|
|
Post by themeddlingmonk on Jan 17, 2019 1:06:47 GMT
Same way everyone just ignores Rose telling the Doctor that he’s so gay in Aliens Of London.
It was really not that long ago that that kind of talked was still looked at as socially acceptable. We know better now and you wouldn’t see lines like that these days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 1:12:08 GMT
Same way everyone just ignores Rose telling the Doctor that he’s so gay in Aliens Of London. Sure, but at least Aliens of London was written by RTD, who is gay, there was still some anger over the line at the time, and it was was also far from on the same level of throwing slurs at the literal corpse of a guy for dressing ‘too feminine’. Not really comparable IMO. I mean, I don’t like that line in Aliens of London, but it’s not even close to wing the same level as... this. |
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jan 17, 2019 1:13:22 GMT
Same way everyone just ignores Rose telling the Doctor that he’s so gay in Aliens Of London. It was really not that long ago that that kind of talked was still looked at as socially acceptable. We know better now and you wouldn’t see lines like that these days. Exactly. The context this was used, the line wouldn’t be used or accepted that way. However, I do think that there is an argument that this is acceptable in a clear and cut stand up comedy routine in where it is a punchline, and when a joke doesn’t mean intent, freedom of speech etc. But that’s a can of worms for another time. |
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 17, 2019 1:17:19 GMT
Same way everyone just ignores Rose telling the Doctor that he’s so gay in Aliens Of London. Sure, but at least Aliens of London was written by RTD, who is gay, there was still some anger over the line at the time, and it was was also far from on the same level of throwing slurs at the literal corpse of a guy for dressing ‘too feminine’. Not really comparable IMO. I mean, I don’t like that line in Aliens of London, but it’s not even close to wing the same level as... this. If it matters writer Paul Magrs is also gay. As is, I believe, director Barnaby Edwards. |
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jan 17, 2019 1:17:26 GMT
Same way everyone just ignores Rose telling the Doctor that he’s so gay in Aliens Of London. Sure, but at least Aliens of London was written by RTD, who is gay, there was still some anger over the line at the time, and it was was also far from on the same level of throwing slurs at the literal corpse of a guy for dressing ‘too feminine’. Not really comparable IMO. I mean, I don’t like that line in Aliens of London, but it’s not even close to wing the same level as... this. But you just ignored MM’s second paragraph entirely, and to excuse something you find homophobic etc. because the person who said it/wrote it is part of the minority. I can’t say I agree with that, as if we want equality between genders, races, sexual orientation etc. you either let it all be okay or none of it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 1:18:56 GMT
Sure, but at least Aliens of London was written by RTD, who is gay, there was still some anger over the line at the time, and it was was also far from on the same level of throwing slurs at the literal corpse of a guy for dressing ‘too feminine’. Not really comparable IMO. I mean, I don’t like that line in Aliens of London, but it’s not even close to wing the same level as... this. If it matters writer Paul Magrs is also gay. As is, I believe, director Barnaby Edwards. Paul Magrs isn’t trans tho. Being gay doesn’t give you the right to use transphobic slurs. |
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jan 17, 2019 1:19:48 GMT
Sure, but at least Aliens of London was written by RTD, who is gay, there was still some anger over the line at the time, and it was was also far from on the same level of throwing slurs at the literal corpse of a guy for dressing ‘too feminine’. Not really comparable IMO. I mean, I don’t like that line in Aliens of London, but it’s not even close to wing the same level as... this. But you just ignored MM’s second paragraph entirely, and to excuse something you find homophobic etc. because the person who said it/wrote it is part of the minority. I can’t say I agree with that, as if we want equality between genders, races, sexual orientation etc. you either let it all be okay or none of it. And to that further, like I mentioned earlier, context is everything. In the context of a family show aimed at being inclusive, it’s not the best place to use it, however in a raunchy/offensive comedy setting, if it’s written well, then it should be allowed. |
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 17, 2019 1:22:10 GMT
If it matters writer Paul Magrs is also gay. As is, I believe, director Barnaby Edwards. Paul Magrs isn’t trans tho. Being gay doesn’t give you the right to use transphobic slurs. Was transphobic even a term used when this was written/produced? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 1:22:30 GMT
Sure, but at least Aliens of London was written by RTD, who is gay, there was still some anger over the line at the time, and it was was also far from on the same level of throwing slurs at the literal corpse of a guy for dressing ‘too feminine’. Not really comparable IMO. I mean, I don’t like that line in Aliens of London, but it’s not even close to wing the same level as... this. But you just ignored MM’s second paragraph entirely, and to excuse something you find homophobic etc. because the person who said it/wrote it is part of the minority. I can’t say I agree with that, as if we want equality between genders, races, sexual orientation etc. you either let it all be okay or none of it. I didn’t ‘excuse’ it. I said I didn’t like the line. All I said was that the fact that he’s part of the group that the line ‘targets’ it’s more permissible than a cis person using transphobic slurs for cheap laughs. |
|
|
|
Post by Digi on Jan 17, 2019 1:25:10 GMT
Paul Magrs isn’t trans tho. Being gay doesn’t give you the right to use transphobic slurs. Was transphobic even a term used when this was written/produced? Probably in some quarters, but broadly/in terms of general awareness, almost certainly not. Seems to me it's only really entered the general vocabulary in the last 3 or 4 years. Horror of Glam Rock came out in 2007, likely having been written in mid- to late-2006. |
|
|
|
Post by fingersmash on Jan 17, 2019 1:26:17 GMT
If it is consolation, Nick (and others I believe) have addressed and apologized for this line. I believe Nick's was in an issue of Vortex a couple years ago
|
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 17, 2019 1:27:15 GMT
And as someone who follows Paul Magrs via FB & Instagram, I think he is probably the last person anyone would call transphobic but hey, if you want to judge someone by what is acceptable in 2019 on a single scene from a play he wrote 12 or 13 years ago, go ahead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 1:28:53 GMT
And as someone who follows Paul Magrs via FB & Instagram, I think he is probably the last person anyone would call transphobic but hey, if you want to judge someone by what is acceptable in 2019 on a single scene from a play he wrote 12 or 13 years ago, go ahead. Don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t call Paul Magrs transphobic once in this thread. I called the LINE transphobic. Because that’s what it is. It’s a literal slur. |
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 17, 2019 1:33:03 GMT
And as someone who follows Paul Magrs via FB & Instagram, I think he is probably the last person anyone would call transphobic but hey, if you want to judge someone by what is acceptable in 2019 on a single scene from a play he wrote 12 or 13 years ago, go ahead. Don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t call Paul Magrs transphobic once in this thread. I called the LINE transphobic. Because that’s what it is. It’s a literal slur. It doesn't really matter to me what you are or are not accusing Paul Magrs of being, you are still imposing today's values on something written & produced well over a decade ago. |
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jan 17, 2019 1:33:34 GMT
But you just ignored MM’s second paragraph entirely, and to excuse something you find homophobic etc. because the person who said it/wrote it is part of the minority. I can’t say I agree with that, as if we want equality between genders, races, sexual orientation etc. you either let it all be okay or none of it. I didn’t ‘excuse’ it. I said I didn’t like the line. All I said was that the fact that he’s part of the group that the line ‘targets’ it’s more permissible than a cis person using transphobic slurs for cheap laughs. Fair enough, that was me putting words into your mouth, so apologies on that. I think what I am trying to understand is whether a slur should be more acceptable by the "victim" of it or not? Myself I think it’s a tricky issue and that there is a difference between theoretical and actual application. A good example of this is the N-word. In theory, I think the only way to lessen the is for all people to be allowed to say it, but in the real world, it doesn’t work like that. It’s, whether rightly or wrongly, reserved for people of a darker skin tone. However, there are times where white people saying it should and is acceptable, such is the case of Sam Rockwell in Three Billboards. His character is a flat out racist that believes it is okay to say the N-word. Rockwell doesn’t say it just to say it. It serves a purpose and an appropriate one at that. What I’m saying is these things are all case by case and they can’t be given a one size fits all solution. Sorry if this makes no sense, I am attempting to resepond on my phone. And again sorry for the misrepresentation of what you said. |
|
|
|
Post by Digi on Jan 17, 2019 1:40:31 GMT
Don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t call Paul Magrs transphobic once in this thread. I called the LINE transphobic. Because that’s what it is. It’s a literal slur. It doesn't really matter to me what you are or are not accusing Paul Magrs of being, you are still imposing today's values on something written & produced well over a decade ago. Indeed--context matters. There are a million and one examples of things that are slurs today that were not slurs 10, 20, 50 years ago. Language is not set in stone, it's a living, evolving thing. Give it 30 years and terms in everyday usage today will be horrifyingly offensive to the teenagers of 2049. |
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jan 17, 2019 1:42:10 GMT
It doesn't really matter to me what you are or are not accusing Paul Magrs of being, you are still imposing today's values on something written & produced well over a decade ago. Indeed--context matters. There are a million and one examples of things that are slurs today that were not slurs 10, 20, 50 years ago. Language is not set in stone, it's a living, evolving thing. Give it 30 years and terms in everyday usage today will be horrifyingly offensive to the teenagers of 2049. I think you just summed up my longer post and wrote it better, so all I’ll say is I whole heartedly agree. |
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jan 17, 2019 1:53:08 GMT
It doesn't really matter to me what you are or are not accusing Paul Magrs of being, you are still imposing today's values on something written & produced well over a decade ago. Indeed--context matters. There are a million and one examples of things that are slurs today that were not slurs 10, 20, 50 years ago. Language is not set in stone, it's a living, evolving thing. Give it 30 years and terms in everyday usage today will be horrifyingly offensive to the teenagers of 2049. I get listening/reading/watching something written years ago with 2019 ears. It can be shocking but as noted, context is key and art is always a reflection of when it was created. I think it is important to note what has changed but also feel that outrage is best directed towards what is happening now and how we can move rights & representation forward. |
|
|
|
Post by eric009 on Jan 17, 2019 2:05:09 GMT
A literal slur. it may be but it 's old news if it was something done in last few years then fair enough make a noise about it but 2007, no point kick up the ant's nest, all the ants have left by now
|
|
|
|
Post by fantasticalice on Jan 17, 2019 2:21:44 GMT
As someone who was very involved with drag and trans communities at the time the phrase "t@#££%" was not onlt in common useage at the time as both reference to crossdressers, drag queens, and frequently transfolk themselves. Is it a mistkae in the piece? Yes. But the ignorance of connotations back then and it not bein ok for a teenager from blackpool to say it is different now.
As in now the word is almost exclusively a slur. I am not even sure of transfolk use it anymore.
That said, I am glad to hear there was an apology. But cultural context at the time and widespread non negative useage by 3 separate queer cultures makes it forgivable for the time.
It's one of my favourite 8 and Lucy stories and it does hit me funny. Also, it would have made more sense if it had been used by one of the 1975 folk instead of Lucy. (As in the 70s it was even further removed)
It was actually in really widespread useage in 2006-8 by like I said 3 differnet queer subcultures and many people who really shouldn't have been using the word were not aware of it bein offensive.
Today in 2019 it seems to be almost exclusively a slur.
I am intersexed and identify as fluid and performed as a king back then and the T word was everywhere.
It was also a miserable time for anyone who was born trans, gay, or intersex.
Etymologically the t word fell out of favour because it was used to identify people in a dehumanizing way to the point that nobody was comfortable with hearing the word anymore.
|
|
