Woke is alive and well

[Stirlingsays]

Can a woman have p****?

Only if she asks very nicely.

 

[Stirlingsays]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2038322303327404499

Is he wrong?

Brilliant.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Hitler was famously a big fan of gay Jewish men.

Ernst Röhm was gay and headed the SA, the Nazi paramilitary wing.

He wasn't Jewish but you can't have everything.

Eventually he had him shot.

Again, you can't have everything.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Ernst Röhm was gay and headed the SA, the Nazi paramilitary wing.

He wasn't Jewish but you can't have everything.

Eventually he had him shot.

Again, you can't have everything.

Great - that doesn't change the fact that Hitler and the Nazi regime were strongly opposed to homosexuality, and gay men in particular.

Early Nazism had some exceptions, like Röhm, but as you acknowledge, this was violently ended and the repression intensified over time.

Hitler also wasn't vegan.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Great - that doesn't change the fact that Hitler and the Nazi regime were strongly opposed to homosexuality, and gay men in particular.

We can definitely say he certainly over did most of the things he was opposed to.

However, being opposed to homosexuality in practical terms is just supporting the continuation of the human race.

But that doesn't mean you have to be against individuals or their private lives.

Early Nazism had some exceptions, like Röhm, but as you acknowledge, this was violently ended and the repression intensified over time.

It was, but it wasn't ended because he was homosexual.......Röhm was gay but he was also a social conservative, which is more common than people think.

Hitler also wasn't vegan.

I know, he was a vegetarian for medical reasons.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

However, being opposed to homosexuality in practical terms is just supporting the continuation of the human race.

But that doesn't mean you have to be against individuals or their private lives.

Gay people existing doesn't threaten the continuation of the human race - straight people aren't going to stop having kids because homosexuality is accepted.

It's also very hard to say you’re “opposed to homosexuality in practical terms” but not against individuals - those two things aren’t separate.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Gay people existing doesn't threaten the continuation of the human race - straight people aren't going to stop having kids because homosexuality is accepted.

Who mentioned existing? That's your language. Propagating and expanding (as has happened) does reduce birth rates (especially importantly amongst females who are more prone to bisexuality) and that does factor in.

The reason homosexuality was always opposed was hardly down to a dislike of males with fashion sense.

It's also very hard to say you’re “opposed to homosexuality in practical terms” but not against individuals - those two things aren’t separate.

Well there is a difference, one is about how a topic is treated in media and education and the other involves direct intervention into people's lives.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Who mentioned existing? That's your language. Propagating and expanding (as has happened) does reduce birth rates (especially importantly amongst females who are more prone to bisexuality) and that does factor in.

The reason homosexuality was always opposed was hardly down to a dislike of males with fashion sense.



Well there is a difference, one is about how a topic is treated in media and education and the other involves direct intervention into people's lives.

There are much simpler, and far more impactful levers we can pull to address declining birth rates - the existence of bisexual women is barely a consideration to any real discussion of that topic.

The reason homosexuality has historically been opposed also had very little to do with birth rates.

How a topic is treated in media and education inevitably impacts people’s lives, which is my point - you can’t so easily separate the two.

 

[Stirlingsays]

There are much simpler, and far more impactful levers we can pull to address declining birth rates - the existence of bisexual women is barely a consideration to any real discussion of that topic.

Go on, I'm interested to know your thoughts.

The reason homosexuality has historically been opposed also had very little to do with birth rates.

Go on, I'm interested to know your thoughts.

How a topic is treated in media and education inevitably impacts people’s lives, which is my point - you can’t so easily separate the two.

It does but indirectly, which I what I implied anyway.

Also, the change in favour of homosexuality also affected those who disapproved for the reasons stated plus others. So why the consideration only going one way? But again, I'm interested in hearing your argument.