March 23rd, 2011
|03:23 pm - Why I seriously hate people|
Someone put out an app for the iPhone which would cure you of being gay. In theory, you could go online to Apple's store and buy an app to cure you of being gay.
(Frankly, I thought it was a pretty good chance for a practical joke or two -- download it onto someone else's iPhone and watch the sparks fly, right?)
Someone complained and managed to get around 150,000 people to bitch, whine, and moan at Apple about this app. Presumably, the complaint was that you can't cure homosexuality and that it was offensive to gay people.
So Apple decided to pull it on that basis. And at that moment, I found a new hatred for people.
Seriously -- is that all it takes? Get 150k people to agree with you that an app WHICH YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR AND DOWNLOAD AND NOT DELETE is offensive? I bet there's at least that many people who think that being gay is offensive. I guess grinder should get pulled too?
News flash: Some people believe different things than you do. They're every bit as entitled to those beliefs as you are. What gives you the right to ride roughshod over their beliefs? Is there a quality to your indignancy which makes the offense you feel to be a right?
No. There isn't. You're just another sad, stupid human being who has no more right to force people to think a certain way.
I remember a certain quotation from Martin Niemoller:
First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Am I blowing this out of proportion by quoting a pastor who was talking about the Nazi holocaust? Maybe I'm just sensitive to this because I suspect that I could easily offend 150,000 people. In fact, by defending the ability for people to post an app, I'm likely offending at least that many people right now.
I wholly believe in your right to have intercourse in whatever way you'd like with whoever's willing. But right now, I hate the people who perceive this as a triumph for gay rights rather than a tragedy for human rights.
I don't know. that app is kind of discriminatory and discrimination is often against the law so I can understand why it was pulled. It's like if an app was created to spot a Jew. That'd get pulled immediately.
|Date:||March 23rd, 2011 10:35 pm (UTC)|| |
that's a good way to put it.
There's already an app out there called "Grinder". You turn it on and use it to find other gay people (who are self-identifying by running the app).
To my knowledge, that has not been pulled.
Those apps are hardly analogous, though.
I consider the apps analogous in that one is made to be usable by gay people (who presumably believe that there's nothing wrong with being gay). Its persistent propagation presumably promotes that point of view.
The app which I'm mentioning expresses the view that one oughtn't be gay. In spite of what seems to me to be extremely limited utility, people have claimed that it's offensive because it promotes an "anti-gay" view (and bear with me -- I'm using "anti-gay" as shorthand for "people who believe that being gay is unhealthy or immoral").
I'd bet that anti-gay people would find the Grinder app offensive. Would you support Apple if they removed the Grinder app for this reason?
Replace "gay" with "black" - would you still be angry?
In the event that an app offered to cure someone of being black? More power to the author -- I would still be angry with Apple. In fact -- let's make this especially ridiculous. Let's say it supported some pseudo-scientific concept that by producing electromagnetic radiation, it would lighten your skin. I absolutely hate pseudo-science in all its forms.
But in spite of that, I explicitly support the right of people to say things regardless of whether or not I agree with them. In this particular case, I support that right especially because I disagree with them.
Someone who bought that app would have to withstand my ire. I'd be quite annoyed at them for an unwillingness to educate themselves.
But I would never seek to stop them from being able to buy it.
Ok then, how do you feel about someone being able to buy a copy of Mein Kampf? Perhaps the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Does its presence on a bookshelf somewhere offend you? Do you believe that it should be pulled?
If an app was created to spot a Jew, I'd be OK with it. It would probably be a hilarious conglomeration of stereotypes.
I don't consider that offensive because those books are considered historical literature. There is nothing worthy that app brings to anyone.
Presumably, it would allow someone to learn to not be gay. This is something that apparently there's a market for. If there wasn't, then someone wouldn't bother paying Apple for the privilege of listing it in the iPhone store.
It's a cop out to claim that they're historical anti-semitic texts. For one thing, there are still people who claim that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are still factual. For another, there was a time when neither of those books were historical literature. Would you have supported their availability at the time?
I'd sincerely hope you would. It's part of our right of free speech. The right to express hateful things in a non-violent way has even been upheld in various court cases (ACLU vs. Skokie, IL, for example).
Now it's fair to say that putting an app up for sale in the iPhone store is not a right. And it's that fact which actually makes this situation more telling -- it's a question of whether or not you believe in the philosophy behind the first amendment completely apart from our legal system.
An awful lot of people are happy to support the right of free speech when the person in question is saying something that they agree with (cf. the reversal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"), but they rarely support the ability of people to say things that they don't agree with.
It's not a sign of a sick society to have people expressing unpopular views. It's a sign of a sick society to repress those views.
At the time they were published I would not have a choice in supporting them because it was more acceptable to be anti semetic. Even so, at the time of publication they had detailed information and were presented factually (though if they are remains to be seen).
I don't have a problem with free speech, but hate speech is against the law. I don't think that the app qualifies as hate speech, but it is discriminatory. It is not illegal to publish discriminatory text as a book so I am wondering how it different with electronic software.
At the time they were published I would not have a choice in supporting them because it was more acceptable to be anti semetic.
And that's a cop-out for the same reason.
I don't think that the app qualifies as hate speech, but it is discriminatory. It is not illegal to publish discriminatory text as a book so I am wondering how it different with electronic software.
I take a hard line on this -- I actually think that hate speech is OK, but I'm willing to accept that's an extreme view.
I'm sure that if anyone tried to prosecute that app as hate speech. This is well outside of legal circles which is why it's even more telling to me. This is a matter of principle and the principle that people demonstrate repeatedly is a willingness to use whatever means are necessary to gag anyone who disagrees with them.
|Date:||March 23rd, 2011 10:34 pm (UTC)|| |
it's less about someone "forcing someone to think a certain way" & more about not standing idly by while someone DOES think a certain way. both sides will always be protested. if it's Gay vs HateGay, i can see a big company like apple going "OKAY LET'S KNOCK OFF THE HATE IF GAY IS UPSET, for a loss of Gay's money would be greater than the loss of this HateGay ap's revenue."
yes, i agree it's about human rights, not GAY rights, but i also don't care about the semantics of it.
now go ahead & make a joke about apple/fruit/gay.
Both sides will be protested and -- to me -- both sides have an equally valid assertion that they're right.
I neither believe in a God, nor do I believe in doing a guy. But hey, people can do either with my blessing.
As I've said before, I think it's unquestionably wrong and lame of people to persecute others for their beliefs. It's very simple: We all believe crazy things -- what makes you think your set of crazy things is less crazy than mine?
As long as we're not hurting anyone, then what's the big deal? Let them say it's wrong to do a guy. Let them say that it's OK to do a guy. Let them say that there's Jedi knights in the far reaches of the galaxy who fight tribbles which bite you and implant eggs in your stomach which hatch.
As soon as you say otherwise, you're claiming to be an arbiter. Neither you, I, nor Apple are qualified to make that call.
|Date:||March 24th, 2011 01:24 am (UTC)|| |
but apple is very qualified to say "we want money".
... and here am I, who likes to think of herself of being rather pro gay rights and all of that, thinking 'caveat emptor'. I mean, it's sorta like me buying an app to cure migraines and expecting it to work, right? Granted, I can see where the offense would come in, but if Apple would hope to have gay-friendly apps (and sorry, I'm very anti-Apple so I wouldn't know), they would have to realize that in all fairness they need an open market and as long as it's not breaking any laws to let the buyer decide if they want to pay money for the thing or not.
The whole sanitizing thing goes both way, so I see your point.
Top Gear informed me that there is a gay friendly app called "Grinder". You run it and people who also have it on can use it to find other people who claim to be gay.
So yeah, while it's not as strong as 'you're trying to say there's something wrong with being gay and that they need to be 'fixed'', I can easily imagine an argument that the other side could come up with against such an app as that. Slippery slopes indeed.
Is it me or do people need to get better hobbies?
People do need better hobbies, but I don't think anyone will ever tire of compelling someone they disagree with in some way or another to STFU.
I can't really argue on that point. I gleefully yell at people until they change their mind or run screaming. Arguing can be a fun pastime when you're winning.
Still, I try to limit my expressions of opinion to pseudo-thoughtful posts on the internet where everyone is free to denounce or ignore me as a crank. 8)
well, my reaction to this news is mixed.
for one, i wasn't actually offended or particularly threatened by the existence of this app. i just thought it was kind of dumb and the sort of thing someone would probably attempt to destroy himself with. and good riddance.
it being removed doesn't fill me with a sensation of joy, either, though. like i said, i didn't care.
i am mildly freaked out by the precedent, though. if a large group of people decided something i liked/did/was happened to be unacceptable to them, are all my likes going on the chopping block? is it that easy?
god, this is why all the shows i like get cancelled!
i also find it HILARIOUS that you even know what grindr is.
They mentioned it on Top Gear.
It is information that has not improved my life.
god, this is why all the shows i like get cancelled!
Oh man -- I hadn't made that connection! That's terrible!