Your just coming across as morally the equivalent of a Nazi defender, because they are trans they can’t also be a racist, sexist Nazi? Who is a horrid person and should be banned from the internet and likely locked in a jail cell?
They are saying that they dislike that the Nazi being trans/autistic is being mentioned at all, it’s not relevant to their “being horrible”-ness even if those labels technically apply, so since the list of things they are described by has so many horrible things,it seems to imply that those are the things by which they should be hated for,not just generic descriptive labels, which is why seeing those two specific non horribleness defining traits stand out. I don’t really care but just trying to clarify. ILYSM
It’s relevant if its been used successfully in a court of law to defend a rape they commited. Or the individual in question has used being trans to excuse non consensual sexual deviance. This is a discussion about an individual not a group. Nuance and context are important.Also, don’t you think this individual would want at least those two labels applied to them? Wouldn’t including them be respectful of their wishes/identity? If expressing this text makes you think I’m a hateful transphobe you should definitely block me.
As I said, I don’t really care since they’re quite the POS and this is not a court of law. I just wanted to give extra context to give proper framing to the point that I felt the other commenter didn’t properly drive through. If you still disagree, fine by me, no need to be so combative <3
No, you were pretty clear in what you said. Not sure why people upvoted that explanation instead of yours.
Taking all the misgendering here into account too, this shit is like calling Jesse Lee Peterson the N-word and defending oneself by saying that because he is a horrible person it’s okay to do so.
So if someone is bad, erase the fact they are trans and never ever bring it up? But if they are good you’re allowed to reference it? Or are both situations equivalent to the N word somehow?
Sometimes I take a second and remember everyone is allowed equal access to typing comments. Which is a good thing even though that includes some of the worst/most toxic people. Imagine the reaction if/when confronted by someone with actual ill intent. Having been covered in a bubble of non reality is gonna prove so detrimental.
Your just coming across as morally the equivalent of a Nazi defender, because they are trans they can’t also be a racist, sexist Nazi? Who is a horrid person and should be banned from the internet and likely locked in a jail cell?
Where is the defence in that comment? They are just saying being trans is not relevant at all.
They are saying that they dislike that the Nazi being trans/autistic is being mentioned at all, it’s not relevant to their “being horrible”-ness even if those labels technically apply, so since the list of things they are described by has so many horrible things,it seems to imply that those are the things by which they should be hated for,not just generic descriptive labels, which is why seeing those two specific non horribleness defining traits stand out. I don’t really care but just trying to clarify. ILYSM
It’s relevant if its been used successfully in a court of law to defend a rape they commited. Or the individual in question has used being trans to excuse non consensual sexual deviance. This is a discussion about an individual not a group. Nuance and context are important.Also, don’t you think this individual would want at least those two labels applied to them? Wouldn’t including them be respectful of their wishes/identity? If expressing this text makes you think I’m a hateful transphobe you should definitely block me.
As I said, I don’t really care since they’re quite the POS and this is not a court of law. I just wanted to give extra context to give proper framing to the point that I felt the other commenter didn’t properly drive through. If you still disagree, fine by me, no need to be so combative <3
Couldn’t have said it better myself. @Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world
Thanks :3
No, you were pretty clear in what you said. Not sure why people upvoted that explanation instead of yours.
Taking all the misgendering here into account too, this shit is like calling Jesse Lee Peterson the N-word and defending oneself by saying that because he is a horrible person it’s okay to do so.
So if someone is bad, erase the fact they are trans and never ever bring it up? But if they are good you’re allowed to reference it? Or are both situations equivalent to the N word somehow?
So, now “trans” and “mentally ill” and “autism” are derogatory labels comparable to racial slurs?
Oh dear.
Do you realize how insulting that is to everyone with autism and mental illness, and trans for that matter?
Sometimes I take a second and remember everyone is allowed equal access to typing comments. Which is a good thing even though that includes some of the worst/most toxic people. Imagine the reaction if/when confronted by someone with actual ill intent. Having been covered in a bubble of non reality is gonna prove so detrimental.