The Gaming Den

Maybe the fact that Rand Paul is in favor of *amending the law to legalize discrimination* wheras Frank is in favor or *being less judgmental about word choice*?

Actually I'm amazed Franks argument about the meaning of words is still ongoing.

It seems awful one sided. "Words can mean multiple things! Meanings change! No word is bigoted".

Thats... an incredibly stupid argument to make. His conclusion does not follow from his claims. If anything his claims about the shifting nature of the English language only go to show that ANY word can become a tool of Bigots.

You know, like when a couple of Bigots use you know any "meaningless words" to inexplicably single out two of the only outed minorities on a message board and ceaselessly abuse them for months eventually driving one of them off.

Because if it isn't the word but the behavior that defines bigotry then Frank loses this fucking argument because the exclusionary and abusive behavior and the nature of the targeting and methodology of that behavior used by the people accused of Bigotry in this incident is consistent with that of bigotry.

If I call someone something, ANYTHING, and they say "that is offensive to my minority" and I CONTINUE to do so and DEMAND THE RIGHT to do so, and do so repeatedly and ceaselessly derailing their discussions and engagement in the community I am acting in a manner utterly consistent with the methodology used in the oppression of minorities.

And THAT is where you get when you accept Frank's "but words are just words man!" argument. Though really I wonder if he really means that, after all no one used any of the words used to abuse HIS minority now did they?

Crissa wrote:Where's the difference?

The difference between saying something and the difference between doing something.

I can endure an unlimited amount of nasty words from an upper class white girl (or boy, or... whatever) because it will never do me harm or limit my rights ever. Someone saying I cannot do something or go somewhere however could limit my rights.

There's a difference between calling names and banning people from things.

Words are ultimately "just words", if you actively harass someone with them, that's one thing. You shouldn't be allowed to force someone to listen to you by getting up in their face and insulting them.

However, if you're speaking in a general context, like on a message board, then you have freedom of speech. If someone doesn't want to listen to your message, then they can put on ignore. Yeah, you can call someone a dick or impolite for using various words, but that doesn't mean anyone has the right to go around censoring them.

If you believe in freedom of speech, then you have to be willing to accept that sometimes people are going to spread a message that you disagree with or even hate. And yet, you have to accept their right to say it.

And on bigotry-based jokes in general, there's always going to be targets of some kind. Whether you're bashing people of a different religion, nationality, sexuality, appearance or intellect... it really doesn't matter. It's just that as time goes on it becomes more civilized to make fun of transgenders rather than Jewish people, or (as we often do at the Den) make fun of other internet posters stupidity. But seriously, whether you're making fun of someone because they're black, obese or retarded, you're still making fun of them. And really, I get pissed off when people say that some groups are somehow magically off limits for one reason or another.

Everyone has their special little crusade about what can and shouldn't be insulted. For some people, it's religion, for other people it's race, for some people, it's sexuality... but whatever the fuck it is. I don't care. Seriously, fuck you people and think that your cause is more special than anyone else, because you're hypocrites. If you're going to go and insult someone for being ugly or stupid, it's pretty much the same as insulting them for being black or gay or whatever. Yes, they were born that way and if you're going to insult people for anything, then pretty much you have to accept that some people are going to insult you.

PhoneLobster wrote:You know, like when a couple of Bigots use you know any "meaningless words" to inexplicably single out two of the only outed minorities on a message board and ceaselessly abuse them for months eventually driving one of them off.

Oh PL, say what you mean, say what you mean. I mean, Crissa is wrong when she accuses everyone who disagrees with her about anything of bigotry, but damn, at least she's not a coward about it.

Go ahead call out which "couple" of Bigots you are talking about.

Prak the evil bastard who used trap to refer to a friends D&D character and Kaelik the evil bastard of the male pronoun until asked to stop?

Or aforementioned Kaelik and Frank of the mean old cosmetic surgery?

Or Prak and Uber the urban dictionary bitch quoting?

Go on, tell us to our face you little cowardly dick. Who are you calling a Bigot, back it up liar.

My favorite part is "the only outed minorities" because taking Zinegata at his word on the Phillipino thing, Frank is the only straight white male among the fab five of evil bigots. Assuming he is in fact one.

Orion wrote:But, every person who sore spots you willingly push is someone you have explicitly excluded from your audience. They will tend to be personally cross with you and they are right to do so. It should not be surprising that you are taken to task by people whose preferences you have explicitly ignore,d nor that they would attempt to drive you out in order to preserve a community where they can participate in the discussion.

You are wrong.

The entire point of the gaming den is that we are supposed to be above this bullshit where someone using words you find offensive causes you to completely ignore all content of the post.

People all over the internet have chosen to find the work fuck offensive, and ban it's use, but we privileged few are supposed to be up to the monumental task of not turning off our brains and rejecting everything someone says because they say a naughty word.

And instead, in an Incredibles moment, as soon nothing is offensive, apparently everything is, because according to Team Offended the most violent and terrible offense committed in the last several months was my use of a pronoun that had been used to refer to the aggrieved party without incident for the last 14 years.

Crissa wrote:My facts aren't wrong.

Crissa wrote:Before it was a slur, it didn't have a negative meaning.

FrankTrollman wrote:It just meant "happy." To the extent it referred to homosexuals at all, it was a slur.

Frank isn't even bothering to contradict me, and yet he says I'm wrong.

I'm not the one arguing for the right to make this board uncomfortable to a specific person.

-Crissa

contradiction and correction are two different things. You're right, he's not contradicting you, he's correcting you because you tried to smokescreen things again. Before gay was a slur it had nothing to do with homosexuals same with the word [EDITED], really.

So you're technically right, before gay and [EDITED] were slurs, they had neutral connotations. Specifically "happy" and "firewood" and nothing to do with homosexuals. Then people started using gay as code the same way we say someone's light in the loafers, and started burning gays so they derisively called gays firewood. [EDITED] is gallows humour, and given that, I would fucking bet that it started being reclaimed soon after it started being used. Why? Because not every homosexual is some stereotyped trope of an effeminate, cowardly man, or butch, overly-masculine woman (thanks for being such a great example, Crissa), and so I'm sure there were some who indulged in gallows humour, it's one of the human races' great habits, joking about impending death.

Orion wrote:The first time I ever heard the word trap to refer to a transvestite or transsexual was when Roy used it as a personal attack on Cielingcat. Consequently, people who use it remind me of Roy. If you want my respect, you won't use it.

Orion, you're a faceless presence on the internet who responds to a word by thinking everyone who uses it must be exactly like some idiot who insulted a person going through hard times and strung out on hormones foreign to their body.
Why would I ever give a damn about your respect?

alright, on the other hand, Frank's right, you have a perfectly good reason for disliking the word trap. But I'm a language freak, I think it might come with being an aspiring writer, so to me, it's stupid, but it is well reasoned, I must admit.

If I were to make a claim that Prak is a bigot, I wouldn't do it by asserting that the word "trap" is inherently bigoted. I'd do it by asserting that his demonstrated disregard for Cielingcat's feelings is evidence of a general callousness towards trans people.

Um. when did I demonstrate a disregard for Cielingcat's feelings? by using a word that was, allegedly, used to insult them? I don't recall that incident, possibly because after, if I recall, wishing them the best, and seeing it start to turn into a shitstorm, I left.

I'm not actually convinced that that's the case. I think he's probably equally callous towards people of every identity. But that makes him an asshole.

congratulations on figuring that out, you win a cupie doll.

*Hypothetical* people can and will be offended by everything. Given any sentence there exists at least one person who finds it offensive.

This kind of statement is made especially hilarious when you imagine someone taking offense to it specifically.

Crissa wrote:I said a statement was offensive. That should be the end of it. Instead we get a huge diatribe about how it isn't offensive. That's the opposite of respectful.

Ah, I see. You think you are the imperical dictator of what is and what isn't offensive, and think everyone should just shut up, do as you say and lick your [EDITED].

Well, I'm sorry to tell you this, princess, but life don't fucking revolve around you. If you say that you are offended by something I say and declare I should stop saying it because it offends you, and you continue to conduct yourself the way you have on this board, it's all the more likely I'm going to intentionally offend you. Because, yes, I'm an asshole like that, and because I very much enjoy my freedom of expression. I have the fucking right to be offensive, you do not have a right to not be offended. You don't want to read/hear things you find offensive? leave.

You're not defending free speech - you're defending the ability to brush off people as people.

I'm of the opinion that every person is deserving of the same respect as every other person until they prove otherwise. You and I only differ on how much respect we think the default person deserves.

Why would you even take the position that acting bigoted or continuing hateful stereotypes that affect real people is not bigotry? Then what is?

Intentions are bigoted, Thoughts are bigoted, actions can be bigoted though generally technically not (they're usually a relatively neutral action motivated by bigotry). Words are neutral. Expression is free. Technically, the Klan is perfectly within their rights to say whatever hatespeech they want, because they live in America and their speech is free and unhindered.

I wasn't even going to comment further; it's quite clear that people know my position on this issue. But Frank had to go and claim propriety on who is and isn't transgendered. And the basic answer is: He can't know. Which is at the root of why this use of the word trap is so insulting.

what?

And you've proven you have no respect for others.

What is the point of starting a thread fanfaring the use of a word that members of the board have already asked for you not to use?

I've already said why it is inappropriate - it is related to a fairly common motive for assault and murder. That makes it very not-funny.

Why would you argue further?

-Crissa

Words are not neutral. Expression does not come with freedom from consequences.

The consequence of your using this words is that members of the board felt uncomfortable and left. Another consequence is that bigots feel empowered and protected.

Crissa, if you don't want to read a website no one is forcing you to read it. Seriously, you don't have to read the website.

bullshit, Crissa.

First, I have respect for people who show they deserve it, which you haven't.

Second, this thread does not "fanfare" the use of the word trap, it merely provides a place where this arguement can happen without derailing a thread.

third, it's already been shown that you're wrong.

Gee, I can't imagine why I would argue further....

Prak_Anima wrote:

Crissa wrote:But Frank had to go and claim propriety on who is and isn't transgendered. And the basic answer is: He can't know. Which is at the root of why this use of the word trap is so insulting.

what?

What what? You can't know who is and isn't transgendered. Frank has never had the right to see my genitals, you haven't the right. I don't have the right to see CeilingCat's or Maj's. And I don't care.

What's insulting about this argument is that for any woman speaking about it, either they have to demonstrate they aren't a target or by outing themselves to be allowed to speak on the topic. Frank's argument is that only people who are willing to have their privacy invaded are allowed to complain.

And your argument, and ubernoob's, is that they don't even qualify for respect. Apparently in their world it's perfectly okay to chase someone off the board with racist, homophobic language.

It was a simple request: Please don't use that use of a word. Why is it so valuable to you that you must violate that request?

You are right: I have no right not to be insulted.

-Crissa

Prak_Anima wrote:bullshit, Crissa.

First, I have respect for people who show they deserve it, which you haven't.

How? Because I asked you to not use some internet slang?

Prak_Anima wrote:Second, this thread does not "fanfare" the use of the word trap, it merely provides a place where this arguement can happen without derailing a thread.

The thread was already derailed and locked. You started this thread. Several people already asked, and in the first page of this thread said supporting your position made them uncomfortable with posting here.

Prak_Anima wrote:third, it's already been shown that you're wrong.

How am I wrong? Please quote something I've said factually incorrect.

Or are you back to saying that no words can be negative or positive in connotation? It's a ridiculous position to take. Positive and negative words shape the world that we are in. Without context, people assume words have positive and negative connotations - and this varies by person and region, certainly, but not so randomly as to be useless to marketers and journalists.

-Crissa

Crissa wrote: Another consequence is that bigots feel empowered and protected.

And in this case, they should be, because it's a matter of freedom of speech.

If you believe in freedom of speech, then you have to accept that others have the right to say shit that you personally disagree with or things that offend you.

But that doesn't empower bigots. What truly empowers bigotry is taking away that freedom of speech and giving someone the right to control what's said. Because if that someone happens to have some bias (and he/she/they will) then you're dealing with some kind of favoritism and discrimination. Once you start banning "offensive" things, you start realizing that "offensive" is a relative term. There are plenty of religious nutjobs out there who consider gay lifestyles to be evil and devil worship and would consider anyone talking about it to be offensive to them. There are people who think the same of D&D.

We generally came to this board because we don't like being censored and having some arrogant ass moderator decide what's okay and not okay for people to hear. If you want to be at a place like that, then by all means, do so. I know you can find one, because there are plenty of boards like that already.

The den is special because it's a place where you can voice your opinions on shit without having to worry about getting censored. I'm actually proud that this place is somewhere that has the balls to tell the PC patrol to go fuck off.

Crissa wrote:I've already said why it is inappropriate - it is related to a fairly common motive for assault and murder. That makes it very not-funny.

Why would you argue further?

Because you were completely 100% wrong.

Crissa wrote:The consequence of your using this words is that members of the board felt uncomfortable and left. Another consequence is that bigots feel empowered and protected.

The consequence of you accusing every third person of bigotry is that if any of us were as thin skinned as Ceiling Cat we would have rage quit TGD already.

The only reason we don't, is because our response to someone (you) being wrong, is to call you wrong. Whereas your reaction to believing someone to be wrong is to call them variations on the word mean, including, but not limited to, sexist, racist, bigot.

no you're saying that "trap" is offensive because you can't know who is and isn't transgendered. That almost makes sense, except... yeah, I still can't see it. It's also not what you were arguing at first, so you're changing arguments.

and the only one who's saying people have to out themselves to have an opinion is you, Crissa, you said that it was bigoted because I was not in the group, so I couldn't say it.

Well, I am in the group, time to change your damned tune.

I never used racist or homophobic language. not once. I cannot control what other people find offensive, nor can I control their past experiences or even have absolute knowledge of them. I stayed out of ceilingcat's threads because the only advice I had to offer them was "suck it up, I did" and I knew it wouldn't be helpful, especially since my experience and theirs are not the same.

As for why is it so valuable to me to say what I want, because I have free speech, and it's about the only right I can exercise and protect, so I want a damned good reason to not exercise it, and you being offended is not a good reason. People using it in another context, with another connotation as a defense for murder is not a good reason.

as for fbmf condoning my speech (it's the internet, I have done anything), he has yet to say anything.

edit: I would just like to share that both people I've told about this, both bisexuals and both transgender to some degree, have prescribed exactly the same solution to Crissa's personality and argument.

As it happens when pointless arguments get this long and I decide not to read through the mess I do not know what is even being argued anymore.

However lets try not to point fingers about any more stupid shit. The reason why people left this board is because they felt it was the thing to do. It is no one else's decision but that person's so lets not get into a word fight over who hurt who's feelings. I'm not anymore responsible for Cat's feelings than anyone else here is responsible for mine.

The bottom line is, and I believe Frank is the first one to mention it, words are just words. No one here is responsible for someone else's feelings. If you wanna be butt hurt about someone's language that's reasonable but turning around and slapping hate terms back on them just because you think you have the moral high ground to do so isn't going to win any hearts.

The discussion is never going to move anywhere (if this one has been any evidence) and it will produce nothing but negative emotions. So to both Team: Offended And Team: Shut Up, any further arguing of this point is moot. There is nothing that can be said about it that hasn't already been put here in black and Grey. I in fact think this discussion should be locked. Nothing good will come out of it if it were to continue.

Prak_Anima wrote:no you're saying that "trap" is offensive because you can't know who is and isn't transgendered. That almost makes sense, except... yeah, I still can't see it. It's also not what you were arguing at first, so you're changing arguments.

Crissa wrote:What's insulting about this argument is that for any woman speaking about it, either they have to demonstrate they aren't a target or by outing themselves to be allowed to speak on the topic.

I don't see where I said 'trap' is offensive because you can't tell who it might apply to. I did say your argument was offensive, and specifically Frank's position that I cannot speak on the part because I haven't shown my genitals to him.

FrankTrollman wrote:The fact is, Crissa has no expertise that would make her more capable of judging the intent or social acceptability of 4chan memes than Prak does;

FrankTrollman wrote:You jumped all over Prak for having fun with transgendering, when he is transgendered.

(Which of course, I didn't. I only asked that the internet slang not be used.)

Prak_Anima wrote:and the only one who's saying people have to out themselves to have an opinion is you, Crissa, you said that it was bigoted because I was not in the group, so I couldn't say it.

Well, I am in the group, time to change your damned tune.

Where did I ever say that? It doesn't stop me from asking you not to use it. I would ask a black person not to use negative words for black people, or a programmer to use negative words about programmers. It's something I do.

And on this subject, I find this particular use of 'trap' to not just be negative, but to be outright disingenuous and disgusting - for the reasons I outlined previously: Coddling homophobia and attacks on gender variance, murder and assault, etc. I don't even understand your argument that 'the meaning behind trap is used as a defense for murders is no reason to be offended'.

Prak_Anima wrote:I never used racist or homophobic language.

I said 'trap' was homophobic. Several posters have agreed with me. Even Frank cannot argue away that this use would never have occurred without homophobia.

I don't believe I ever said that you were using homophobic language; merely that you're willing to perpetuate an environment that is protective of bigots. Your support from Kaelik, RC, ubernoob, and Roy should inform you of this more than anything I could say.

-Crissa

This thread reminds me of an episode of the The Boondocks.

MGuy wrote:The discussion is never going to move anywhere (if this one has been any evidence) and it will produce nothing but negative emotions. So to both Team: Offended And Team: Shut Up, any further arguing of this point is moot. There is nothing that can be said about it that hasn't already been put here in black and Grey. I in fact think this discussion should be locked. Nothing good will come out of it if it were to continue.

Exactly. I fail to see how any proponent of the opposing viewpoints is going to pull some magically convincing argument out of their ass and settle this in a manner that leaves anyone at all satisfied. You're all just rehashing now.

Hey Crissa, no one cares about your genitalia. Stop bringing them up.

Crissa wrote: And on this subject, I find this particular use of 'trap' to not just be negative, but to be outright disingenuous and disgusting - for the reasons I outlined previously: Coddling homophobia and attacks on gender variance, murder and assault, etc.

How is this encouraging murder and assault?

Nobody here has ever even come close to saying that it's okay to commit hate crimes. So lets forget about that whole bullshit about how we're encouraging physical violence, because we're not.

Oddly you seem to be launching an attack against intolerance while actually being the least tolerant in the debate. You're the one arguing that other people's freedom of speech should be restricted because you can't tolerate it.

I said 'trap' was homophobic. Several posters have agreed with me.

Actually I have a lesbian friend who is afraid of the whole "chick with a dick" incident too. But I guess she's homophobic too... oh wait...

Not surprisingly, when you expect one thing to be there and the other thing you didn't want is there instead, you're probably going to be disappointed. That doesn't have anything to do with homophobia, so much as it has to do with not wanting a penis.

Crissa wrote:

Prak_Anima wrote:I never used racist or homophobic language.

I said 'trap' was homophobic.

Yes, you boldly asserted that it was homophobic based on the fact that you don't like it.

I boldly assert that the name Crissa is homophobic.

Now change your name you homophobe!

Oh wait, one person isn't the sole arbiter of what words are offensive. So you have to deal with the multiplicity of people who also get a say, like everyone who uses it, many of whom disagree with you.

Crissa wrote:Your support from Kaelik, RC, ubernoob, and Roy should inform you of this more than anything I could say.

Yes when your support consists largely of posters who have openly outed themselves as lying about their own positions in order to troll this forum for lulz and also a poster infamous for openly writing post after post of rape apologia on this board... well...

There are good reasons I have about half those guys on ignore and am NOT clicking view this post on their current responses on this thread. They have absolutely no credibility on anything they say but ESPECIALLY not on this topic.

I mean seriously you like having pro-rape RC supporting your ethical decisions?

Crissa wrote:

Prak_Anima wrote:no you're saying that "trap" is offensive because you can't know who is and isn't transgendered. That almost makes sense, except... yeah, I still can't see it. It's also not what you were arguing at first, so you're changing arguments.

Crissa wrote:What's insulting about this argument is that for any woman speaking about it, either they have to demonstrate they aren't a target or by outing themselves to be allowed to speak on the topic.

I don't see where I said 'trap' is offensive because you can't tell who it might apply to. I did say your argument was offensive, and specifically Frank's position that I cannot speak on the part because I haven't shown my genitals to him.

Crissa, I'm done with anything having to do with your genitals. I want nothing more to do with this particular argument.

FrankTrollman wrote:The fact is, Crissa has no expertise that would make her more capable of judging the intent or social acceptability of 4chan memes than Prak does;

FrankTrollman wrote:You jumped all over Prak for having fun with transgendering, when he is transgendered.

(Which of course, I didn't. I only asked that the internet slang not be used.)

and then called me bigoted and implied I was homophobic because I used the term.

Prak_Anima wrote:and the only one who's saying people have to out themselves to have an opinion is you, Crissa, you said that it was bigoted because I was not in the group, so I couldn't say it.

Well, I am in the group, time to change your damned tune.

Where did I ever say that? It doesn't stop me from asking you not to use it. I would ask a black person not to use negative words for black people, or a programmer to use negative words about programmers. It's something I do.

and it's nosy and obnoxious, I'm sure the black person and the programmer would respectfully decline to acquiesce to your request. (yarrgh)

And on this subject, I find this particular use of 'trap' to not just be negative, but to be outright disingenuous and disgusting - for the reasons I outlined previously: Coddling homophobia and attacks on gender variance, murder and assault, etc. I don't even understand your argument that 'the meaning behind trap is used as a defense for murders is no reason to be offended'.

Prak_Anima wrote:I never used racist or homophobic language.

I said 'trap' was homophobic. Several posters have agreed with me. Even Frank cannot argue away that this use would never have occurred without homophobia.

the problem is, just because you say something and the Offended Brigade agrees doesn't make it so. Really it's not homophobia which is to blame for the term, but Star Wars. Please Crissa, feel free to boycott star wars for originating a funny meme which is offensive to gays. I know an Admiral Ackbar toilet you could buy if you really want...

I don't believe I ever said that you were using homophobic language;

yes, you did. Unless you were saying trap was offensive to blacks when you said I was using bigoted language...

merely that you're willing to perpetuate an environment that is protective of bigots. Your support from Kaelik, RC, ubernoob, and Roy should inform you of this more than anything I could say.

-Crissa

so long as it is speech we are talking about defending, yes, I am willing to perpetuate an environment where "bigots" can speak freely, because it means everyone can. My support from Kaelik, RC and Ubernoob just tells me they can't be all bad, or as dumb as they occasionally seem from other arguments.

mean liar wrote:She started it on a lark, not as a political statement. It was like something out of Life of Brian.

It was by her own enter button that she sent her cartoon to other writers and publishers who had more clout than she did to spread it around, and it was by her own mouth that she talked about it on a radio show.

From what I've read, the problem is that people didn't get her joke and started putting out actually offensive imagery. And at that point, she knew where the blame would fall.

I call her a dumbass not because she took it back, but because she was the one who distributed it, talked about it, and then claims she didn't understand that it would catch on. It's like an advertiser making a TV commercial and then being surprised that people bought the product.

CA wrote:Probably due to the fact that he didn't want to die. Everyone has their breaking point, and most people won't defend anything to their own deaths. There are exceptions, of course. In most people, self-preservation will trump all other morals and ethics.

Judge for yourself. She's made a deal of it on her webpage {OK, Retraction, Cartoon}.

Crissa wrote:I said a statement was offensive. That should be the end of it. Instead we get a huge diatribe about how it isn't offensive. That's the opposite of respectful.

The problem is your credibility. Not only do you have issues with etymology and word origins, but you choose words that are on the fringe to get upset about. That results in people not believing you when you say something is offensive.

I have actually taken a college course on feminism where the spear in your avatar's hand would be considered offensive because spears are phallic and OMG PENIS!!!111!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It was absurd.

You seem to choose fights about words that are equally ridiculous.

Crissa wrote:Upper class white boys make up the majority of this pool

One demonstration in London is hardly indicative of 4chan users as a whole - and most of those pictures are from the same event. And just because I'm curious... How can you tell class by looking at a bunch of people?

Kaelik wrote:The entire point of the gaming den is that we are supposed to be above this bullshit where someone using words you find offensive causes you to completely ignore all content of the post.

Yes.

Crissa wrote:What's insulting about this argument is that for any woman speaking about it, either they have to demonstrate they aren't a target or by outing themselves to be allowed to speak on the topic.

I was under the impression that it was the people on your side of the argument who tend to dismiss the opinion of people outside the "target" group. I've felt the need to speak up about my opinion and bring my gender into it precisely because you've shown absolutely no respect toward males who feel a word doesn't mean what you think it does.

By maintaining a position wherein people have to be victims in order to have a valid opinion, you force people to declare their victimhoodnessicity before they're allowed to speak.

RandomCasualty2 wrote:Nobody here has ever even come close to saying that it's okay to commit hate crimes.

But apparently you're okay with a group of Stormfront guys picking up a game here and tossing around their free speech?

Actually I have a lesbian friend who is afraid of the whole "chick with a dick" incident too. But I guess she's homophobic too... oh wait...

Yes, she probably is. Although that would be transphobia, specifically. There's a long and storied history of outspoken lesbians attacking transwomen and excluding them out of bigotry.

-Crissa