5 ms·

not everthing is about LGBTQIA+ .... I think adding in national origin or skin color or religion is more pressing and common.

Broken_Hippo 4y ago
not everthing is about LGBTQIA+ Sure, if you aren't in these groups you have the luxury of completely freaking ignoring it. I'm bisexual all the time. Transfolks are trans all the time. All queer folks are queer all the time even if you can't tell they are queer. So yes, everything is about it as much as you are always gonna be whatever nationality you are (even if you aren't legally a citizen), you'll always have your basic skin color, and so on.
- LoganDark 4y ago
  Well said. It's such a sad situation that nearly everyone who is not queer doesn't give a fuck about being queer. Wonder if their mind would change if they ever found out they weren't cishet. But just in general I wish people would care about groups they're not a part of. Selfishness is part of nature but it's so disheartening to see it on this scale.
  - heywhatupboys 4y ago
    > It's such a sad situation that nearly everyone who is not queer doesn't give a fuck about being queer. You gotta be kidding, the Western world has immense support for queer people, especially recently.
    - Broken_Hippo 4y ago
      Recently? Kinda. We let queer folks die of aids in the 80s, though. I'm in my 40s, I remember that. Folks stopped talking to me my 8th grade year because I "was lesbian". The next 2 years, people would go up to my friends and ask why they were even friends with me. "She's a lesbian, you know..." My school didn't let folks go to proms with a queer lover: Someone I knew got suspended for wearing a kilt-like skirt, and I know that at least a few admin didn't like hiring gay teachers because they thought they made kids gay. I graduated high school in 96, by the way. When I started working, I could be fired for being queer. The military still had the Don't Ask, Don't tell, which basically meant that being queer was OK as long as you didn't act queer, say anything queer, or have a queer relationship. In the 2000s, it became trendy to be bisexual. If you were female, that is. My sexuality was a fashion accessory. I was told I did it to attract men. Yay. Queer folks couldn't marry someone of the same sex until after I moved out of the US. This is in the last 10 years. Today, the most ill-supported group are transfolks. There definitely isn't support for all queer folks - have you seen the legislation? Western countries aren't supportive enough to speak out against anti-queer groups or countries that would sentence folks like me to death in some cases. Is it better than in the recent past? Sure, sometimes. But folks have died for that and still are.
    - LoganDark 4y ago
      > You gotta be kidding, the Western world has immense support for queer people, especially recently. A lot of it is tokenism and PR. Don't get me wrong, I know there are tons of people out there who support queer people! It's just that there's also tons of people who don't, which makes me sad.
- arghnoname 4y ago
  Any multifactorial ranking needs some way of ranking the relative importance of different metrics, and obviously not everyone will agree on these rankings. One reasonable approach would be to weight factors by the prevalence of individuals who would be affected by it, ergo, something that harms women (50% of the population) would be of greater importance in the ranking than something that harms transgender people to a similar degree. I don't entirely agree with this wholly utilitarian approach, but if we're just talking about stupid and pointless rankings, as opposed to judicial philosophy, I don't know, seems fine for a general audience and people who aren't a general audience should seek publications and rankings that are more targeting towards their specific circumstances. For instance, I don't have kids. If I read a list about 10 awesome things to do at Disney world I wouldn't grumble that it's all about family activities and wonder why there isn't more in there for singles. I'd look elsewhere than the inflight magazine for what single people should do at Disneyworld.
  - isodev 4y ago
    Your example is not a reasonable approach. Also, why the need to introduce relative importance between "metrics"? Let's circle back to the context of the article, which is about how easy it is for a foreigner to settle in a foreign country. The article doesn't specify who is this foreigner, and so the only reasonable approach is to assume it must apply to every single human being.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- HopenHeyHi 4y ago
  > Sure, if you aren't in these groups you have the luxury of completely freaking ignoring it. Of course! This is such a strange point to make in my opinion, I assure you even though you are a bisexual you are ignoring all kinds of things that don't affect you directly as you are only human. :) It is a big complicated world filled with problems, everything can't possibly be equally urgent in equal proportions to every single person. If anything it is a good way to drive yourself into a depression and in-action, what good is impotent emoting really?
  - isodev 4y ago
    You're right that it's a big and complicated world, which happens to be crawling with humans. So, as long as we treat each other with respect and dignity, equally, none of the above would be a problem. To get there is not easy and instead of driving oneself into depression, one could also proactively attempt to improve their community for everyone. e.g. The author of the article, could have included a more inclusive perspective. It would have made for a better article - imagine the plot-twist: sometimes, as a foreigner, it may be easier to move into a country with a little bit more bureaucracy in exchange for a more stable and happier life.
    - HopenHeyHi 4y ago
      > one could also proactively attempt to improve their community for everyone. Sure. I'm just saying attempt effectively. And don't forget everyone is not everyone you like/agree with. > The author of the article, could have included a more inclusive preselective Eh? You want the article to better reflect that bisexsual dudes might want to think twice about moving to Saudi Arabia? One would assume that is common knowledge or at least the responsibility of the reader to further research. By the same token, some of the readers are conservative muslims. How does one simultaneously editorialize the article to be more inclusive/cater to them? I hope my point is clear. I don't believe a more inclusive preselective is logically possible in every situation, the broader the subject the less chance you have of pleasing every possible reader. Consider not spending your inclusivity tokens on every single thing you encounter simply because you'll run out. Spend wisely. :) P.S. - Please don't shoot the messenger.
nasmorn 4y ago
Parent also mentioned being a woman which is decidedly a majority position of the worlds population.
- renox 4y ago
  Yes, women are treated as a subspecies in some of these countries listed, what a poor article!
- LoganDark 4y ago
  Based on the number of people who use "You're a man!" as an argument against being trans, I'm convinced that a lot of people must think "being a woman" is a part of the "minority" of being queer. Even more hilarious when said people are women themselves.
isodev 4y ago
> is more pressing and common. More common for whom? This is an example of the kind of bias I'm trying to point to. They're not mutually exclusive, and so neither is more important than the other. That's why we call them generally "civil liberties". In some of the TOP 10 countries, having the wrong religion (or none) can be just as life-threatening as being gay. And in others, good luck even walking outside to sort out your papers if you're a woman without an escort or a trans person.

Broken_Hippo 4y ago

not everthing is about LGBTQIA+ Sure, if you aren't in these groups you have the luxury of completely freaking ignoring it. I'm bisexual all the time. Transfolks are trans all the time. All queer folks are queer all the time even if you can't tell they are queer. So yes, everything is about it as much as you are always gonna be whatever nationality you are (even if you aren't legally a citizen), you'll always have your basic skin color, and so on.

LoganDark 4y ago
Well said. It's such a sad situation that nearly everyone who is not queer doesn't give a fuck about being queer. Wonder if their mind would change if they ever found out they weren't cishet. But just in general I wish people would care about groups they're not a part of. Selfishness is part of nature but it's so disheartening to see it on this scale.
- heywhatupboys 4y ago
  > It's such a sad situation that nearly everyone who is not queer doesn't give a fuck about being queer. You gotta be kidding, the Western world has immense support for queer people, especially recently.
  - Broken_Hippo 4y ago
    Recently? Kinda. We let queer folks die of aids in the 80s, though. I'm in my 40s, I remember that. Folks stopped talking to me my 8th grade year because I "was lesbian". The next 2 years, people would go up to my friends and ask why they were even friends with me. "She's a lesbian, you know..." My school didn't let folks go to proms with a queer lover: Someone I knew got suspended for wearing a kilt-like skirt, and I know that at least a few admin didn't like hiring gay teachers because they thought they made kids gay. I graduated high school in 96, by the way. When I started working, I could be fired for being queer. The military still had the Don't Ask, Don't tell, which basically meant that being queer was OK as long as you didn't act queer, say anything queer, or have a queer relationship. In the 2000s, it became trendy to be bisexual. If you were female, that is. My sexuality was a fashion accessory. I was told I did it to attract men. Yay. Queer folks couldn't marry someone of the same sex until after I moved out of the US. This is in the last 10 years. Today, the most ill-supported group are transfolks. There definitely isn't support for all queer folks - have you seen the legislation? Western countries aren't supportive enough to speak out against anti-queer groups or countries that would sentence folks like me to death in some cases. Is it better than in the recent past? Sure, sometimes. But folks have died for that and still are.
  - LoganDark 4y ago
    > You gotta be kidding, the Western world has immense support for queer people, especially recently. A lot of it is tokenism and PR. Don't get me wrong, I know there are tons of people out there who support queer people! It's just that there's also tons of people who don't, which makes me sad.
arghnoname 4y ago
Any multifactorial ranking needs some way of ranking the relative importance of different metrics, and obviously not everyone will agree on these rankings. One reasonable approach would be to weight factors by the prevalence of individuals who would be affected by it, ergo, something that harms women (50% of the population) would be of greater importance in the ranking than something that harms transgender people to a similar degree. I don't entirely agree with this wholly utilitarian approach, but if we're just talking about stupid and pointless rankings, as opposed to judicial philosophy, I don't know, seems fine for a general audience and people who aren't a general audience should seek publications and rankings that are more targeting towards their specific circumstances. For instance, I don't have kids. If I read a list about 10 awesome things to do at Disney world I wouldn't grumble that it's all about family activities and wonder why there isn't more in there for singles. I'd look elsewhere than the inflight magazine for what single people should do at Disneyworld.
- isodev 4y ago
  Your example is not a reasonable approach. Also, why the need to introduce relative importance between "metrics"? Let's circle back to the context of the article, which is about how easy it is for a foreigner to settle in a foreign country. The article doesn't specify who is this foreigner, and so the only reasonable approach is to assume it must apply to every single human being.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
HopenHeyHi 4y ago
> Sure, if you aren't in these groups you have the luxury of completely freaking ignoring it. Of course! This is such a strange point to make in my opinion, I assure you even though you are a bisexual you are ignoring all kinds of things that don't affect you directly as you are only human. :) It is a big complicated world filled with problems, everything can't possibly be equally urgent in equal proportions to every single person. If anything it is a good way to drive yourself into a depression and in-action, what good is impotent emoting really?
- isodev 4y ago
  You're right that it's a big and complicated world, which happens to be crawling with humans. So, as long as we treat each other with respect and dignity, equally, none of the above would be a problem. To get there is not easy and instead of driving oneself into depression, one could also proactively attempt to improve their community for everyone. e.g. The author of the article, could have included a more inclusive perspective. It would have made for a better article - imagine the plot-twist: sometimes, as a foreigner, it may be easier to move into a country with a little bit more bureaucracy in exchange for a more stable and happier life.
  - HopenHeyHi 4y ago
    > one could also proactively attempt to improve their community for everyone. Sure. I'm just saying attempt effectively. And don't forget everyone is not everyone you like/agree with. > The author of the article, could have included a more inclusive preselective Eh? You want the article to better reflect that bisexsual dudes might want to think twice about moving to Saudi Arabia? One would assume that is common knowledge or at least the responsibility of the reader to further research. By the same token, some of the readers are conservative muslims. How does one simultaneously editorialize the article to be more inclusive/cater to them? I hope my point is clear. I don't believe a more inclusive preselective is logically possible in every situation, the broader the subject the less chance you have of pleasing every possible reader. Consider not spending your inclusivity tokens on every single thing you encounter simply because you'll run out. Spend wisely. :) P.S. - Please don't shoot the messenger.

nasmorn 4y ago

Parent also mentioned being a woman which is decidedly a majority position of the worlds population.

renox 4y ago
Yes, women are treated as a subspecies in some of these countries listed, what a poor article!
LoganDark 4y ago
Based on the number of people who use "You're a man!" as an argument against being trans, I'm convinced that a lot of people must think "being a woman" is a part of the "minority" of being queer. Even more hilarious when said people are women themselves.

isodev 4y ago

> is more pressing and common. More common for whom? This is an example of the kind of bias I'm trying to point to. They're not mutually exclusive, and so neither is more important than the other. That's why we call them generally "civil liberties". In some of the TOP 10 countries, having the wrong religion (or none) can be just as life-threatening as being gay. And in others, good luck even walking outside to sort out your papers if you're a woman without an escort or a trans person.