[_ph_]

As a non-american, I can see how some actions of the left seem to be a bit over the top and as things escalated might really got a bit extreme too. But is a push against racism, for gender equality, LGBT rights really wrong? Do you notice, how much people, who stand for those issues, get attacked in the public discussion?

[emptysongglass]

> But is a push against racism, for gender equality, LGBT rights really wrong?

No, of course it isn't. But many people I know, myself included, are afraid to speak out against what we see as new forms of hate levied in their name. The CHAZ or the hijacking of this brutal war against Ukraine into a commentary on care only being bound to race or the evacuation of cisgendered women and men from their own bodies by way of language so that everyone is "just" a vagina-haver or penis-possessor are just a few examples of where I see these pushes become the very weapons of the forces its proponents profess to fight.

> Do you notice, how much people, who stand for those issues, get attacked in the public discussion?

As a liberal (or what was liberal 10 years ago), I mostly notice how much people who stand for these issues attack others who have a different opinion and try to silence them.

This is the first time I'm giving voice to some of these deeply unpopular opinions in the new liberal left spaces like HN, for which I fully expect to be downvoted and potentially flagged into oblivion.

I don't think the oft-violent rhetoric and deplatforming crusades of the new left is the right way of effecting positive change on the world.

[Chris2048]

> But is a push against racism, for gender equality, LGBT rights really wrong?

Framing it this way is misleading. "push back" that entails violent, harmful and illegal behaviour maybe wrong with total irrelevance to what you are trying to achieve.

> Do you notice, how much people, who stand for those issues, get attacked in the public discussion?

No, I see the opposite, to the extend that extreme virtue-signalling on these topics is met with no opposition, because no-one wants to be labelled an *-ist.

[mensetmanusman]

“ But is a push against racism, for gender equality, LGBT rights really wrong?”

Isn’t it an issue of framing? E.g. it appears that some think that the solution to racism appears to be implementing institutional racism indefinitely until racism is cured.

This is distracting from the real issue of class warfare which is what psyops relies on to divide prior arguing past each other.

[kbelder]

Neither party is racist, neither party is sexist, except for the fringe minority of both. They disagree on approach and methods, and twist that into believing their opponent is evil to the core.

Democrats think Republicans are evil racists for trying to shut down diversity mandates. Republicans think Democrats are evil racists for trying to impose diversity mandates. They both want to eliminate racism, but their worldviews cause conflict on how to do that.

There are some legitimate fundamental differences on LGBT rights, I'll admit. Not so much on LG, but as you get further into the abbreviation, it increases.

[Already__Taken]

As an outsider "name of grotesque moral rightnessess" thrown from the Christian right made me spit my coffee out.

[akomtu]

If most "christian rights" knew my beliefs about the religion, they'd burn me at stake. I do think that the Bible has a lot of wisdom in it, but a lot of bs too.

[stronglikedan]

> racism, for gender equality, LGBT rights

The thing is, those are all non-issues now, and have been for a while. The reason the MSM is known as fake news in the US, is that they keep trying to push these as current issues, even though they've been settled.

[ajford]

That's a truck-load of bullshit. Texas Gov. Abbot is pushing an anti-LGBTQ+ agenda in the open. He and his pals are flat-out pushing anti-trans agendas that accuse parents of children seeking gender-affirming treatment of child abuse.

The Texas right-leaning lege just got through passing a bill that was designed to be hard to assail in the courts that hands out money for turning in anyone who assist someone in seeking an abortion, robbing people of their rights over their own bodily autonomy.

Florida gov't is trying to pass bills that prohibit talking about gender orientation and identity, racism, and equality in the workplace and classroom.

This isn't a "non-issue". This isn't "settled". We're still fighting for our rights and freedoms, and those of our children. I'll be damned if I'm gonna let some greedy nutjob politician deny my children (or anyone's children) the right to be who they are or want to be.

If they don't like gender transitioning, then they shouldn't transition, but don't tell me or mine that they can't!

[mensetmanusman]

In the Context of politics being preference:

“ He and his pals are flat-out pushing anti-trans agendas that accuse parents of children seeking gender-affirming treatment of child abuse.”

Isn’t this, by definition, a very debatable topic with pros and cons that have to be weighed. Where one comes down, I.e. their preference for policy on this, will be informed by their background and biases.

E.g. it isn’t entirely obvious that we should give minors, who legally can not consent to many activities, access to ethically untestable non-reversible treatments.

These issues are actually the purpose of politics. E.g. it is a feature of the system that there is debate on implementing the preferences of a democracy.

[ajford]

The treatment administered to minors is reversible.

Studies show that gender-affirming treatments and care can reduce thoughts of suicide and self-harm.

No one is pushing these treatments on unwilling minors. To take away peoples' rights to these treatments is unconscionable. And to direct people to be charged or investigated for child abuse is even more so. It's just another point that puts people in fear of the authorities.

[klyrs]

> Isn’t this, by definition, a very debatable topic with pros and cons that have to be weighed.

Honestly, you're voicing for support of the person you're responding to, here. These aren't "non-issues" as GGP claimed.

But, puberty blockers, the medical treatment under fire, aren't non-reversible.

[spoils19]

I agree whole heartedly. Until we figure it out, treating it as legal abuse and punishing the parents is the way to go.

[cheeseomlit]

Chemically castrating a child is child abuse.

[ajford]

Puberty blocking is not chemical castration.

By your argument chemotherapy is assassination by poison and setting a broken bone is assault.

[Broken_Hippo]

Delaying puberty is not chemical castration.

[metamet]

They certainly aren't non-issues.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/florida-s-don-t-...

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/judg...

[jtgeibel]

This is complete nonsense. I can easily think of an example from the past week where a Republican controlled state is attacking transgender children and their parents to score political points with the Republican base. It is absurd to claim that equal rights in America is a settled topic or a non-issue.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-transgender-care-lawsuit-...

[Broken_Hippo]

The thing is, those are all non-issues now, and have been for a while

That's just not true.