this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2025
131 points (99.2% liked)
Slop.
760 readers
582 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The evangelicals are a lost cause on this. But there is a surprisingly high number of non-religious people who will still say “it’s ok to be gay or trans, but kids shouldn’t be exposed to that”
It’s either ok to be gay, or it isn’t. If it’s ok and just as valid as being straight, then why should there be any issue with showing gay relationships in content that would also show straight relationships? I mean, basically once you get past TV and movies for absolute babies, you will see hetero couples in shows like Cocomelon or Daniel Tiger. If you think those shows shouldn’t have gay relationships, then you are accepting the reactionary framing that these relationships are somehow inappropriate, that there is something fundamentally “unnatural” about being gay and thus small children shouldn’t see it. Either that or you think that exposure to gay relationships might somehow make your kid gay, and that to you is a bad thing, which still makes you a bigot despite what you might say about being ok with homosexuality.