Fin Fang Foom And Foxx's Review

[Guest alanm]

"And since you are white, you know for a FACT that there are some twisted faggots out there who are into black guys not because they like the skin color or the "look" of black men but rather because they have personal issues about sex and race and they prefer having sex with black guys because black guys make them feel dirty whereas sex with a white guy does not create the same dynamic for them. (I would also point out that there are black guys who prefer having sex with white guys because they see white guys as trophies.)"

 

Your explanation is worse than the original post. My experience is that many white guys hire black escorts because they like to have sex with

Africian Americans. I am sure that there are "some twisted faggots" who fit your profile. The problem with your original post is that you chose to emphasize the latter group because it served your purposes.

[RockHard]

RE: Fin Fang Foom's defense.

 

"I've made the comparison that one guy may work at Le Bernadin and the other at The Starlight Diner but they're still both waiters. "

 

Don't tell that to the Bernardin (correct spelling) steward who's pulling in $300,000+ a year. Furthermore, "waiter" is not a derogatory term. Comparing this word to "prostitute" is false.

 

I'd rather be fucking a hot man at the Morgan than anyone in a car at some pier. Yes, both would define me as "horny" but the Morgan would leave me with that feeling of clean and comfortable. Yup, there's definitely a difference.

[+ Lucky]

Jay, I agree with what you have to say, excepting your comments on Scott. One of the reasons Foom's post may have skidded by on its racism is that most of us are used to the drivel that he posts. One could call him a caricature of a reactionary Republican who likes to show how outrageous he is. Check his posts in the politics forum to see what I mean. Then, take him for a laugh but don't take him too seriously. (Probably a good idea for the message center in generral.)

[SAdler]

>They are MANY

>MANY MANY reasons why Scott is a low class escort that have

>nothing to do with his race

 

WOW Jay. I have been nothing but cordial to you despite YOUR derogatory remarks in past dealings but THAT was totally rude and unnecessary. I'm sorry you feel the need to bend over backwards to please every prick as I recall the arguement but YOUR offensive remarks probably warrant an apology else mark that you were kidding because I certainly didn't read it that way.

[twinklover]

"just as Scott Alder isn't a low class escort on the basis that he is Jewish. They are MANY MANY MANY reasons why Scott is a low class escort that have nothing to do with his race."

 

Hehehehehe. The comparison of Foxx and Scott is pretty funny. It's remarkable (and more than coincidental) that they are both mentioned in this thread and in Scott's coverboy picture thread. Watch out, the long knives are coming out. It must be that time of month.

[Jay Ganymede]

It was a joke. Mr. Adler is cool in my book.

 

Chill

[twinklover]

"Mr. Adler is cool with me" too. Yes, as cool as the ice cubes when hell freezes over. I still think it's quite possible that Scott could have been that escort, not Foxx, doing and saying the same things. I even have images of the scene (substitute Scott for Foxx) in my mind.

[twinklover]

"Mr. Adler is cool with me" too. Yes, as cool as the ice cubes when hell freezes over. I still think it's quite possible that Scott could have been that escort, not Foxx, doing and saying the same things. I even have images of the scene (substitute Scott for Foxx) in my mind.

[Luv2play]

RE: Fin Fang Foom's defense.

 

I find this conversation interesting because it revolves around class and America has always been conflicted about class. Although ostensibly America was supposed to be or at least some thought it to be "classless", it has from the start been a society based on class. The thing that distinguished it from the "old country" was that people were able to move from one class to another through their personal efforts (or lack thereof in those downward cases), which was difficult if not impossible in older societies.

 

When you examine closely what FFF said about blacks, he did not say they were "low class". What he said is that prostitutes were not in a position to cast aspersions on a client's class. He also said that some white men perceived blacks to be low class and seek black escorts (whom he calls prostitutes) as sexual partners to abase themselves. He could have also said but did not that some upperclass men seek out white workingclass guys for the same purposes.

 

But it is equally true that some gay guys seek out "high" class guys to degrade them in certain ways. FFF also did not bother to mention that. And these "high" class guys could be black, yellow or brown for that matter. I would argue that it is the quality of the act that defines the case for personal abasement, not the color of the skin. But I suppose there is a certain sensitivity in America, given its racial history, that the two often become entwined. Especially when someone starts throwing around the term "nigguh". (It's interesting that the Nobel laureate Hemingway often resorted to the N word whereas many of his contemporaries did not. Those familiar with Kipling's works would also note this.)

 

What it comes down to is that FFF's comments were offensive because of the way he framed his arguments. Just as today some find Hemingway's and Kiplings writing to be offensive. Personally, I don't favor censorship as I think offensive language reflects more on the writer than anything else. What offends me more are the actions of certain people as actions speak louder than words but in this forum we can only judge people on their words.

[Epigonos]

RE: Fin Fang Foom's defense.

 

Luv2play makes some very interesting and relevant points. It seems to me that at times we have, in this country, carried political correctness to the point of the ridiculous and furthermore to the point of censorship. In polite, nice, considerate, civil society we do not use words like "####", "spic", "cunt", or "faggot" but the Bill of Rights of the United States Consitution guarantees that people who are not polite, nice, considerate, or civil have a right to do so. I may not choose to mix with these people but I will fight to sustain their right to use these hurtful, racial, sexist, and homophopic words. Personally I found it absurd that during the O.J. Simpson trial television and radio news commentators when quoting Mark Fermun spoke of the "N" word. I find it fightening that even in quoting someone there are now certain words that cannot be spoken. In a free society this tendency can lead to a dangerous path.

 

Interesting to note that even on this site the "N" word is blanked out when it is being used, in quotes, in a discussion rather than as a racial slur. It is also interesting that the other quoted words are acceptable thus censorship on this site, as in all, is limited and selective -- even more frightening

[+ deej]

RE: Fin Fang Foom's defense.

 

The Constitution and Bill of Rights protects US Citizens from censorship by the government. It does not protect free speech in a private venue, such as this site. News organizations, for example, can and do have editorial policies which may or may not restrict a reporter's ability to cover a story in the manner s/he'd like.

 

This site has editorial policies as well, but generally tries to stay away from objective judgement calls. A personal attack, which is not allowed, is a pretty easy call. "Offensive" is something even the US Supreme Court has tried (and failed) to define several times.

 

We're not always consistent because we're human. In this case, I find FFF's remarks completely offensive. But that was his aim, after all, and there's no rule against being offensive. He has a long history of going right up to the line, but never crossing it, and reveling in watching everyone get their knickers in a twist. It's what turns his crank.

 

People who post intentionally offensive remarks intended to garner responses are known as trolls and are best dealt with by ignoring them, leaving their words so that future posters can learn their patterns.

 

The MC masks certain words because you have to create a banned words list just to install the software. ;-) Hooboy chose words that he, personally, found offensive. We've seen no reason, to date, to change them.

 

Having said all that, every camel's back has a breaking point. Sometimes we reach it. The operators of this site have that right.

[Lookin]

Words and Class

 

Words and Class are both big subjects, in my opinion. But, like many big subjects, they can be trivialized to the point where nearly all meaning is lost.

 

Take words. “That N*gg*r’s Crazy” uses charged words and sounds exceptionally offensive. Yet Richard Pryor chose it as the title of his third album. “Yes, Foxx, there are men out there who hire you because, to them, sex with you is degrading because you’re black and they’re white.” doesn’t contain a single charged word, but I think most of us would find it offensive to hear it said about us.

 

Class, too, can be trivialized. The clever use of words can equate class with the quality of hotel room one rents, with one’s occupation, with one’s sexual proclivities, and with just about anything else. But class, in my opinion, is mostly about how one treats others. And, as FFF said, “it’s never classy to denegrate someone else’s class.”

 

I think it’s pretty hard to set up specific rules about which words are offensive and what constitutes class, but I believe most thoughtful people can spot them a mile away.

[Epigonos]

RE: Words and Class

 

deej I couldn't agree with you more. As a privately owned and operated site daddy and the moderators can make any rules they wish. I would, however, be interested in knowing why the "N" word is considered by the powers at be to be more offensive than words like, "honkie", "spic", "whop", "chink", "cunt" and "faggot".

[RockHard]

RE: Censorship

 

"Personally, I don't favor censorship as I think offensive language reflects more on the writer than anything else. What offends me more are the actions of certain people as actions speak louder than words but in this forum we can only judge people on their words."

 

Nicely expressed, Luv2play.

 

I judge Fin a good writer. He has a way of expressing himself that is far more entertaining than any sentence Rico "the entertainer" manages to pull together. Writing to entertain is not easy and most so-called "entertainers"— you know, the wannabees—can't write an entertaining sentence worth shit.

 

I can't stand political correctness or censorship of any kind. I'm a huge fan of HBO's "The Wire" and "Deadwood" and, even though I admit to cringing and wincing at some of the dialogue, I can't help but appreciate how the hateful words feed the story and define the personality of the characters. They do the same in real life.

 

This is a private site and, so far, I have no issue respecting the policy of the owner. If that respect dissipates, I have the freedom to go elsewhere.

 

"but there's still a certain pleasure in sticking it to someone who is obviously an asshole - and let's be honest, isn't that why most of you enjoy reading my posts?"

 

Best not to bite the hands that applaud your work, Fin dear. Fans tend to love to see their idols fall. (I use that term loosely. Fin's head is big enough.)

 

"People who post intentionally offensive remarks intended to garner responses are known as trolls and are best dealt with by ignoring them, leaving their words so that future posters can learn their patterns."

 

This is a most precious offering from deej. Maybe this is a good time to offer another quote from him: "The double standard here just floors me, Scott. Always has."

 

Blatant rudeness is also defined as "intentionally offensive remarks" and deej has quite a rude history here in his 7000+ posts. I have plenty of scars from his definition of trolldom. Lately, he's been considerate and diplomatically-toned. I hope this continues. I don't mean to slap deej down by bringing attention to his statements, since many of us are capable of being described as trolls, according to deej's definition, including deej. After all, it is the nature of this anonymous-poster beast.

[Jay Ganymede]

RE: Words and Class

 

The "N" word was a recent addition to that list. Hooboy for one didnt add it, it was done after his death.

[+ deej]

RE: Words and Class

 

>I would, however, be interested in knowing why the

>"N" word is considered by the powers at be to be more

>offensive than words like, "honkie", "spic", "whop", "chink",

>"cunt" and "faggot".

 

Dunno. You'd have to ask Hooboy. As I said before, he chose the words in the filter.

[Jay Ganymede]

RE: Censorship

 

I am totally not up for censorship, which is why I never mentioned anything about this post when it first appeared. What annoyed me was the SAME WORDS posted here, uttered in another thread which was PROMPTLY removed. If one statement directed at person Jewish offends and is a personal attack to Jewish then that same statement directed at person Black with even harsher words use (i.e. the "N" word) then it should ALSO be seen as offensive and a personal attack to person Black.

[Jay Ganymede]

RE: Words and Class

 

At the sake of being redundant Hooboy didn't place "NlGGER" on the list. The adjective was used to describe me; and then "censored" this year by another poster who was making a valid point.

[+ deej]

RE: Words and Class

 

Thank you for jogging my memory, Jay. You are correct.

 

I forgot I added that word to the filter during a spate of hateful posts from a poster who was again disabled just days ago. The hatefulness of the posts were compounded by the fact the poster was an alter-ego for an escort who posts here.

 

Would you like me to take that word out of the filter?

[RockHard]

RE: Annoyed by the details.

 

Since Foxx doesn't knowingly post here, there is that fine line of what defines a "personal" attack. If I say, "I think Naomi Campbell behaves like a coke-snortin', spoiled-cunt, psycho-addict niggah-fashionista," does this count as a personal attack here? Should it matter that her style of prostitution may be different than Foxx's?

 

Scott Adler is a known member here at the MC. He's written many times that he's Jewish. It seems to me any anti-semetic remark thrown his way could reasonably be judged a personal attack and deleted. Can, or should, the same consideration be applied to non-members?

[+ deej]

RE: Annoyed by the details.

 

>Can, or should, the same consideration be applied to non-members?

 

If it ever is, the politics forum is history.

[JakeSamers]

The original post might be a bit below the belt... (and racist). If the place looks like a bad situation when you drive up, call and cancell. Class is not an issue; or taste. Some guys, including myself, enjoy for a change going to a filthy "motel" and behaving badly. It does not matter how much money one has or what "end of the deal" you are on. All parties involved willingly participated.

 

Be safe and have fun

 

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~jakesamers-m4m

 

Jake Samers

Houston TX

[JakeSamers]

Uh oh, just reread the origianl post. I was mistaked in calling it racist. oops.

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~jakesamers-m4m

 

Jake Samers

Houston TX

[Guest alanm]

Before this week, Foxx had two very favorable reviews from people who have submitted other reviews. In other words, they are not first time reviewers. One reviewer is African American. The other is a white man who has reviewed many escorts, including Kristian from LA.

 

I thought Foxx's response to the review was awful. But there is nothing in Foxx's three reviews to support FFF comments about white men hiring black escorts because they enjoy being humiliated. In fact, reviews #1 and #2 complement Foxx on his good personality.

[VaHawk]

>I thought Foxx's response to the review was awful. But there

>is nothing in Foxx's three reviews to support FFF comments

>about white men hiring black escorts because they enjoy being

>humiliated. In fact, reviews #1 and #2 complement Foxx on his

>good personality.

 

WTF!?? Did you READ FFF's original posting???, really, DID you???? :-(

 

JESUS F*****G CHRIST!!!!!!!!!!!! There was NOTHING racist and NOTHING untrue in FFF'S observations about white men looking to hookup with black men !!!

 

Don't you people EVER visit any internet hookup site other than this one, or GOD FORBID, ever hookuped with men outside the escort scene???

 

Because if you DID!!!, you WOULD realize that FFF's comments were SPOT ON!!

 

Why ELSE would you see ads from white men, looking for BIG BLACK COCKS???? Notice the emphasis in such ads on BLACK and BIG!, as that is the misconception that these posters have!!!

 

FFF made a VALID and TRUE observation, but was SHOT down by all the pc pussies, yet again, who PRESUME to speak for all gay men. It must be NICE to have an asshole so tight and upright that even a swizzle stick up that asshole would require "hemmorhoid surgery" and a soda straw shoved up that same butt hole would be a self-induce lobotomu!!