[A4ET8a8uTh0]

I think the overall concern is that people in general seem all too willing to ignore reality. I can't really speak for any particular group in US ( or even in the old country ), because I am sufficiently weird that I do not really fit anywhere. Yay me.

That said, trigger warning is already a trigger word and may need to replaced with something else to avoid emotional reaction ( although I admit I do not have a good replacement off the top of my head ).

Some of the other posters mentioned movie ratings I almost chuckled a little, because I imagined a future, where I send an email in corporate settings with various tags to allow other people to ignore it in time and corporate code of conduct, where you agree to always read some upsetting tags..but I digress.

<< Is that somehow in a different category? << Conservatives routinely get upset about the presence of gay people in media, among many other things.

Please correct if I am wrong ( I have done my best to limit my news intake lately ), but conservatives being angry over gays does not ring true to my ears. If I understand current zeitgeist correctly, it is, currently, about a 'conveyor belt upon which progressives plan to place their children'(paraphrasing certain host). The difference is notable. Is it possible you are using old caricature for specific effect?

And this kinda brings me to the other point. Lately, it seems, it is not conservatives are not the ones calling for boycots, bans, deplatforming and demonetization. It is actually their opponents, which, in itself, is already interesting.

[rsynnott]

> That said, trigger warning is already a trigger word and may need to replaced with something else to avoid emotional reaction ( although I admit I do not have a good replacement off the top of my head ).

"Content warning" is fairly well-accepted (and broader, in that it makes more sense to use it to describe things that people simply _do not want to see_; see discussion of NSFL elsewhere.

[all2well]

The point I was probably trying to make is that I suspect that the author of this study and the accompanying article probably has a particular political axe to grind. That's mostly just conjecture, though.

Moral panics are nothing new, and (self-)censorship is nothing new either.

I think it's naive to think that conservatives have "gotten over" gay marriage, or gay rights more broadly, especially given how recent progress has been in those areas, and how much opposition remains to things like trans rights. I personally have a number of queer friends who are estranged from their families because they're queer, and those families usually aren't particularly progressive, as far as I know.

[killdozer]

Yes they're never going to stop trying to restrict and rollback the rights of minorities, they have a lot of money and power they're willing to deploy to this end. Maintaining these rights will always be a constant struggle.

[xigoi]

> or gay rights more broadly, especially given how recent progress has been in those areas, and how much opposition remains to things like trans rights.

Why are people still conflating homosexuality with transgender? They're completely different issues.

[acoustics]

> Lately, it seems, it is not conservatives are not the ones calling for boycots, bans, deplatforming and demonetization.

Without getting too far into the weeds of partisan politics, I’m not sure how you got this impression.

Ask your local school board or your local library which political side spends more time trying to get media banned.

[xigoi]

Look at social networks like Reddit, Tumblr or pre-Musk Twitter and notice what kind of speech they ban. For example, are you more likely to gét banned for saying “white people should die”, or “black people should die”?

[anonymouskimmer]

"because I am sufficiently weird that I do not really fit anywhere"

Do you want to fit somewhere but haven't yet found a place to fit, or do you not care about fitting anywhere? If it's the latter you may have a social-variant blindspot (halfway down this reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Enneagram/comments/kx0wfa/russ_huds... ). If it's the former you're probably just looking in the wrong places, or aren't engaging enough with the right people to find their similarities to you (or find out if they know of someone else similar to you).

"where I send an email in corporate settings with various tags to allow other people to ignore it in time and corporate code of conduct"

My employer uses a system called "Bucketlist" for kudos or something of the sort. I don't really know because the moment I saw it I created a filter that autodeletes every single email with that word in it. I can handle being reminded of death, but I don't want it popping into my work inbox.

"Please correct if I am wrong ( I have done my best to limit my news intake lately ), but conservatives being angry over gays does not ring true to my ears."

It depends. Media talking points should never be taken at face value. The Log Cabin Republicans continue to be denied a booth at the Texas Republican state convention: https://www.texastribune.org/2022/07/24/texas-log-cabin-repu...

But, as you indicate, conflation of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, transsexual, and a variety of other groups make it difficult at times to figure out what people are actually in favor of or opposed to.

"Lately, it seems, it is not conservatives are not the ones calling for boycots, bans, deplatforming and demonetization. It is actually their opponents, which, in itself, is already interesting."

It's all sides. If you're noticing one side and not the other it's because of the bias of the media you're consuming. Examples:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/06/why-half-...

https://theoutline.com/post/6140/a-brief-history-of-batshit-...

[A4ET8a8uTh0]

<<"because I am sufficiently weird that I do not really fit anywhere"

>

Do you want to fit somewhere but haven't yet found a place to fit, or do you not care about fitting anywhere?

Seems somewhat personal, but I will respond. Neither. I see myself as an outsider, which allows for a very different set of perspectives. For better or worse, I like the fact that I do not belong everywhere equally.

<< But, as you indicate, conflation of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, transsexual, and a variety of other groups make it difficult at times to figure out what people are actually in favor of or opposed to.

I did not directly say that, but that is a good catch.

<<The Log Cabin Republicans

I will admit that this portion of history was news to me so I appreciate you sharing it ( this is why I like HN; you get to learn things ). It is a genuinely sad story to me ( and were I in their place, I would be livid ).

That said, Republicans have learned some lessons it seems ( creations of GAG - https://www.gaysagainstgroomers.com/about; expanding into black and latino communities ).

<< It's all sides. If you're noticing one side and not the other it's because of the bias of the media you're consuming.

I agree in general. This is also why I qualified my statement with lately. Between BLM/WFH phenomena/movements ( last 2 years ) the majority of the recent effort does not seem to be on the republican side ( statement, which your links actually support ). Anecdotally, even I am aware of crazy religious group trying to ban Quake ( but that is ancient history by internet standards ):D

[anonymouskimmer]

"Seems somewhat personal, but I will respond. Neither. I see myself as an outsider, which allows for a very different set of perspectives. For better or worse, I like the fact that I do not belong everywhere equally."

For what it's worth this is a particularly common worldview for a particular couple of personality/motivational types (of which I, and many other people in places such as HN, happen to be a member of one).