6 ms·

It's pretty simple. In Democratic areas you don't speak out about being Republican and in Republican areas you don't speak out about being a Democrat. I'm from

It's pretty simple. In Democratic areas you don't speak out about being Republican and in Republican areas you don't speak out about being a Democrat. I'm from the South, lived in Oregon and New York for a while, and now live in the South again so I've seen the dynamics play both ways. Social ostracism is more vicious from Democrats but I've known of Republicans to spread outrageous rumors about Democratic voters and in places like where I grew up, if you're a man, you'll be called gay/pedo and possibly beaten (usually not jumped, but aggressively taunted with slurs until a fight ensues from what I've seen IRL) unless you're well liked for some other reason like that you're well connected, have money, or are really masculine/served in the military. Overall I'd say it's better to be a Republican in a Democratic area than the opposite since the looming threat of physical violence is worse than people just thinking you're a bad person. The main reason why Republicans in Democratic areas would have to worry would be if they work in a creative industry where being known as a bigot of some kind would cause people to not like to collaborate with you but even then you're relatively safe as long is you're only bigoted against one of the less protected minority groups like trans people (probably why trans people are the culture war topic du jour).

reitanqild 4y ago
> where being known as a bigot of some kind would cause people to not like to collaborate with you but even then you're relatively safe as long is you're only bigoted against one of the less protected/liked groups like trans people Is this some kind of underhanded smear or did you write something other than what you were thinking? Or did I read it wrong? The way I read what you write that Republicans are always bigoted, the question is only about how many groups they are bigoted against.
- ifyoubuildit 4y ago
  This was my reading as well. As someone who has zero (or even negative) party loyalty but has friends and loved ones all over the spectrum, it's really disappointing to see these kinds of casual assumptions. Edit: Though maybe a more charitable reading is that whether or not the assumption is fair, you have to acknowledge that people out there do make it, and so republicans would be wise to not advertise their affiliation.
- cwmma 4y ago
  There are many people on the left who belive that since the republican platform these days includes anti gay rights, anti trans rights provisions, and provisions suppressing voting rights for African Americans, that the party is this bigoted and supporting said party is thus a bigoted choice because even if you don't intend to harm marginalized groups supporting Republicans will cause harm to marginalized groups.
  - reitanqild 4y ago
    By anti trans rights, do you among other things include being against doing irreversable surgeries on vulnerable teens?
    - theprincess 4y ago
      > irreversable surgeries on vulnerable teens In the latest scare about this in Nashville, TN it came out that they were doing about 5 breast reductions a year on trans men who were 16-17 years old. This is a surgery that is commonly performed on cisgender boys who have gynecomastia because, surprise, boys feel awkward about having large breasts. They were only allowed to do this after counseling between them and their parents. Trans men are given these surgeries as minors from time to time because many have a habit of binding their breasts so tightly that they damage their bodies, cracking ribs etc.... Genital surgeries are not performed. https://apnews.com/article/health-business-tennessee-nashville-vanderbilt-university-6deb93f7dea92f1b2082c39f72b59766 https://apnews.com/article/health-business-tennessee-nashvil... > On average, VUMC has provided five gender affirming surgeries to minors every year since its transgender clinic opened in 2018. All were over the age of 16 and had parental consent, and none received genital procedures. In Florida they are attempting to ban SOCIAL transition which is just someone male being able to wear girls' clothes or someone female being able to wear boys' clothes. https://www.them.us/story/florida-trans-youth-transition-care-ban-ron-desantis https://www.them.us/story/florida-trans-youth-transition-car... In Tennessee they are attempting to classify "female and male impersonators" alongside strippers as being unfit to be seen in public. The law is vague enough that it would give police leeway to persecute anyone who is gender non-conforming including gay and lesbian people. Anti-crossdressing laws were the main way that gay and lesbian people were harassed up through the 70's FYI and were directly related to the Stonewall uprising. https://www.advocate.com/law/2022/11/09/bills-introduced-tenn-ban-drag-shows-gender-affirming-care https://www.advocate.com/law/2022/11/09/bills-introduced-ten... Even mentioning the existence of transgender adults around children is being legislated against and called "grooming" -- you can't make someone trans any more than you can make them gay so the idea is ridiculous. When Matt Walsh, a very notable conservative catholic anti transgender activist who works under Ben Shapiro, appeared on Joe Rogan last week he was fact checked after he claimed MILLIONS of kids are being put on puberty blockers. The actual figure, as pointed out on the show, is under 5000 in the past five years. Not even a thousand a year. He recently released an anti transgender film called "What is a Woman?" which leads one to believe that his wildly inaccurate figure was an attempt to enrage Joe Rogan's audience with a lie rather than inform them with the truth. That, or he somehow spent thousands of hours pouring over the topic and still managed to get a basic statistic wrong by two orders of magnitude. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2lG7Y_8bVU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2lG7Y_8bVU Matt Walsh has also said that his goal is for transition to be banned for everyone including adults: https://archive.ph/mi8jc https://archive.ph/mi8jc This all adds up to one obvious conclusion, which is that the talking point you just shared is a scare tactic meant to turn people against supporting the tiny minority of trans people in this country and instead treat them as a danger to themselves and others. It's cruel and misinformed and it won't work in the long run because it's based on irrational hatred, lies and half truths rather than genuine concern about people's wellbeing.
- havblue 4y ago
  I think these claims are hard to quantify one way or another. I've been threatened with violence for not "supporting our troops" in the past. That being said I think a lot of people are keeping their political opinions to themselves out of concern about human resources retaliation.
- theprincess 4y ago
  I think, on average, well informed Democrats tend to perceive well informed Republicans as bigots because the Republican national party platform is unabashedly bigoted toward many minority communities. Less informed Republicans are perceived in a mix of ways but it's usually a ratio of bigot and rube (for voting against their own best economic and social interests). Republicans conversely seem to perceive well informed Democrats as ne'er do wells who want to harm their children and destroy civilization by way of sexual immorality, increased criminality and failure to protect the nation/economy while less informed Democrats are seen as immature and naive.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
cwmma 4y ago
As somebody that lives in a conservation area of Massachusetts (but not that conservative since it's Massachusetts) lemme tell you Republican, MAGA, QANON, and oath keeper supporters have NO hesitation to broadcast their support. In my town where trump's state campaign manager lost by 17 points there were WAY more signs for him then for his opponent.
- cudgy 4y ago
  Do you live in a conservation area where lost qanon, maga, and oath keeper people are gathered to roam the countryside? Are there safaris that are available to view these rare specimen?
tablespoon 4y ago
> The main reason why Republicans in Democratic areas would have to worry would be if they work in a creative industry where being known as a bigot of some kind would cause people to not like to collaborate with you but even then you're relatively safe as long is you're only bigoted against one of the less protected minority groups like trans people (probably why trans people are the culture war topic du jour). It's kind of interesting how progressives come up with all this awkward phraseology (e.g. "people experiencing homelessness") to avoid labeling people in certain definitive ways, but then throw that all out the window when they want to slur people they disagree with.
- theprincess 4y ago
  Comparing the term bigot to the term homeless is apples and oranges. It doesn't make sense to try to soften the stigma of a word like bigot. People who are bigoted enforce cruelty on others. People who aren't able to acquire shelter for whatever reason: mental health, misfortune, disability... are not visiting cruelty on others but are themselves suffering. The reason why language around such groups changes is to try to decrease social stigma directed at those groups, because older terms may carry cultural baggage e.g. the word "homeless" may evoke imagery of a violent drug addict in the minds of some people which is counter productive to trying to advocate for the group as a whole (it's branding essentially). Bigots could also use support in that most bigoted people are suffering from their own trauma and projecting that onto out-groups in the form of hatred, mistrust and discrimination but the act of being a bigot should continue to be branded in a negative light.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > It doesn't make sense to try to soften the stigma of a word like bigot. People who are bigoted enforce cruelty on others. It kind of does, because otherwise you're blocking the path to redemption. Calling someone "homeless" reduces them to that thing and implies it's a permanent identity, but calling someone a "person experiencing homelessness" at least invites the possibility of seeing that experience as temporary. Also you're talking like being a "bigot" is some kind of objective condition. However, in fact it's highly subjective and the label has been over-applied by various activists in attempts to enforce ideological conformity. If you, random internet person, call someone a bigot, I'm just going interpret it as a meaningless slur against people you disagree with, because you want it to be unacceptable to disagree with you. Any other interpretation needs far more context.
cudgy 4y ago
This whole anecdotal diatribe sounds bigoted and manufactured and presents as an underhanded slant against people from the “South”.

reitanqild 4y ago

> where being known as a bigot of some kind would cause people to not like to collaborate with you but even then you're relatively safe as long is you're only bigoted against one of the less protected/liked groups like trans people Is this some kind of underhanded smear or did you write something other than what you were thinking? Or did I read it wrong? The way I read what you write that Republicans are always bigoted, the question is only about how many groups they are bigoted against.

ifyoubuildit 4y ago
This was my reading as well. As someone who has zero (or even negative) party loyalty but has friends and loved ones all over the spectrum, it's really disappointing to see these kinds of casual assumptions. Edit: Though maybe a more charitable reading is that whether or not the assumption is fair, you have to acknowledge that people out there do make it, and so republicans would be wise to not advertise their affiliation.
cwmma 4y ago
There are many people on the left who belive that since the republican platform these days includes anti gay rights, anti trans rights provisions, and provisions suppressing voting rights for African Americans, that the party is this bigoted and supporting said party is thus a bigoted choice because even if you don't intend to harm marginalized groups supporting Republicans will cause harm to marginalized groups.
- reitanqild 4y ago
  By anti trans rights, do you among other things include being against doing irreversable surgeries on vulnerable teens?
  - theprincess 4y ago
    > irreversable surgeries on vulnerable teens In the latest scare about this in Nashville, TN it came out that they were doing about 5 breast reductions a year on trans men who were 16-17 years old. This is a surgery that is commonly performed on cisgender boys who have gynecomastia because, surprise, boys feel awkward about having large breasts. They were only allowed to do this after counseling between them and their parents. Trans men are given these surgeries as minors from time to time because many have a habit of binding their breasts so tightly that they damage their bodies, cracking ribs etc.... Genital surgeries are not performed. https://apnews.com/article/health-business-tennessee-nashville-vanderbilt-university-6deb93f7dea92f1b2082c39f72b59766 https://apnews.com/article/health-business-tennessee-nashvil... > On average, VUMC has provided five gender affirming surgeries to minors every year since its transgender clinic opened in 2018. All were over the age of 16 and had parental consent, and none received genital procedures. In Florida they are attempting to ban SOCIAL transition which is just someone male being able to wear girls' clothes or someone female being able to wear boys' clothes. https://www.them.us/story/florida-trans-youth-transition-care-ban-ron-desantis https://www.them.us/story/florida-trans-youth-transition-car... In Tennessee they are attempting to classify "female and male impersonators" alongside strippers as being unfit to be seen in public. The law is vague enough that it would give police leeway to persecute anyone who is gender non-conforming including gay and lesbian people. Anti-crossdressing laws were the main way that gay and lesbian people were harassed up through the 70's FYI and were directly related to the Stonewall uprising. https://www.advocate.com/law/2022/11/09/bills-introduced-tenn-ban-drag-shows-gender-affirming-care https://www.advocate.com/law/2022/11/09/bills-introduced-ten... Even mentioning the existence of transgender adults around children is being legislated against and called "grooming" -- you can't make someone trans any more than you can make them gay so the idea is ridiculous. When Matt Walsh, a very notable conservative catholic anti transgender activist who works under Ben Shapiro, appeared on Joe Rogan last week he was fact checked after he claimed MILLIONS of kids are being put on puberty blockers. The actual figure, as pointed out on the show, is under 5000 in the past five years. Not even a thousand a year. He recently released an anti transgender film called "What is a Woman?" which leads one to believe that his wildly inaccurate figure was an attempt to enrage Joe Rogan's audience with a lie rather than inform them with the truth. That, or he somehow spent thousands of hours pouring over the topic and still managed to get a basic statistic wrong by two orders of magnitude. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2lG7Y_8bVU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2lG7Y_8bVU Matt Walsh has also said that his goal is for transition to be banned for everyone including adults: https://archive.ph/mi8jc https://archive.ph/mi8jc This all adds up to one obvious conclusion, which is that the talking point you just shared is a scare tactic meant to turn people against supporting the tiny minority of trans people in this country and instead treat them as a danger to themselves and others. It's cruel and misinformed and it won't work in the long run because it's based on irrational hatred, lies and half truths rather than genuine concern about people's wellbeing.
havblue 4y ago
I think these claims are hard to quantify one way or another. I've been threatened with violence for not "supporting our troops" in the past. That being said I think a lot of people are keeping their political opinions to themselves out of concern about human resources retaliation.
theprincess 4y ago
I think, on average, well informed Democrats tend to perceive well informed Republicans as bigots because the Republican national party platform is unabashedly bigoted toward many minority communities. Less informed Republicans are perceived in a mix of ways but it's usually a ratio of bigot and rube (for voting against their own best economic and social interests). Republicans conversely seem to perceive well informed Democrats as ne'er do wells who want to harm their children and destroy civilization by way of sexual immorality, increased criminality and failure to protect the nation/economy while less informed Democrats are seen as immature and naive.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

cwmma 4y ago

As somebody that lives in a conservation area of Massachusetts (but not that conservative since it's Massachusetts) lemme tell you Republican, MAGA, QANON, and oath keeper supporters have NO hesitation to broadcast their support. In my town where trump's state campaign manager lost by 17 points there were WAY more signs for him then for his opponent.

cudgy 4y ago
Do you live in a conservation area where lost qanon, maga, and oath keeper people are gathered to roam the countryside? Are there safaris that are available to view these rare specimen?

tablespoon 4y ago

> The main reason why Republicans in Democratic areas would have to worry would be if they work in a creative industry where being known as a bigot of some kind would cause people to not like to collaborate with you but even then you're relatively safe as long is you're only bigoted against one of the less protected minority groups like trans people (probably why trans people are the culture war topic du jour). It's kind of interesting how progressives come up with all this awkward phraseology (e.g. "people experiencing homelessness") to avoid labeling people in certain definitive ways, but then throw that all out the window when they want to slur people they disagree with.

theprincess 4y ago
Comparing the term bigot to the term homeless is apples and oranges. It doesn't make sense to try to soften the stigma of a word like bigot. People who are bigoted enforce cruelty on others. People who aren't able to acquire shelter for whatever reason: mental health, misfortune, disability... are not visiting cruelty on others but are themselves suffering. The reason why language around such groups changes is to try to decrease social stigma directed at those groups, because older terms may carry cultural baggage e.g. the word "homeless" may evoke imagery of a violent drug addict in the minds of some people which is counter productive to trying to advocate for the group as a whole (it's branding essentially). Bigots could also use support in that most bigoted people are suffering from their own trauma and projecting that onto out-groups in the form of hatred, mistrust and discrimination but the act of being a bigot should continue to be branded in a negative light.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > It doesn't make sense to try to soften the stigma of a word like bigot. People who are bigoted enforce cruelty on others. It kind of does, because otherwise you're blocking the path to redemption. Calling someone "homeless" reduces them to that thing and implies it's a permanent identity, but calling someone a "person experiencing homelessness" at least invites the possibility of seeing that experience as temporary. Also you're talking like being a "bigot" is some kind of objective condition. However, in fact it's highly subjective and the label has been over-applied by various activists in attempts to enforce ideological conformity. If you, random internet person, call someone a bigot, I'm just going interpret it as a meaningless slur against people you disagree with, because you want it to be unacceptable to disagree with you. Any other interpretation needs far more context.

cudgy 4y ago

This whole anecdotal diatribe sounds bigoted and manufactured and presents as an underhanded slant against people from the “South”.