Calls for violence against LGBTQ people intensify

[El Lazaro]

An ideal solution for homophobes.

An ideal solution for no one who hasn't killed another

But killing all killers makes you a killer that another killer of killers has to kill or be killed by. This seems like a difficult policy to implement.

[Soviet Haaregrad]

An ideal solution for no one who hasn't killed another

But killing all killers makes you a killer that another killer of killers has to kill or be killed by. This seems like a difficult policy to implement.

I think you misread Floof's comment. They're commenting on how most people don't find killing other people particularly easy to do.

[Floofybit]

An ideal solution for no one who hasn't killed another

But killing all killers makes you a killer that another killer of killers has to kill or be killed by. This seems like a difficult policy to implement.

The person who killed the killer by law wouldn't count as a killer. Although, I'm still shaky on the death penalty

[Ifreann]

But killing all killers makes you a killer that another killer of killers has to kill or be killed by. This seems like a difficult policy to implement.

The person who killed the killer by law wouldn't count as a killer. Although, I'm still shaky on the death penalty

How you would design the murder laws in your fantasy authoritarian dictatorship are not really relevant to this thread.

[Floofybit]

The person who killed the killer by law wouldn't count as a killer. Although, I'm still shaky on the death penalty

How you would design the murder laws in your fantasy authoritarian dictatorship are not really relevant to this thread.

I know, I was just beforehand stating that homophobes nor homosexuals deserve the death penalty because people were saying otherwise

[Soviet Haaregrad]

How you would design the murder laws in your fantasy authoritarian dictatorship are not really relevant to this thread.

I know, I was just beforehand stating that homophobes nor homosexuals deserve the death penalty because people were saying otherwise

There's nothing wrong with poking fun at people who advocate to harm others by reminding them they too can be targeted.

[Ifreann]

How you would design the murder laws in your fantasy authoritarian dictatorship are not really relevant to this thread.

I know, I was just beforehand stating that homophobes nor homosexuals deserve the death penalty because people were saying otherwise

The brand new, one post account that wants to kill all LGBTQ people doesn't need to be treated like they're making a serious point about the death penalty.

[Floofybit]

I know, I was just beforehand stating that homophobes nor homosexuals deserve the death penalty because people were saying otherwise

The brand new, one post account that wants to kill all LGBTQ people doesn't need to be treated like they're making a serious point about the death penalty.

I was thinking more about this post

KILL THEM ALL

An ideal solution for homophobes.

[Ifreann]

The brand new, one post account that wants to kill all LGBTQ people doesn't need to be treated like they're making a serious point about the death penalty.

I was thinking more about this post

An ideal solution for homophobes.

Is also obviously not worth taking as a serious point about the death penalty.

[Portzania]

I know, I was just beforehand stating that homophobes nor homosexuals deserve the death penalty because people were saying otherwise

There's nothing wrong with poking fun at people who advocate to harm others by reminding them they too can be targeted.

"But officer! I was just joking about killing people, why am I getting sentenced for a death threat!???"

[Soviet Haaregrad]

There's nothing wrong with poking fun at people who advocate to harm others by reminding them they too can be targeted.

"But officer! I was just joking about killing people, why am I getting sentenced for a death threat!???"

Imagine failing to understand context this badly.

[Fahran]

Threatening suicide because you feel like you are in the wrong body and if you don’t get hormones and surgery done to fit in your supposed preferred body you will miserable. That statement right there, how does that not sound like a mental illness?

Whether or not gender dysphoria, which is what you’re describing albeit in a somewhat awkward fashion, is a mental illness is controversial. On the one hand, it’s a medical condition that can result in extreme distress, identity crises, image issues, depression, suicidal ideation, etc. On the other hand, marginalized communities tend to experience many such issues, and we wouldn’t label being black or fat as mental illnesses. I tend to characterize gender dysphoria as a mental illness because it justifies treatment and insurance coverage - if only that worked for other mental health struggles. That said, there’s a difference between experiencing gender dysphoria and being trans. One is a medical term to describe a particular cognitive state and form of distress. The other is an informal social term to describe someone who doesn’t identify as the gender corresponding to their genetic or biological sex at birth - mostly it relates to secondary sexual characteristics.

[Fahran]

I heard that Uganda banned gay people

“Why are you gae?”

But seriously tho that’s messed up and disgusting. Ancient Greece allowed gay people, do better Uganda.

Ancient Hellenes also originated the idea that being gay was a mental illness and that certain gay men were effeminate. Don’t pat them on the back too hard.

[Todes Reich]

It is the strong belief of the Reich that this notion of increased calls for violence against sexual deviants is nothing but an over-exaggeration. Granted that such a crime is punishable by death in the Reich, there are few other regions/nations that follow a similar policy. Misconstrued liberal radicals with too much time on their hands and a goal of propagating their agenda have begun using hyperbole in a war of attrition and subversion to project an image of victimisation and extend their influence into regions where communities live in harmony with and without queers. This is further supported by the constant denials of their own attempts at increasing their population by 'subliminal manipulation' and targeted dissemination of widespread confusion amongst children and young adults. The Reich believes it is high time to put an end to this farce of a 'civil movement' and collectively euthanise those who refuse to integrate into society. Either they live as our equals or die. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Fahran]

generally speaking, to read this forum is to not desire to participate it.

however, here, i am tempted against my better judgement to say that, in my country, the dialectics about class war or class struggle, do not coincide with the dialectics about transgender surgeries for adolescents.

it is this way in most of the world.

i invite you to consider the reasons for which these two dialectics form an ideological cluster in your local culture, where they do not form such a cluster in the other many cultures in the world.

Coalition-building. It’s the same reason Islamists and black nationalists, who often aren’t particularly progressive beyond niche issues, have begun to receive some degree of support in left-wing circles. They’re all arrayed in opposition to existing forms of hegemony and likely could not gain ground alone. Intersectionality, while a sincere attempt to describe how overlapping privileges and identities function in society, serves to alleviate what would otherwise be very obvious ideological contradictions in such a coalition. Beyond that, y’all still have an active labor movement???

[Gravlen]

generally speaking, to read this forum is to not desire to participate it.

however, here, i am tempted against my better judgement to say that, in my country, the dialectics about class war or class struggle, do not coincide with the dialectics about transgender surgeries for adolescents.

it is this way in most of the world.

i invite you to consider the reasons for which these two dialectics form an ideological cluster in your local culture, where they do not form such a cluster in the other many cultures in the world.

One of the things I've really started considering recently is how obsessed people are with surgery. Take a thread with a fairly innocuous theme, like increasing violence against LGBTQ people. Or heck, a slightly more nocuous theme like increasing violence against trans people, which is what discussion on LGBTQ people always devolves into. How many people are going to barge in on that thread and talk solely about 'the surgery' on adolescents, like it's the big issue of the day that's being forced onto society. No mention that surgery is a single optional part of transition that many trans people don't get for a variety of reasons, no mention that increasing violence is tied at most to a false perception around surgery. It's just 'surgery on kids=bad, ergo trans=bad.'

All this ties into my homegrown theory on how transphobia propagates because people are obsessed with dicks, but that's another tangent.

I've expressed my own version of that theory before, so I wouldn't be surprised if I already subscribe to your newsletter.

Surgery sounds scary, but it's not what's happening. The concern about children undergoing surgery often betrays that people haven't looked into what's actually happening, and what trans health care actually consists of.

[Fahran]

It is the strong belief of the Reich that this notion of increased calls for violence against sexual deviants is nothing but an over-exaggeration. Granted that such a crime is punishable by death in the Reich, there are few other regions/nations that follow a similar policy. Misconstrued liberal radicals with too much time on their hands and a goal of propagating their agenda have begun using hyperbole in a war of attrition and subversion to project an image of victimisation and extend their influence into regions where communities live in harmony with and without queers. This is further supported by the constant denials of their own attempts at increasing their population by 'subliminal manipulation' and targeted dissemination of widespread confusion amongst children and young adults. The Reich believes it is high time to put an end to this farce of a 'civil movement' and collectively euthanise those who refuse to integrate into society. Either they live as our equals or die. Nothing more, nothing less.

This is an out-of-character forum.

[Portzania]

"But officer! I was just joking about killing people, why am I getting sentenced for a death threat!???"

Imagine failing to understand context this badly.

What context? You advocated for violence in return of someone else advocating for violence. What good does that do?

[Fahran]

Imagine failing to understand context this badly.

What context? You advocated for violence in return of someone else advocating for violence. What good does that do?

This is why I just want to send all y’all, as well as everyone else who posts to NSG, to a pony farm. It’s the ideal solution to y’all’s numerous serious transgressions.

[Peoples Place]

What context? You advocated for violence in return of someone else advocating for violence. What good does that do?

This is why I just want to send all y’all, as well as everyone else who posts to NSG, to a pony farm. It’s the ideal solution to y’all’s numerous serious transgressions.

please just be the better person and stop people. I beg

[Phobos Drilling and Manufacturing]

An ideal solution for no one who hasn't killed another

But killing all killers makes you a killer that another killer of killers has to kill or be killed by. This seems like a difficult policy to implement.

You don’t want the death penalty because you think killing is immoral,

I don’t want the death penalty because I want serial killers to suffer

We are not the same.

[Nilokeras]

generally speaking, to read this forum is to not desire to participate it.

however, here, i am tempted against my better judgement to say that, in my country, the dialectics about class war or class struggle, do not coincide with the dialectics about transgender surgeries for adolescents.

it is this way in most of the world.

i invite you to consider the reasons for which these two dialectics form an ideological cluster in your local culture, where they do not form such a cluster in the other many cultures in the world.

One of the things I've really started considering recently is how obsessed people are with surgery. Take a thread with a fairly innocuous theme, like increasing violence against LGBTQ people. Or heck, a slightly more nocuous theme like increasing violence against trans people, which is what discussion on LGBTQ people always devolves into. How many people are going to barge in on that thread and talk solely about 'the surgery' on adolescents, like it's the big issue of the day that's being forced onto society. No mention that surgery is a single optional part of transition that many trans people don't get for a variety of reasons, no mention that increasing violence is tied at most to a false perception around surgery. It's just 'surgery on kids=bad, ergo trans=bad.'

All this ties into my homegrown theory on how transphobia propagates because people are obsessed with dicks, but that's another tangent.

Like a climber trying to scale a frozen waterfall, gender-affirming surgery is just where they've managed to lodge their ice axe. It's a problem going all the way back to the gay marriage debate: the polling generally shows that people are broadly supportive of LGBT rights, even among relatively conservative circles. They may think it's a sin, but they also think people should be able to live their lives as they choose without being discriminated against.

Most people are small-l liberals that way, so this sort of stance goes with the grain. The right's major failure in the LGBT rights debate in the 2010s was in failing to turn marriage into a wedge - an issue that they could wield and force enough people to get on their side about to exploit. Gender-affirming surgery, drag and sports seems to be their attempt this time around, with mixed results. One imagines the first debate between DeSantis and Trump where DeSantis tries to nail Trump about being insufficiently committed to the anti-trans crusade and Trump counters with 'you think a lot about kids' privates, Ron. That's weird'.

And it is weird, and the GOP has a very thin tightrope to walk in not coming across as deeply weird and offputting to the large majority of people who might express concern when asked by a pollster about trans kids in sports, but would think mandatory genital inspections at football games is a bridge too far.

[Ryemarch]

It is the strong belief of the Reich that this notion of increased calls for violence against sexual deviants is nothing but an over-exaggeration. Granted that such a crime is punishable by death in the Reich, there are few other regions/nations that follow a similar policy. Misconstrued liberal radicals with too much time on their hands and a goal of propagating their agenda have begun using hyperbole in a war of attrition and subversion to project an image of victimisation and extend their influence into regions where communities live in harmony with and without queers. This is further supported by the constant denials of their own attempts at increasing their population by 'subliminal manipulation' and targeted dissemination of widespread confusion amongst children and young adults. The Reich believes it is high time to put an end to this farce of a 'civil movement' and collectively euthanise those who refuse to integrate into society. Either they live as our equals or die. Nothing more, nothing less.

General
For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

[Gravlen]

One of the things I've really started considering recently is how obsessed people are with surgery. Take a thread with a fairly innocuous theme, like increasing violence against LGBTQ people. Or heck, a slightly more nocuous theme like increasing violence against trans people, which is what discussion on LGBTQ people always devolves into. How many people are going to barge in on that thread and talk solely about 'the surgery' on adolescents, like it's the big issue of the day that's being forced onto society. No mention that surgery is a single optional part of transition that many trans people don't get for a variety of reasons, no mention that increasing violence is tied at most to a false perception around surgery. It's just 'surgery on kids=bad, ergo trans=bad.'

All this ties into my homegrown theory on how transphobia propagates because people are obsessed with dicks, but that's another tangent.

Like a climber trying to scale a frozen waterfall, gender-affirming surgery is just where they've managed to lodge their ice axe. It's a problem going all the way back to the gay marriage debate: the polling generally shows that people are broadly supportive of LGBT rights, even among relatively conservative circles. They may think it's a sin, but they also think people should be able to live their lives as they choose without being discriminated against.

Most people are small-l liberals that way, so this sort of stance goes with the grain. The right's major failure in the LGBT rights debate in the 2010s was in failing to turn marriage into a wedge - an issue that they could wield and force enough people to get on their side about to exploit. Gender-affirming surgery, drag and sports seems to be their attempt this time around, with mixed results. One imagines the first debate between DeSantis and Trump where DeSantis tries to nail Trump about being insufficiently committed to the anti-trans crusade and Trump counters with 'you think a lot about kids' privates, Ron. That's weird'.

And it is weird, and the GOP has a very thin tightrope to walk in not coming across as deeply weird and offputting to the large majority of people who might express concern when asked by a pollster about trans kids in sports, but would think mandatory genital inspections at football games is a bridge too far.

Relevant to this:

the New York Times reported in April that message-testing determined that isolating transgender Americans might be an effective political wedge for the right.

This is not an accident, as the New York Times reported on Sunday. After the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage — and particularly after it overturned Roe v. Wade — right-wing activist groups needed a new organizing target. Terry Schilling of American Principles Project told the Times that his movement “threw everything at the wall” to find something that mobilized their base. Schilling’s organizations did polling to figure out what messages were most effective. And what they landed on will not surprise you, if you’ve been tracking the national conversation: a focus on transgender Americans, particularly in amateur sports, was a winner.

But there's questions about how effective the focus on trans issues is among the mainstream GOP:

Former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley, herself a candidate for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, was in New Hampshire on Wednesday, where she sought to toss some red meat to the Republican audience.

“Everybody know about Dylan Mulvaney? Bud Light?” she said, according to reporter David Weigel. “That is a guy, dressed as a girl, making fun of women.”

This would have played well on right-wing social-media, no doubt. But in the room she got nothing but crickets. This is not an animating fight for all Republicans, much less most Americans.

[Neoncomplexultra]

Coalition-building. It’s the same reason Islamists and black nationalists, who often aren’t particularly progressive beyond niche issues, have begun to receive some degree of support in left-wing circles. They’re all arrayed in opposition to existing forms of hegemony and likely could not gain ground alone. Intersectionality, while a sincere attempt to describe how overlapping privileges and identities function in society, serves to alleviate what would otherwise be very obvious ideological contradictions in such a coalition. Beyond that, y’all still have an active labor movement???

coalition-building is a rational explanation for the example you provided, but it is not a rational explanation for the example i asked about.

even in your example, it is not an example of an arbitrary ideological cluster of non-intersecting ideas. you have described an example of a cluster of groups with directly contradictory ideas, but with convergence of real interests.

in your example, it is rational for arab and african ethnic minority groups to cooperate based on the convergence of real interests in opposing the interests of the majority host populations of the countries they live in. these groups are poorer on average, and so should rationally gravitate to the socialist or wealth-redistribution position. this is the standard explanation i have been given for the overwhelming commitment of western blacks in general to left wing voting behaviors: that they do not care at all about progressive culture, as they have their own culture, but they want material benefits and will vote for the wing that benefits them materially.

this is not an ideological cluster. political islam directly contradicts liberal progressive ideology in every tenant, such as divorce, abortion, homosexuality, etc. it is psychologically impossible for someone to have both islamic political ideology, and liberal progressive political ideology. to the extent that they cluster, it is assumed that the same explanation for western blacks applies here, that their material self-interest takes predominance.

the question is, why is socialist or wealth-redistribution ideology clustered with liberal progressive ideology, and the inverse?

these ideologies neither coincide nor contradict. they are immediately unrelated and appear to be an arbitrary ideological cluster of non-intersecting ideas. still, i see marxist slogans only in the backgrounds of people promoting political homosexuality. in fact, data indicates that social progressive ideology is strongly correlated to wealth in the western world, through the intermediate factor of education level but perhaps through other factors, while the less wealthy tend to be socially conservative. unlike with arabs and socialists, there is no clear convergence of real interests.

so, why is it that there is this cluster? would it not make more sense for there to be a capitalist-progressive cluster, and a socialist-conservative cluster, if there must be two clusters? i am very confused by this clustering and would be relieved if someone could explain how this happened.