The LGBT+ movement has a good assortment of prominent figures who advocated louder than the rest for their respective time periods. We will examine the two most prominent LGBT+ activists of the movement’s early days in order to get a better idea of where the modern LGBT+ movement originated.
Sixth-grade ass writing, gtfo
There are theories, but it requires further investigation. As was said earlier: we will not assert anything that does not need to be asserted. What we have stated here are simply the facts. If these facts do not condemn the movement, then the movement should have no problem hearing these facts stated.
as soulless Ben Shapiro but less brains, the biggest waste of humanity I've seen in awhile
Just like proudly cherry picking the two shite activists to hold up as paragons of millions of people
just fyi i heard thru some tik toks that there are cia/fedposters that are doing rounds in the trans community as well, stirring up bullshit about transwomen and their supposed "not experiencing misogyny" or some shit, and many other very fucked discourse.
so yea this for sure an op. dont engage. or call it out.
or call it out
Calling it out as this post and others are doing strikes me as the best way to counter it?
If it is indeed an op then the obvious goal is to create spaces in which neoliberals can point to and say "Look! Marxists are anti-LGBT!" with which they can harm growth of the ideology. The method to counter this is to vocally and loudly oppose it elsewhere in order to make it extremely clear they are an out of touch regressive fringe who are rejected by the rest of the movement.
I ragequit reading that at the point where he equates gayness and pederasty. Mildly surprised it took him 3 pages to get there.
Fucking amazing analysis. This is the closest I've come to observing horseshoe theory in practice. They came around to Christian Scientism. Incredible stuff.
historical materialism is when you deny history and science, and the more you deny it, the more historically materialistic it is
So like....how do they explain that most pedophiles are heterosexual
:wojak-nooo::le-pol-face: :
Nonsensical essay homophobic modteam on :reddit-logo:
:gigachad: :hexbear-bi-2::big-cool: :
Me having sex with both of their parents
Yeah one of them wrote an essay about how BLM was "Lumpen Aristocracy" because they are fighting to gain a larger portion of imperial spoils. Very on the ground research of the BLM movement from a weird Albanian Greek dude.
Also they all have incredibly cheesy nom de guerres despite the fact that they are not at all transgressive or threatening to power in anyway. One of them just calls himself J. Steel.
fighting to gain a larger portion of imperial spoils
the people in Ferguson have done more praxis in solidarity with Palestine than any bloodless Euro Trot org
Yeah all the continental socialist subs are run by the same "cadre." And they fucking suuuuuckkk. Tailist trash.
Ah yes, LGBT+ is incompatible with leftism, thats why the original participants of the Stonewall Riots were communist supporting activists.
:jokerfication:
why would you guys assume they feds? literally look into one vital communist party out there, there are real people holding anti-intersectional views, dont just assume everybody is a fed
I actually agree. I was just being snarky. I wish these people were feds honestly because then they wouldn't be actually representative of a large portion of so-called communists that are in fact incredibly regressive conservatives.
You know, maybe I am more liberal than leftist if this is what socialism is, with all this stupidpol shit. I thought it was dictatorship of the proletariat, not tyranny of the majority.
Think I’ve given up on revolution because every revolution will be dominated by these assholes. I just want to farm.
I called them out as tailists and they said actually fighting for gay rights was commandism, because it talks down to imperialized workers that don't support gay rights.
Oh no, don’t educate workers, that so silly and condescending, ahaha. Just sit in armchair like a boss
Every leftist I've met IRL has been very good toward LGBT rights and addressing structural racism. These stupidpol types you only see online because in most real movements they are shunned and recognized as the selfish hypocrites they are. EDIT: I'm reading from some other people in this thread and I might have a regional bias. It depends on where you are, sadly it appears in some countries there are communist parties which support homophobic policies and those parties are the most popular leftist movements. YMMV
abondoning the idea of revolution or DotP because online stupidpol takes convinced you that the majority of leftists (especially young ones since we are talking decades down the line) are -and will be- homophobic stupidpol people and so any potential revolution will have that character and be dominated by it, has strong "made up twitter guy" energy
I'm not going to be used by a 'revolution' and then be tossed away for the same racist and bigoted bullshit that happened in the previous system.
Its a legit point we should make that we should have to keep these people down and away but why would people think that its nearly possible or realistic that "leftist" people like this would dominate a revolution and the society afterwards ? Enough to peace out from a revolutionary movement or project pre-emptively decades before it may be even possible to begin constructing it
I dont think stupidpol,racist and transphobic opinions and people just existing as a small minority inside the left (that constantly becomes smaller as time goes by and that doesnt even do much) and socialist projects being homophobic a century ago coming from illiterate peasant societies warrants seeing this as some immediate threat or as something that is possible to happen
