Your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B:
> You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
> What I'm saying is these ideological and political groups are about preferential treatment for their chosen demographic.
>
> Naturally, all of that is usually done under the guise of "I'm a victim", "I'm oppressed", "they're wrong", "we deserve this but they don't", etc. so they feel justified.
Can you give some examples of the preferential treatments LGBTQ people are supposedly looking for, i.e. some treatment that non-LGBTQ people don't have and that would go beyond equality?
Your comment seems to discuss transgender issues. As of September 2023, [transgender topics are no longer allowed on CMV](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5). There are **no exceptions** to this prohibition. **Any** discussion of **any** transgender topic, no matter how ancillary, will result in your comment being removed.
If you believe this was removed in error, please message the moderators [via this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Transgender%20Removal%20Appeal%20for%20y_a_t_&message=y_a_t_%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20[this%20post](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/cmv_lgbtq_feminism_black_lives_matter_white/lavpmxw/?context=3\).) Appeals are **only** for posts that were mistakenly removed by this filter; we **will not** approve posts on transgender issues, so **do not ask**.
Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Here’s a few:
[the White House formally celebrating and endorsing pride month](https://wwd.com/pop-culture/celebrity-news/gallery/white-house-2024-pride-photos-1236472643/)
[lgbt people protesting that they’re not allowed to use a public bridge to display pride colors](https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/southeast/sarasota-florida-lgbtq-march/amp/)
[massive companies like Disney endorsing pride through merchandising, among other celebrations](https://www.disneystore.com/collections/the-disney-pride-collection/)
By contrast:
[aclu protesting religious images in government](https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty/government-promotion-religion/religious-displays-government)
One notable preferential standard is LGBT activists allowing and encouraging their official endorsement and support by companies and governments, but say that they cannot endorse, say, a popular and influential religion.
If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well - or, if governments shouldn’t be allowed to display religious imagery for the sake of bipartisanship, then neither should they be allowed to publicly endorse the lgbt movement.
>If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well
How does this follow? The American government is specifically called out not to privilege religions. But Pride and LGBT+ movements aren't religions. Why would restrictions against one thing be expected to apply to something else?
INB4 Zorg's reasons for it being categorizable with a religion are stuff like "pushed on kids in the schools" or implications that gay icons are saints because something something veneration
Except not a single lgbt+ person wants to convert you. They merely want you to know its an option and that if thats how you feel thats ok.
Pro lgbt isnt anti straight or anti cis.
>If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well
That only tracks if the government can't celebrate heterosexuality. Sexuality isn't religion. Equating them is just a false equivalence fallacy.
If your position were true, that means politicians can't put pictures out their opposite-sex spouse on their desk. No wedding pictures. No pictures of biological children. Nothing that indicates they are in a heterosexual relationship should be allowed if homosexual pride can't be celebrated.
If your position were true that means government office workers that are, say, fans of Twilight or Harry Potter can't have toys or memorabilia from the series on their desk because it promota heterosexual relationships
I don't think OP would consider politicians being able to put out gay wedding pictures or reading books that depict homosexual relationships to be preferential treatment, and I don't think comparing wedding pictures or being a fan of a book with relationships in it, gay or straight, is at all comparable to pride month. I think you're really stretching the definition of "promote" here.
I’m not talking about individual ‘celebrations’ like pictures in offices - I have no problems with those gay or straight - but public displays like
[the White House emblazoned in pride colors](https://www.nps.gov/places/white-house-lit-up-with-rainbow-colors.htm#:~:text=On%20December%2013%2C%202022%2C%20the,Hodges%20being%20overturned). Is that not excessive or preferential treatment? How would you feel if the White House displayed “straight pride” colors?
...do you know what "separation of church and state" is? You appear to think anything to do with LGBT issues is a religion. That's a massive projection.
> One notable preferential standard is LGBT activists allowing and encouraging their official endorsement and support by companies and governments, but say that they cannot endorse, say, a popular and influential religion.
Pride etc. falls under events and awareness-raising *about the lack of equal treatment*, and definitely not aimed at achieving preferential treatment by anyone.
It's like saying that there need to be straight pride or white pride events.
> If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well - or, if governments shouldn’t be allowed to display religious imagery for the sake of bipartisanship, then neither should they be allowed to publicly endorse the lgbt movement.
If you're opening that door, then in the interest of fairness the government would need to also give equal attention to all religions and their counterparts. So not just Christianity, but also Islam, Hinduism, atheism, satanism, paganism etc.
> … about the lack of equal treatment …
That’s hard to take seriously when, again, the government, most corporations, and public figures are proudly and openly supporting pride. Is the open endorsement and support of the most powerful institutions in the country not preferential treatment? Is a solid month dedicated to you not preferential treatment?
If being gay is as normal as being straight, then gay pride should be as weird as straight pride. If straight people don’t need to celebrate their sexuality because it’s normal, then neither should gay people need to celebrate theirs. Celebration is reinforcing their abnormality.
Celebrating pride is a means to an end, not an end in itself.
It's precisely because being LGBTQ+ is still a long way off from being considered something as ordinary and uncontroversial as most other things in life, that pride is unfortunately still needed.
From what I saw, none of the complaints brought up showed any preferential treatment, but were about being treated in equivalent ways to the majority.
That's generally the goal of the LGBTQ+ community: being treated in equivalent ways as the non-LGBTQ+ majority.
If we transfer this principle to same-sex couples: one of the equalities that we have been looking for (and in other parts of the world are still looking for) is the ability to marry someone of the same sex. In the not too distant past, this was often described as wanting a "special right", because everyone already has the equal right to marry someone of the opposite sex. It's such a bullshit argument, as these kinds of arguments always are.
They did mention the LGBTQ+ community, not just the T, so there must supposedly be something that we're looking for that non-LGB_Qs don't have, and that would go beyond just seeking equality...
I also used the word supposedly, as I was expressing this from the POV of OP.
If they only meant to criticize one tiny subgroup, they shouldn't have written LGBT/Q+. The unusual use of the slash even indicates that they thought about how to best capture the entire group without committing to a single initialism.
Like I said, they very clearly meant the entire LGBTQ+ group, not just the one subgroup.
There are even some accusations in other replies that confirm this:
* people were being putting their sexual orientation over other people's race
* How is "LGBT/Q+" right for all and, at the same time, prioritizing people because of their sexuality, attempting to silence whoever doesn't share the same views
* ...making non-heterosexuality the core of society
If that was OP's comment, that particular group is a small minority of LGBTQ, so there should be plenty of other examples. Like, what special privileges are homosexuals looking for?
It’s equally wierd then that that is what you chose to imply. You said they cannot talk about people under the lgbt umbrella.
You have clearly been active long enough to know why one niche of lgbtq isn’t talked about here, and given OP used the whole umbrella in their title and CMV, then it seems perfectly reasonable for someone to simply ask for the other examples
Let's say we were at Christmas dinner and grandma started choking. I stand up and say "help grandma is choking!" and then dad say ,"Hold on. People besides grandma choke all the time. Why are you only worried about grandma?"
Do you think I would be trying to "divide" the family? Of course not. I obviously know other people besides grandma can choke, but grandma is actively choking in front of me and needs help.
In the same way, people who support things like Black Lives Matter aren't trying to say only Black people are treated poorly by police, but they are actively getting killed in front of us and need help.
I think I can see where you're coming from. But tell me, does that mean that you're gonna start making a movement of grandma's not choking or are you just gonna help her and do what you can to help people who might experience the same thing regardless of whether that's your grandma again or not? That's literally your example.
If we find thousands (if not tens of thousands) of instances of grandma's choking and no one doing anything to help them maybe we should have a movement of grandma's not choking.
We can't start a movement before we know why they are choking and why they aren't being helped? Isn't the fact that they are choking and no one is helping them reason enough to start a movement if it is happening on that large of a scale?
We obviously don't want them to continue choking regardless of the reason right?
We don't need a reason to help someone, but creating a movement isn't the solution to everything. Sometimes it's not that deep. What if it turns out they are choking because there's people who are having problems and there's a lack of aid? We can always make our own world better, sometimes we can do that way than by spending our lives telling others what they're doing right, wrong, etc.
We have kind of gone off the rails no? I'm not saying a movement is the solution to everything but if we take it back to your CMV, if you follow my grandma analogy then you wouldn't say a "Grandma Lives Matter" movement would be for the preferential treatment of grandma's would you?
But if you find out that the police are actually the ones choking grandmas, and you have video evidence of multiple instances, is that enough to go off of to start some sort of movement to end police choking grandmas specifically? Or at least bring it up as a topic of discussion so it can be addressed?
Well, as a person of LGBT leanings, it has been during my lifetime that gay bashing was considered a sort-of sport, and the police didn't care. Many of my friends got beaten up and stabbed just for existing.
So yeh, literally.
The movement was basically built around stopping this.
Well, I don't think it's all 100% bad like I said in the original post. I can find things that I can agree with and others that I cannot agree with. I support individuals because we are all equal, not because they're more or less attacked than others.
Yeh, but that's the thing: these movements have come out of being treated vastly unequally in a systematic way, and the desire to reattain equality.
I agree that LGBT rights are pretty much a given now, but I can viscerally remember when they weren't. My wife and I only had our marriage legally able to be recognised many years after the ceremony and within our kid's memories. They're only teenagers.
So we need to make sure that both people who are actively being attacked and those who are not receive equal attention? You know, to be fair. Many people being attacked will die of course, but it will be fair as we help the people who are fine and don’t need it.
>Naturally, all of that is usually done under the guise of "I'm a victim", "I'm oppressed"
*Is* this a guise? Or is it more genuine because they are subject to oppression?
I'm not talking about actual cases of violence, abuse and oppression. I'm talking about people who use those circumstances to do to others the exact same thing they complain about.
If I understand you right, you're talking about people using circumstances under which they claim oppression or victimization, and then turn around and oppress and victimize others. Do I have that right? And if so, do you have any examples of that? I can't think of any.
It would be helpful to try and change your view if you actually explained why you think these groups are actually about preferential treatments and not equality. Because I don't see how any of these groups except for white supremacy is promoting a divide among people.
To me, each one of the groups I mentioned is equally comparable to "White Supremacy" because the only difference between them is the demographic they choose to advocate for. The rest is very similar; they all can't see past people's race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively. That's not equality. They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively, makes you more or less deserving of sympathy. That's not equality. They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively should be more or less celebrated. That's not equality. They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively makes you more or less deserving of being censored. That's not equality.
In practice, this is one of the many cases of vandalism that happened during "Black Lives Matter" in the name of equality. I'm fine with people thinking that feeling oppressed is a reason to oppress others but that's just not something I can agree with. That's not equality. If you want respect, treat others with respect. To me it's not that complicated. And I say this as a non-heterosexual man myself.
I just don't understand how you can see that. Because this is completely ignoring the horrible mistreatment perpetuated on them by our system. It's not being the race, sex, or sexual orientation that deserves sympathy. It's seeing the treatment that they've had to deal with for hundreds of years that deserves sympathy and is trying to change those treatments to be equal with the historical treatment of straight white men.
>If you want respect, treat others with respect
Are you attributing this to groups or individuals? Because if you're attributing this to groups then straight white men should not be given any respect because they don't treat anyone with respect.
Edit: I say this as a cis bi white man who thought he was straight for a long time.
You see what you did while talking about straight white men as though they're all the same? That's my point, to me division, putting yourself another group of people because of their demographic has nothing to do with equality. Also, I'm talking about most of the people who advocate for these ideological and political groups, not white, female, black or non-heterosexual people themselves.
But the people advocating for those ideological and political groups are members of the groups they're advocating for.
And saying that historically straight white men have been fucking awful and have oppressed groups that they viewed as different from them is not saying all straight white men are the same. And again I say this as a white man who only recently discovered he was not straight. So I'm not putting myself above another group. I'm saying the group that I was born into has historically been horrible.
Not all, one thing is people as individuals, and another one as people as ideological or political groups. Not every white person is a "white supremacist", not every woman is a "feminist", not every black person is a "supporter of Black Lives Matter" and not every non-heterosexual person is "LGBT/Q+".
Also, if you think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, or whatever, makes you be in one group of people instead of just another human being who is much more than his demographic I'm not sure there's much I can say to you so you can see past that much division. Honestly, Buddy.
By definition, non-heterosexual people were called "faggot" and non-heterosexuality was considered a mental illness. Does that mean that simply because something is referred to one one it is right or accurate? Debatable, right?
See, the G stands for Gay.
Which means every gay person is LGBTQ+. Same for the other letters. It's not an organization; it's an acronym.
And not a slur either.
Yeah, people have used different terms throughout the years for different things. Both accurate and inaccurate terms. If your beliefs do align with "LGBT/Q+" it's fine and deserves respect in my opinion. You might not find it that easily online since the censorship has gotten a bit far but most non-heterosexual people don't even care or feel aligned with "LGBT/Q+". Not for the same reasons as me since everyone is different, but for similar reasons.
Are you seriously out here arguing the definition of the term 'LGBTQ'? It's a fairly simple thing to google. If you're non-hetero, you're either gay, bi, pan or anything inbetween, all of which is included by the term.
Yes, that's what I'm doing. Simply because someone claims to represent you or to be doing something on your behalf doesn't always mean it's true. I mean, they can fool someone.
>Also, if you think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, or whatever, makes you be in one group of people instead of just another human being
These two things aren't mutually exclusive. I am an individual who's more than a demographic while also being a part of a demographic. That's how the world works. It isn't one or the other, it's both. Saying that this demographic has historically been oppressed is not saying every single individual as a part of this demographic is only defined by said demographic. That white men have historically been the oppressors in this country is not saying that every single individual white man is an oppressor. It's not an either or and it never has been and I don't understand people who can't comprehend that.
> It's seeing the treatment that they've had to deal with for hundreds of years that deserves sympathy and is trying to change those treatments to be equal with the historical treatment of straight white men.
That is what /u/jeffwhaley06 said. By necessity, inequality requires the existence of two disparate groups. Naming those groups does not imply that it has "nothing to do with inequality," it is pointing out how their treatment is not the same as other groups. They just want things like being able to kiss on television without backlash. Things like the right to marry — which may even be on the chopping black right now. As a straight person, displays of your sexuality on television are normalized. As a straight person, your access to institutions like marriage has never been in question. That's why they mention that. This is the same thing as what MLK called "white moderates" who purport to care about issues facing black Americans, yet react negatively when they protest against segregation because it creates "tension."
So again, you haven't really explained **why** you think this. You seem to be just taking this as a given. Why do you think they can't see past people's intrinsic characteristics? Why do you think these movements believe certain demographics should be celebrated more? Why do you think they see sympathy as intrinsically linked to these groups? Why do you think they believe certain demographics are more deserving of being censored?
Their whole argument is that they are trying to reach equality by **compensating** for historical injustice. I feel like your position requires you to either believe these movements are lying about their goals, or that the historical justice they are combatting does not exist, or that they are overcompensating for it. Your post does not make any of these arguments. Please clarify **why** you believe this.
> To me, each one of the groups I mentioned is equally comparable to "White Supremacy" because the only difference between them is the demographic they choose to advocate for.
That's crazy man. Feminism first off is and for over a century has been about equality between men and women. Modern bourgeois US feminism is ugly garbage, but that's a whole other conversation. Feminism point blank period is not comparable to white supremacy.
I'm black I have dealt with white supremacists and vile racists alright. They believe I should leave, or be hidden out of sight. Feminists do not believe all men should leave or be out of sight. It wouldn't even make sense because many feminists are straight women who I'd guess like men around as long as they aren't your standard cis white dude in US. Feminism isn't along racial lines it's along a biological divide in humanity which leaves us with actual non-social differences. Not even close to white supremacy & that's including modern bourgeois Feminism here.
> In practice, this is one of the many cases of vandalism that happened during "Black Lives Matter" in the name of equality. I'm fine with people thinking that feeling oppressed is a reason to oppress others but that's just not something I can agree with. That's not equality. If you want respect, treat others with respect. To me it's not that complicated. And I say this as a non-heterosexual man myself.
Liking dick as a man doesn't make your opinion any more valid, just like me saying I'm black doesn't. Are you out of the closet? Do you at least openly wear that you're not heterosexual and I don't mean being excessive just is it something you discuss ever & do people know? If the answer is no then your bit about being non heterosexual is useless because it doesn't even provide you a different lived experience externally only internally. We are talking about society not psychology.
> I'm fine with people thinking that feeling oppressed is a reason to oppress others but that's just not something I can agree with.
Are you saying vandalism = oppression? What cases of vandalism you talking about?
Let's look back, since it's too bad the US destroyed brothers and sisters communities & political organizations long ago we are stuck with bullshit like "BLM" which is joke compared to the Panthers, maybe because we aren't dealing with active de jure segregation & KKK pulling up to our homes with regularity, but I think a lot is because those movements threatened US power structures. Tupacs Auntie if she alive I hope she living it up if she dead I hope she RIP. Anyways, is it oppression to fight back against an oppressor? That's an insane take. My kid gets bullied and he punches back "I mean it's fine if you think oppression is a reason to oppress others" no I think oppression is a reason to jaw someone's ass.
Whiteness, Straightness these are already praised in society and face ZERO backlash. How is saying gay people should be celebrated instead of admonished like white supremacy? They are saying their sexuality should be equally as valid and respected as heterosexuality.
In none of you examples can I think of anyone who is a "Gay supremacist" "Black supremacist" (actually a lot of us think that if I'm being honest, but not in a let's "subjugate white people" way, in a "fuck them were better than them anyways" way) no nationalists arguing we need to take political power and send white folks back to Europe, no "women supremacy" where women say let's take political power and subjugate men. Again with modern US feminism which is extremely problematic in pop culture shooting itself in the foot because it serves only privileged women and will not acknowledge that white women have it made compared to black women. Thing is I get it from women why many would have the attitudes they do towards men, that's not the issue, the issue is according to US feminism liberation of women means working an exploitative job men could work & not being attacked. What an embarrassment. Women deserve better they do hold up half the sky.
> They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively makes you more or less deserving of being censored. That's not equality.
Tell me mr "non heterosexual" what demographic in the US is most in numbers when it comes to shit takes? White people no doubts there. It's no one saying censor gays, straights, Christians, I notice these complaints all center around criticisms of the most powerful groups within those categories without actually saying it. They must center on white people, men, Christians, Straights because the opposite is validly recognized as bullshit & no one would argue against the present power structures with "all these White supremacists are the same as Christian nationalist, misogynists, and homophobes. That is true, what you're saying is just putting the blame for the problems seeking to be addressed by said groups on them. It's not censoring white people...they are everywhere. It's not censoring men...they are everywhere. It's not censoring Christians...they are everywhere. It's not censoring heterosexuals...they are everywhere. Its effortless to have those points manifest themselves because they are so numerous.
What should women, black people, gay people, or whatever other group do? Nicely say "Hey that's not fair!" And allow the group being unfair to determine whether or not their complaint is valid based on how nice they were? Even if that was the case it wouldn't be good enough.
You caught me with one in the hand so I'm probably not making sense, but I really am very curious if you're out the closet or not because if not being "non heterosexual" has bo bearing on social issues and how they affect you externally. Even more so if you're white too. If those are both the case you're just regular out of touch white boy if that's not true embarrassing brother you even more out of touch.
>To me, each one of the groups I mentioned is equally comparable to "White Supremacy" because the only difference between them is the demographic they choose to advocate for.
You actually think that black people actually don' have it harder in life, aren't unfairly treated by the system and their only goal is to become the dominant race in the country?
All of those movements exist because a specific slice of the population is being disadvantages by the system and are an attempt at equality. In no way do LGBTQ people for example think they should have more rights than non-LGBTQ people.
Suppose there's a group that's being treated worse by cops than others.
How do I try to improve this situation without you saying I'm trying to do preferential treatment?
If I even point it out, you'll say "why are you dividing people by groups like that"
If I try to say I'm against cops who do this, you'll say "why are you putting yourself against other groups of people"
If I say we should try to help this group, you'll say "why are you trying to force your view onto others"
>I'm not talking about people's sex, race or sexuality here as I think we're all equal and deserve the same rights and duties. I'm talking about the people who advocate for these ideological and political groups.
Right, in an ideal world, where everybody is starting from the same spot, I agree. We should treat everybody equally.
But suppose one group is being treated worse by cops than others. What should we do?
We should focus on how cops treat that group, and try to improve it.
Yes?
But if I do that you'll just say "hey how come you're focusing on race? We shouldn't look at race! Everybody should be treated equally".
... Yes, that's the problem. Everybody should be treated equally, this group is not being treated equally, so we need to focus and improve their situation... So that they are treated equally.
Do you see?
How do we make progress here without you complaining about it
I believe I know what OP means -- maybe....
Pick a "movement" OP mentions. That movement is against some perceived systematic wrong doing (real or not, but let's assume real).
Random person living in a small midwestern town not only never sees this injustice/oppression/whatever, but may also have a hard time believing it exists to the same degree as the spokespeople make things out to be.
But what they maybe *do* experience is the impact on their lives. Large corporations hiring practices and promotion practices go against equality and show clear biases towards the group and against other groups. Or they see the annual corporate charade for Pride Month, or change the Columbus Day day off for another one in June that (wrongly) was never even mentioned in schools.
I think that may be where OP is coming from.
......maybe?
As someone who agrees with the OP, but actually supports the causes, by and large, here's the way I'd put it. The perception is that by and large these movements are basically "give us power". Because they're not really dealing with systematic issues, they're dealing with systemic issues. Think not rules and structures, but instead culture.
I'm all for fixing the first thing, right. There's rules and structure and what comes out of it is something we all have to live by. I'm ok with that. But I'm not ok for people grabbing power for their own interests, while doing little in my mind to actually address the issues.
Perhaps you might expand on your view a bit further? Like how *specifically* does, say, Black Lives Matter demonstrate this alleged desire for "preferential treatment" of, I guess, living black people over?
I don't know if you remember the many businesses that were vandalized during "Black Lives Matter", in the name of "Black Lives Matter. Or the many people who believe you can't be racist towards a white person because they only type of racism, or racially-motivated discrimination, that exists is only from white people and every other race is their eternal victim. Or the fact many people who advocate for "Black Lives Matter" blame it all on race and believe the corporate world should be built in a way that every race is equally "represented" in amount, instead of leaving that bs behind and let people do their job without second guessing their race.
Every single thing you just said is either not true or not promoted by the BLM movement. No business was vandalized by or at the behest of BLM. BLM did not attempt or condone acts of violence during a period of civil unrest; many other factors resulted in the violence, including the over-aggressive police respond to what began as non-violent protests.
No one says there is only one definition of racism. That's absurd. The racism = prejudice + power speaks specifically to things like institutional racism. No one says that a minority literally cannot be racist on an individual level.
No one in the BLM movement or anyone who spoke favorably of it "blames it all on race"
I've really gotta question what your sources of information are, and I pray you don't rely youtube and social media
Yeah, you're right. The things I'm saying are either not true or not promoted by "Black Lives Matter". Also, there isn't people who think only white people can be racist. It is realistic for you to say that no one in that ideological and political group blame it all on race, because you know all of them. I just made all that stuff up, right? Jaja, kind regards.
Whoa slow your roll, partner. "No one" is a widely known turn of phrase that doesn't literally mean no single person ever. But some yahoo on Twitter isn't representative of an entire movement.
Basically, what I'm saying, is that you're straw-manning BLM, feminism, etc. There is no credible or remotely mainstream civil rights movement that promotes anything you've accused them of promoting. Your entire view is founded on misconception
I saw that with what I like to call the Sodom And Gomorrah Fallacy (unless there's a proper name, it's after the whole Abraham-arguing-with-God-over-how-many-good-people-are-worth-sparing-those-cities thing); the idea that you can't say what a group doesn't believe because you don't know the beliefs of every single member so for all you know there's someone who does and that somehow means the group does
Sorry, u/Effective-Host5342 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Effective-Host5342&message=Effective-Host5342%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavh2nv/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
In response:
I find you can avoid looking foolish if you instead ask me what I think. Shoving your hand up your ass to rummage around for wild guesses is a great ways to build strawmen. But it is a piss poor way to learn about a person.
European missionaries were for bringing the true faith and civilization to people lacking it.
The Australian government policy towards indigenous people was similarly aimed at civilizing the continent.
All these groups largely legitimately believed that these were their goals, and their actions were largely aimed at that. Except... their actions had side effects that they didn't like to consider and that in the long run overshadowed their main goals.
Similarly the problem with many of these modern groups is that their supporters like to say "these are their goals and... end of story". Considering the side effects is apparently best left for all those wrong people in the past, we on the other hand are too advanced and progressive to let that happen with us.
Taking one example, a large part of feminist narrative describing the wage gap largely focuses on average (rather than median, which could have shown that men and overrepresented at top AND bottom) difference in pay, and hates to use data compensated for hours worked and education levels. So their conclusions are consistently "give women more money" that looks much less solid once you actually start seriously looking into data. If you look at the people in most dire need of extra money - homeless and so on, there's going to be many more men than women - something that just about every article describing "the continuing 20% gender wage gap" will be carefully diverting your attention from using these very specific methods in combination that even even a person with a cursory familiarity with statistics would not pick accidentally.
Invading a country and forcing the people who live there into slavery isn't "bringing civilization"
If anyone acted like savages, it was the colonizers. Beating, kidnapping, torturing and raping
This is a bad analogy. Colonizers believed they needed to civilize indigenous people because they were "savages". These modern groups aren't claiming that other groups are worse or sub-human, they are saying we should be treated equally and we aren't.
Also, the colonizers used the fact that the indigenous people were below them to justify stealing from them.
Yes, I am comparing modern feminism and colonization (or at least certain groups of colonizers like missionaries) in that they both thought they were fighting for a good thing (and in some ways were), but ultimately were doing a lot of wrong in areas they didn't like to look at.
Yeah remember when feminists enslaved all men and murdered children who didn't convert?
A bad comparison dude. Is this really how some of you view feminism or do you just not think colonialism was that bad?
u/Creative_Board_7529 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Creative_Board_7529&message=Creative_Board_7529%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavf22d/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
>Black Lives Matter is about removing systemic discrimination against African Americans in the police and justice system, which has been empirically proven by the United States Government itself to be very real. So wrong.
And what is their solution?
Lets defund the police in already crime infested inner cities. That will definitely help things!
I'm sure their intended cause is noble. But how they go about it is often down right STUPID. Nobody but the criminals prospers from defunding the police.
Psssst
Cops have never done jack shit to defend anyone from these "criminals"
You watch Hollywood cop movies and assume every cop is getting into shoot outs but when kids get shot at school cops run away
Ask any victim of robbery
Of assault
Of rape
Ask them how much the cops "helped"
You know what happened to me when I was robbed and assaulted?
Cops took a statement then told me not to bother them
That's EVERY victims story
The only people who think cops help have never needed help from a cop
What currently happens is you call 911 because your autistic brother is having a melt down and you need help and the cops come to help and then shoot your brother because he is acting odd.
Because instead of sending a mental health professional they send a man with zero training and a gun.
Or they can do what they did in Chicago for year and stick a pencil into a black man's ear until that person confessed to a crime they didn't commit.
Murder and attempted murder cops didn't do shit for us. They come for domestic calls and stop DUI drivers for cash. They ain't saving no one in the "inner city" as you call it. Matter of fact they likely making it worse.
u/Creative_Board_7529 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Creative_Board_7529&message=Creative_Board_7529%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavgorl/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
u/Creative_Board_7529 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Creative_Board_7529&message=Creative_Board_7529%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhp2u/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. AI generated comments must be disclosed, and don't count towards substantial content. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/ShoddyMaintenance947 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20ShoddyMaintenance947&message=ShoddyMaintenance947%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhjs7/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/Effective-Host5342 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Effective-Host5342&message=Effective-Host5342%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavgx1q/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
You mean the traitor terrorist loser who was told at gun point by a cop to stop breaking down the door to the capitol in an attempt to murder our senators?
Let me guess...voting for a convicted felon?
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I think I can see where you're coming from. To me, you see "Feminism", "Black Lives Matter" and "LGBT/Q+" from a human rights perspective, and you don't think that's the same for "White Supremacy". I think that's fair and the way a lot of people see it. But if you promote division, putting yourself against others because of what they believe (even if it doesn't harm anyone), silencing others, and prioritizing your chosen demographic above everyone else is the same thing the groups I mentioned earlier do.
By making race the center of every human interaction. By thinking people, who just happen to be white, owe something to people, who just happen to be black, because of some stupid people in the past and present. By encouraging others to be against people who don't have the same beliefs because, to them, that means they're racist. By making a victim of one race and an abuser of another one, as though race makes people their personality.
In what way do homosexuals promote division? Homosexuals have been working pretty hard for the better part of the last century to be accepted as equals to heterosexuals. Any division that exists is put there by heterosexuals and homophobes, and gay people are by and large just try to remove that division. The end goal of the movement is a society where sexual orientation is a very uninteresting trait of a person that's only relevant for dating purposes.
You got it all wrong. I'm not talking about people, I'm talking about those particular ideological and political groups anyone (regardless of their sexual orientation, race, or any of that stuff) can advocate for.
Sorry, u/AngryBlitzcrankMain – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
> **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20AngryBlitzcrankMain&message=AngryBlitzcrankMain%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhate/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/OmniManDidNothngWrng – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
> **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20OmniManDidNothngWrng&message=OmniManDidNothngWrng%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavehlq/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Hi /u/y_a_t_! You're not in trouble, don't worry. This is just a **Rules Reminder for All Users.**
---
The following rules apply to comments:
**1. Direct responses to a submission must challenge or question at least one aspect of the submitted view.** Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to comments.
**2. Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if the rest of it is solid.
**3. Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view.** While being open to changing one’s views is a requirement for submitting (see the other rules), accusing them of trolling only serves to make people who truly are open more defensive and less likely to hear what you have to say.
**4. Award a delta when acknowledging a change in your view, and not for any other reason.** Celebrating view changes is at the core of Change My View, so if your view is changed, reply to the response that changed it with a short explanation as to how and award a Delta; do not use deltas sarcastically, jokingly, or when you already agree with the response.
**5. Responses must contribute meaningfully to the conversation.** In order to keep responses relevant to the discussion, users can report posts that don't add anything useful to the thread. To be clear, we're not referring to the effort of an argument - we don't make it our place to judge the strength or weakness of your comment in this regard - but rather to the effort of the comment itself.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding our rules, please message the mods through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) (*not PM*).
This is such a ridiculous argument. If they actually cared about equality, they wouldn't speak out against people who seek to undermine them. MLK puts it better than I ever could:
>"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
Sorry, u/decrpt – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20decrpt&message=decrpt%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavgfuj/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Sorry, u/thecrawlingrot – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
> **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20thecrawlingrot&message=thecrawlingrot%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavf73a/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Proof? LGBT is rights for all, feminists like RBG even expanded men's rights for some equalities like getting male spouses of military servicewomen their equal access.
How is "LGBT/Q+" right for all and, at the same time, prioritizing people because of their sexuality, attempting to silence whoever doesn't share the same views, forcing their self-image on others (even if it doesn't align with people's perception) and making non-heterosexuality the core of society? Don't get me wrong, I can understand you might think these things are done for a good reason, but you need to be real, how are those things about rights for all? Riddle me that.
Every single political movement in history is pro silencing people directly opposed to them specifically. See: literally all of them throughout history.
How is non-heterosexuality being made the core of society? What does that even mean?
That's one of the scariest things I've seen someone say like it's nothing. You're the definition of everything wrong with "LGBT/Q+", "Feminism", "Black Lives Matter", "White Supremacy". If every political movement in history was about silencing people opposed to them specifically we would live in a literal wasteland. But you're right on one thing, those ideological and political groups I mentioned are, among other things, about silencing others, which is my point, that's not equality.
Way to sidestep my point entirely and personally attack me while you're at it.
Anyway, please find me *any* political movement, any movement whatsoever-- conservatives, libertarians (left or right), etc etc that *isn't* pro silencing people that explicitly position themselves as anti-conservative, anti-libertarian, etc etc.
It's so interesting that you mention all of that stuff because they're more often than not the same. The "right", "left", "conservatives", "liberals", "republican", "democrat", the ideological and political groups I mentioned in the title, etc. Why do I say there's more often than not the same? Because I don't see how being divided, having preferences towards particular demographics and putting myself against another group of people has something to do with equality.
It seems the only way you know to support people and stand against injustice is by advocating for groups instead of treating and seeing people past their sex, race, sexuality, beliefs, etc.
Again, you continue to make unfounded assumptions about me.
I think it is absolutely more useful and fair to give individuals exactly the help and support *they* need. Doing so on a government policy level is absolutely infeasible. In some demographics, individuals often have a lot of problems in common with eachother, so dividing society into demographics and trying to solve the problems that all those demographics largely have is the only real way to start solving problems, because solving individual problems is so fine grained it can only be done interpersonally, not as a matter of policy.
I have firsthand experience of both men's and women's issues. I advocate for both groups when appropriate.
Also: you have yet to provide any political group seeking to solve problems that *didn't* want to silence the people diametrically ideologically opposed to solving problems. If you cannot do so, that is an implicit admission that this trait is in common with all political groups looking to solve problems, and if you consider it to be a trait we shouldn't have then you're saying we should abandon politics (societal problem solving) altogether or reshape the entire political and cultural landscape... somehow.
If one political group says that women should have rights and another says that women shouldn't be able to have their own bank account or vote, both groups will *want* the other to be silenced. I don't see any way this won't be the case.
The problem is you have exactly what I mean on the original post above but still come here to make assumptions. When did I say a word about same-sex marriage? If that's what you mean. Did you read the word "equality" I typed up there? Honestly.
So instead of actually backing up your implication by making an actual clear argument or citation, you're just saying that I got your vague implication wrong.
Fundamentally difference between the first three groups listed and the last one.
LGBTQIA+ people are not looking to have an LGBTQIA+ run world, where heterosexuals are a sub class of people. The general goal is equality.
The mass mass majority of feminists are not looking for a matriarchal/female run world where men are a sub class of people (outside of fringe “feminazis” and Reddit echo chambers). The general goal is equality. This is supported by the fact that are men who identify as feminists, which, IMO, would not occur if the ultimate goal of the feminist movement was to subjugate men and have a completely female dominated world.
“Black Lives Matter” and the mass majority if not all racial equality movements are not looking a POC/Black run world, where white individuals are the subclass of people. The general goal is equality.
I do not think that when you really look at the goals of these 3 organization/diverse groups of movements, they are not looking for preferential treatment, they are looking for equality and equity (where appropriate).
Now, and please correct me if I am wrong, BUT white supremacists ARE looking for preferential treatment at the expense of others.
White supremacists are looking for a world that is completely and totally run by white individuals (preferably white men) and that all individuals outside of the white, heteronormative, (and often male) in-group should belong to a subclass of people held at a lower standard then this in-group.
Just to support this, the Oxford definition of white supremacy:
“white su·prem·a·cy
noun
the belief that white people constitute a superior race and should therefore dominate society, typically to the exclusion or detriment of other racial and ethnic groups.”
I understand and accept that white supremecists exist, have a right to exist and, in the US freely, have a right to freely discuss their opinions on how this country should be run and who should be in charge.
Just as I am entitled to judge them for their opinions and choose not to collaborate them. We have fundamentally differing values (just as I have fundamentally different values with some minority subsections of feminism I.e TERFS and “men should be subjugated” types). Personally I am not going to break bread with someone who believes white individuals are the dominant class and all other races are inferior.
In all honestly, I don’t even know how to, so many complex opinions or beliefs can and should be discuss amongst individual of different ideologies, it’s how we learn and grow and evolve. But how does one (I specifically) meet half way with “white individuals are the dominant race and all other races are inferior and belong to a subclass of human”? (If you have any tips, I am genuinely open to hearing them, as I would like to understand).
Sorry, u/Effective-Host5342 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Effective-Host5342&message=Effective-Host5342%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhq4i/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
>I think we're all equal and deserve the same rights and duties.
You are factually wrong.
And that's the entire point.
If we were all equal then your CMV would be correct. We aren't.
As a white hetero man, my sexuality has never been questioned, no person has ever called the police on me and I've never been groped on a bus. Never been told that whether I wear shorts or jeans I would be looking to be raped.
If that's the experience of most "LGBT/Q+", "Feminism", "Black Lives Matter" then we are equal and they are just seeking preferential treatment. **Which the must never get**. But if that's not the case. This post is wrong.
If the house across the street from mine is on fire, spraying it with water isn't preferential treatment.
It's absolutely wild that you grouped white supremacy in with feminism and BLM. I think that says a lot about the information you're consuming.
I don't think I can change your view because you're ultimately making a statement about the intent of a very broad group of people and there's just no way that statement is accurate, or that I'll convince you otherwise.
u/GenericUsername19892 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20GenericUsername19892&message=GenericUsername19892%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavg8rd/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I'm going to narrow it down and just ask about LGBTQ+ advocacy orgs. Can you name a specific policy those organizations have pushed for that constitutes preferential treatment?
This is really out of touch with the majority views of these movements. There are some reactionary mutations but they tend to be marginal and hated by the left wing of movements and unwelcome by other regular participants.
So for example, what do most black separatists want… they want to be away from a society they see as racist and oppressive towards them.
What do white separatist want? They want black people removed to someplace else because they think black people themselves are a threat that needs to be controlled or removed.)
White Supremacy isn’t even about preferential treatment for whites, it’s about controlling groups of people. Poll Tax laws disenfranchised poor whites even though black folks were the direct target. The rallying cry of the Southern Democrats and proto-KKK during reconstruction was “stop [black] domination” as if voting rights and not being able to control people meant they were oppressing you.
This kind of argument about people asking for their rights to be respected as “special treatment” is very common on conservative media, they’ve been saying it my whole life which is funny because I remember people being like: “well early feminism was ok because voting rights should be equal, but now they get mad if you Pat a waitress’s bottom—feminism has gone too far!”
The deliberate (for pundits imo) confusion is over formal legal rights vs rights in practice and in society. The law applies to everyone but if young people in poor neighborhoods are stop and frisked randomly for drugs but fraternities and college students are not… there is a inequality in practice since a chunk of young people are all going to tend to have drugs. If public defenders are too overworked and just force everyone to take a plea whereas rich people’s lawyers will fight it no matter if their client was caught red-handed, then there is equality on paper but not in reality.
>What I'm saying is these ideological and political groups are about preferential treatment for their chosen demographic.
How does your worldview account for ordinary people who don't belong to the demographic whose interests the ideological or political group advocates for, but support that ideological or political group regardless?
There are many heterosexual people who support LGBT/Q+; many men who support feminism; many non-black people who support BLM; many non-white people who support white- oh, silly me, there are basically NO non-white people who support white supremacy.
So I agree white supremacy is all about preferential treatment for white people... hey, come to think of it, the clue is right there in the name! In contrast, I can't help noticing that BLM is not BLMMTNBL; it is "black lives matter", *not* "black lives matter more than non-black lives".
OP, if you can't explain why so many people support ideologies and/or groups that don't focus on the demographic they belong to, I think you have to accept the explanation that these people - people such as me - will offer: most of these ideologies and/or groups *are* about equality, so we support them because equality is a moral goal.
**Note:** Your thread has **not** been removed.
Your post's topic seems to be fairly common on this subreddit. Similar posts can be found through our [DeltaLog search](https://www.reddit.com/r/DeltaLog/search?q=feminism+%7C+feminist&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all) or via the [CMV search function](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=Feminism&restrict_sr=on).
Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
LGBTQ+ isn’t an ideology or movement. It’s just a community of people. Feminism is both a movement and a belief - a movement originally, to push for equal rights for women, who historically did not have equal rights, and now more of a belief and stance for gender equality.
White supremacy isn’t really a movement I don’t think, it’s just a belief that white people are superior to all other races. And “black lives matter” similar to feminism is both a movement and a belief to fight systemic racism and inequalities for black people.
Whew, all that out of the way.. so you’re saying these groups don’t want equality, they want preferential treatment. This is just not true. What is your basis for this belief?
The 2 that are actually somewhat active movements, are representing groups of people that actively do not have equal rights and are ACTIVELY oppressed. So those are movements to fight for equality. What preferential treatment do you think they’re fighting for?
>If they truly cared about equality, they wouldn't encourage people to divide, to put themselves against other groups of people, to force their views on others and to censor and attack whatever they don't agree with.
This is simply incorrect. If someone is oppressed, someone else is doing the oppression. So while white supremacists are wrong about being oppressed those other labels advocate for actually oppressed groups. You don't get to equality without getting rid of oppression along those lines.
I highly differ from what you're saying entirely. The answer to oppression is not more oppression, that's the problem these groups have. That's only led to more oppression if you haven't noticed, maybe not to the same groups of people but to others. It's the reason why since the legalization of, let's say, same-sex marriage there hasn't been another milestone for equality and human rights, that didn't happen because people were putting themselves against one another, or because they were censoring people, or because people were being putting their sexual orientation over other people's race. It did happen because a lot of people were open to discuss, because a lot of people knew a non-heterosexual person who they thought deserved the same rights as everyone else, because a lot of people understood it is about equality. Not about the things a lot of people claim it was about today.
But if I'm advocating for my lgbt friends to have the exact same rights as I do.I am advocating for myself and my lgbt friends to have equal protections.
If I can post a picture of my wife and that's okay I also want my lesbian friend to have the same right to post that picture and have that be okay.
And that's not a world we live in. In certain states if she posts a picture of her wife at her school she can get into trouble that I would never have to deal with.
Of course civil rights advances pit people against each other. They are by their very nature divisive. Why do you think there wasn't marriage equality if no one opposed it?!
Do you think everyone was in favor of black people being equal under the law before the 60s?
Opposing to things is necessary, but both of those things you mention happened and succeeded because a lot of people (with different races, sexualities, beliefs, etc) united as they thought everyone is equal and just wanted to live like everyone else, not because they were forcing their views on others, silencing people, making it all about their differences, etc.
I mean, yeah, they united against their oppressors. When gay marriage was legalized, it took the exclusive right to legal marriage away from straight couples. That's the those opposing it said that gay marriage leads to marrying a dog.
Think about the 2 major parts of this argument for a second. The first one is that anti marriage equality people feel oppressed by the fact that non-straight couples are able to publicly exist and be recognized by the government. The second one is that the calls about marrying dogs suggests that they believe homosexual people to be about on the same level as a dog.
And even today, you hear constant whining about how people being gay publicly (one could say people who are proud of their identity instead of shameful of it) is a problem because they believe that "it should be kept out of public", but only when it specifically is something they are uncomfortable with. Gay people should not be allowed to express themselves in legal ways, but for example, 2A nuts should be allowed to express *themselves* openly by carrying a gun in public.
All these groups or "movements" are being actively oppressed by *people*, and they must divide the people between those who are allys and those who are enemies, because they are in fact enemies.
Buddy, you know discrimination goes in all directions. The same way some heterosexual people have had problems with non-heterosexuality, some non-heterosexual people have problems with heterosexuality. It feels like you are trying to make a victim out of one group of people when, ultimately, intolerance, hatred and close-mindedness can come from everyone regardless. I can also understand what you're saying about stabilizing the difference between people who support same-sex marriage and those who, even today, don't, but, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties, I don't need everyone to agree with me on everything so I feel good about myself or have a normal conversation with someone... if they want.
I think you need to separate the people from the ideological and political groups. Not every white person is a "white supremacist", not every woman is a "feminist", not every black person is a "Black Lives Matter supporter" and not every non-heterosexual person is "LGBT/Q+". Meaning that just because someone doesn't support any of those groups doesn't automatically mean they are people's enemies or that they have a problem with people's sex, race, sexual orientation, identities or people having the same rights.
>some non-heterosexual people have problems with heterosexuality
...and? You're attributing that to the entire LGBT community.
>but, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties,
Queer people are going "hey, we're not being treated equally," and you're going "fuck you, asking not to be discriminated against is asking for preferential treatment." You're seriously making the argument that the only thing worse than discrimination against homosexuals is *negative reactions to homophobes for discriminating against homosexuals.*
How can you say I'm attributing that to every person that supports "LGBT/Q+" when I literally said "some" right before? Jaja.
Like I said, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties. Notice I haven't said that's the case and there's nothing wrong. The argument I'm making is that you can't complain you're silenced, being discriminated against or looked down upon, when you do the same to others who you don't agree with; because to me, that leads to division, not equality.
>How can you say I'm attributing that to every person that supports "LGBT/Q+" when I literally said "some" right before? Jaja.
Because your argument is complete nonsense if you aren't implying that.
>Like I said, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties. Notice I haven't said that's the case and there's nothing wrong. **The argument I'm making is that you can't complain you're silenced, being discriminated against or looked down upon, when you do the same to others who you don't agree with; because to me, that leads to division, not equality.**
What, pray tell, *are they "silencing, being discriminated against, or looked down upon" for?* Oh no, people are bigoted against bigotry? The most put upon social class of all, bigots being told they cannot and should not practice their bigotry?
So anyone who doesn't share the same views as those of the ideological and political groups I mean is automatically a bigot to you, right? You sound like a bigot.
So, your assertion here is that Straight people have had societal problems with oppression specifically due to their being straight?
The LGBTQ+ Movement is not anti-straight. If you believe that, then you need to get that nonsense sorted out.
Here we go again, haha. My assertion here is that everyone can both discriminate and experience discrimination, not just one group of people; and being discriminated against doesn't mean it's okay for me to discriminate. I mean, I can do it but it doesn't mean it's right. "LGBT/Q+" is anti-equality. You can indeed claim it stands for equal rights, but it's very hard to see the relationship between equal rights and forcing views on others, attempting to silence others and making it all about sexuality.
The same way a Christian person could put their symbols on other people's surroundings as though their beliefs weren't personal, be vigilant about other people's business, go out there and start telling others about their beliefs out of no where, use name-calling as a weapon to defend themselves instead of facts or accuracy, attempting to make the law work based on what they believe even for the people who don't share the same beliefs as them, needing people to agree with them on everything, etc.
*United against other people who opposed them to force their views on them.* That's literally what the civil rights movement was. It's simply undeniable that tons of people opposed the civil rights movement and didn't want equality under the law forced on them. Luckily it happened anyway.
A. nice trying to trip people up by lumping white supremacy in with positions usually held by those opposed to white supremacy
B. so what should any of those movements have done to show they're about equality, called themselves something like equalists (which if they changed to the name metaphorically-now is most associated with fictional villains who (albeit for a characteristic people from our world don't possess) iirc basically wanted to bring about equality through Harrison-Bergeron-esque tactics)
Sorry, u/ShoddyMaintenance947 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20ShoddyMaintenance947&message=ShoddyMaintenance947%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhayd/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/ShoddyMaintenance947 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20ShoddyMaintenance947&message=ShoddyMaintenance947%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhayd/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B: > You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
> What I'm saying is these ideological and political groups are about preferential treatment for their chosen demographic. > > Naturally, all of that is usually done under the guise of "I'm a victim", "I'm oppressed", "they're wrong", "we deserve this but they don't", etc. so they feel justified. Can you give some examples of the preferential treatments LGBTQ people are supposedly looking for, i.e. some treatment that non-LGBTQ people don't have and that would go beyond equality?
[удалено]
Your comment seems to discuss transgender issues. As of September 2023, [transgender topics are no longer allowed on CMV](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5). There are **no exceptions** to this prohibition. **Any** discussion of **any** transgender topic, no matter how ancillary, will result in your comment being removed. If you believe this was removed in error, please message the moderators [via this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Transgender%20Removal%20Appeal%20for%20y_a_t_&message=y_a_t_%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20[this%20post](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/cmv_lgbtq_feminism_black_lives_matter_white/lavpmxw/?context=3\).) Appeals are **only** for posts that were mistakenly removed by this filter; we **will not** approve posts on transgender issues, so **do not ask**. Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Here’s a few: [the White House formally celebrating and endorsing pride month](https://wwd.com/pop-culture/celebrity-news/gallery/white-house-2024-pride-photos-1236472643/) [lgbt people protesting that they’re not allowed to use a public bridge to display pride colors](https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/southeast/sarasota-florida-lgbtq-march/amp/) [massive companies like Disney endorsing pride through merchandising, among other celebrations](https://www.disneystore.com/collections/the-disney-pride-collection/) By contrast: [aclu protesting religious images in government](https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty/government-promotion-religion/religious-displays-government) One notable preferential standard is LGBT activists allowing and encouraging their official endorsement and support by companies and governments, but say that they cannot endorse, say, a popular and influential religion. If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well - or, if governments shouldn’t be allowed to display religious imagery for the sake of bipartisanship, then neither should they be allowed to publicly endorse the lgbt movement.
>If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well How does this follow? The American government is specifically called out not to privilege religions. But Pride and LGBT+ movements aren't religions. Why would restrictions against one thing be expected to apply to something else?
INB4 Zorg's reasons for it being categorizable with a religion are stuff like "pushed on kids in the schools" or implications that gay icons are saints because something something veneration
Except not a single lgbt+ person wants to convert you. They merely want you to know its an option and that if thats how you feel thats ok. Pro lgbt isnt anti straight or anti cis.
>If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well That only tracks if the government can't celebrate heterosexuality. Sexuality isn't religion. Equating them is just a false equivalence fallacy. If your position were true, that means politicians can't put pictures out their opposite-sex spouse on their desk. No wedding pictures. No pictures of biological children. Nothing that indicates they are in a heterosexual relationship should be allowed if homosexual pride can't be celebrated. If your position were true that means government office workers that are, say, fans of Twilight or Harry Potter can't have toys or memorabilia from the series on their desk because it promota heterosexual relationships
I don't think OP would consider politicians being able to put out gay wedding pictures or reading books that depict homosexual relationships to be preferential treatment, and I don't think comparing wedding pictures or being a fan of a book with relationships in it, gay or straight, is at all comparable to pride month. I think you're really stretching the definition of "promote" here.
I’m not talking about individual ‘celebrations’ like pictures in offices - I have no problems with those gay or straight - but public displays like [the White House emblazoned in pride colors](https://www.nps.gov/places/white-house-lit-up-with-rainbow-colors.htm#:~:text=On%20December%2013%2C%202022%2C%20the,Hodges%20being%20overturned). Is that not excessive or preferential treatment? How would you feel if the White House displayed “straight pride” colors?
...do you know what "separation of church and state" is? You appear to think anything to do with LGBT issues is a religion. That's a massive projection.
> One notable preferential standard is LGBT activists allowing and encouraging their official endorsement and support by companies and governments, but say that they cannot endorse, say, a popular and influential religion. Pride etc. falls under events and awareness-raising *about the lack of equal treatment*, and definitely not aimed at achieving preferential treatment by anyone. It's like saying that there need to be straight pride or white pride events. > If the government can officially celebrate pride month, then they should also be able to celebrate things like religious holidays as well - or, if governments shouldn’t be allowed to display religious imagery for the sake of bipartisanship, then neither should they be allowed to publicly endorse the lgbt movement. If you're opening that door, then in the interest of fairness the government would need to also give equal attention to all religions and their counterparts. So not just Christianity, but also Islam, Hinduism, atheism, satanism, paganism etc.
> … about the lack of equal treatment … That’s hard to take seriously when, again, the government, most corporations, and public figures are proudly and openly supporting pride. Is the open endorsement and support of the most powerful institutions in the country not preferential treatment? Is a solid month dedicated to you not preferential treatment? If being gay is as normal as being straight, then gay pride should be as weird as straight pride. If straight people don’t need to celebrate their sexuality because it’s normal, then neither should gay people need to celebrate theirs. Celebration is reinforcing their abnormality.
Celebrating pride is a means to an end, not an end in itself. It's precisely because being LGBTQ+ is still a long way off from being considered something as ordinary and uncontroversial as most other things in life, that pride is unfortunately still needed.
Apparently they are not allowed to.
From what I saw, none of the complaints brought up showed any preferential treatment, but were about being treated in equivalent ways to the majority. That's generally the goal of the LGBTQ+ community: being treated in equivalent ways as the non-LGBTQ+ majority. If we transfer this principle to same-sex couples: one of the equalities that we have been looking for (and in other parts of the world are still looking for) is the ability to marry someone of the same sex. In the not too distant past, this was often described as wanting a "special right", because everyone already has the equal right to marry someone of the opposite sex. It's such a bullshit argument, as these kinds of arguments always are.
I have no opposition to same sex marriage whatsoever.
They did mention the LGBTQ+ community, not just the T, so there must supposedly be something that we're looking for that non-LGB_Qs don't have, and that would go beyond just seeking equality...
Why *must* they? They very well may not.
I also used the word supposedly, as I was expressing this from the POV of OP. If they only meant to criticize one tiny subgroup, they shouldn't have written LGBT/Q+. The unusual use of the slash even indicates that they thought about how to best capture the entire group without committing to a single initialism.
They are not allowed to specify the specific group.
Like I said, they very clearly meant the entire LGBTQ+ group, not just the one subgroup. There are even some accusations in other replies that confirm this: * people were being putting their sexual orientation over other people's race * How is "LGBT/Q+" right for all and, at the same time, prioritizing people because of their sexuality, attempting to silence whoever doesn't share the same views * ...making non-heterosexuality the core of society
Okay.
If that was OP's comment, that particular group is a small minority of LGBTQ, so there should be plenty of other examples. Like, what special privileges are homosexuals looking for?
Why should there be plenty if other examples? When did they say homosexuals are looking for special privileges?
When they said lgbtq people were looking for special privileges. Literally in their title
Right. And they are not allowed to talk about the people under the LGBTQ umbrella who want special privileges.
What? Are you saying gay people aren’t under LGBTQ?
No. That is not what I said. What a weird question.
It’s equally wierd then that that is what you chose to imply. You said they cannot talk about people under the lgbt umbrella. You have clearly been active long enough to know why one niche of lgbtq isn’t talked about here, and given OP used the whole umbrella in their title and CMV, then it seems perfectly reasonable for someone to simply ask for the other examples
Let's say we were at Christmas dinner and grandma started choking. I stand up and say "help grandma is choking!" and then dad say ,"Hold on. People besides grandma choke all the time. Why are you only worried about grandma?" Do you think I would be trying to "divide" the family? Of course not. I obviously know other people besides grandma can choke, but grandma is actively choking in front of me and needs help. In the same way, people who support things like Black Lives Matter aren't trying to say only Black people are treated poorly by police, but they are actively getting killed in front of us and need help.
I think I can see where you're coming from. But tell me, does that mean that you're gonna start making a movement of grandma's not choking or are you just gonna help her and do what you can to help people who might experience the same thing regardless of whether that's your grandma again or not? That's literally your example.
If we find thousands (if not tens of thousands) of instances of grandma's choking and no one doing anything to help them maybe we should have a movement of grandma's not choking.
I would def support that, but we would need to find the reason they're choking and the reason no one is doing anything to help them first.
We can't start a movement before we know why they are choking and why they aren't being helped? Isn't the fact that they are choking and no one is helping them reason enough to start a movement if it is happening on that large of a scale? We obviously don't want them to continue choking regardless of the reason right?
We don't need a reason to help someone, but creating a movement isn't the solution to everything. Sometimes it's not that deep. What if it turns out they are choking because there's people who are having problems and there's a lack of aid? We can always make our own world better, sometimes we can do that way than by spending our lives telling others what they're doing right, wrong, etc.
We have kind of gone off the rails no? I'm not saying a movement is the solution to everything but if we take it back to your CMV, if you follow my grandma analogy then you wouldn't say a "Grandma Lives Matter" movement would be for the preferential treatment of grandma's would you?
But if you find out that the police are actually the ones choking grandmas, and you have video evidence of multiple instances, is that enough to go off of to start some sort of movement to end police choking grandmas specifically? Or at least bring it up as a topic of discussion so it can be addressed?
Well, as a person of LGBT leanings, it has been during my lifetime that gay bashing was considered a sort-of sport, and the police didn't care. Many of my friends got beaten up and stabbed just for existing. So yeh, literally. The movement was basically built around stopping this.
Well, I don't think it's all 100% bad like I said in the original post. I can find things that I can agree with and others that I cannot agree with. I support individuals because we are all equal, not because they're more or less attacked than others.
Yeh, but that's the thing: these movements have come out of being treated vastly unequally in a systematic way, and the desire to reattain equality. I agree that LGBT rights are pretty much a given now, but I can viscerally remember when they weren't. My wife and I only had our marriage legally able to be recognised many years after the ceremony and within our kid's memories. They're only teenagers.
So we need to make sure that both people who are actively being attacked and those who are not receive equal attention? You know, to be fair. Many people being attacked will die of course, but it will be fair as we help the people who are fine and don’t need it.
How about a movement asking for that research to be done?
>Naturally, all of that is usually done under the guise of "I'm a victim", "I'm oppressed" *Is* this a guise? Or is it more genuine because they are subject to oppression?
I'm not talking about actual cases of violence, abuse and oppression. I'm talking about people who use those circumstances to do to others the exact same thing they complain about.
If I understand you right, you're talking about people using circumstances under which they claim oppression or victimization, and then turn around and oppress and victimize others. Do I have that right? And if so, do you have any examples of that? I can't think of any.
It would be helpful to try and change your view if you actually explained why you think these groups are actually about preferential treatments and not equality. Because I don't see how any of these groups except for white supremacy is promoting a divide among people.
To me, each one of the groups I mentioned is equally comparable to "White Supremacy" because the only difference between them is the demographic they choose to advocate for. The rest is very similar; they all can't see past people's race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively. That's not equality. They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively, makes you more or less deserving of sympathy. That's not equality. They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively should be more or less celebrated. That's not equality. They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively makes you more or less deserving of being censored. That's not equality. In practice, this is one of the many cases of vandalism that happened during "Black Lives Matter" in the name of equality. I'm fine with people thinking that feeling oppressed is a reason to oppress others but that's just not something I can agree with. That's not equality. If you want respect, treat others with respect. To me it's not that complicated. And I say this as a non-heterosexual man myself.
I just don't understand how you can see that. Because this is completely ignoring the horrible mistreatment perpetuated on them by our system. It's not being the race, sex, or sexual orientation that deserves sympathy. It's seeing the treatment that they've had to deal with for hundreds of years that deserves sympathy and is trying to change those treatments to be equal with the historical treatment of straight white men. >If you want respect, treat others with respect Are you attributing this to groups or individuals? Because if you're attributing this to groups then straight white men should not be given any respect because they don't treat anyone with respect. Edit: I say this as a cis bi white man who thought he was straight for a long time.
You see what you did while talking about straight white men as though they're all the same? That's my point, to me division, putting yourself another group of people because of their demographic has nothing to do with equality. Also, I'm talking about most of the people who advocate for these ideological and political groups, not white, female, black or non-heterosexual people themselves.
But the people advocating for those ideological and political groups are members of the groups they're advocating for. And saying that historically straight white men have been fucking awful and have oppressed groups that they viewed as different from them is not saying all straight white men are the same. And again I say this as a white man who only recently discovered he was not straight. So I'm not putting myself above another group. I'm saying the group that I was born into has historically been horrible.
Not all, one thing is people as individuals, and another one as people as ideological or political groups. Not every white person is a "white supremacist", not every woman is a "feminist", not every black person is a "supporter of Black Lives Matter" and not every non-heterosexual person is "LGBT/Q+". Also, if you think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, or whatever, makes you be in one group of people instead of just another human being who is much more than his demographic I'm not sure there's much I can say to you so you can see past that much division. Honestly, Buddy.
>not every non-heterosexual person is "LGBT/Q+". Of course they are. By definition.
By definition, non-heterosexual people were called "faggot" and non-heterosexuality was considered a mental illness. Does that mean that simply because something is referred to one one it is right or accurate? Debatable, right?
See, the G stands for Gay. Which means every gay person is LGBTQ+. Same for the other letters. It's not an organization; it's an acronym. And not a slur either.
Yeah, people have used different terms throughout the years for different things. Both accurate and inaccurate terms. If your beliefs do align with "LGBT/Q+" it's fine and deserves respect in my opinion. You might not find it that easily online since the censorship has gotten a bit far but most non-heterosexual people don't even care or feel aligned with "LGBT/Q+". Not for the same reasons as me since everyone is different, but for similar reasons.
Are you seriously out here arguing the definition of the term 'LGBTQ'? It's a fairly simple thing to google. If you're non-hetero, you're either gay, bi, pan or anything inbetween, all of which is included by the term.
Yes, that's what I'm doing. Simply because someone claims to represent you or to be doing something on your behalf doesn't always mean it's true. I mean, they can fool someone.
>Also, if you think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, or whatever, makes you be in one group of people instead of just another human being These two things aren't mutually exclusive. I am an individual who's more than a demographic while also being a part of a demographic. That's how the world works. It isn't one or the other, it's both. Saying that this demographic has historically been oppressed is not saying every single individual as a part of this demographic is only defined by said demographic. That white men have historically been the oppressors in this country is not saying that every single individual white man is an oppressor. It's not an either or and it never has been and I don't understand people who can't comprehend that.
> It's seeing the treatment that they've had to deal with for hundreds of years that deserves sympathy and is trying to change those treatments to be equal with the historical treatment of straight white men. That is what /u/jeffwhaley06 said. By necessity, inequality requires the existence of two disparate groups. Naming those groups does not imply that it has "nothing to do with inequality," it is pointing out how their treatment is not the same as other groups. They just want things like being able to kiss on television without backlash. Things like the right to marry — which may even be on the chopping black right now. As a straight person, displays of your sexuality on television are normalized. As a straight person, your access to institutions like marriage has never been in question. That's why they mention that. This is the same thing as what MLK called "white moderates" who purport to care about issues facing black Americans, yet react negatively when they protest against segregation because it creates "tension."
So again, you haven't really explained **why** you think this. You seem to be just taking this as a given. Why do you think they can't see past people's intrinsic characteristics? Why do you think these movements believe certain demographics should be celebrated more? Why do you think they see sympathy as intrinsically linked to these groups? Why do you think they believe certain demographics are more deserving of being censored? Their whole argument is that they are trying to reach equality by **compensating** for historical injustice. I feel like your position requires you to either believe these movements are lying about their goals, or that the historical justice they are combatting does not exist, or that they are overcompensating for it. Your post does not make any of these arguments. Please clarify **why** you believe this.
> To me, each one of the groups I mentioned is equally comparable to "White Supremacy" because the only difference between them is the demographic they choose to advocate for. That's crazy man. Feminism first off is and for over a century has been about equality between men and women. Modern bourgeois US feminism is ugly garbage, but that's a whole other conversation. Feminism point blank period is not comparable to white supremacy. I'm black I have dealt with white supremacists and vile racists alright. They believe I should leave, or be hidden out of sight. Feminists do not believe all men should leave or be out of sight. It wouldn't even make sense because many feminists are straight women who I'd guess like men around as long as they aren't your standard cis white dude in US. Feminism isn't along racial lines it's along a biological divide in humanity which leaves us with actual non-social differences. Not even close to white supremacy & that's including modern bourgeois Feminism here. > In practice, this is one of the many cases of vandalism that happened during "Black Lives Matter" in the name of equality. I'm fine with people thinking that feeling oppressed is a reason to oppress others but that's just not something I can agree with. That's not equality. If you want respect, treat others with respect. To me it's not that complicated. And I say this as a non-heterosexual man myself. Liking dick as a man doesn't make your opinion any more valid, just like me saying I'm black doesn't. Are you out of the closet? Do you at least openly wear that you're not heterosexual and I don't mean being excessive just is it something you discuss ever & do people know? If the answer is no then your bit about being non heterosexual is useless because it doesn't even provide you a different lived experience externally only internally. We are talking about society not psychology. > I'm fine with people thinking that feeling oppressed is a reason to oppress others but that's just not something I can agree with. Are you saying vandalism = oppression? What cases of vandalism you talking about? Let's look back, since it's too bad the US destroyed brothers and sisters communities & political organizations long ago we are stuck with bullshit like "BLM" which is joke compared to the Panthers, maybe because we aren't dealing with active de jure segregation & KKK pulling up to our homes with regularity, but I think a lot is because those movements threatened US power structures. Tupacs Auntie if she alive I hope she living it up if she dead I hope she RIP. Anyways, is it oppression to fight back against an oppressor? That's an insane take. My kid gets bullied and he punches back "I mean it's fine if you think oppression is a reason to oppress others" no I think oppression is a reason to jaw someone's ass. Whiteness, Straightness these are already praised in society and face ZERO backlash. How is saying gay people should be celebrated instead of admonished like white supremacy? They are saying their sexuality should be equally as valid and respected as heterosexuality. In none of you examples can I think of anyone who is a "Gay supremacist" "Black supremacist" (actually a lot of us think that if I'm being honest, but not in a let's "subjugate white people" way, in a "fuck them were better than them anyways" way) no nationalists arguing we need to take political power and send white folks back to Europe, no "women supremacy" where women say let's take political power and subjugate men. Again with modern US feminism which is extremely problematic in pop culture shooting itself in the foot because it serves only privileged women and will not acknowledge that white women have it made compared to black women. Thing is I get it from women why many would have the attitudes they do towards men, that's not the issue, the issue is according to US feminism liberation of women means working an exploitative job men could work & not being attacked. What an embarrassment. Women deserve better they do hold up half the sky. > They all think being one race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. respectively makes you more or less deserving of being censored. That's not equality. Tell me mr "non heterosexual" what demographic in the US is most in numbers when it comes to shit takes? White people no doubts there. It's no one saying censor gays, straights, Christians, I notice these complaints all center around criticisms of the most powerful groups within those categories without actually saying it. They must center on white people, men, Christians, Straights because the opposite is validly recognized as bullshit & no one would argue against the present power structures with "all these White supremacists are the same as Christian nationalist, misogynists, and homophobes. That is true, what you're saying is just putting the blame for the problems seeking to be addressed by said groups on them. It's not censoring white people...they are everywhere. It's not censoring men...they are everywhere. It's not censoring Christians...they are everywhere. It's not censoring heterosexuals...they are everywhere. Its effortless to have those points manifest themselves because they are so numerous. What should women, black people, gay people, or whatever other group do? Nicely say "Hey that's not fair!" And allow the group being unfair to determine whether or not their complaint is valid based on how nice they were? Even if that was the case it wouldn't be good enough. You caught me with one in the hand so I'm probably not making sense, but I really am very curious if you're out the closet or not because if not being "non heterosexual" has bo bearing on social issues and how they affect you externally. Even more so if you're white too. If those are both the case you're just regular out of touch white boy if that's not true embarrassing brother you even more out of touch.
>To me, each one of the groups I mentioned is equally comparable to "White Supremacy" because the only difference between them is the demographic they choose to advocate for. You actually think that black people actually don' have it harder in life, aren't unfairly treated by the system and their only goal is to become the dominant race in the country? All of those movements exist because a specific slice of the population is being disadvantages by the system and are an attempt at equality. In no way do LGBTQ people for example think they should have more rights than non-LGBTQ people.
Can you actually name a specific policy that you think constitutes preferential treatment?
Suppose there's a group that's being treated worse by cops than others. How do I try to improve this situation without you saying I'm trying to do preferential treatment? If I even point it out, you'll say "why are you dividing people by groups like that" If I try to say I'm against cops who do this, you'll say "why are you putting yourself against other groups of people" If I say we should try to help this group, you'll say "why are you trying to force your view onto others" >I'm not talking about people's sex, race or sexuality here as I think we're all equal and deserve the same rights and duties. I'm talking about the people who advocate for these ideological and political groups. Right, in an ideal world, where everybody is starting from the same spot, I agree. We should treat everybody equally. But suppose one group is being treated worse by cops than others. What should we do? We should focus on how cops treat that group, and try to improve it. Yes? But if I do that you'll just say "hey how come you're focusing on race? We shouldn't look at race! Everybody should be treated equally". ... Yes, that's the problem. Everybody should be treated equally, this group is not being treated equally, so we need to focus and improve their situation... So that they are treated equally. Do you see? How do we make progress here without you complaining about it
I believe I know what OP means -- maybe.... Pick a "movement" OP mentions. That movement is against some perceived systematic wrong doing (real or not, but let's assume real). Random person living in a small midwestern town not only never sees this injustice/oppression/whatever, but may also have a hard time believing it exists to the same degree as the spokespeople make things out to be. But what they maybe *do* experience is the impact on their lives. Large corporations hiring practices and promotion practices go against equality and show clear biases towards the group and against other groups. Or they see the annual corporate charade for Pride Month, or change the Columbus Day day off for another one in June that (wrongly) was never even mentioned in schools. I think that may be where OP is coming from. ......maybe?
As someone who agrees with the OP, but actually supports the causes, by and large, here's the way I'd put it. The perception is that by and large these movements are basically "give us power". Because they're not really dealing with systematic issues, they're dealing with systemic issues. Think not rules and structures, but instead culture. I'm all for fixing the first thing, right. There's rules and structure and what comes out of it is something we all have to live by. I'm ok with that. But I'm not ok for people grabbing power for their own interests, while doing little in my mind to actually address the issues.
Fair counter-argument
Perhaps you might expand on your view a bit further? Like how *specifically* does, say, Black Lives Matter demonstrate this alleged desire for "preferential treatment" of, I guess, living black people over?
I don't know if you remember the many businesses that were vandalized during "Black Lives Matter", in the name of "Black Lives Matter. Or the many people who believe you can't be racist towards a white person because they only type of racism, or racially-motivated discrimination, that exists is only from white people and every other race is their eternal victim. Or the fact many people who advocate for "Black Lives Matter" blame it all on race and believe the corporate world should be built in a way that every race is equally "represented" in amount, instead of leaving that bs behind and let people do their job without second guessing their race.
Every single thing you just said is either not true or not promoted by the BLM movement. No business was vandalized by or at the behest of BLM. BLM did not attempt or condone acts of violence during a period of civil unrest; many other factors resulted in the violence, including the over-aggressive police respond to what began as non-violent protests. No one says there is only one definition of racism. That's absurd. The racism = prejudice + power speaks specifically to things like institutional racism. No one says that a minority literally cannot be racist on an individual level. No one in the BLM movement or anyone who spoke favorably of it "blames it all on race" I've really gotta question what your sources of information are, and I pray you don't rely youtube and social media
Yeah, you're right. The things I'm saying are either not true or not promoted by "Black Lives Matter". Also, there isn't people who think only white people can be racist. It is realistic for you to say that no one in that ideological and political group blame it all on race, because you know all of them. I just made all that stuff up, right? Jaja, kind regards.
Whoa slow your roll, partner. "No one" is a widely known turn of phrase that doesn't literally mean no single person ever. But some yahoo on Twitter isn't representative of an entire movement. Basically, what I'm saying, is that you're straw-manning BLM, feminism, etc. There is no credible or remotely mainstream civil rights movement that promotes anything you've accused them of promoting. Your entire view is founded on misconception
I saw that with what I like to call the Sodom And Gomorrah Fallacy (unless there's a proper name, it's after the whole Abraham-arguing-with-God-over-how-many-good-people-are-worth-sparing-those-cities thing); the idea that you can't say what a group doesn't believe because you don't know the beliefs of every single member so for all you know there's someone who does and that somehow means the group does
[удалено]
Sorry, u/Effective-Host5342 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Effective-Host5342&message=Effective-Host5342%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavh2nv/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please do not spam a copy-paste comment.
[удалено]
In response: I find you can avoid looking foolish if you instead ask me what I think. Shoving your hand up your ass to rummage around for wild guesses is a great ways to build strawmen. But it is a piss poor way to learn about a person.
[удалено]
European missionaries were for bringing the true faith and civilization to people lacking it. The Australian government policy towards indigenous people was similarly aimed at civilizing the continent. All these groups largely legitimately believed that these were their goals, and their actions were largely aimed at that. Except... their actions had side effects that they didn't like to consider and that in the long run overshadowed their main goals. Similarly the problem with many of these modern groups is that their supporters like to say "these are their goals and... end of story". Considering the side effects is apparently best left for all those wrong people in the past, we on the other hand are too advanced and progressive to let that happen with us. Taking one example, a large part of feminist narrative describing the wage gap largely focuses on average (rather than median, which could have shown that men and overrepresented at top AND bottom) difference in pay, and hates to use data compensated for hours worked and education levels. So their conclusions are consistently "give women more money" that looks much less solid once you actually start seriously looking into data. If you look at the people in most dire need of extra money - homeless and so on, there's going to be many more men than women - something that just about every article describing "the continuing 20% gender wage gap" will be carefully diverting your attention from using these very specific methods in combination that even even a person with a cursory familiarity with statistics would not pick accidentally.
Invading a country and forcing the people who live there into slavery isn't "bringing civilization" If anyone acted like savages, it was the colonizers. Beating, kidnapping, torturing and raping
This is a bad analogy. Colonizers believed they needed to civilize indigenous people because they were "savages". These modern groups aren't claiming that other groups are worse or sub-human, they are saying we should be treated equally and we aren't. Also, the colonizers used the fact that the indigenous people were below them to justify stealing from them.
…what? Are you comparing feminism to colonization, that’s definitely a reasonable take🤥.
Yes, I am comparing modern feminism and colonization (or at least certain groups of colonizers like missionaries) in that they both thought they were fighting for a good thing (and in some ways were), but ultimately were doing a lot of wrong in areas they didn't like to look at.
Yeah remember when feminists enslaved all men and murdered children who didn't convert? A bad comparison dude. Is this really how some of you view feminism or do you just not think colonialism was that bad?
Where did feminism “go wrong”?
u/Creative_Board_7529 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Creative_Board_7529&message=Creative_Board_7529%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavf22d/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
>Black Lives Matter is about removing systemic discrimination against African Americans in the police and justice system, which has been empirically proven by the United States Government itself to be very real. So wrong. And what is their solution? Lets defund the police in already crime infested inner cities. That will definitely help things! I'm sure their intended cause is noble. But how they go about it is often down right STUPID. Nobody but the criminals prospers from defunding the police.
Psssst Cops have never done jack shit to defend anyone from these "criminals" You watch Hollywood cop movies and assume every cop is getting into shoot outs but when kids get shot at school cops run away Ask any victim of robbery Of assault Of rape Ask them how much the cops "helped" You know what happened to me when I was robbed and assaulted? Cops took a statement then told me not to bother them That's EVERY victims story The only people who think cops help have never needed help from a cop
What currently happens is you call 911 because your autistic brother is having a melt down and you need help and the cops come to help and then shoot your brother because he is acting odd. Because instead of sending a mental health professional they send a man with zero training and a gun. Or they can do what they did in Chicago for year and stick a pencil into a black man's ear until that person confessed to a crime they didn't commit.
Murder and attempted murder cops didn't do shit for us. They come for domestic calls and stop DUI drivers for cash. They ain't saving no one in the "inner city" as you call it. Matter of fact they likely making it worse.
[удалено]
[удалено]
u/Creative_Board_7529 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Creative_Board_7529&message=Creative_Board_7529%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavgorl/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
[удалено]
u/Creative_Board_7529 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Creative_Board_7529&message=Creative_Board_7529%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhp2u/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. AI generated comments must be disclosed, and don't count towards substantial content. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/ShoddyMaintenance947 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20ShoddyMaintenance947&message=ShoddyMaintenance947%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhjs7/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
I dont even want to go down the semantics. But Feminism, BLM, LGBTQ are very, very, very different movements from White Supremacy OP.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
Sorry, u/Effective-Host5342 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Effective-Host5342&message=Effective-Host5342%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavgx1q/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
You mean the traitor terrorist loser who was told at gun point by a cop to stop breaking down the door to the capitol in an attempt to murder our senators? Let me guess...voting for a convicted felon?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I think I can see where you're coming from. To me, you see "Feminism", "Black Lives Matter" and "LGBT/Q+" from a human rights perspective, and you don't think that's the same for "White Supremacy". I think that's fair and the way a lot of people see it. But if you promote division, putting yourself against others because of what they believe (even if it doesn't harm anyone), silencing others, and prioritizing your chosen demographic above everyone else is the same thing the groups I mentioned earlier do.
In what *specific way(s)* does, say, Black Lives Matter "promote division"?
By making race the center of every human interaction. By thinking people, who just happen to be white, owe something to people, who just happen to be black, because of some stupid people in the past and present. By encouraging others to be against people who don't have the same beliefs because, to them, that means they're racist. By making a victim of one race and an abuser of another one, as though race makes people their personality.
BLM as a movement never advocate for anything you said here. Where are you getting this information?
That doesn't sound like division?
It certainly would, if any of what you said was in any way a reflection of reality
In what way do homosexuals promote division? Homosexuals have been working pretty hard for the better part of the last century to be accepted as equals to heterosexuals. Any division that exists is put there by heterosexuals and homophobes, and gay people are by and large just try to remove that division. The end goal of the movement is a society where sexual orientation is a very uninteresting trait of a person that's only relevant for dating purposes.
You got it all wrong. I'm not talking about people, I'm talking about those particular ideological and political groups anyone (regardless of their sexual orientation, race, or any of that stuff) can advocate for.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sorry, u/AngryBlitzcrankMain – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20AngryBlitzcrankMain&message=AngryBlitzcrankMain%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhate/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
If you really believe these two are in any way comparable that I dont have anything else to tell you.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/OmniManDidNothngWrng – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20OmniManDidNothngWrng&message=OmniManDidNothngWrng%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavehlq/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Hi /u/y_a_t_! You're not in trouble, don't worry. This is just a **Rules Reminder for All Users.** --- The following rules apply to comments: **1. Direct responses to a submission must challenge or question at least one aspect of the submitted view.** Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to comments. **2. Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if the rest of it is solid. **3. Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view.** While being open to changing one’s views is a requirement for submitting (see the other rules), accusing them of trolling only serves to make people who truly are open more defensive and less likely to hear what you have to say. **4. Award a delta when acknowledging a change in your view, and not for any other reason.** Celebrating view changes is at the core of Change My View, so if your view is changed, reply to the response that changed it with a short explanation as to how and award a Delta; do not use deltas sarcastically, jokingly, or when you already agree with the response. **5. Responses must contribute meaningfully to the conversation.** In order to keep responses relevant to the discussion, users can report posts that don't add anything useful to the thread. To be clear, we're not referring to the effort of an argument - we don't make it our place to judge the strength or weakness of your comment in this regard - but rather to the effort of the comment itself. If you have any questions or concerns regarding our rules, please message the mods through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) (*not PM*).
This is such a ridiculous argument. If they actually cared about equality, they wouldn't speak out against people who seek to undermine them. MLK puts it better than I ever could: >"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sorry, u/decrpt – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20decrpt&message=decrpt%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavgfuj/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/thecrawlingrot – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20thecrawlingrot&message=thecrawlingrot%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavf73a/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Proof? LGBT is rights for all, feminists like RBG even expanded men's rights for some equalities like getting male spouses of military servicewomen their equal access.
How is "LGBT/Q+" right for all and, at the same time, prioritizing people because of their sexuality, attempting to silence whoever doesn't share the same views, forcing their self-image on others (even if it doesn't align with people's perception) and making non-heterosexuality the core of society? Don't get me wrong, I can understand you might think these things are done for a good reason, but you need to be real, how are those things about rights for all? Riddle me that.
Every single political movement in history is pro silencing people directly opposed to them specifically. See: literally all of them throughout history. How is non-heterosexuality being made the core of society? What does that even mean?
That's one of the scariest things I've seen someone say like it's nothing. You're the definition of everything wrong with "LGBT/Q+", "Feminism", "Black Lives Matter", "White Supremacy". If every political movement in history was about silencing people opposed to them specifically we would live in a literal wasteland. But you're right on one thing, those ideological and political groups I mentioned are, among other things, about silencing others, which is my point, that's not equality.
Way to sidestep my point entirely and personally attack me while you're at it. Anyway, please find me *any* political movement, any movement whatsoever-- conservatives, libertarians (left or right), etc etc that *isn't* pro silencing people that explicitly position themselves as anti-conservative, anti-libertarian, etc etc.
It's so interesting that you mention all of that stuff because they're more often than not the same. The "right", "left", "conservatives", "liberals", "republican", "democrat", the ideological and political groups I mentioned in the title, etc. Why do I say there's more often than not the same? Because I don't see how being divided, having preferences towards particular demographics and putting myself against another group of people has something to do with equality. It seems the only way you know to support people and stand against injustice is by advocating for groups instead of treating and seeing people past their sex, race, sexuality, beliefs, etc.
Again, you continue to make unfounded assumptions about me. I think it is absolutely more useful and fair to give individuals exactly the help and support *they* need. Doing so on a government policy level is absolutely infeasible. In some demographics, individuals often have a lot of problems in common with eachother, so dividing society into demographics and trying to solve the problems that all those demographics largely have is the only real way to start solving problems, because solving individual problems is so fine grained it can only be done interpersonally, not as a matter of policy. I have firsthand experience of both men's and women's issues. I advocate for both groups when appropriate. Also: you have yet to provide any political group seeking to solve problems that *didn't* want to silence the people diametrically ideologically opposed to solving problems. If you cannot do so, that is an implicit admission that this trait is in common with all political groups looking to solve problems, and if you consider it to be a trait we shouldn't have then you're saying we should abandon politics (societal problem solving) altogether or reshape the entire political and cultural landscape... somehow. If one political group says that women should have rights and another says that women shouldn't be able to have their own bank account or vote, both groups will *want* the other to be silenced. I don't see any way this won't be the case.
What? How is any one person prioritized by allowing gay marriage etc? Can you make a clear and specific claim?
The problem is you have exactly what I mean on the original post above but still come here to make assumptions. When did I say a word about same-sex marriage? If that's what you mean. Did you read the word "equality" I typed up there? Honestly.
So instead of actually backing up your implication by making an actual clear argument or citation, you're just saying that I got your vague implication wrong.
In what way is the LGBTQIA+ community attempting to make itself the core of society?
Fundamentally difference between the first three groups listed and the last one. LGBTQIA+ people are not looking to have an LGBTQIA+ run world, where heterosexuals are a sub class of people. The general goal is equality. The mass mass majority of feminists are not looking for a matriarchal/female run world where men are a sub class of people (outside of fringe “feminazis” and Reddit echo chambers). The general goal is equality. This is supported by the fact that are men who identify as feminists, which, IMO, would not occur if the ultimate goal of the feminist movement was to subjugate men and have a completely female dominated world. “Black Lives Matter” and the mass majority if not all racial equality movements are not looking a POC/Black run world, where white individuals are the subclass of people. The general goal is equality. I do not think that when you really look at the goals of these 3 organization/diverse groups of movements, they are not looking for preferential treatment, they are looking for equality and equity (where appropriate). Now, and please correct me if I am wrong, BUT white supremacists ARE looking for preferential treatment at the expense of others. White supremacists are looking for a world that is completely and totally run by white individuals (preferably white men) and that all individuals outside of the white, heteronormative, (and often male) in-group should belong to a subclass of people held at a lower standard then this in-group. Just to support this, the Oxford definition of white supremacy: “white su·prem·a·cy noun the belief that white people constitute a superior race and should therefore dominate society, typically to the exclusion or detriment of other racial and ethnic groups.” I understand and accept that white supremecists exist, have a right to exist and, in the US freely, have a right to freely discuss their opinions on how this country should be run and who should be in charge. Just as I am entitled to judge them for their opinions and choose not to collaborate them. We have fundamentally differing values (just as I have fundamentally different values with some minority subsections of feminism I.e TERFS and “men should be subjugated” types). Personally I am not going to break bread with someone who believes white individuals are the dominant class and all other races are inferior. In all honestly, I don’t even know how to, so many complex opinions or beliefs can and should be discuss amongst individual of different ideologies, it’s how we learn and grow and evolve. But how does one (I specifically) meet half way with “white individuals are the dominant race and all other races are inferior and belong to a subclass of human”? (If you have any tips, I am genuinely open to hearing them, as I would like to understand).
"I would prefer if your heel wasn't dug into my neck" is not comparable to "I prefer to keep my heel dug into your neck."
[удалено]
Sorry, u/Effective-Host5342 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Effective-Host5342&message=Effective-Host5342%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhq4i/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
> these groups can have things we can agree with In what ways do you agree with white supremacists?
[удалено]
What is welfare abuse?
[удалено]
How is that abuse? We voluntarily agree to have welfare paid for by taxes when we vote for the people we vote into congress.
>I think we're all equal and deserve the same rights and duties. You are factually wrong. And that's the entire point. If we were all equal then your CMV would be correct. We aren't. As a white hetero man, my sexuality has never been questioned, no person has ever called the police on me and I've never been groped on a bus. Never been told that whether I wear shorts or jeans I would be looking to be raped. If that's the experience of most "LGBT/Q+", "Feminism", "Black Lives Matter" then we are equal and they are just seeking preferential treatment. **Which the must never get**. But if that's not the case. This post is wrong.
If the house across the street from mine is on fire, spraying it with water isn't preferential treatment. It's absolutely wild that you grouped white supremacy in with feminism and BLM. I think that says a lot about the information you're consuming. I don't think I can change your view because you're ultimately making a statement about the intent of a very broad group of people and there's just no way that statement is accurate, or that I'll convince you otherwise.
[удалено]
u/GenericUsername19892 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20GenericUsername19892&message=GenericUsername19892%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavg8rd/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I'm going to narrow it down and just ask about LGBTQ+ advocacy orgs. Can you name a specific policy those organizations have pushed for that constitutes preferential treatment?
This is really out of touch with the majority views of these movements. There are some reactionary mutations but they tend to be marginal and hated by the left wing of movements and unwelcome by other regular participants. So for example, what do most black separatists want… they want to be away from a society they see as racist and oppressive towards them. What do white separatist want? They want black people removed to someplace else because they think black people themselves are a threat that needs to be controlled or removed.) White Supremacy isn’t even about preferential treatment for whites, it’s about controlling groups of people. Poll Tax laws disenfranchised poor whites even though black folks were the direct target. The rallying cry of the Southern Democrats and proto-KKK during reconstruction was “stop [black] domination” as if voting rights and not being able to control people meant they were oppressing you. This kind of argument about people asking for their rights to be respected as “special treatment” is very common on conservative media, they’ve been saying it my whole life which is funny because I remember people being like: “well early feminism was ok because voting rights should be equal, but now they get mad if you Pat a waitress’s bottom—feminism has gone too far!” The deliberate (for pundits imo) confusion is over formal legal rights vs rights in practice and in society. The law applies to everyone but if young people in poor neighborhoods are stop and frisked randomly for drugs but fraternities and college students are not… there is a inequality in practice since a chunk of young people are all going to tend to have drugs. If public defenders are too overworked and just force everyone to take a plea whereas rich people’s lawyers will fight it no matter if their client was caught red-handed, then there is equality on paper but not in reality.
>What I'm saying is these ideological and political groups are about preferential treatment for their chosen demographic. How does your worldview account for ordinary people who don't belong to the demographic whose interests the ideological or political group advocates for, but support that ideological or political group regardless? There are many heterosexual people who support LGBT/Q+; many men who support feminism; many non-black people who support BLM; many non-white people who support white- oh, silly me, there are basically NO non-white people who support white supremacy. So I agree white supremacy is all about preferential treatment for white people... hey, come to think of it, the clue is right there in the name! In contrast, I can't help noticing that BLM is not BLMMTNBL; it is "black lives matter", *not* "black lives matter more than non-black lives". OP, if you can't explain why so many people support ideologies and/or groups that don't focus on the demographic they belong to, I think you have to accept the explanation that these people - people such as me - will offer: most of these ideologies and/or groups *are* about equality, so we support them because equality is a moral goal.
>oh, silly me, there are basically NO non-white people who support white supremacy. You're free to be wrong if you want
You're free to not know the meaning of the word "basically" if you want.
**Note:** Your thread has **not** been removed. Your post's topic seems to be fairly common on this subreddit. Similar posts can be found through our [DeltaLog search](https://www.reddit.com/r/DeltaLog/search?q=feminism+%7C+feminist&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all) or via the [CMV search function](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=Feminism&restrict_sr=on). Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
LGBTQ+ isn’t an ideology or movement. It’s just a community of people. Feminism is both a movement and a belief - a movement originally, to push for equal rights for women, who historically did not have equal rights, and now more of a belief and stance for gender equality. White supremacy isn’t really a movement I don’t think, it’s just a belief that white people are superior to all other races. And “black lives matter” similar to feminism is both a movement and a belief to fight systemic racism and inequalities for black people. Whew, all that out of the way.. so you’re saying these groups don’t want equality, they want preferential treatment. This is just not true. What is your basis for this belief? The 2 that are actually somewhat active movements, are representing groups of people that actively do not have equal rights and are ACTIVELY oppressed. So those are movements to fight for equality. What preferential treatment do you think they’re fighting for?
How is being LGBTQ+ an ideological group?
>If they truly cared about equality, they wouldn't encourage people to divide, to put themselves against other groups of people, to force their views on others and to censor and attack whatever they don't agree with. This is simply incorrect. If someone is oppressed, someone else is doing the oppression. So while white supremacists are wrong about being oppressed those other labels advocate for actually oppressed groups. You don't get to equality without getting rid of oppression along those lines.
I highly differ from what you're saying entirely. The answer to oppression is not more oppression, that's the problem these groups have. That's only led to more oppression if you haven't noticed, maybe not to the same groups of people but to others. It's the reason why since the legalization of, let's say, same-sex marriage there hasn't been another milestone for equality and human rights, that didn't happen because people were putting themselves against one another, or because they were censoring people, or because people were being putting their sexual orientation over other people's race. It did happen because a lot of people were open to discuss, because a lot of people knew a non-heterosexual person who they thought deserved the same rights as everyone else, because a lot of people understood it is about equality. Not about the things a lot of people claim it was about today.
But if I'm advocating for my lgbt friends to have the exact same rights as I do.I am advocating for myself and my lgbt friends to have equal protections. If I can post a picture of my wife and that's okay I also want my lesbian friend to have the same right to post that picture and have that be okay. And that's not a world we live in. In certain states if she posts a picture of her wife at her school she can get into trouble that I would never have to deal with.
Of course civil rights advances pit people against each other. They are by their very nature divisive. Why do you think there wasn't marriage equality if no one opposed it?! Do you think everyone was in favor of black people being equal under the law before the 60s?
Opposing to things is necessary, but both of those things you mention happened and succeeded because a lot of people (with different races, sexualities, beliefs, etc) united as they thought everyone is equal and just wanted to live like everyone else, not because they were forcing their views on others, silencing people, making it all about their differences, etc.
I mean, yeah, they united against their oppressors. When gay marriage was legalized, it took the exclusive right to legal marriage away from straight couples. That's the those opposing it said that gay marriage leads to marrying a dog. Think about the 2 major parts of this argument for a second. The first one is that anti marriage equality people feel oppressed by the fact that non-straight couples are able to publicly exist and be recognized by the government. The second one is that the calls about marrying dogs suggests that they believe homosexual people to be about on the same level as a dog. And even today, you hear constant whining about how people being gay publicly (one could say people who are proud of their identity instead of shameful of it) is a problem because they believe that "it should be kept out of public", but only when it specifically is something they are uncomfortable with. Gay people should not be allowed to express themselves in legal ways, but for example, 2A nuts should be allowed to express *themselves* openly by carrying a gun in public. All these groups or "movements" are being actively oppressed by *people*, and they must divide the people between those who are allys and those who are enemies, because they are in fact enemies.
Buddy, you know discrimination goes in all directions. The same way some heterosexual people have had problems with non-heterosexuality, some non-heterosexual people have problems with heterosexuality. It feels like you are trying to make a victim out of one group of people when, ultimately, intolerance, hatred and close-mindedness can come from everyone regardless. I can also understand what you're saying about stabilizing the difference between people who support same-sex marriage and those who, even today, don't, but, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties, I don't need everyone to agree with me on everything so I feel good about myself or have a normal conversation with someone... if they want. I think you need to separate the people from the ideological and political groups. Not every white person is a "white supremacist", not every woman is a "feminist", not every black person is a "Black Lives Matter supporter" and not every non-heterosexual person is "LGBT/Q+". Meaning that just because someone doesn't support any of those groups doesn't automatically mean they are people's enemies or that they have a problem with people's sex, race, sexual orientation, identities or people having the same rights.
>some non-heterosexual people have problems with heterosexuality ...and? You're attributing that to the entire LGBT community. >but, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties, Queer people are going "hey, we're not being treated equally," and you're going "fuck you, asking not to be discriminated against is asking for preferential treatment." You're seriously making the argument that the only thing worse than discrimination against homosexuals is *negative reactions to homophobes for discriminating against homosexuals.*
How can you say I'm attributing that to every person that supports "LGBT/Q+" when I literally said "some" right before? Jaja. Like I said, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties. Notice I haven't said that's the case and there's nothing wrong. The argument I'm making is that you can't complain you're silenced, being discriminated against or looked down upon, when you do the same to others who you don't agree with; because to me, that leads to division, not equality.
>How can you say I'm attributing that to every person that supports "LGBT/Q+" when I literally said "some" right before? Jaja. Because your argument is complete nonsense if you aren't implying that. >Like I said, as long as we are all treated equally by the law and have the same rights and duties. Notice I haven't said that's the case and there's nothing wrong. **The argument I'm making is that you can't complain you're silenced, being discriminated against or looked down upon, when you do the same to others who you don't agree with; because to me, that leads to division, not equality.** What, pray tell, *are they "silencing, being discriminated against, or looked down upon" for?* Oh no, people are bigoted against bigotry? The most put upon social class of all, bigots being told they cannot and should not practice their bigotry?
So anyone who doesn't share the same views as those of the ideological and political groups I mean is automatically a bigot to you, right? You sound like a bigot.
So, your assertion here is that Straight people have had societal problems with oppression specifically due to their being straight? The LGBTQ+ Movement is not anti-straight. If you believe that, then you need to get that nonsense sorted out.
Here we go again, haha. My assertion here is that everyone can both discriminate and experience discrimination, not just one group of people; and being discriminated against doesn't mean it's okay for me to discriminate. I mean, I can do it but it doesn't mean it's right. "LGBT/Q+" is anti-equality. You can indeed claim it stands for equal rights, but it's very hard to see the relationship between equal rights and forcing views on others, attempting to silence others and making it all about sexuality.
Please explain what you mean by "forcing your views on others"
The same way a Christian person could put their symbols on other people's surroundings as though their beliefs weren't personal, be vigilant about other people's business, go out there and start telling others about their beliefs out of no where, use name-calling as a weapon to defend themselves instead of facts or accuracy, attempting to make the law work based on what they believe even for the people who don't share the same beliefs as them, needing people to agree with them on everything, etc.
*United against other people who opposed them to force their views on them.* That's literally what the civil rights movement was. It's simply undeniable that tons of people opposed the civil rights movement and didn't want equality under the law forced on them. Luckily it happened anyway.
Agreed, but notice how my post is about how equality is what I think matters. So I'm not sure that's a good example.
Was gay marriage not about equality? Was women's suffrage not about equality? Was the civil rights movement of the 60s not about equality?
A. nice trying to trip people up by lumping white supremacy in with positions usually held by those opposed to white supremacy B. so what should any of those movements have done to show they're about equality, called themselves something like equalists (which if they changed to the name metaphorically-now is most associated with fictional villains who (albeit for a characteristic people from our world don't possess) iirc basically wanted to bring about equality through Harrison-Bergeron-esque tactics)
Is anyone under the impression that white supremacists are advocating for equality?? “Supremacy” is a word with a very clear meaning.
I think it always starts of recognition for their kind and acceptance. It gets hijacked by extremists though
[удалено]
Sorry, u/ShoddyMaintenance947 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20ShoddyMaintenance947&message=ShoddyMaintenance947%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhayd/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards). Sorry, u/ShoddyMaintenance947 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20ShoddyMaintenance947&message=ShoddyMaintenance947%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1driaqw/-/lavhayd/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.