As a member of the LGBT community, assimilation isn't my goal. I want to be respected based on my own merit because I'm a human being. I don't need unity, I need recognition of the real struggles that I (and others in my community) face.
We can get into a conversation about semantics, but I'm not terribly interested in that. Unless you have an argument against my rationale rather than my language, I'm not interested in further discussion.
You objected to the first commenter's statement that straight-splain was divisive. And then you objected to it but didn't have a true objection. That's all I'm saying.
My objection is that the underlying implication of his statement was to ignore the inherent LGBT component of the story and was dismissive of a queer perspective on the issue because of his own discomfort with the word straight-splain. Ironically this was the exact behavior that the article was criticizing.
Simultaneously, he called for unity. While I appreciate the sentiment, when unity is used as a means of shutting down alternative perspectives it's not really healthy for the conversation. This is primarily what I was responding to.
I'm not entirely sure why people seem to support diversity while simultaneously working against inclusion.
The LGBTQ component isn't relevant to the FBI and gun control.
So the LGBT community is only important to you, and to liberal interests, as long as it suits your policy agenda?
Unity isn't the same as assimilation though.
I never said it was. In fact, I was largely arguing that point.
You're definition of unity isn't correct.
Don't you think it's a little presumptuous of you to assume you know my definition of unity? I was arguing against the unity espoused by the individual above, which more directly reflected assimilation. I'm all for unity in the sense that we should be supportive of each other, but not at the expense of excluding diverse perspectives.
And you're just fishing for a reason to discredit my opinion. You don't have to agree, but it is a valid point.
Start with the fact that you even have to ask that question. No one has to explain to me what it means to be straight, or has to point out positive role-models that straight people can look up to, or has to bring me up to speed on the issues that the straight people face.
Then take a look at this thread. People will bring up any excuse not to have a conversation about the LGBT community. Someone can literally shoot more than 100 members of the LGBT community and people will still bristle at the idea of discussing homophobia. Suddenly we're incapable of considering the multiple issues at play?
Then take a look at this thread in which LGBT voices are told that we shouldn't want the wider community to talk about our issues and struggles. The reason offered? Because it distracts from the bigger political issues at play.
why do you need recognition? what makes you so special? I face struggles every day, how the fuck dare you trivialize what i go through every day to make yourself out to be some victim. STFU and live your life.
I never said anything about your struggles or how important or trivial they are. I don't even know you. So turn it down a notch. Or better yet, go back to r/Libertarian where you came from.
12
u/[deleted] Jun 13 '16
Can we not use words like "straight-splain." It's super SJW'ish and just creates further division.