approve of is distracting from their cause (if that really is their cause).