News

It Doesn't Get Better: VIDEO

Fckh8

For homophobes, that is.

The latest video from FCKH8 features YouTube celebrities Shane Dawson, Glozell, Miles Jai, Chris Thompson, and Tyler Oakley mocking the hypocrisy of anti-gay groups with FCKH8's trademark brand of filthy language and sass.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. A perfect example of the kind of crap that has alienated the social mainstream and made it so hard for us to be accepted or respected. Effeminacy gone wild, filthy language, adolescent-like levels of maturity on display......and pink everywhere.

    And you wonder why most people don't like us.....

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 2:41:07 PM


  2. rick, go take a time out.

    Posted by: alguien | Apr 17, 2012 2:49:38 PM


  3. 'It doesn't get better' - such clever play on words. Took me a while to realize that it also referred to the video itself.

    Posted by: Agontuk | Apr 17, 2012 2:53:24 PM


  4. I'm finding I don't like Rick right now...

    Posted by: Chad | Apr 17, 2012 2:53:25 PM


  5. Love the energy of this!

    Posted by: Giselle | Apr 17, 2012 2:56:41 PM


  6. Oh Rick, the behaviour in that video is just not NORMAL, is it.

    It's DIFFERENT from you -- and so you dislike it INTENSELY.

    And you wonder why people don't like what you're saying...

    Posted by: Michael in Toronto | Apr 17, 2012 2:57:28 PM


  7. No, this behavior is the reason that I get dirty looks when I buy tampons. The checkout girls, who are women and thus not our allies, look at me and think "OH, look, a man buying tampons. I guess he wants to be a woman!" and the truth is I just need the tampons to soak up the residue from my un-curable anal yeast infection. Which I got from wearing a thong 7 days in a row without washing.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 3:01:51 PM


  8. @Rick What the hell your unfortunate situation have to do with your feelings about the campaign and in general with the LGBT commmunity. Can you care to explain us? Your logical non-sense has no logic at all. Or at me to the least.

    Posted by: Betocreativo | Apr 17, 2012 3:40:49 PM


  9. >psssst - there's RICK, and then there is hyper-rediculous RICK. Although its sometimes hard to tell them apart, one is a parody<

    Posted by: TJ | Apr 17, 2012 3:58:42 PM


  10. Rick, I'd worry more about my animosity toward women than what cashiers think of me. Responding to something that's supposed to promote acceptance and equality with misogyny makes it very hard for me to take you seriously.

    Posted by: Scott | Apr 17, 2012 4:00:44 PM


  11. Shows how "tolerant" you pathetic extremist liberals are. I have a genuine problem with anal leakage, and this culture of effeminacy means I get dirty looks when I buy tampons to soak it up.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 4:10:35 PM


  12. What's wrong with Tyler's voice??

    Posted by: Andrew | Apr 17, 2012 4:16:11 PM


  13. @Scott Use your head, man. That post was by an impostor, as is the comment below beginning with "Shows how". I don't know why the proprietors of this site continue to allow this individual to act as such, but they do.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 5:12:59 PM


  14. Rick --

    You're probably right. This probably won't endear us to anyone who isn't already LGBT or allied, and runs a small risk of alienating people who might be won over by more moderate means.

    Still, while we're offering criticism, you might want to take some time for self-reflection. Your constant whining about norms and acceptance by the larger community is one of the most insidious and harmful things we have to contend with within the LGBT community.

    I say this as a masculine, pretty boring (though I don't think I'm any more or less normal than anyone else, LGBT or otherwise) guy. It's how I identify and feel comfortable living my life. I assume you're probably somewhat the same, and I support your right to conduct your life and act however you please, along the gender spectrum and otherwise. What I don't support is your arrogation of the authority to determine what is normal/good/appropriate.

    The argument that if LGBT people conformed more to heterosexual norms, they'd be accepted more is probably true, but we'd have to ask ourselves: at what cost? A slippery slope looms fairly balefully, and at some point you might not be comfortable with where it leads you. Maybe you think we should just "act straight" and all would be fine. Maybe some other people think we should "act straight" and not be able to bottom. Maybe some other people thing we should just "act straight" and not be able to have sex at all, and, you know, screw the ability for transvestites to even exist at all!

    It's a losing game, at least for our side. Embracing "normality" will always favor heterosexuals and demonize LGBT people. I think you should work on questioning the assumptions of other people regarding normalcy and the ensuing consequences before you embrace them. At the very least you can stop telling us what is good for us.

    Posted by: CDA | Apr 17, 2012 5:41:42 PM


  15. I *am* right. The second I started acting more like a man is supposed to act I was finally allowed to perform analingus on my father while wearing boys clothes. Before that, I was forced to dress like a girl while merely being permitted to perform fellatio.

    Why can't you liberal effeminate queens learn from my example? Act the way that bigots demand you act and they'll let you lick their bums. Hey, it's worked for me.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 5:44:16 PM


  16. @CDA Here is the flaw in your argument, which I hear a lot. Effeminacy is a RESULT of oppression by straight people and represents an internalization of THEIR value judgment that homosexuality and masculinity are incompatible with each other.

    Effeminate behavior is no more natural for men who are homosexual--in the absence of an oppressive society that wants to deny them their masculinity--than it is for men who are heterosexual. And the fact that virtually all gay men find a masculine demeanor far more appealling--sexually and otherwise--than they do an effeminate demeanor (and we all know that that is true) just underscores that fact.

    We should not eschew effeminate behavior in order to be more like heterosexuals--we should eschew it because it is unnatural and because it is unattractive (to ourselves and each other apart from what straight society thinks) and because, above all, eschewing it is a form of rejecting homophobia and asserting our natural place among men as equals.

    Why some of you want to cling so tenaciously to behavior that is a badge of oppression and shame, that practically nobody regards as attractive, and that brings such grief upon those who engage in it, is beyond me. I guess it is because it is so deeply entrenched in some that they really and truly believe that it is "just the way they are" rather than a reflection of the low self-esteem that results from surrendering your claim to masculinity and all the respect that goes with it. Or because they just think it would be too hard to change.

    But the change has to take place and the sooner it does, the better off we will be, not because straight society wants us to (indeed, many of them would prefer for us to continue to behave effeminately so that they can continue to isolate us socially and perpetuate homophobia), but because it is in our best interests to do so.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 5:56:52 PM


  17. Some of you may have noticed that when perform oral sex on a gay man, he can't orgasm (we all know that's true, it can't possibly be that i give mediocre oral). My father never had that problem - he always had orgasms when I blew him, but only if he dressed me up like a girl.

    So the sooner you extremist liberal queens stop defending those gender-confused clowns who act like effeminate princesses, the sooner masculine gay men like me can get back to doing what we do best - performing oral sex on our fathers in a masculine manner.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 6:03:28 PM


  18. @ CDA, what a terrific post, well though out and presented, and it falls on deaf ears. Truly deaf.

    Posted by: shane | Apr 17, 2012 6:05:54 PM


  19. "@CDA Here is the flaw in your argument, which I hear a lot. Effeminacy is a RESULT of oppression by straight people and represents an internalization of THEIR value judgment that homosexuality and masculinity are incompatible with each other."

    That's a pretty bold statement. I'll give you the courtesy of not dismissing it as complete tommyrot pending some rigorous research and sociological analysis, but the burden is upon you to produce the information that supports your claim.

    "Effeminate behavior is no more natural for men who are homosexual--in the absence of an oppressive society that wants to deny them their masculinity--than it is for men who are heterosexual."

    Ditto to the above.

    "And the fact that virtually all gay men find a masculine demeanor far more appealling--sexually and otherwise--than they do an effeminate demeanor (and we all know that that is true) just underscores that fact."

    Re: your assumption, I think you would find that a lot of people would disagree with you. You would find me amongst them. Also, if it is true, it does not necessarily underscore the earlier contention. In your world, there would be a tremendously high ratio of masculine men who were coupled to effeminate men who were coupled, when in reality there is no discernable difference. Also, in your world you would find that the beautiful, slim-but-not-bulky, fashionable, glittery, and well-groomed gays who know how to dance and cook and decorate well would be far less preferable on the whole to the hyper-masculine, hirsute, beefy, deep-voiced bears... in practice I think you'd have to be a fool to contend this.

    "We should not eschew effeminate behavior in order to be more like heterosexuals--we should eschew it because it is unnatural and because it is unattractive (to ourselves and each other apart from what straight society thinks) and because, above all, eschewing it is a form of rejecting homophobia and asserting our natural place among men as equals."

    Again, these are very bold and emphatic statements. Please back them up with facts and/or studies.

    "Why some of you want to cling so tenaciously to behavior that is a badge of oppression and shame, that practically nobody regards as attractive, and that brings such grief upon those who engage in it, is beyond me. I guess it is because it is so deeply entrenched in some that they really and truly believe that it is "just the way they are" rather than a reflection of the low self-esteem that results from surrendering your claim to masculinity and all the respect that goes with it. Or because they just think it would be too hard to change.

    But the change has to take place and the sooner it does, the better off we will be, not because straight society wants us to (indeed, many of them would prefer for us to continue to behave effeminately so that they can continue to isolate us socially and perpetuate homophobia), but because it is in our best interests to do so."

    It is because being queer is about not having to answer to society's capricious and mostly substance-less standards. As I have said, I am a pretty masculine guy, but I don't think there is anything more intrinsically worthy of respect about masculinity than any other gender identity. At the crux of your (among other things, very misogynist) arguments is the idea that individuals should be beholden to what society deems is good. Society has been warrantlessly bigoted, oppressive, angry, mean, violent, selfish and harmful throughout history - it has been so very wrong throughout history in more facets than not, especially as regards what it deems normal - and there is no reason to believe that we have only now achieved enlightenment. You spend your time trying to denigrate others, and to prevent them from achieving happiness. Rest assured my friend - if you were straight, you would be one of the most tireless and stubborn opponents of the right to happiness and sexual freedom for homosexuals, even if you now draw a flimsy distinction. You should think about this, and in the meantime you can at least give your arguments a patina of legitimacy by offering up some legitimate proof.

    Posted by: CDA | Apr 17, 2012 6:39:35 PM


  20. @Shane No, I heard him. But you make a choice. You can either decide to be a part of society or you can decide to live in your own little bubble or at the margins. You can go out in the street in your leather jockstrap with your butt hanging out on Pride and you can swish and lisp and do whatever else you want to......but if you do so, you are never going to head a Fortune 500 corporation, any more than someone who insists on wearing shorts and sandals to work is.

    By way of analogy, Oprah Winfrey had a choice--she could host a "black" talk show and have a very limited audience or she could host a talk show for the entire population, which meant downplaying her "blackness" in order to be successful...and Barack Obama did the same thing in running for President.

    Virtually no gay men who have succeeded in any field of endeavor have effeminate characteristics.

    Of course, this all assumes that effeminate behavior is natural in gay men to begin with, a premise that I just pointed out is totally wrong to begin with.

    But for the sake of argument, let's say your "slippery slope" idea is valid.....in that case, what is the point of the gay movement? If you don't want to be a part of mainstream society and refuse to compromise in any way (not that not behaving effeminately is really a compromise), then what is it you are aiming for? Acceptance of ANY kind of behavior by anybody in any situation? Right.....in other words, social anarchy......which would make society totally unworkable.....which, in turn, is why what you are aiming for is unattainable.

    And this is why the gay movement has stalled, as I have pointed out before. Many of you don't want to eradicate homophobia--you want to sacrifice that goal on the altar of social anarchy......why, I have no idea, but you are making a big mistake and destroying our movement by doing so......

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 6:41:47 PM


  21. i am laughing so hard at "effeminacy gone wild"

    Posted by: Joe | Apr 17, 2012 6:51:51 PM


  22. hey rick what do you make of straight frat bros wearing pink polo shirts?

    Posted by: Joe | Apr 17, 2012 6:54:45 PM


  23. @CDA The "proof" is self-evident. If effeminate behavior were in some way directly related to sexual orientation, itself, then ALL gay men would be effeminate. But they are not. Likewise, if effeminate behavior were random in the sense of being completely independent of sexual orientation, then you would expect to see as much effeminacy in straight men as you do in gay men. But you don't--in fact, you see almost none.

    So what does this tell us, particularly in the total absence of any genetic evidence to differentiate the effeminate from the non-effeminate? It tells us that effeminate behavior is the result of the EXPERIENCE of being homosexual in a homophobic culture--which manifests itself in some, but not others, depending, obviously, on the degree to which they have internalized societal norms that dictate that homosexuality and masculinity are incompatible. And that is reinforced by the fact that most effeminate behavior is learned--it is not as though these individuals each arrived independently at the idea of referring to other men in the female vernacular, just to use one example

    This is all obvious from deduction, without any formal academic studies having been done.

    As for the point about virtually all gay men preferring masculine men, there is an academic study that supports this (I linked it once--it was authored by a prof at Northwestern)....but again, it is not something that we don't all know from everyday experience

    Your last paragraph betrays you, though, as what I was describing in my response to Shane.

    You are clearly a social anarchist--and you will never achieve the goal of a society without ANY rules of behavior whatsoever because such societies are unworkable, for obvious reasons.

    And while some forms of non-conformity are worth fighting for, I can think of nothing that is less worth fighting for than a desire to behave effeminately.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 6:55:24 PM


  24. If you effeminate screaming liberals would just do what I do, and live a completely closeted life, then you'd get somewhere.

    Nobody knows I'm gay and I lead a successful life. This is why non-white people who can pass for white don't get shot when they wear hoodies while they walk home from 7-11s.

    And to prove that I don't have any effeminate characteristics whatsoever, I'm not going to prove it, because facts and proof are for bleeding-heart liberals. We real men don't back up what we say, we just say it anonymously.

    At some point you effeminate liberals will have to realize that your effeminacy means that you hate being a man. Just like women with short haircuts who wear pants hate being women. And if a woman ever plays a professional sport she's one more gender-confused clown because sports are for men, only.

    If you say it's ok for a man to wear pink, or march in a parade with a sparkly feathered boa, then how is that any difference from some other man choosing to rape children or shoot people?
    You're saying that ANY behavior is ok, so how about the behavior of people who shoot people? Are you liberals going to defend that, too?

    I'm not effeminate in any way, and I don't have to prove it because I don't need to prove anything because proof is for sissies.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 6:56:45 PM


  25. And let me be clear - since there is no genetic evidence of difference between homosexual and heterosexual men, it's clear that homosexuality is the result of EXPERIENCE.

    If you effeminate queens didn't hate being so much then maybe I wouldn't resent being gay so much.

    And yes, I still get dirty looks when I buy tampons for my anal leakage, and it's all Lady Gaga's fault.

    Posted by: Rick | Apr 17, 2012 7:05:05 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Canadian Activist Beaten to Death Outside Halifax Gay Bar« «