Recent comments in /f/Maine

OddClass134 t1_j9ye5zw wrote

>Broadcasting your social activism to classrooms... eh... not the same thing.

I understand this point, but for LGBT people and especially trans people, the simple act of existing is often social activism in and of itself.

When I was in school we had a gay teacher who could not legally marry his partner. When he became able to, he told us he was getting married. This is no different than a straight teacher saying they are getting married, very PG and acceptable, but the fact he was gay and doing it carried significant political baggage.

It seems unreasonable to ask people who's identities themselves are topics of public debate to avoid bringing politics into the classroom. I don't see anyway they could reasonably do that without intentionally hiding aspects of their lives that non-LGBT teachers would never be expected to hide.

Not to mention education itself is far from "neutral" politically anyway, but that's a different conversation.

21

HumpSlackWails t1_j9yach8 wrote

This isn't just existing. Existing is a trans person doing stuff.

A tik tok devoted to your transitions is not "just existing."

A tik tok of a gay person reviewing movies is just existing. A tik tok chronically their coming out journey is something special.

No one except the content creator said, with this content, "I am trans and this is about me being trans specifically."

Not every group is a potential audience for activism because you feel, of course, your message is super critical and HAS to reach them. Everyone will use that rationale - and has been - and its how oppression happens. Just take a step back and understand sometimes people in marginalized groups can cross lines too. She did.

0

HerrAdventure t1_j9yaa3e wrote

I believe you missed the point I brought up with a reference to a nonpartisan site that showcases issues with headlines of the media. Fox News does promulgate its stories to its base interests much like CNN does on its headlines. I also noted the term toxic certainty as being an issue that stems from a tribal mindset and to adhere to that, companies will forego news stories to appease their followers. It's fear tactics to keep them coming back for more. The best thing we all can do is relax and not show support for the polarizing objective the MSM has created.

The story is the story and can be said neutrally. To answer your question, those articles are not in their best interest which is wrong and not complete, and I agree with your premise that overlooking one instead of the other is not of value to the concern of what has occurred. Can we agree that Fox has an agenda of targeting transgender issues? I know I can. And I'm agreeing with you. I'm not agreeing with you in labeling an entire base of people as a broad brush stroke, however. That also is wrong to do.

1