little joe morgan outed
by oakath on Jan 6, 2011 9:50 AM PST
Email
Print
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Joe Morgan being a complete assbag is not a surprise to me at all.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 6, 2011 10:18 AM PST reply actions
I hear worse stores about Reggie Jackson actually,
He really has made some enemies no doubt: even if I am hearing somewhat exaggerated stories about the guy.
As much as I can't stand Joe Morgan
I think a better title for rhe piece might read something like “Further Proof of Joe Morgan’s miserable personality”. I don’t think he was “outed” by this piece :)
I have abandonment issues. Thanks Lew.
by OptimistPrime on Jan 6, 2011 12:14 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
All three comments above are good, so I'll just give a "+3".
"We don't see things as they are, we see things as we are."
~ Anais Nin
outed? really?
Because we all know that being “out” reflects a queeny, superficial, whiny, effeminate, clothes-obsessed character, don’t we? We are not using mordant stereotypes to make points completely irrelevant to the term “outed” here, no no not at all. Posting this kind of terminology on a Bay Area website where several of the participants happen to be gay is not offensive, no not in the slightest.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
I didn't take it to mean that at all, personally.
I’ve always thought that word just meant “exposed.”
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 6, 2011 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
says who? straight people?
not to me it isn’t.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 3:52 PM PST up reply actions
and when it is
it demonstrates more than anything I could muster the sense of entitlement straight people feel to refer to stuff associated with being gay as undesirable and lesser.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 4:12 PM PST up reply actions
all I'm saying is that its the insensitivity and sense of majority entitlement
on the part of straight people that enables that to be so.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 4:29 PM PST up reply actions
no.
I think that’s clearly a misinterpretation on your part. The term, in the context it was used, was perfectly appropriate. If you’re offended by its use in this context, perhaps you need to deal personally with your own feelings of insecurity or anxiety about such language.
don't presume to enumerate my "feelings of insecurity"
until you’ve walked in my shoes. Was I even the only person here to take offense or question the use of this term? Was I even the only GAY person? Maybe you should lecture them about how insecure they are, that they should just allow what amounts to a subtle form of hate speech to go unchallenged.
You’d do well not to imagine or invent diagnoses about what someone feels about themselves when you’ve never even met them.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 9:27 PM PST up reply actions
Not only was the context wrong and inappropriate but it doesnt even apply to the body of the post......
Outing someone would imply that he is telling us something that is not already known….and I have never heard it used unless you are talking about gay people. I think it is readily accepted that Joe Morgan is a jerk, so in this case he is not telling something that is already known…
There is no A in OFFENSE!!
it's just another way to ensure that we are lesser and to be disparaged even in circumstances that
haven’t a thing to do with homosexuality.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 11:12 PM PST up reply actions
it doesn't matter
that it’s a misuse of the term – it’s not morally or ethically inappropriate for the poster to use that term. I would agree that they could have chosen their words better for the title of the post, but I don’t think it is derogatory or demeaning in it’s nature. I’m speaking from the perspective of a gay rights activist of 12 + years.
A few sources:
Wikipedia:
Extended meaning
The term can also be used more broadly to mean publicly disclosing other personal characteristics, such as political affiliation, ethnic origin or religion, that someone wishes to keep private.
Dictionary.com:
64. to become public, evident, known, etc.: The truth will out.
65. to make known; tell; utter (fol. by with ): Out with the truth
Thefreedictionary.com:
v.intr.
To be disclosed or revealed; come out: Truth will out
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 6, 2011 4:14 PM PST up reply actions
so bigotries have Wiki pages now, very nice
Let’s break it down: The title of this post says that Joe Morgan — no wait, “Little” Joe Morgan — was “outed” by this uniform guy as being a selfish, preening, abusive, negative little prick. It seems that people are never “outed” for doing good or being associated with constructive, positive behavior, only negative behaviors to be castigated and mocked. As the genesis of the term has to do with closeted gay people being removed from their secrecy against their will and subjected to scrutiny and judgment of others that in their concealment they were trying to avoid, I’d say that this term attempts a permanently negative connotation based on an association with queerness and as a gay man I will call that out or reject its efficacy every time I see it.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 4:28 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think this post had anything to do with homosexuality at all.
I think he simply wanted to say “exposed” but chose the word “outed” because he felt like it. I sincerely doubt he meant to make a homosexual connotation (going by the fact that I personally never made that connection until you brought it up.)
I personally think this term just means things beyond “revealed as to being a homosexual.” The word gay theoretically means only one thing: Homosexual (yes, happy too, but that’s beside the point.) The word outed, to me at least, means “exposed” first and “shown to be homosexual” second.
Maybe its a culture thing.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 6, 2011 4:32 PM PST up reply actions
no, it's a human sensitivity thing
why are gays “in the closet” and in a position to be “outed” anyways? Because they are afraid to be brutalized by a majority that is willing to subject gays to abuse because they feel entitled to do so as the majority orientation.
It’s not that this post had anything to do with gayness per se… I get that. But why make it about that then, by using a term that has as its basis concepts rooted in negative judgment of homosexual behavior, or really homosexual behavior as viewed through the prism of heterosexual sensibilities and norms?
I’m not trying to start trouble here (original poster did just fine at that), I’m just trying to elucidate to those of you that aren’t “this way” the subtle dehuminizations and denigrations we are subjected to only to be told that “it’s normal” and “I don’t mean it against gays.”
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
If it were me having written this fanpost, I can assure you, that my intentions had zero to do with homosexuality.
I’ll go into the author’s shoes myself, since I can’t speak for him, but if I wrote this fanpost “little joe morgan outed” about being a huge jerk, I didn’t intend to make it about homosexuality at all. I think the idea that he “made it about that” wasn’t intentional due to the ambiguity of the word for certain people.
Now that you’ve brought it up, I can see why you’d think it was (if you think of the word “outed” strictly as “exposed as a homosexual”) an insensitive, jerkish snide, but if the OP is anything like me, it’s out of the blue. That said, knowing this information now (that the homosexual community views this word with strictly the aforementioned meaning) then I’d choose a different word.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 6, 2011 4:44 PM PST up reply actions
I guess it is a geographical thing
Here in the bay we hear “outed” and it is a word that has been almost exclusively used in context of outing someone who is gay.
I have abandonment issues. Thanks Lew.
by OptimistPrime on Jan 6, 2011 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
For what it's worth...
When I read the title I immediately thought “gay” and the next thing that popped into my mind was whether Johnny Bench “outed” him or not.
At one point in my life I liked Dave Kingman more than Rickey Henderson. I was stupid.
Me, too. Not the Johnny Bench part, though.
Actually, I figured Joe Morgan had a son (that’s the “Little” part, right) and his son had been outed.
And, for what it’s worth, my Indiana household in the 90s subscribed to The Advocate, and we would never have imagined that “to out” might refer to anything other than sexual identity.
"Honestly, the more I teach, the more I find myself in favor of medication. I don't think kids should take any, though." - Nico
I didn't
My initial thought was that the post was going to expose Morgan ( or his kid “little” ) for something that he did, but didn’t want to be public.
If the word outed means to bring out, which I personally believe it does, then often times when something is brought out, it first was hidden, otherwise it would have been out in the open already. I’ve lived my whole life in the bay, and while I have heard this term used in reference to exposing someone to be homosexual, I have also heard it in reference to exposing someone to be a liar, a cheat, etc. I think the only relation is in the etymology of the word that something was hidden, then brought out.
The beauty of language is that words can be used in many ways, and often you have to look at the context to derive the authors intended meaning.
Absolutely no offense meant in any of this. Just my 2 cents…
When its time to shoot, shoot... don't talk
by Charlie O the Mule on Jan 7, 2011 7:34 AM PST up reply actions
Surely there is someone here with access to the OED
who can actually look up the origins of the term “outed” (and, I suspect, reveal this etymology to be false).
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
word Paul
I doubt they were saying that until it meant forced “out” of the closet, so to say.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 11:07 PM PST up reply actions
I do
I would be stunned if the original use of that word had a thing to do with homosexuality.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Rather, I don't (doubt it)
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Wiki out
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 11:30 PM PST up reply actions
Even if it originally did, it clearly has a generic meaning now
Such that dictionaries don’t even mention homosexuality (necessarily) in their definitions.
OED has it being used as a term meaning “to expose as a closet homosexual” used as early as 1990. I’d be shocked if this term wasn’t used in other contexts earlier than it.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2011 8:43 AM PST up reply actions
1990?!?
If that’s the earliest usage, it barely even counts as a word.
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
-1
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
by PaulThomas on Jan 6, 2011 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I'll settle RTF down
when people no longer feel available to use automatic terms of disparagement of who and what I am to describe circumstances that have less-than-nothing to do with those terms, just because they feel like it or “everyone does it.”
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 11:10 PM PST up reply actions
you have jumped right off a bridge here.
and derailed this thread for reasons that aren’t obvious here.
The OP said nothing remotely homophobic, and it’s your mistake to suggest that he had. Just because you and others make the mistake of thinking that “outing” is strictly a gay thing doesn’t make you right, and doesn’t make me concerned in the slightest for your little rage party you’re throwing for yourself here.
Of course, as noted above, the OP didn’t out Joe Morgan at all – most of us are well aware that he’s an asshole.
Nick Swisher is handsome.
by ChrisCEIT on Jan 7, 2011 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The word "outed" is not exclusive to homosexuality; nor was its origin as a verb in regard to homosexuality.
It is a generic word that refers to making something that was secret public. You can’t just assign your own personal meanings and connotations to words and expect the world to follow them.
This is absolutely nothing like people saying “That’s gay” about something that is bad. There is a clear connection between homosexuality and badness in that context (though I’d argue that the meaning of the word has changed from the original use there, but I still understand sensitivity to it).
The word “outed” is a neutral word that is sometimes used to refer to homosexuals making their sexuality public, but I find it offensive that you think you can just claim a word for your particular group of people. You don’t get to say “Sorry, even though this word is used all the time, on a daily basis, with no hint or a reference of homosexuality, we’re taking it. It’s now offensive to use this in any other context.” That, my friend, is bullshit.
www.zekeishungry.com
by thejd44 on Jan 7, 2011 8:40 AM PST up reply actions
I think the problem is it's primarily become the term to use when a homosexual person is exposed as such
By nature of its usage overall, it describes something generally seen as a negative: the revealing of some kind of information that was intended to be kept secret.
If that’s where the main issue with its use is, I get it. But it can’t be claimed as something that’s only specific to homosexuality.
Last of the Ninth - Photography
that's it flash, thank you
it’s that no one’s ever “outed” for anything good, really. For me it feeds into the illustration of what I am as terminally negative and to be furtively kept secret, away from the (implication in much of society is deserved) abuse that will come if I am “exposed” as this “bad thing.”
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 7, 2011 8:08 PM PST up reply actions
If you go through a link at the end of the Uniwatch post, you can see a few things Sale has
Among them is one of the old Turn Ahead The Clock jerseys.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/65516705@N00/sets/72157625746633066/detail/
Last of the Ninth - Photography
the Angels futuro ones I think are gross
but the A’s ones I kind of like.
Silence s'il vous plait!! Vous ne voyez pas que je suis en train de se masturber?!?
by emperor nobody on Jan 6, 2011 4:32 PM PST up reply actions
The Angels I think are gross but the A's I kind of like
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Can someone please explain to me a phenomenon that seems to happen here on AN all the time...
People take the time to write a fan post and actually post it on the site. Several people comment on said fan post, often times raising questions or speculating about what the person may have been thinking or what they meant, and not once does the original author come back in the thread and respond or even post anything at all. Sometimes people ask questions that can only be answered by the author, and they just remain silent. I really don’t get it?
It just seems as if there is no reason to speculate on what someone meant or what they were thinking when it is very easy for that person to just come in the thread that they wrote and post a response!
There is no A in OFFENSE!!
Though in many of these cases, the words "take the time to write a fan post" may refer to seconds or minutes, not hours.
"Honestly, the more I teach, the more I find myself in favor of medication. I don't think kids should take any, though." - Nico
Because they forget about it
Some people just have a random thought about the A’s (or a random link they want to share) and just decide to share it. They don’t really read every thread or know the way things are typically done around here, since they never stick around long enough to figure that out. They’ll probably disappear, but someone just like them will take their place.
by Rebuilding Season on Jan 7, 2011 12:25 AM PST up reply actions
Most AN readers are casual readers and rarely post if at all
Though I’m a diehard A’s fan and love AN, I’m also one of those who work 60+ hrs a week and have an hour commute on top of that, so I don’t necessarily read every single post- who has the time? If I post something, which is rare, I don’t always go back and read every single comment made to my post. You make a good point though, maybe anyone who posts should go back and read the comments, at least for the same day the post is made.
The greenmachine
my apologies for starting this fire
and stepping aside to avoid the repercussions. life interrupted. i’m back. emperor nobody – please accept my apology. bad title. period. the little part of the already bad title refers derisively to morgan’s nickname back in the day. none of us knew too much about him till he was traded to reds from astros for lee may and tommy helms in 1971. joining charlie hustle et al, he personified the missing piece of the puzzle. and, the big red machine was born. even though he went to castlemont, he was easy to target, with rose, for non reds fans, cause he was so good. let’s go a’s.
owner of a lonely tarp
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
