politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Not if they’re homophobic.
It’s a tautology.
It most certainly is still homophobic to blame homophobia on gay people. Straight homophobes exist in a vastly higher quantity than any subsection of the population which is gay, the subsection of that which is self-hating, and the subsection of that which channels that self-hatred into promoting homophobia.
No. I don’t buy this.
If a closeted gay person beats a gay person to death for being gay, that’s homophobia.
Being closeted isn’t an excuse.
Speaking of which, fuck Lindsey Graham.
You don't have to buy it, it's a fact. Straight people possess the ability to be homophobic, do you deny that? If not, you must accept that by sheer volume, they outnumber any self-hating homophobe. If you do deny the ability of straight people to be homophobic, that is blaming homophobia in it's entirety on gay people (which is very homomphobic).
If you're just doing the "haha calling the homophobe gay" bit, that's homophobic by using homosexuality as an insult.
Ultimately it just comes down to that, if you see a homophobic person and immediately assume they are gay, that is homophobia. You are linking their bigotry to an alleged homosexuality. What other bigotries do you think someone must secretly be part of the group they hate?
It is not using homosexuality as an insult. It's using hypocrisy as an insult.
No one said that.
Republicans are generally more prone to homophobia, yet many of those Republican homophobes are actually homosexual, as evidenced by various high-profile instances as well as the multiple times that Grindr has crashed in the immediate vicinity of a Republican convention.
Again -- homosexual is fine, hypocrite is not. Especially when that hypocrisy is directly harming other homosexuals through shitty policies being pushed through.
The hypocrisy is based on allegedly being homosexual, which is unproven and based on "well homophobes must be gay" which is homophobic.
That's the behavior of calling every homophobe gay, they don't need to say it.
You say that based on what?
Yes, a few high profile instances. I don't think they happen in nearly enough numbers to outweigh the straight homophobes who have the vast numerical advantage.
Do you have an actual source for that? Because as far as I can tell it's a meme based on a website which takes user reports as evidence of an outage, which would be very susceptible to false reports because it's funny.
Sure, but how about you actually wait until one of them is shown to be a hypocrite instead of pinning all the homophobes on homosexuals just so you can have a laugh?
Think about it, Dallas is a huge liberal zone in Texas with a population of 1.33 million, Grindr and underlying network infrastructure can definitely take big loads. Even if every single person there for the convention was a raging hypocrite, do you really think that is enough to cause a complete outage? It's silly. The articles I see say they expected 20,000 people, and maybe another couple thousand were waiting in a line or something. Even if we assume each and every one is instantly hopping on the grind (which is a HUGE if), it would still be a drop in the bucket compared to the usual traffic of Grindr in Dallas.
Attack Republicans for what they are (or are shamefully revealed to be), not what would be funny if true. That just gives actual straight homophobes an excuse ("I'm not homophobic because I'm definitely not gay") and spreads the narrative that homophobia is just something gay people do to themselves.
It's not hypocrisy unless they're actually gay, and statistically it's unlikely to be the case for the majority of attendants.
Interesting choice of words for such a serious conversation, I'm offended
Honestly, fair point. I don't know the methodology for the outage tracking, you could be right on this one.
Fair
This is where you go off the rails. It's a very weird jump to make and is completely illogical. You're claiming that Republican Grindr jokes reinforce a narrative that only gay people hate gay people, and to that I say, respectfully: what the fuck lol
How is that illogical? That is the narrative reinforced by seeing homophobes and thinking "they must be gay." If they hate gay people -> they are gay people -> homophobia is by gay people.
I don't think anyone in significant numbers believes the narrative, but that's the narrative the behavior supports. Unless it's an insult and just "haha ur gay," which while ironic and pointed at a deserving target, is still using gay as an insult.
WRONG.
say it as much as you want, doesn't make it true
That kinda applies to you more. It's not like you're even using the term 'homophobia' anywhere near correct. Bigoted, yes. But that's different.
I explained why what I think is true, not just shouting WRONG at opinions I don't like as if that will rationalize it.
A distinction without a difference. So you do agree it's bigoted towards homosexuals, then? Please elaborate on how I'm misusing homophobic though, I'm very interested. Maybe also explain how blaming homophobia on gay people isn't "bigoted towards homosexuals" as well.
If some gay people are being bigoted against gay people then those people are bigoted. We're talking about closeted Republican gays who vocally push against gay rights. They are the enemy of gays, including themselves - they deserve to be called out for their utter hypocrisy. The fact that they exist in significant numbers is very important to bring to light and make them recognize that they are not alone - and that for all Republicans, their bigotry is the wrong policy - even for themselves. In general it's not acceptable to 'out' closeted gays, because they deserve privacy, but when those people are actively trying to hurt other gays, they need to be called out at least as a group. When people point out the large grindr usage at republican conferences it's bringing to light a truth that has the power to help remedy the bigotry. It's not a slur. It is funny in that it points out a ridiculous hypocrisy and doesn't give any room for a response without republicans facing this hypocrisy. So their only logical response is to actually recognize their bigotry and change course for the better, or deny the facts, or to act all butt-hurt about it as if it's an attack on all gays. You seem to be speed running the last two options, which is pretty sad.