China is currently in a state of precariousness, with the primary contradiction being the inequality between urban and rural.
In that context, it’s understandable, albeit not laudable, that they’ve chosen not to legalise gay marriage. The focus is on stability, and that seems to mean not triggering any culture wars.
The above argument isn't about administrative capacity to enact change, they're talking about faith in the government. Governments only accomplish things with the consent of the people who perform the relevant actions, so they have to carefully manage how much they ask of the people they need. China's industrialization project relies on both drastically upsetting the lives of people living in the countryside and the participation of those same people, so that's already a tricky situation.
Now, does that mean that the perfectly just and free of prejudice party decided that the support of the uniquely homophobic countryside after a considered cost-benefit analysis of the need for the countryside's support in industrializing vs the needs of the LGBT community, free of any prejudice minimizing LGBT issues? Lol no.
Remembering a post on here a few days ago where the guy said that he doesn’t understand the need to use the right pronouns for non-binary people because it seems “low priority” in the face of everything else
China is currently in a state of precariousness, with the primary contradiction being the inequality between urban and rural.
In that context, it’s understandable, albeit not laudable, that they’ve chosen not to legalise gay marriage. The focus is on stability, and that seems to mean not triggering any culture wars.
That said, there have been victories. LGBT couples can file for voluntary guardianship of one another. There have been court victories. Being gay and trans has been demedicalised. We’ve seen more representation in media in recent years.
One upshot is that, to my knowledge, there aren’t any conservative groups opposing LGBT rights.
But yeah, they should take a cue from Fidel in his later years.
deleted by creator
Hey only the DNC isn't allowed to do that okayy
‘Embrace’ is a strong word. We’re still seeing progress; it’s just at a glacial pace.
deleted by creator
And in some cases America sees rolling back.
deleted by creator
The above argument isn't about administrative capacity to enact change, they're talking about faith in the government. Governments only accomplish things with the consent of the people who perform the relevant actions, so they have to carefully manage how much they ask of the people they need. China's industrialization project relies on both drastically upsetting the lives of people living in the countryside and the participation of those same people, so that's already a tricky situation.
Now, does that mean that the perfectly just and free of prejudice party decided that the support of the uniquely homophobic countryside after a considered cost-benefit analysis of the need for the countryside's support in industrializing vs the needs of the LGBT community, free of any prejudice minimizing LGBT issues? Lol no.
Yeah, pretty much.
The comment you are replying to is just another example of class reductionism. Apparently we can't look at idpol while poor people exist 🤷
Remembering a post on here a few days ago where the guy said that he doesn’t understand the need to use the right pronouns for non-binary people because it seems “low priority” in the face of everything else
https://hexbear.net/post/2441
deleted by creator
I assumed it happened in ML states because (all?) ML states arose from deeply patriarchal agrarian societies.
deleted by creator