"I also think what I was trying to say was, I'm sorry you twisted my accusation of you trolling (a verb) into the idea that I called you a troll (a noun) in an effort to dismiss your opinion and make you an 'Other.' That's where accusations of 'playing the victim card' come from. "
I didn't twist anything, and your efforts here try and shift the focus on nuances of grammar speak volumes of you trying to justify calling me a troll. I stand by my point that this was just to discredit me and make me an Other, and the accusations of playing the victim card are clearly unfounded for reasons I have already elaborated on previously.
"In fact, by trying to label me as a name caller, I almost feel like my opinion is being dismissed and silenced. Don't worry I'm not offended though. "
All you are doing here is taking a valid point of mine and equivocate for your own purposes of knocking over a strawman. First of all, you did call me a troll, which I hope we can agree is a negative term, i.e. name calling (and one that ought not apply to me, as I am not hiding behind anonymity, nor have I resorted to immature tactics that internet trolls are famous for) . Then when I point out the name calling, I obviously hit a nerve, because now look at what you have resorted to. By me pointing out that you called me a troll in no way dismisses your opinion or silences you, it is what it is, which I have already elaborated on.
"It was even more interesting that you deny your post was 'meant to cause argument and controversy,' given that when I suggested you start a new thread as I felt that 'most of what is or you perceive to be negative responses to your posts here are more related to the way you barged into a joke thread bearing the baggage of real life, rather than your actual message.' You say this is a bad idea because 'it may get ignored by the very people that an alternative opinion challenges.'
So let me get this straight, it's important for you to voice your alternative opinion to people it will challenge, but you did not mean to cause argument or controversy?"
You are being either willfully obtuse here, or don't understand the difference between an argument and say, a discussion and/or a debate. Controversy is entirely subjective, so I will skip that, but you do realize that there is a difference between having an honest, open discourse of ideas vs. exchanging angry, insulting posts at each other? Challenging people's perceptions and assumptions does not equal causing arguments and controversy, of course. You're reaching, much like with the whole troll vs. name calling thing, and again it is quite telling.
"Oh also I forgot that I accused you of being rude, funny I don't remember that. Another attempt to dismiss my opinion no doubt. "
This is a false charge. Please tell me exactly where I claim that you accuse me of being rude. More reaching. And simply by repeating this whole "dismiss my opinion" nonsense will not make it true. I think I have made it abundantly clear that I am not dismissing anyone's opinion here--to the contrary, I have given full and detailed rebuttals to anyone that has taken issue with my posts, much like I am doing right now.
"Your ignorance of hypocrisy and trolling aside, what is it your are hoping to accomplish with your posts?"
An ad hominem, and two more false charges. I have already been very clear about my intentions and will not repeat them.
"You clearly recognize the importance of a captive audience --> 'I think that this is exactly the place to have this kind of discussion, where it is immediately relevant.' So what is the message? Is it simply that:
You don't think jokes based on stereotypes are funny?"
No, I never said that. Please read my posts more carefully.
"You think jokes based on stereotypes are not funny and are offensive (but not to you)?"
Again, another mischaracterization. It's about context. My own tolerance of offensive stereotypes (and "offensive" things in general) does not mean that others may be offended or that stereotypes are not accurate reflections of reality, i.e. not all women like shopping and are burdens to men.
"You think jokes based on stereotypes are not funny and are offensive but you respect our right to make them so long as you can voice your dissenting opinion?"
Try again. Having a complex opinion on a complex topic I know can be difficult for some to grasp, but I think if you pay attention to my posts you can do a better job of characterizing my stances on the matter at hand.
"You hope your dissenting opinion will encourage others to not make stereotypical or offensive jokes?"
Obviously not all others. Again: context. Professional comedians (whose political and social views they often make known to the public, it would add) making sophisticated jokes/satire and observations about society that include things like stereotypes that result in challenging the stereotypes themselves is one thing. I have already given several examples of comedians in my posts. Logging onto a backpacking site and finding strangers cracking canned (merits reminder: literally cut and pasted) jokes is another thing altogether. I cannot assume the intentions of the strangers making the jokes because I don't know them nor are they public figures that have made their views known. In contrast, David Cross for example is a leftist comedian that often uses irony to make his points and facilitate his satire. He has used the n-word and the f-word, but it is obvious he is neither racist nor homophobic.
"What would be a perfect world?"
I never aspired to suggest either this question or an answer to it.
"One where no stereotypical jokes were ever told?"
"One where we stopped making them after your first post?"
"One where you convinced us not to make them through several compelling posts illustrating our moral depravity?"
You're trying to smuggle another mischaracterization here and I of course can't let you get away with that. I never suggested anyone was morally depraved.
"One where opinions such as your swelled to such a critical mass that we all felt jokes that were at the expense of someone else were inappropriate? "
"What defines an appropriate joke vs and inappropriate joke? Or funny vs unfunny joke?"
Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think I ever said anything about appropriate vs. inappropriate. Funny vs. unfunny of course is subjective and also depends on context. We would need a specific example to make a determination.
"Forget about jokes, what about everyday sayings? For instance, I'm having a conversation with a group of people about relationships and the importance of our significant other's and in response to someone's anecdote I reply 'happy wife, happy life.' Is that sexist? Was the woman at the table who accused me of being sexist right? (true story) If I had said 'happy partner, happy life' would that have made it an appropriate catch phrase?"
It depends. I was not there so I can't judge, and even if I was there, I don't know you or the people in the group, so I still would not know. Personally, if I heard a group of strangers talking, and one of them said "happy wife, happy life" I wouldn't say anything because I don't know the full context. If it was someone I was friends with and they said it, perhaps I'd ask them what they mean by it, give them a chance to explain. Many of my friends have dark and ironic senses of humor, and among ourselves we will crack jokes that to an outsider might sound as though we were being sexist, racist, homophobic, etc. These conversations are private, for one, and two they rely on context. For example when my radical feminist friends (I have many, for the record) say things like, "But what do I know? I should be in the kitchen cooking." the joke is of course the irony--they don't actually believe in gender roles, nor do I.
"What kind of discussion will satisfy you Cesar?"
Ah ha. You got all existential on me. Dang. I don't know man. What kind of gear list will satisfy you?
"When will you get what you need out of this thread to satisfy yourself and wander off to share your holier than though rhetoric elsewhere?"
Oh, so because I bother to question lame, sexist jokes--I am holier than thou? What a low bar for such a title, and odd for a person that has explicitly stated that they support the right and encourage free speech and dialog.
"Are stereotypical jokes even worthy of your efforts? Surely there are bigger fish for you to fry."
This is an actual good question. Sometimes one feels the need to take a stand, for whatever reason. Obviously I felt the need to focus some of my efforts here, which is fine by me or otherwise I wouldn't have bothered.
But it comes down to this. I really enjoy backpacking and going down the UL path has really made my life happier and better overall. When I log on and check up on cool gear and interesting tips and information, it makes me happy. To have this experience interrupted by lame, sexist jokes was disappointing, so I wanted to try and contribute a semblance of balance to this thread for anyone else that might be on the fence about things or agree with my alternative take on things. And I in the end I am happy I did. I have made people reconsider things, I would hope, and if anything I have been thanked by a few people who are glad I spoke up.
I think as has been said before, the phrase "enough is enough" is apt. If I had it my way, I'd have liked to not see such thread here on BPL. Then again, if I had it my way, I'd have a grand log cabin deep in the woods and mountains of Spain on a huge and pristine piece of land, and with 10 million Euros in the bank. Of course I will not get either wish and I am well aware of that. But I can still do my best. I can contribute to threads I wish had not have interrupted my happy UL daydreaming and get a nice little mental work out of it when I can. And I can continue to take yearly vacations to Spain and take amazing SUL overnight trips.
Maybe one day, there will be less lame, sexist jokes on BPL--or at least others will speak up besides me. And maybe one day, I really will have my own little cottage in Spain--or at least take more vacations there when I am retired.