Nevermind He’s Back

[Blue4130]

49 minutes ago, Arika said:

that is one hell of a generalization, actual """racist, homophobic farm boys""" are/were the majority of the population? and all of them (or at least a large majority of them) use/d twink as a derogatory term?....

 

It's fine that you don't believe me, but unless you have spent time here, I don't think you are qualified to determine what is and isn't used as a derogatory term here.

[Rocketdog2112]

I find it funny that a group can use a term within their circle, but let an outside group use that same term or reference and it is automatically deemed derogatory by the first group. 

 

Next thing you know, the outside group are now being referred to by the first group in a derogatory manner as racist homophonic farm boys. 

 

[wanderingfool2]

16 hours ago, SansVarnic said:

Is there a point of relevance to this? [asking for a friend]

You know there is a general issue in regards to the joke being made in it...having looked at it a bit.

 

The biggest issue I can see is that there doesn't seem to be any indication he is opening gay, where some bios on him seem to imply he is married to a woman (but overall has kept her out of the lime light).  So it's effectively judging someone on their looks, and essentially stereotyping him into a category.

 

I in general also have a bit of disdain towards jokes in regards to meeting "quotas" of minority groups.  Imagine if you were a minority and hear jokes that you got to where you are because of your minority status.  It's a real thing, it happens, and being on a receiving end that joke isn't pleasant; but as a society allowing those kinds of jokes as acceptable just fuels real world negativity where the talking point is "only got the job because of xyz" [even if they are the most qualified candidate and even if the company hires based on quality]...especially since as well it is something that actually happens as well.

 

2 hours ago, Blue4130 said:

It's fine that you don't believe me, but unless you have spent time here, I don't think you are qualified to determine what is and isn't used as a derogatory term here.

Yea, where I grew up in BC I heard that term almost exclusively in the negative context...but also gay was used in a negative context (although twink was I think more of an accusatory "somethings wrong with you freak" kind of way so in general used as a worse insult).  With that said, I think context matters a lot in regards to whether or not it's used as an insult really.

[Neroon]

On 11/23/2023 at 3:24 PM, SansVarnic said:

Is there a point of relevance to this? [asking for a friend]

That calling someone gay is very unprofessional and calling them specifically a twink, is just unacceptable. He is not their buddy, the audience won't know if it's a joke, it has no added value, and just ends up sounding homophobic. Maybe you don't care. By all means skip the thread if you don't care. Otherwise the point should be obvious by reading the first post in this thread.

 

 

Anyhoo. Tagging @RILEYISMYNAME

[RILEYISMYNAME]

Just to maintain context, here's the line in question 

Quote

an entirely new board - with the exception of Adam D'Angelo, who will remain to represent the views of the former board and to maintain OpenAI leadership's all-important skinny twink quota.

 

I review / edit every TL/GL script. Jessica wrote this line, and I approved it. I can understand why someone might take issue with it. It might give someone the impression that Adam D'Angelo is gay. If he's not(after a few minutes looking online I couldn't find any info about this), then it could, potentially, offend Adam himself or other members of the gay community. 

 

But while the word "twink" usually refers to someone who is gay, it's often been used, for comedic purposes, to refer to non-gay-men who would otherwise qualify. I'm definitely more familiar with gay comedy tropes than the average straight-white-cis-heteronormative-etc-male, and I am 97% confident that calling a possibly-straight person a "twink" as a joke is fine.

 

As evidenced by the division in this thread, I don't think think it's a given that using the term in this way, comedically, is widely viewed as derogatory. It's certainly not an insult - just a descriptive term, like "redhead". 

 

BUT - If you don't find this funny, well, that's absolutely fine! Comedy is subjective. 

[SansVarnic]

On 11/23/2023 at 3:17 PM, Skipple said:

Simply commentary on the lastest LMG video. There isn't a dedicated thread for separate non-LTT videos.

On 11/24/2023 at 1:20 AM, wanderingfool2 said:

You know there is a general issue in regards to the joke being made in it...having looked at it a bit.

 

The biggest issue I can see is that there doesn't seem to be any indication he is opening gay, where some bios on him seem to imply he is married to a woman (but overall has kept her out of the lime light).  So it's effectively judging someone on their looks, and essentially stereotyping him into a category.

 

I in general also have a bit of disdain towards jokes in regards to meeting "quotas" of minority groups.  Imagine if you were a minority and hear jokes that you got to where you are because of your minority status.  It's a real thing, it happens, and being on a receiving end that joke isn't pleasant; but as a society allowing those kinds of jokes as acceptable just fuels real world negativity where the talking point is "only got the job because of xyz" [even if they are the most qualified candidate and even if the company hires based on quality]...especially since as well it is something that actually happens as well.

 

Yea, where I grew up in BC I heard that term almost exclusively in the negative context...but also gay was used in a negative context (although twink was I think more of an accusatory "somethings wrong with you freak" kind of way so in general used as a worse insult).  With that said, I think context matters a lot in regards to whether or not it's used as an insult really.

On 11/24/2023 at 1:12 PM, Neroon said:

That calling someone gay is very unprofessional and calling them specifically a twink, is just unacceptable. He is not their buddy, the audience won't know if it's a joke, it has no added value, and just ends up sounding homophobic. Maybe you don't care. By all means skip the thread if you don't care. Otherwise the point should be obvious by reading the first post in this thread.

 

 

Anyhoo. Tagging @RILEYISMYNAME

My comment was rhetorical.

 

[divito]

I'm irritated that descriptive terms used for comedic purposes is the source of this discussion, and not the actual news. Sub "twink" for almost any other descriptive, would you still be offended? I'm curious to the psychology of those choosing to take offense. Being gay or a twink is not a negative thing, and if you think it is, then you probably need a hard look in the mirror and speak to a mental professional.

 

[Blue4130]

16 minutes ago, divito said:

I'm irritated that descriptive terms used for comedic purposes is the source of this discussion, and not the actual news. Sub "twink" for almost any other descriptive, would you still be offended? I'm curious to the psychology of those choosing to take offense. Being gay or a twink is not a negative thing, and if you think it is, then you probably need a hard look in the mirror and speak to a mental professional.

 

If the word substituted was k**k, the n word, f*g or others, would you be ok with that also?

[wanderingfool2]

54 minutes ago, divito said:

I'm irritated that descriptive terms used for comedic purposes is the source of this discussion, and not the actual news. Sub "twink" for almost any other descriptive, would you still be offended? I'm curious to the psychology of those choosing to take offense. Being gay or a twink is not a negative thing, and if you think it is, then you probably need a hard look in the mirror and speak to a mental professional.

 

There isn't anything wrong about being gay, but the issue is if it's used in a joking sense the concept of using it as a joke is an issue.  Like I said in my post, lots of people when I grew up would use twink in a derogatory way; so there can be a perception that the use of that word to label someone who isn't gay can be generally problematic.  It's like if you knew someone was gay, and made jokes where you identify them as straight.  It also goes onto labeling someone off their looks, and associating their gender preference on a stereotype.

 

For myself though, lots of other descriptors in place of twink would be an issue.

 

For example, replacing the word with, black, woman, minority, etc would all be equally problematic; because you are now talking about a "quota".

 

Hiring based on gender, race, and sexuality is a thing (and with affirmative action it's a thing that happens as well).  There are actual government jobs, or jobs that require affirmative action where being a straight male puts you at a disadvantage in hiring compared to a gay male.

 

So yea, it's really those two things.  Stating a sexuality based on appearance alone, and the general "quota" portion which implies getting the job not based on merits.

[divito]

1 hour ago, Blue4130 said:

If the word substituted was k**k, the n word, f*g or others, would you be ok with that also?

Substituting those words evokes malice compared to other available words. Those words (other than f*g's British usage) are probabilistically derogatory.

I have no problems in general with using any words, because intent and context are important in writing. Outside of 'gay' when I was younger being synonymous with something bad or unideal, 'twink' hasn't carried such connotations, nor does 'gay' due to our societal advancement; it's tantamount to describing someone as 'husky' or having a 'baby face.' I'm not sure why we're going back in time to less acceptance.
 

50 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

It's like if you knew someone was gay, and made jokes where you identify them as straight.  It also goes onto labeling someone off their looks, and associating their gender preference on a stereotype.

Calling your friend 'straight' when they're gay in most friendships would be funny, especially when the entire point is comedic in nature. If I was called 'gay' for my appearance or actions (stereotypical or not) I similarly would not take offense, as I'm not homophobic, and am comfortable with myself as an individual.
 

50 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

For example, replacing the word with, black, woman, minority, etc would all be equally problematic

Why is factually stating if someone is a woman or a minority in their geographic location problematic? I assume it's because you're conflating physical/factual description with something negative, or you're discounting any humor and conjoining it with below:

 

50 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Hiring based on gender, race, and sexuality is a thing (and with affirmative action it's a thing that happens as well).  There are actual government jobs, or jobs that require affirmative action where being a straight male puts you at a disadvantage in hiring compared to a gay male.

 

So yea, it's really those two things.  Stating a sexuality based on appearance alone, and the general "quota" portion which implies getting the job not based on merits.

That's. The. Joke. It's comedically implying something that is outlandish for humor. Jokes are essentially finding creative perspectives and diction to illicit laughter. There is no serious expose of OpenAI having quotas, especially ones involving a 'type' of male homosexual. Even your mind going there is horrendously disturbing.

[Bitter]

On 11/22/2023 at 11:03 PM, Skipple said:

I'm not sure if anyone caught this in the latest TechLinked video, but at 0:30 in reference to OpenAI's shuffle up:

For those that are not aware.... a "Twink" is gay slang for a gay man who is usually (but not always) in his late teens to twenties whose traits may include a slim to average physique, a youthful appearance that may belie an older age, having little or no body hair, flamboyancy, and general physical attractiveness.^[1]

 

Now, while agree that Adam D'Angelo does infact fit the physical definition of a twink, as far as I'm aware he has not come out as gay.

While I admittedly find this description of D'Angelo a bit funny, it does seem a bit tactless and sophomoric to call a tech executive a twink on a tech news show. It definitely caught me off guard when I heard it. 

 

Regardless, I'm personally looking forward to the description of Sam Houser as the gaming industry's resident otter and Steve Wozniak or Gabe Newell as our big cuddly bear. 

Fun fact, I didn't know that Otter was a term in the gay community until a couple years ago when I innocently googled 'cute otters' and got past page 2 on Google Image search with safe search off. I'd googled that exact term previously and never ran into that so something changed and there I was starting at both cute otters and cute otters much to my amusement. Thankfully I like learning and that was a learning experience.

[wanderingfool2]

4 hours ago, divito said:

That's. The. Joke. It's comedically implying something that is outlandish for humor. Jokes are essentially finding creative perspectives and diction to illicit laughter. There is no serious expose of OpenAI having quotas, especially ones involving a 'type' of male homosexual. Even your mind going there is horrendously disturbing.

What is disturbing is that you don't see the relation to how joking about essentially affirmative action could be problematic

 

It's like joking about a woman who only got the job because of her looks.  It's not acceptable, as even if it's a joke there's an implication that has been said because IT IS NOT AN OUTLANDISH STATEMENT.

 

There are people who get hired everyday, and people who are put in power because of exactly what is joked about.  So joking that is a reason isn't something that is appropriate.

 

4 hours ago, divito said:

Why is factually stating if someone is a woman or a minority in their geographic location problematic? I assume it's because you're conflating physical/factual description with something negative, or you're discounting any humor and conjoining it with below:

Because it says they got the job because of it.  If you went up to lets say the CEO of YouTube and joked they were a "woman quota" do you not think she would be upset.

 

People can't keep hiding behind the "it's just a joke" mentality; because guess what, that's the same excuse people used for stereotypes like "asians are bad drivers", or joking about someone being japanese doing a kamakaze.  At one point it was just "humor"; so it mustn't be bad.

[Neroon]

12 hours ago, divito said:

I'm irritated that descriptive terms used for comedic purposes is the source of this discussion, and not the actual news. Sub "twink" for almost any other descriptive, would you still be offended? I'm curious to the psychology of those choosing to take offense. Being gay or a twink is not a negative thing, and if you think it is, then you probably need a hard look in the mirror and speak to a mental professional.

 

Hi, I am a mental health professional.

 

Anyway... Calling someone for someone they are not, and to make fun of someone, is not ok. Even if he was gay and a twink, why call them that? They are not friends, they don't know each other, there is no running gag.

 

I have nothing against little girls, but if I were to call you a little girl, would you think that's ok?

I have nothing against prostitutes, would you be ok if I called you one?

If I called you a socialist/capitalist (whichever doesn't apply) is that ok?

 

Point is, that the difference between a joke and an insult is a thin line. A lot depends on how people interpret it, what setting and if those words are commonly used for insulting people.

 

Gay and twink are absolutely used for insulting people, add to that again that they don't know each other, lacks context etc, and it becomes offensive to many. And really for what? Was it a useful comment? Did it add anything?

[Sauron]

I'm not qualified to comment on the twink discourse so I'll comment on the openAI shitshow instead

 

Apparently there are competing "factions" within openai, one of which is mainly interested in bringing a competitive product to market (my understanding is that Altman belongs to this category) and one composed of cultists who see themselves as creators of a god in the form of AI and literally burn effigies of "unaligned AGI" to ward off skynet (????????)

 

The latter faction seemingly had a strong presence in the board and got Altman kicked out, however since the majority of employees are not unhinged maniacs they threatened to leave and got Altman reinstated as well as most of the board replaced.

 

There is a real problem with silicon valley startups devolving into cults and what worries me is that we seem to be relying on these people to bring about the future of computing.

[divito]

10 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

What is disturbing is that you don't see the relation to how joking about essentially affirmative action could be problematic

 

It's like joking about a woman who only got the job because of her looks.  It's not acceptable, as even if it's a joke there's an implication that has been said because IT IS NOT AN OUTLANDISH STATEMENT.

 

There are people who get hired everyday, and people who are put in power because of exactly what is joked about.  So joking that is a reason isn't something that is appropriate.

Wait. You're implying that because something can/might be true, it can never be joked about? Does that mean you dislike the concept of roasts?
 

10 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

If you went up to lets say the CEO of YouTube and joked they were a "woman quota" do you not think she would be upset.

That entirely depends on her frame of mind. Given her intelligence and her status, I imagine she'd find it funny, or just call me a troll and move on with her day. There's no way she didn't hear mean-spirited talk like that internally before she accepted being CEO, which is again, different from humor.
 

10 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

People can't keep hiding behind the "it's just a joke" mentality; because guess what, that's the same excuse people used for stereotypes like "asians are bad drivers", or joking about someone being japanese doing a kamakaze.  At one point it was just "humor"; so it mustn't be bad.

Stereotypes by definition are a simplistic, generalized belief about a group of people. Oftentimes they are based in something tangible or anecdotal, and no longer or never really accurately described reality, but were a microcosm of a time or geographic period. 

Being intolerant or hateful with stereotypes is a lot different than using them for humor. I'm of Italian descent, and Italian stereotypes are funny to me, because they reflect some of my mannerisms and/or childhood experiences. Does that mean every Italian can relate? Of course not. Does that mean every stereotype is positive or neutral? Also no. 
 

Whether someone is using a 'negative' stereotype for humor, or attempting to insult me, that's their prerogative and right to free speech. Depending on the situation, it's either funny, or perhaps I try to get to the root of their issue and help them, or I simply ignore it.

Being offended is a choice that is generally unproductive and is typically the result of trauma that has negatively sensitized an individual's perception and self-image/self-esteem, and causes them to be volatile to innocuous happenings, and they imply intent where there is none.
 

3 hours ago, Neroon said:

Anyway... Calling someone for someone they are not, and to make fun of someone, is not ok. Even if he was gay and a twink, why call them that? They are not friends, they don't know each other, there is no running gag.

Why use humor? As a mental health professional, you probably know about humor and its mental health benefits. If you're going to ask every comedy writer or comedian "why that phrase?" for every joke, that's problematic and belies something deeper inside of you.
 

4 hours ago, Neroon said:

I have nothing against little girls, but if I were to call you a little girl, would you think that's ok?

I have nothing against prostitutes, would you be ok if I called you one?

If I called you a socialist/capitalist (whichever doesn't apply) is that ok?

 

Point is, that the difference between a joke and an insult is a thin line. A lot depends on how people interpret it, what setting and if those words are commonly used for insulting people.

Humans are capable of freely speaking their mind; you can call me whatever you like. It is not my job to stifle someone's speech or censor their thoughts, whether your statements are factually correct or not. If I did have an issue with a joke/insult, I can express that, or I can simply practice radical acceptance and move on, as everyone should.
 

4 hours ago, Neroon said:

Gay and twink are absolutely used for insulting people, add to that again that they don't know each other, lacks context etc, and it becomes offensive to many. And really for what? Was it a useful comment? Did it add anything?

As someone who had no idea what Adam D'Angelo looked like, 'twink' definitely helped describe his look based on the definition of the word, before subsequently having to Google him for the purposes of this discussion. Perhaps authors should avoid descriptive nouns altogether, to avoid the readers using their own biases and phobias when reading.

[Neroon]

48 minutes ago, divito said:

Why use humor? As a mental health professional, you probably know about humor and its mental health benefits. If you're going to ask every comedy writer or comedian "why that phrase?" for every joke, that's problematic and belies something deeper inside of you.

 

Humans are capable of freely speaking their mind; you can call me whatever you like. It is not my job to stifle someone's speech or censor their thoughts, whether your statements are factually correct or not. If I did have an issue with a joke/insult, I can express that, or I can simply practice radical acceptance and move on, as everyone should.
 

As someone who had no idea what Adam D'Angelo looked like, 'twink' definitely helped describe his look based on the definition of the word, before subsequently having to Google him for the purposes of this discussion. Perhaps authors should avoid descriptive nouns altogether, to avoid the readers using their own biases and phobias when reading.

How are his looks even remotely relevant? Did you consider that?

 

You say you can decide if you have an issue with a joke and express that, but I'm guessing that LMG didn't send him an advanced copy and gave him ample time to respond. Instead they just put it online for everyone to see. Get how that's different?

 

I know all about humour, I use it a ton in my work. Guess what though, if I call them a twink, half the people won't like it. 

 

Riley is not Ricky Gervais, and techlinked is not stand-up. So instead of offending people you don't know for a quick laugh from a certain crowd, get rid of of the offensive jokes that serve no purpose and aren't even funny to begin with.

 

Ps. While I never been on the side of Madison with her wild claims, calling straight people you don't know thinks, doesn't really shout "we are super inclusive and treat people well".

[divito]

55 minutes ago, Neroon said:

How are his looks even remotely relevant? Did you consider that?

It seems that you're judging the joke as if it's strictly news. Techlinked is effectively tech news sprinkled with a satirical slant, and projecting your expectations is unhelpful.
 

55 minutes ago, Neroon said:

You say you can decide if you have an issue with a joke and express that, but I'm guessing that LMG didn't send him an advanced copy and gave him ample time to respond. Instead they just put it online for everyone to see. Get how that's different?

Do you think The Daily Show (or any other similar program) contacted the people they referenced in their relaying of events/news to make sure those people/organizations are okay with the jokes they've written for that episode? 

 

55 minutes ago, Neroon said:

Riley is not Ricky Gervais, and techlinked is not stand-up. So instead of offending people you don't know for a quick laugh from a certain crowd, get rid of of the offensive jokes that serve no purpose and aren't even funny to begin with.

He doesn't need to be Ricky Gervais to be humorous (or approve jokes for the scripts). Instead of censoring people and their speech, addressing the reason for taking offense is far more productive. All censoring does is allow unhealthy coping mechanisms to fester and invade other areas of one's life instead of dealing with the root cause. It also helps exacerbate NPD and other disorders that have issues with entitlement. 

You clearly dislike the joke or see it as irrelevant, so I'm naturally curious as to what has caused that in you. There are jokes or comedians I don't find funny, or distasteful, etc... but I don't have the right to tell them to stop, because that's ridiculous. They're my feelings, and valid or not, I don't get to project my feelings onto other people to manipulate them. If something ever did bother me, I have the proper tools to deal with it and address it. If anything, it will help me to investigate to discover why it bothered me in the first place. The world doesn't exist to cater to you and your insecurities or past trauma.

 

56 minutes ago, Neroon said:

Ps. While I never been on the side of Madison with her wild claims, calling straight people you don't know thinks, doesn't really shout "we are super inclusive and treat people well".

Again, there is nothing wrong with being gay and/or a twink. 

[Bitter]

1 hour ago, divito said:

It seems that you're judging the joke as if it's strictly news. Techlinked is effectively tech news sprinkled with a satirical slant, and projecting your expectations is unhelpful.
 

Do you think The Daily Show (or any other similar program) contacted the people they referenced in their relaying of events/news to make sure those people/organizations are okay with the jokes they've written for that episode? 

 

He doesn't need to be Ricky Gervais to be humorous (or approve jokes for the scripts). Instead of censoring people and their speech, addressing the reason for taking offense is far more productive. All censoring does is allow unhealthy coping mechanisms to fester and invade other areas of one's life instead of dealing with the root cause. It also helps exacerbate NPD and other disorders that have issues with entitlement. 

You clearly dislike the joke or see it as irrelevant, so I'm naturally curious as to what has caused that in you. There are jokes or comedians I don't find funny, or distasteful, etc... but I don't have the right to tell them to stop, because that's ridiculous. They're my feelings, and valid or not, I don't get to project my feelings onto other people to manipulate them. If something ever did bother me, I have the proper tools to deal with it and address it. If anything, it will help me to investigate to discover why it bothered me in the first place. The world doesn't exist to cater to you and your insecurities or past trauma.

 

Again, there is nothing wrong with being gay and/or a twink. 

No but using that as the butt of a joke doesn't sit too well with me and it seems like a lot of other people.

[divito]

5 minutes ago, Bitter said:

No but using that as the butt of a joke doesn't sit too well with me and it seems like a lot of other people.

Which is all the more concerning. Intolerance and trauma-based reactions are growing instead of people dealing with their mental health. They're externalizing things as if they're infallible.

Voicing displeasure is fine, even encouraged. That there are this many people disliking that joke, perhaps they'll take that into editorial consideration for the future. However, the level of one's feelings and some of the sentiments expressed here definitely require some individual reflection. Dealing with past trauma can be tough, but projection is not the answer, whatever short term 'benefits' you might get.

[starsmine]

12 minutes ago, Bitter said:

No but using that as the butt of a joke doesn't sit too well with me and it seems like a lot of other people.

IMO, in the strongest language. The only people who would be bothered by these jokes are "straight" people who are unsure of their sexuality. 

Twink is a vibe and aesthetic. the word is appropriated from the LGBT community. Not ever is it a word used derogatorily, It's a positive for many. Like being goth. being mad at someone calling another a twink is like being mad at someone calling another person a goth. 

[Bitter]

19 minutes ago, divito said:

Which is all the more concerning. Intolerance and trauma-based reactions are growing instead of people dealing with their mental health. They're externalizing things as if they're infallible.

Voicing displeasure is fine, even encouraged. That there are this many people disliking that joke, perhaps they'll take that into editorial consideration for the future. However, the level of one's feelings and some of the sentiments expressed here definitely require some individual reflection. Dealing with past trauma can be tough, but projection is not the answer, whatever short term 'benefits' you might get.

 

8 minutes ago, starsmine said:

IMO, in the strongest language. The only people who would be bothered by these jokes are "straight" people who are unsure of their sexuality. 

Twink is a vibe and aesthetic. the word is appropriated from the LGBT community. Not ever is it a word used derogatorily, It's a positive for many. Like being goth. being mad at someone calling another a twink is like being mad at someone calling another person a goth. 

Someone used to derisively say 'hey ADD' at me, I found it angering and uncomfortable as it's not something I can do anything about. Using something that someone has no control over as the butt of a joke in a negative light is not OK. It happens but it's not OK. I don't think they were using 'gay' or 'twink' in an uplifting positive manner, do you?

[divito]

16 minutes ago, Bitter said:

Someone used to derisively say 'hey ADD' at me, I found it angering and uncomfortable as it's not something I can do anything about. Using something that someone has no control over as the butt of a joke in a negative light is not OK. It happens but it's not OK. 

Firstly, there are things you can do, if you were so inclined. That it made you angered and uncomfortable, that's a bit interesting and unfortunate. Does having it make you feel ashamed? While I don't think I ever had shame, there are tinges of regret for not being diagnosed with ADHD earlier, to prevent certain things in my youth. But those thoughts aren't really productive, so I let them go.

If you were referenced by your height, would that also bother you, since you can't do something about it? 
 

16 minutes ago, Bitter said:

I don't think they were using 'gay' or 'twink' in an uplifting positive manner, do you?

For the joke? I think there were using it as referenced on Wikipedia, as a neutral descriptor, "traits may include a slim to average physique, a youthful appearance that may belie an older age, having little or no body hair, flamboyancy, and general physical attractiveness." As also referenced in the Wiki, it does have pejorative use, but most of that seems limited to between gay individuals, where the nuance of their trauma and experience play roles in their perspective of the word and its usage. It seems those with lingering self-image and self-esteem issues have the most problems with its usage. I've personally heard it used by gay individuals I know, and it's anecdotally always been as a descriptor, never insulting. Same as bear, otter, bull, cub, etc..

[Neroon]

3 hours ago, starsmine said:

IMO, in the strongest language. The only people who would be bothered by these jokes are "straight" people who are unsure of their sexuality. 

Twink is a vibe and aesthetic. the word is appropriated from the LGBT community. Not ever is it a word used derogatorily, It's a positive for many. Like being goth. being mad at someone calling another a twink is like being mad at someone calling another person a goth. 

Plenty of people dislike being called a goth, especially when they are not.

 

You tried an example and failed at it. There is a difference though, which is that gay etc is used in an offensive way a lot, and goth isn't.

[starsmine]

6 minutes ago, Neroon said:

Plenty of people dislike being called a goth, especially when they are not.

 

You tried an example and failed at it. There is a difference though, which is that gay etc is used in an offensive way a lot, and goth isn't.

I didnt fail you are just taking the piss at this point. Find me someone who objects to goth in an offensive way(as in, a person who isn't just confused by the comment, like actually offended by it) who isn't a hateful fundamentalist that I would have respect for. 

[Neroon]

4 hours ago, divito said:

 If anything, it will help me to investigate to discover why it bothered me in the first place. The world doesn't exist to cater to you and your insecurities or past trauma.

 

Again, there is nothing wrong with being gay and/or a twink. 

My insecurities or past trauma. How about you don't make idiotic assumptions about me.

 

As a mental health worker I see discrimination all around me. Religious families who don't want to be in contact with their kids, because they are part of the LGBTQ, or won't accept them for who they are.

People who are discriminated against consistently etc. Don't for 1 second think this is past us, discrimination is extremely real.

 

Maybe instead of telling me I should research why I dislike it, maybe you should research why others don't.

 

Would you be okay if Riley were to talk about some other board members, and how some guy hits their black quota? Maybe add some colourful language to it, maybe throw around the N word. Or do you have limits to what you think is ok?

Maybe he can reflect on LMG's own mostly white male staff and how they got their own 'token' employees.

 

Point is, is that none of this had anything to do with this guy, it's offensive at worst, and a stupid joke at best. If you are gonna offend people, make sure it's actually funny and people can tell it's an actual joke, and not just discriminating. Or better, don't do it. I know comedy is important for the channel, but they can skip a joke or 2 if they are in bad taste.