It’s hard for me to express why, but this posts bothers me a lot. I’m a married, straight male. I’m also a feminist, and I think that post-modern thought on morality is generally quite insightful. But because I’m not LGBT the post seems to say that I have nothing interesting to say,
It sounds like your question has to do with theoretical debate of activists for minority groups: should the minority population accommodate and work around majority prejudice (the position of Booker T. Washington) or should the minority population demand integration and an end to prejudice (the position of W.E.B. Du Bois).
If instead, you are asking about today’s on-the-ground issues with the political alliance known as LGBT activism, I have less knowledge. But if that’s what you’re asking about, ask about THAT. Don’t make generalizing references to “[a] community [that] seems to be prone to taking unnecessary offense, and believing in subjectivism and silly things like that.” It is neither necessary nor sufficient to talk to a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person in order to find out the political realities of LGBT activism.
I’m not talking about political stuff as much as asking practical questions about being LGBT. I agree that if I were interested in only the activism I wouldn’t need to talk to an LGBT in particular. I think you misinterpreted that from my post.
If instead, you are asking about today’s on-the-ground issues with the political alliance known as LGBT activism, I have less knowledge.
I find that a unlikely interpretation. Politics is a mostly respected taboo here. Only in very rare circumstances where the benefit to the refinement of the art outweighs the mind-killing caused by the political analysis or example is politics directly discussed.
It’s hard for me to express why, but this posts bothers me a lot. I’m a married, straight male. I’m also a feminist, and I think that post-modern thought on morality is generally quite insightful. But because I’m not LGBT the post seems to say that I have nothing interesting to say,
It sounds like your question has to do with theoretical debate of activists for minority groups: should the minority population accommodate and work around majority prejudice (the position of Booker T. Washington) or should the minority population demand integration and an end to prejudice (the position of W.E.B. Du Bois).
If instead, you are asking about today’s on-the-ground issues with the political alliance known as LGBT activism, I have less knowledge. But if that’s what you’re asking about, ask about THAT. Don’t make generalizing references to “[a] community [that] seems to be prone to taking unnecessary offense, and believing in subjectivism and silly things like that.” It is neither necessary nor sufficient to talk to a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender person in order to find out the political realities of LGBT activism.
I’m not talking about political stuff as much as asking practical questions about being LGBT. I agree that if I were interested in only the activism I wouldn’t need to talk to an LGBT in particular. I think you misinterpreted that from my post.
I find that a unlikely interpretation. Politics is a mostly respected taboo here. Only in very rare circumstances where the benefit to the refinement of the art outweighs the mind-killing caused by the political analysis or example is politics directly discussed.