Is this homophobic?

[The Grand Nudger]

Keeping with habit I'll blurt my opinion out first and then go see what everyone else tells you.

No, it wasn't homophobic.  The humor only relies on the idea that a homosexual living as such (and without medical intervention) will not have produced a son.  No slight toward gays implied in that.

Do you think that's an accurate implication.....or an expression of bias and ignorance that gets a pass because "it's just a joke"?

---

To highlight why subtle forms of prejudice can express themselves innocuously and even amusingly, what if the comment had been "I wish his mother had embraced miscegeny sooner" - the implication being that mixed babies were aborted more frequently and did not rise to prominent positions.

Neither joke is based in a factual appraisal, both..however, are based in reenforcing a stereotype. One many of us will immediately identify and rail against. The other is more subtle, more acceptable. Both, at least to someone, would be hilarious.

:raises hand:

[Whateverist]

Keeping with habit I'll blurt my opinion out first and then go see what everyone else tells you.

No, it wasn't homophobic.  The humor only relies on the idea that a homosexual living as such (and without medical intervention) will not have produced a son.  No slight toward gays implied in that.

Do you think that's an accurate implication.....or an expression of bias and ignorance that gets a pass because "it's just a joke"?

---

To highlight why subtle forms of prejudice can express themselves innocuously and even amusingly, what if the comment had been "I wish his mother had embraced miscegeny sooner" - the implication being that mixed babies were aborted more frequently and did not rise to prominent positions.

Neither joke is based in a factual appraisal, both..however, are based in reenforcing a stereotype.  One many of us will immediately identify and rail against.  The other is more subtle, more acceptable.  Both, at least to someone, would be hilarious.

:raises hand:

It strikes me as the most plausible explanation.  I don't think it is indicative of homophobia any more than some stupid joke that played off of a darker skinned person being harder to see in the dark would necessarily indicate racism.  Both would be crude and in poor taste, but I don't being homophobic or racist would necessarily be indicated.  Could be though.

[paulpablo]

Keeping with habit I'll blurt my opinion out first and then go see what everyone else tells you.

No, it wasn't homophobic.  The humor only relies on the idea that a homosexual living as such (and without medical intervention) will not have produced a son.  No slight toward gays implied in that.

Do you think that's an accurate implication.....or an expression of bias and ignorance that gets a pass because "it's just a joke"?

---

To highlight why subtle forms of prejudice can express themselves innocuously and even amusingly, what if the comment had been "I wish his mother had embraced miscegeny sooner" - the implication being that mixed babies were aborted more frequently and did not rise to prominent positions.

Neither joke is based in a factual appraisal, both..however, are based in reenforcing a stereotype.  One many of us will immediately identify and rail against.  The other is more subtle, more acceptable.  Both, at least to someone, would be hilarious.

:raises hand:

What stereotype is that re enforcing?  That men in a homosexual lifestyle don't often impregnate women, especially not the same women they would have impregnated in an alternate reality where they didn't embrace a homosexual lifestyle?


RIP comedy, shot in the back by SJW bullshit.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't think it was homophobic, and yes, I did laugh. It didn't traffic in stereotype, it didn't denigrate gays as a group, it didn't feature slurs. All it did was use what is, after all, the defining characteristic of gay men (they don't often fuck women) in order to deliver a somewhat witty rejoinder.

Question: When Edwin Edwards was running for governor of Louisiana back in the 80s, at one point he quipped to a reporter "The only way I can lose this election is to be caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy." Was that homophobic?

[The Grand Nudger]

What stereotype is that re enforcing?  That men in a homosexual lifestyle don't often impregnate women,

Yeah..that one...or did you not know that gay men -very- often have children........and that those who don't still want them about as much as any other guy?

especially not the same women they would have impregnated in an alternate reality where they didn't embrace a homosexual lifestyle?


RIP comedy, shot in the back by SJW bullshit.

"What's homophobic about that?" Aint nobody said it wasn't funny, jackass, lol. It's more funny for hearing you wonder what might be homophobic about it when it wears it's ignorance on it's sleeve as a way to -be- funny.....same as any racist joke that would have you here asking the same question with one change of word.

---

Question: When Edwin Edwards was running for governor of Louisiana back in the 80s, at one point he quipped to a reporter "The only way I can lose this election is to be caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."  Was that homophobic?

Nope - but it;s only funny because it explicitly references comical, actual, homophobia.  Pretty good line though, and true. I have to ask....in retrospect, he get caught with either?

---

 Both would be crude and in poor taste, but I don't being homophobic or racist would necessarily be indicated.  Could be though.

-it doesn;t take a racist or homophobic person to tell a racist or homophobic joke.  We're all, obviously, capable.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Question: When Edwin Edwards was running for governor of Louisiana back in the 80s, at one point he quipped to a reporter "The only way I can lose this election is to be caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."  Was that homophobic?

Nope - but it;s only funny because it explicitly references comical, actual,  homophobia.  Pretty good line though, and true.  I have to ask....in retrospect, he get caught with either?

Nope, but like so many LA politicians, he did get caught with his hand in the cookie jar and did time for it.

[paulpablo]

What stereotype is that re enforcing?  That men in a homosexual lifestyle don't often impregnate women,

Yeah..that one...or did you not know that gay men -very- often have children........and that those who don't still want them about as much as any other guy?

especially not the same women they would have impregnated in an alternate reality where they didn't embrace a homosexual lifestyle?


RIP comedy, shot in the back by SJW bullshit.

"What's homophobic about that?"  Aint nobody said it wasn't funny, jackass, lol.  It's more funny for hearing you wonder what might be homophobic about it when it wears it's ignorance on it's sleeve as a way to -be- funny.....same as any racist joke that would have you here asking the same question with one change of word.  

I don't know who you're quoting but I didn't ask what's homophobic about it.  I didn't wonder.  I said it isn't homophobic, so did everyone else who voted in the poll.

The joke isn't about if gay men can have children or want children, it's that in embracing homosexuality the mans father wouldn't have impregnated his mother and he wouldn't have been born.

Which is not ignorant or homophobic in anyway.

I didn't claim you didn't find the joke funny.

[midgetjesusveganslayer666]

There's a controversy that has kicked off recently in my local politics about whether an insulting tweet made by a political commentator was simply cruel or deliberately homophobic. Because the politics surrounding it are so polarised, it's impossible to get an objective reaction because everybody has taken sides with their "team". I know what I think about it, and I think I'm being honest with myself, but you can never fully remove your own biases.

I come to you looking for an honest, impartial assessment. 
I'm going to tell you what happened, with all the politics removed, leaving just the core details. 

Here's the story:
Person A is a prominent, high-ranking politician. He was until a couple of years ago married with (adult) children, that is, until he came out as homosexual.
Person B is his adult son, also a prominent politician, in the same political party as his father.

Person B was recently delivering a long, boring televised speech to his party conference. A Blogger, watching the speech, tweeted the following:

"Person B is the sort of public speaker that makes you wish his dad had embraced his homosexuality sooner."

The Blogger has subsequently been attacked by his political opponents and labelled as "homophobic" for the comment. He argues that, while a deliberately insulting joke, it was in no way homophobic.



Questions
How do you react to that?
Do you think it's funny?
Do you think it's in poor taste?
Do you think that was a homophobic comment? If so, why?



I would really love to hear some impartial feedback on this to help shape my own thinking.

no its not

[Rev. Rye]

Honestly, the first time I read it, I assumed it meant that "maybe if he came out of the closet sooner, his son might have learned to be less of a jackass." Then again, if he went back far enough, he wouldn't even exist.

Either way, I don't consider it homophobic.

[FFaith]

No, it's not homophobic or heterophobic. Maybe Christianophobic or Evangelicalphobic or homophobeophobic or something like that, but I thought it was funny and think it was a completely appropriate joke. Now, if it was something about a gun nut deserving to die for being a gun nut, that's a bit fucked, but this is about someone never coming to exist, not someone dying.

Edit - Looks like I read OP wrong. For some reason I thought the person wanted them not to be born because the politician is homophobic, but now that I go back and read it again, I see no mention of the politician being a homophobe. Still nothing wrong with the joke though.