User talk:PinkAmpersand

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, PinkAmpersand!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | العربية | Asturianu | Azərbaycanca | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Български | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | Estremeñu | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Frysk | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Հայերեն | Interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | Latina | Lietuvių | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Bahasa Melayu | Plattdüütsch | नेपाली | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Scots | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Shqip | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Kiswahili | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | Vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | 中文(台灣)‎ | +/−

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 23:56, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Opinion of a gay, Jewish individual on "offensive" content[edit]

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Penyulap.27s_use_of_an_anti-Semitic_cartoon_as_a_personal_attack – Since you claim to be both gay and Jewish, I'm just wondering if you agree with Fæ. Do you find File:Cry-wolf.png offensive? Do you find Penyulap's use of the cartoon to be wrong? --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 11:16, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Is the cartoon somewhat offensive? Yes, though I appreciate the irony in complaining about anti-semitism in a cartoon about false claims of anti-semitism. It's odd to criticize conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, and at the same time conflate Jews and Israelis, what with the attempt to merge the images of the whiny Orthodox Jew and the gun-toting Israeli soldier. (Many of the Orthodox, of course, feel their religious studies to be more important than actually protecting their homeland.)
Now, is it inappropriate to reference that cartoon in an attempt to show that others are falsely claiming victimization? All in all, I'd say it's not. It's not a particularly good idea, and you can certainly make the case it's deliberately inflammatory, but I think it falls short of being anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli, or homophobic. In fact, I struggle to see a reason why any good-faith contributor would, à propos of nothing, invoke one of the most sensitive and divisive issues in the world. That, in my opinion, is outright trolling, and you don't have to be gay or Jewish to see that.
Furthermore, I find it funny that Penyulap is talking at all about "playing the ___ card", when just the other day he saw fit to restore a highly incendiary remark he'd made that gratuitously invoked mental illness and depression (my third minority characteristic, though you already know that from reading my en.wp userpage Face-smile.svg). In a way, it seems that his remark that "Fae loves dishing shit out, but can't take it" applies as much to him as it does to Fæ; and the only thing worse than a hypocrite is someone who's hypocritcal in their accusations of hypocrisy.
So, yeah, offensive on demographic grounds? If I'm suddenly the Jesse Jackson of gay Jews, my ruling is that it's not. But is it trollish and disruptive? Absolutely.
P.S. Not sure how to prove that I'm gay and Jewish, but here's me in Israel (sorry for the corny shot), me acting gay, and me acting gay while in Israel. Thing that's the best proof I can offer short of dropping my pants and kissing a boy.Clin And if you don't believe me, you can trust Fred Phelps, right? — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 12:11, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
You don't have to share your Facebook photos with me. I already trust you. I'm sorry about using the word "claim". Although your openness led me to believe that you're perhaps the most honest person on Wikimedia, I'm concerned about your privacy. You don't need to prove yourself to me. Am I even worth proving anything to?
Your response is well thought out, but I don't believe that Penyulap is trolling. Penyulap often makes thought-provoking statements and expands discussions and debate. Perhaps some would consider such behavior to be trolling, but I don't believe that this behavior is undesirable. Even so, there are things that Penyulap should take time to think about, so I passed your response over to Penyulap. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 13:16, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't disagree with you that he makes some valid points. I mean, the controversial users who never have anything useful to say get blocked before anyone even notices. The problem is... if you're at a point where you think that bringing the Israeli–Palestininan conflict into a debate is a good idea, or that accusing the WMF of suborning manslaughter will convince anyone of your points, you need to seriously reconsider your priorities on Wikimedia, and the way you're going about achieving them. It's like... I have a very good argument that Rick Santorum's stance on homosexuality is literally fascist, but I generally avoid describing it that way, since once you start calling something fascist (even if that's the best objective term to describe it), the shock value of your comments starts to drown out the rhetorical value. And if I were to start prominently making that argument, I'd essentially be trolling. Fine, maybe trolling's not the best word for it, since it's something more subtle, and it's probably something I've been guilty of too, from time to time. But disruption is disruption.
Oh, and thanks for the humility about the "claim"/proof thingy, but it's fine. I've never quite gotten the whole anonymity thing... what, are the inclusionists/deletionists/spambots gonna show up at my door with guns and machetes, Purge-style? Sure, there a few things I've said on here that might come back to haunt me in real life, but there's also a lot of stuff I've said in real life that might too. My on-and-off personal motto is "Never forget; never hide", and I try to stay true to that. Secrets are dumb. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 14:02, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your help, but I don't believe that Penyulap will change his or her behavior.
I believe that "Vigilant" posted one of your photos on Wikipediocracy. Fortunately, Wikipediocracy's moderators care as much about the safety of minors as I do and removed Vigilant's post, although I should keep in mind that a 17-year-old isn't exactly a vulnerable child. You're intelligent, although there are probably still things that you have yet to experience, such as being examined and mocked on Wikipediocracy. If scrutiny and banter from Wikipediocracy doesn't bother you much, then I find your stance on transparency to be truly admirable, and given the stance of most others here, remarkable. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 02:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)