Originally Posted by Boredpayne

Didn't we already go over how stupid isn't directed towards a specific identifiable minority?

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

Why wouldn't they, since you're using them to portray something in a negative light?
Go ahead and tell me "that's so nigger" isn't offensive because you're using it as a generic insult. When you equate a minority with bad, you are insulting that minority.

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

Oh for the love of christ, we both know that's not what they're doing. The obvious goal is to show why BOTH are wrong and to advocate against perpetuating them.

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

You're still laboring under the misconception that they are "using stereotypes against others."
"See how similar x and y are? Both are wrong!" where y is just more of a parallel to the average person.
And your reply is "stop using y to insult others."

In my mind it's sort of deliberately missing the point.

So it's only bad to insult minorities? I wouldn't say stupid people are the majority though...

An insult is only as strong as it's reaction, like I said before, there are insults that are no longer insulting. I definitely don't think "that's so nigger" instantaneously insults every black person in the world.
Person 1: "Damn, just tripped on a rock, that's so nigger"
Black Person: "Holy shit he just called tripping on a rock nigger, so I am as bad as that?? O M G!"
Does this really happen? Maybe it's just that Australia is a chill country, but I cannot imagine anyone reacting like that. Why would someone identify so strongly with a slur that it's a part of their identity, and insulting that slur insults them?

Maybe that's not what they are trying to do, but that is what they are doing. If I shoot a dog ironically, I still shoot a dog.

That may be what they are saying, but on the surface they are just insulting people and expecting them to say "oh I don't like it when the gays insult me, maybe I shouldn't insult them".

Since when has that tactic ever worked ever?

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

It's bad to specifically target individual demographics for traits that are not inherently harmful to others such as sexuality, race, religion, and so on.

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

People are jumped and attacked for using the word nigger out of context. It definitely happens in Australia too. I think you should be judging a statement based on its intrinsic value, not on the reactions of others.
It is the slur itself that insults their identity, because it is crafted for and targeted towards them.

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

Then in this analogy, you're firing a blank. No one is ostracized in real life for being athletic. It has no weight behind it to call someone a jock. It has the weight of historical context and abusive intentions and a systematic culture of discrimination to call someone a nigger. The same is true to a lesser extent for fag.

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

The reaction is supposed to be "oh hey maybe that kind of stereotype hurts others in the same way this could hurt me"

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

Honestly, I'm pretty on the fence about this campaign, but the whole idea that using fag freely is socially acceptable is to me very wrong, and that's what I took issue with in your original post.