6/17/2007

LOLZ! Uh... it's not the same thing Trexy...

LOL, catching up with the Steve "he must have been the bomb to get this sort of fallout" Gilliard thing at feministe and...

Noticed that our old pal Trex had graced us with this in Zuzu's execellent response to the whole thing:

I dunno, piny. I’m not buying it. The whole defense seems to be that visitors to the blog drawn by one post should have taken the time to figure out from reading the entire blog and casting runes and pawing through entrails what Brittney was all about.

I simply cannot believe that zuzu and I are, for once, in complete accord on an issue. I believe this calls for a celebration. A big one. Zuzu, do you prefer Shiraz or a nice Sauvignon Blanc? Or should we just go directly to champagne?


Now the only reason I'm responding to this is because I can imagine Marcotte and Lindsay are also thinking along the same lines as Trex.

Stop.

Puh-leeze.

The difference between Trex's idiocy/burkagate, and this whole stupid thing is very simple, and as everyone who knew Steve Gilliard is claiming for themselves the right to be complete nitwits without being called on it, I shall explain how it works.

For example, burkagate/Trex was criticised, not because everyone didn't get that marcotte and trex were making a joke (which is why, pretending that that was why you were being criticised inflamed the whole thing and pissed more people off than the original picture) - the trouble was that the joke wasn't actually that funny and was also kinda racist with it. I know strictly speaking a joke is defined by it being amusing, but not laughing at a joke doesn't post hoc mean that the non-laughing member of the audience doesn't grasp that you were not actually joking in the first place, it just means that your joke was crap.

The greatest clue to this fact, is that no one actually thought or even implied that Amanda Marcotte was actually advocating that Jessica Vallenti being forced to wear a burka.

And also Trex wasn't actually joking when he told a woc to "mind her betters."

It is quantifiably different, you see, than Jesus General going around and saying that Brittany was actually going around and trying to put liberals in their place by reposting smantix's filth, which she thought of as a good post in some way, when she wasn't.

It might be okay if the criticisms of Brittany invovle people saying that it wasn't funny, or that it wasn't appropriate to do that sort of post at this time, those would have been fair and well reasoned, that's sort of Donna post on the subject, which is fair...

Because the whole point of such posts that revolve primarily on showing your readers something some right wing idiots say that is really fucked up, is as old as blogging itself, is to, not even make the audience laugh (except at the rank patheticness of the person quoting, of course), but to make the audience go "my fucking god - what an asshole!" Understandably, freinds could go, ugh, that makes me sick, I wish I hadn't looked at that blog post.

But that's a long way from not getting that it wasn't a post supporting but was in fact going "oh my fucking god, look at this asshole!" towards smantix, and criticising the fucked upness of what he said. And It's even farther away from then flipping shit becuase you didn't get that, and then going so far as to actually blame the flipping of shit primarily and entirely on the person who you then misunderstood, for doing shit they didn't actually do outside the confines of your head.

Which is the really fucked up irony of all this, JG has transformed, like a caterpillar exiting its crysalis, into one of the silly heads who presumably wrote him emails saying that he was a nasty immoral right winger back before he put that label up stating that he did satire.

To every silly season, turn...turn...turn... there comes a nitwit, turn...turn...turn...

1 comment:

nezua limón xolagrafik-jonez said...

life shows no mercy when she decides to tell a joke about one of us.