Never mind the flagrantly stupid things the original poster in this message-board thread says. Even if you happen to believe that gays and women are inferior in some way, you should still be startled by this level of incoherence:
it is surprising to me how oft people pretend to be offended by language. whereas some would never dream of using a slur in front of or behind any ethnic group, they sure as shit would not welcome them into their family and would never dream of helping someone not their kind. i think attitudes and actions are worse than words. and what is wrong with words, that we give them such power over us?
…the military (pax not policy) does this strange homophobe dance. calling someone queer when knowing they are not, is just another form of greeting. should there be someone who really is a homo, he’s already one of us and is either loved cuz he is a good guy or hated for being an asshole. guys who truly are gaybashers (and sadly there are a few) who truly would hate someone for being gay will act unabashed like a dragqueen flamer with his buddies and never think twice.
as for DADT, i’ve no problem with gays (i’m from taxachusetts people) but the multitude of problems opened up by it’s repel outweigh (in my opinion) anything gained. and i must confess some frustration that multitudes of people sitting in the comfort of their livingrooms want to dictate how i’m going to live without serving some time in boots themselves.
So essentially, this guy, who is serving (or more likely sitting) in Iraq as a member of the United States Army, is claiming that many if not most of the same people who balk at the use of words like “faggot” and “nigger” are secretly opposed to having anything to do with these minorities on a personal level, and with this “fact” established, such behavior is far worse than calling people faggots and niggers, so the latter isn’t such a big deal. It’s kind of a straw-man/”tu quoque” hybrid fallacy for those in the grip of some serious projection.
The second paragraph is more difficult to parse. I think the guy’s trying to say that using an anti-gay slur is harmless because it’s used to playfully insult straight people, and that the real homophobes (damn them!) act like queers themselves. I’m not sure if it’s the atrocious writing or the extremely dim mind responsible for this dreck, but I can’t really say what the dude’s asserting here.
The closing graf is great. The “writer” dismisses the idea that he might actually be an anti-gay bigot on the basis of being a resident of a gay-friendly state. He then pulls out the “if you civilians only knew” argument against the “repel” of DADT. Well, in my short career as an Army officer I never saw combat duty, but I did “serve” alongside some men and women, most of them officers, who were clearly gay. They failed to cause any of the problems that have been predicted by anti-gay fundamentalists for a long time and against mounting evidence that has reduced their already sad bleating to pitiful whinnies of desperation, with functional illiterates like this fellow being among the dwindling number of holdouts. I dunno, I just never cared much, maybe because I was too busy trying to learn and perform the tasks I was asked to learn, none of which involved me sticking my crotch in anyone’s face and snarling, “I double dare ya!” (That would come later and involve a lengthy misdemeanor record.)
I didn’t even get past the first page of the thread, but on the Web it’s always the stuff stirred up by fifth-degree waterheads that expands at a geometric rate. This seems paradoxical, but people will try to change others’ minds well after the point at which this has plainly become an impossible task. It’s human nature, but avoiding this temptation is much easier when you accept that there is a lot of hominid jelly masquerading as cerebral matter out there, forsake message boards, and instead go straight from observing to bashing on a blog or ignoring altogether.