I’m not sure if you are attempting a platitude or are making a point, but to make a point your logic should be sound.
Your logic is that if an average first world person cannot live in a place comfortably, then you have an unstated implication that they should not receive support against death. Please correct if you were implying something else, would have been easier to know if you had spoken less vaguely.
Nonetheless regarding said “logic”, (TLDR it’s not logical) I don’t see the logical connection between the tourism experience of visiting a country under siege and how that determines whether the residents of that country should be exterminated.
If you were making a point, could you elaborate on this connection? If however you were attempting a platitude, no explanation needed, you succeeded.
Those states are making conditions intolerable for trans people in the hopes that they either kill themselves or flee. I personally know trans people who moved across the country within the past year because of the uncertainty over whether it would even be legal for them to piss in a public restroom, or whether they would have access to medication necessary to keep them mentally healthy. I fled nearly 20 years ago because I saw the writing on the wall.
That’s not even discussing the stochastic terrorism that has made drag flat out dangerous, as in “your gay bar in Brooklyn will get burned down” dangerous. That’s not a hypothetical, it happened less than a year ago.
Ah great, well thank you for the explanation regarding their implication. That is helpful.
Do you happen to also understand if their position is logical, or is your meaning then, “They murder, so we must murder them, so that all of the murderers have been murdered.”
(Please correct the above if I am misunderstanding)
Because there is a bit of a problem with that sentiment as well.
I’m not stating that you take this position, so do not take this next statement as targeted at you, rather it is targeted at those who may hold the above sentiment. That is, progress is rarely generated from the barrel of a gun. Then we live in a world where B’s hate against A is justified, because A hates B. This is a perpetual cycle of endless violence and war, that is the end result of this type of thinking, and why these comments are so negative because a lot of us have lived long enough to see this cycle, every day, it does not end through bloodshed.
They make a valid point, that most of the residents of Gaza despise the rainbow community, and many of them would physically harm them given the chance.
With this in mind, it’s quite bizarre that a Lemmy community built around the rainbow community is formally in support of them. I personally think the best thing to do in this situation would have been to stay out of it.
Plenty of people in the rural southern Appalachian county I grew up in would and did physically harm me when given the chance. Am I supposed to be okay with bombing their kids and hospitals now or something?
I think the best thing to do in this situation is not bomb hospitals and children. 🤷♂️
If it is, I guess we could all take a minute and talk about how Israel has such a problem controlling violent homophobic religious extremists that Jerusalem Pride has needed a ratio of 1 armed guard for every 6 marchers.
So a pride march in Jerusalem is just as safe as one in Gaza, except the one in Israel has more political willpower behind it to attract and maintain the goodwill of the west? Yeah I’d agree with that.
I’m not sure if you are attempting a platitude or are making a point, but to make a point your logic should be sound.
Your logic is that if an average first world person cannot live in a place comfortably, then you have an unstated implication that they should not receive support against death. Please correct if you were implying something else, would have been easier to know if you had spoken less vaguely.
Nonetheless regarding said “logic”, (TLDR it’s not logical) I don’t see the logical connection between the tourism experience of visiting a country under siege and how that determines whether the residents of that country should be exterminated.
If you were making a point, could you elaborate on this connection? If however you were attempting a platitude, no explanation needed, you succeeded.
They murder gay people, that was their point.
so doesn’t the us
Not as a matter of policy, no.
texas, florida, ohio, and utah would like a word
Those states execute people for the crime of being gay?
Those states are making conditions intolerable for trans people in the hopes that they either kill themselves or flee. I personally know trans people who moved across the country within the past year because of the uncertainty over whether it would even be legal for them to piss in a public restroom, or whether they would have access to medication necessary to keep them mentally healthy. I fled nearly 20 years ago because I saw the writing on the wall.
That’s not even discussing the stochastic terrorism that has made drag flat out dangerous, as in “your gay bar in Brooklyn will get burned down” dangerous. That’s not a hypothetical, it happened less than a year ago.
I didn’t realize we were bombing them into being tolerant, before we used to do it to make them a democracy.
Ah great, well thank you for the explanation regarding their implication. That is helpful.
Do you happen to also understand if their position is logical, or is your meaning then, “They murder, so we must murder them, so that all of the murderers have been murdered.”
(Please correct the above if I am misunderstanding)
Because there is a bit of a problem with that sentiment as well.
I’m not stating that you take this position, so do not take this next statement as targeted at you, rather it is targeted at those who may hold the above sentiment. That is, progress is rarely generated from the barrel of a gun. Then we live in a world where B’s hate against A is justified, because A hates B. This is a perpetual cycle of endless violence and war, that is the end result of this type of thinking, and why these comments are so negative because a lot of us have lived long enough to see this cycle, every day, it does not end through bloodshed.
They make a valid point, that most of the residents of Gaza despise the rainbow community, and many of them would physically harm them given the chance.
With this in mind, it’s quite bizarre that a Lemmy community built around the rainbow community is formally in support of them. I personally think the best thing to do in this situation would have been to stay out of it.
Plenty of people in the rural southern Appalachian county I grew up in would and did physically harm me when given the chance. Am I supposed to be okay with bombing their kids and hospitals now or something?
I think the best thing to do in this situation is not bomb hospitals and children. 🤷♂️
Is that relevant?
If it is, I guess we could all take a minute and talk about how Israel has such a problem controlling violent homophobic religious extremists that Jerusalem Pride has needed a ratio of 1 armed guard for every 6 marchers.
The fact that Israel has a pride march at all kinda works against whatever point you’re making.
Do you feel that needing 1 armed guard for every 6 marchers is indicative that it is incredibly safe to be out as queer in Jerusalem?
Who provides the armed guards, out of interest?
Why are the armed guards needed?
Who are they being protected from?
Do you think a pride march in the Gaza strip would be any safer?
So a pride march in Jerusalem is just as safe as one in Gaza, except the one in Israel has more political willpower behind it to attract and maintain the goodwill of the west? Yeah I’d agree with that.
Israel murders those gay people too, as well as their families and friends. The answer to homophobia just isn’t genocide 🤷