An obvious 'phobe. You fit right in with the majority of Star Trek fans.
hmm, lets see what happens when you change just
two words in that sentence;
An obvious buttmonkey. You fit right in with the majority of gays.
now, I don't know about you, but that seems a little bit... prejudiced?
so maybe think a bit more before you start accusing people of being homophobes, ok?
and gosh, I really hope you're a troll...
Beyond Antares' post could no doubt have been better-considered, but I can sort of get where he was coming from and I spoke to that
here, which
ought to have been sufficient.
Now, while it would be unreasonable of me to expect that no one else would want to reply to his post, what I
do not want to see is the sort of would-be backseat moderation exemplified by
WinstonSmith's post above, in which he attempts to school someone he supposes a troll, only to end up looking more than a little trollish himself. One thing I
particularly do not wish to see is a second such example from Mr.
WinstonSmith.
Now, if we could manage to do without personal criticisms of fellow posters and please get back to discussing the topic of Zach Quinto's decision to more openly discuss his sexuality and what impact that might (or might not) have on things?
Sorry
M'sharak, I did not intend to lecture anyone or to make them feel unable to express their own point of view, I was simply offended at being called a homophobe for being a star trek fan. personally, I have no problem with gay people, and I applaud Quinto for coming out, but I find that bandying around the word "homophobe" at any and all occasion in fact makes the whole issue seem
less important. essentially; if a little thing=homophobia, then homophobia=a little thing, or at least it would seem to, something which I believe to be the furthest thing from the truth. And for what it's worth, I actually agree with
Beyond Antares that there is a definite bias towards heterosexual relationships in star trek and in TV and Film in general, and I too hope that changes in the very near future. I just felt that prefacing that message with an inflammatory remark as above was wholly uncalled for and in fact makes people less likely to even
see the real sense of the statement. At the time I was simply angry at being insulted, the result of which was my post above, and I think a lot of other people would be too. It was only afterwards when I read your take on the matter that I actually understood what it was he was trying to say.
I am sorry too to have come across as trolling, I was just reacting too much in haste to a comment that was, to put it mildly, a little bit provocative. I certainly never meant to pass judgement on
Beyond Antares, merely to point out a remark of his that I personally found offensive. I am sure he is a perfectly fine person in all other regards.
I realise I've eaten up a whole post here, which I hope does not come across as a "second example", as I have tried my best to make my reply as civil as I possibly can. the reason I did feel the need to reply was simply to clarify my position in a way that (hopefully) doesn't make me sound like a jerk, but
M'sharak is right that it is definitely more than a little tangential to the thread, and I don't want to piss the mod off any more by sidetracking it or starting a flamewar or somesuch, so I think it would be best if any reply to this post goes to pm.
and once again, I am truly terribly sorry
