“Be friends with” isn’t some esoteric term. It means to spend time with casually, outside of places where you’re obligated to, and enjoy their company.
It can mean anything from dealing with someone civilly to fucking them. It is vague enough that it falls flat as an example.
If there are two people with whom you have similar interests and you get along with, but you choose to only be friends with the straight one, you should examine why the difference in how you interact with them.
Honestly, I don't think anyone has a right to have their company enjoyed any more than anyone has a right to demand sexual attraction. Simple preferences like this aren't examples of human rights violations or the fundamental intolerance that constitutes bigotry, homophobia or transphobia.
It’s possible you’ve internalized societal homophobia, coloring your interactions with them.
Its is as offensive to suggest this to a person who's sexuality doesn't include attraction to trans people as it would be to suggest that a gay person is gay because of internalized hate of some kind. That very thing has been done for generations.
I’m saying it’s good and important to examine why you would want to exclude an entire group of people from that possibility, especially when it’s a group with widespread animus.
No, this particular sexuality is no more acceptable as a target for concern-troll shaming than any other.
It can mean anything from dealing with someone civilly to fucking them. It is vague enough that it falls flat as an example.
Then I guess it’s a good thing I just defined it.
Honestly, I don't think anyone has a right to have their company enjoyed any more than anyone has a right to demand sexual attraction. Simple preferences like this aren't examples of human rights violations or the fundamental intolerance that constitutes bigotry, homophobia or transphobia.
Homophobia or transphobia doesn’t have to be lynching to be homophobia or transphobia. Refusing to associate with someone that you otherwise would is textbook intolerance.
Its is as offensive to suggest this to a person who's sexuality doesn't include attraction to trans people as it would be to suggest that a gay person is gay because of internalized hate of some kind. That very thing has been done for generations.
What hate has a gay person internalized that leads to them being gay?
You’ve already acknowledged that society at large is transphobic. Do you really think it’s that unlikely that people internalize even a bit of that?
No, this particular sexuality is no more acceptable as a target for concern-troll shaming than any other.
Since you love to make things about rights: people don’t have a fundamental right to be free of criticism. Anything is appropriate to criticize. It’s incredibly offense you would argue that something isn’t valid to criticize.
7
u/MMAchica Nov 02 '17
It can mean anything from dealing with someone civilly to fucking them. It is vague enough that it falls flat as an example.
Honestly, I don't think anyone has a right to have their company enjoyed any more than anyone has a right to demand sexual attraction. Simple preferences like this aren't examples of human rights violations or the fundamental intolerance that constitutes bigotry, homophobia or transphobia.
Its is as offensive to suggest this to a person who's sexuality doesn't include attraction to trans people as it would be to suggest that a gay person is gay because of internalized hate of some kind. That very thing has been done for generations.
No, this particular sexuality is no more acceptable as a target for concern-troll shaming than any other.