Gawker Media Outs Apple's New Boss?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
How did Steve Jobs get his liver? Tim Cook is the most powerful gay man in Silicon Valley? Who even cares about this stuff? Can we go back to last week when I was complaining about over-coverage of the Apple "home" button?

It looks increasingly like Steve Jobs' reign at Apple is over. If the CEO doesn't return from his third, indefinite medical leave, COO Tim Cook will succeed him, marking a new era not only for Apple but for gay progress.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I honestly think the fact that they even mention that he is gay is a reminder of how far we still have to go. How is that even slightly relevant?
 
I snickered @ "two well-placed sources." Yes, I'm immature.
 
well it all makes sense about mac users and their ilk.
 
Sorry, but isn't saying "most powerful gay man" and "gay progress" cancel each other out?

I mean, isn't the whole point of equal rights to be viewed the same as everyone else? ...so, by putting a label on someone as gay and then calling it gay progress, doesn't this undermine the whole argument?
 
problem is it seems most "gays" love flaunting their choice and throwing it in people's face every way they can.

i want a straight pride parade!
i want white history month!

the list goes on.
 
Let's not miss the point here, talking about rights and progress and blah blah. This, my friends, is comedy gold and total pwnership.
It's finally official, then. Macfag more literally takes on exactly the same meaning it had before. Because apple is gay, you see.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. The gay part, I mean. And only the gay part.
 
MrGuvernment said:
problem is it seems most "gays" love flaunting their choice and throwing it in people's face every way they can.

i want a straight pride parade!
i want white history month!

the list goes on.
Click to expand...

Don't assume the vocal minority accounts for the majority.
 
I'm afraid the Native American has a few more hills to climb, friend of friends...
 
This explains alot about the leftist/anti cristian social causes they support.
 
I don't understand why this was even mentioned. I can tell a lot of people are already making fun of him but this is going to backfire for everyone who is ridiculing this man/company. Looking at it from a business perspective, this man is going to reach out to the gay community and probably inherit more business.
 
Who cares?

Just like Jobs, its the guys personal life. How about Gawker fucks off and dies? I can't stand Apple, but these guys are still entitled to their personal lives. Whether this guy bats for the blue or the pink team, I don't care, whether he manages the company well, and does the job a CEO should do. That I might give a shit about. Even though I A) Don't own any Apple products, and never will and B) Don't own Apple stock. He is still entitled to his privacy.

So go drink bleach Gawker, you bottom feeding hack journalists
 
rohan23 said:
I don't understand why this was even mentioned. I can tell a lot of people are already making fun of him but this is going to backfire for everyone who is ridiculing this man/company. Looking at it from a business perspective, this man is going to reach out to the gay community and probably inherit more business.
Click to expand...

How? That's been their target demographic all along....
well, and 16yo girls w/daddies credit card.
 
Can any conspiracy theorists find a way to connect the military's research into a "gay bomb" with Apple's management structure and product R&D choices? It might make for some entertaining reading. :)
 
pxc said:
It actually has little to do with even that. It's a mental construct used by some to justify hating another group.
Click to expand...

As much as his statement is not justifiable, invoking silent majorities to refute claims is equally as poor. While it is often "safe to assume" that one doesn't speak for a group, I think it is equally interesting that society has come to accept events (e.g. Pride events) when they relate to popular individual rights groups (which are typically some kind of minority in societel norm). Yet when one suggests creating an event representing the majority (some view this as Congress in the US, I don't), they are given the political equivalent of a lynching on top of threats of violence.
 
MrGuvernment said:
problem is it seems most "gays" love flaunting their choice and throwing it in people's face every way they can.

i want a straight pride parade!
i want white history month!

the list goes on.
Click to expand...

I've experience this 1st hand...
 
Mise said:
As much as his statement is not justifiable, invoking silent majorities to refute claims is equally as poor. While it is often "safe to assume" that one doesn't speak for a group, I think it is equally interesting that society has come to accept events (e.g. Pride events) when they relate to popular individual rights groups (which are typically some kind of minority in societel norm). Yet when one suggests creating an event representing the majority (some view this as Congress in the US, I don't), they are given the political equivalent of a lynching on top of threats of violence.
Click to expand...

Well the general idea is that the majority of people don't need representing because well they're the majority. That said I think shit like gay pride parades are stupid and in many cases only serve to undermine the message trying to be sent.
 
MrGuvernment said:
problem is it seems most "gays" love flaunting their choice and throwing it in people's face every way they can.

i want a straight pride parade!
i want white history month!

the list goes on.
Click to expand...

I don't think you know 'most' gays.

If being gay is a choice then so is being hetro, when did any of the straight [H] followers choose to like members of the opposite sex?

It is sad that if a person who is gay chooses to not disclose their orientation they are hiding something and less honest for it, yet if they are open and talk about who they love then they are being obnoxious by flaunting it. Heads you win, tails I lose.
 
Maybe this just shows that Mac-bashers should be careful what they wish for --they just might get it. ;)

(yes, this was a joke, from a Wintel user who thinks Apple has a a place in the market, even if they aren't his primary computing or technology source)
 
Elf_Boy said:
I don't think you know 'most' gays.

If being gay is a choice then so is being hetro, when did any of the straight [H] followers choose to like members of the opposite sex?

It is sad that if a person who is gay chooses to not disclose their orientation they are hiding something and less honest for it, yet if they are open and talk about who they love then they are being obnoxious by flaunting it. Heads you win, tails I lose.
Click to expand...

Straight users didnt. Because straight is normal, so there is no choice to be made. Deviance from the norm is a choice.
 
The minority that gets the worst scorn are the gays turned straight. Life in this country is easier for the gay.
 
4saken said:
Straight users didnt. Because straight is normal, so there is no choice to be made. Deviance from the norm is a choice.
Click to expand...
I think his point was that neither group 'chooses'. I want to bang chicks because that's how I'm wired. Gay people aren't wired like that — they're wired differently. They look at people of the same sex and think "hey, I'd like to bang that [guy or girl]".

So by that logic, the only choice a gay person makes is whether to lead the homosexual lifestyle (fuckin' the same sex) or try and adhere to the societal norm of a heterosexual lifestyle (fuckin' the opposite sex), even if that isn't what they really want. For them, that's the only choice to be made.

As far as Cook is concerned, I definitely suspected it, but his sexual preferences don't really concern me.
 
phide said:
I think his point was that neither group 'chooses'. I want to bang chicks because that's how I'm wired. Gay people aren't wired like that — they're wired differently. They look at people of the same sex and think "hey, I'd like to bang that [guy or girl]".

So by that logic, the only choice a gay person makes is whether to lead the homosexual lifestyle (fuckin' the same sex) or try and adhere to the societal norm of a heterosexual lifestyle (fuckin' the opposite sex), even if that isn't what they really want. For them, that's the only choice to be made.

As far as Cook is concerned, I definitely suspected it, but his sexual preferences don't really concern me.
Click to expand...

Excellent Observation!!!!!
 
phide said:
I think his point was that neither group 'chooses'. I want to bang chicks because that's how I'm wired. Gay people aren't wired like that — they're wired differently. They look at people of the same sex and think "hey, I'd like to bang that [guy or girl]".

So by that logic, the only choice a gay person makes is whether to lead the homosexual lifestyle (fuckin' the same sex) or try and adhere to the societal norm of a heterosexual lifestyle (fuckin' the opposite sex), even if that isn't what they really want. For them, that's the only choice to be made.

As far as Cook is concerned, I definitely suspected it, but his sexual preferences don't really concern me.
Click to expand...

was just trying to feed the trolls. :)
 
I can't say fuck off to Gawker enough over this. Who gives a shit if he smokes pole or not. It's his life. Until this point I have defended Gawker over the iPhone scandal but no more.
 
As I suspected, this thread is filled a good amount of immaturity. Mix Apple and the word "gay" on [H] and every idiot on here giggles like he's still in middle school.

Although the "gays wave it in our face!" and "its their choice!" posts make me laugh, shows we still live in an ignorant world.

Now I'm just waiting for someone to drop the "other" F-bomb and point it at me for this post, then we'll have the full cycle of neanderthals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top