8 ms·

I hope I'm not considered a troll for asking this question; I will ask on my main account and hopefully people will check my comment history to understand I am

by dijit 3y ago

I hope I'm not considered a troll for asking this question; I will ask on my main account and hopefully people will check my comment history to understand I am not intending to be belligerent or intentionally dumb. But why is it that rainbow flags (pride, et al) are considered the pro-Palestinian side in the conflict. I might be old but I distinctly remember a humanitarian outcry in the 00's because Palestinians were murdering not only Jews and Christians but also homosexuals[0]. I'm not sure of the Israeli stance to be perfectly honest, but it's surprising to me that the only time I had ever heard of LGBTQ+ rights with relation to the Palestinian people it has been with a strikingly deadly tone, yet it seems that in the US the political divide has fallen such that LGBTQ+ people are almost forced to ally with Palestine. I'm genuinely curious how this happened. caveat: I'm not interested in emotional responses, if you feel emotional reading this then please just ignore the comment completely, I am not inviting a flame war, this is genuine ignorance and curiousity. [0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-5-2003-1346_EN.html https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-5-2003-1346_... EDIT: Added a citation for my apparently outlandish statement.

zrn900 3y ago
> I might be old but I distinctly remember a humanitarian outcry in the 00's because Palestinians were murdering not only Jews and Christians but also homosexuals[0]. Just because there are anti-lgbt elements in Palestinian society and politics LGBT people wont be pro-genocide and side with Israel. The proposition defies description no sane person who is not a psychoapath will say "Oh, are they anti-LGBT and they may kill LGBT people? I guess its okay for Israel to murder their children then..." > I'm not interested in emotional responses The murder of children cant be reacted to with any other response than an emotional one.
- C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 3y ago
  > no sane person who is not a psychoapath will say "Oh, are they anti-LGBT and they may kill LGBT people? I guess its okay for Israel to murder their children then..." I'd like to strip that sentence of the LGBT context, and point out that the general line of thinking (that there are legitimate reasons for wanting to kill a group of people's children) is actually popular enough to drive major policy. For example, given the historical record, Israeli society has been conditioned to be okay with murdered children and applying disproportionate and devastating force [0]. That state of mind is achieved through diverting the blame for one's atrocities entirely on the other party, and decrying their insanity and evilness for "making you do that" [2], as if one is not responsible for one's own actions, but is entirely reacting to another's action with no capability to alter course. Think this is far fetched and out of the line? There are 14000 children accounted for as dead as the result of current offensive that strongly suggest otherwise, and the killing is not even over yet. Murdering children does not require an active war against a territory either [1]. It is simply how things are done in their society. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine [1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/23/israel-killing-children-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/23/israel... [2] https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2014-07-28/ty-article/we-can-never-forgive-them/0000017f-e587-da9b-a1ff-edefe0bd0000 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2014-07-28/ty-article/we...
  - zrn900 3y ago
    > I'd like to strip that sentence of the LGBT context, and point out that the general line of thinking (that there are legitimate reasons for wanting to kill a group of people's children) is actually popular enough to drive major policy. For example, given the historical record, Israeli society has been conditioned to be okay with murdered children and applying disproportionate and devastating force Yes, Im aware that this 'Kill their mothers/children' thing was brought to top-level public policy by their recent foreign affairs minister who for the first time publicly and openly used that rhetoric and it helped her career a lot. After this, their prominent politicians seem to have stopped hesitating from openly calling for it and this is the result.
spacechild1 3y ago
> But why is it that rainbow flags (pride, et al) are considered the pro-Palestinian side in the conflict. FWIW in the German speaking countries it's the opposite (for obvious historical reasons). Generally, I think it's ok to demonstrate against atrocities even if the victims are not your "friends". What I do find disturbing is when progressives try to justify the Hamas terror as an act of "resistance" (one famous example being Judith Butler). That is truely fucked up.
inemesitaffia 3y ago
anti-Semitic progressives see Jews as White and the Arabs there as people of color. Look for people talking about Europeans, Settler's (i.e) every Jew in Mandatory Palestine is a settler. People that ignore that the war that gained them the land was a final solution attempt and the only embarrassment (nabka) is the failure to succeed at taht
licebmi__at__ 3y ago
There's the idea, that TBH I don't fully subscribe, that solidarity is not transactional. But what I do subscribe is that little kids don't bear the blame of what people do against LGBTQ+ communities.
londons_explore 3y ago
I think because those who perceive themselves with the minority view support others who they perceive to be the minority. There are vanishingly few people from Gaza living in the west, which makes them the minority. You see similar support between the LGBT community and communities of disabilities.
vlozko 3y ago
>... the political divide has fallen such that LGBTQ+ people are almost forced to ally with Palestine. Short answer: they are often one and the same people - leftist activists who have opinions on more than one subject.
- dijit 3y ago
  I'm sorry but I don't understand and I think I need a longer answer. I could interpret this three ways: 1) "Leftist Activists"; are a mixed group with some supporting pro-LGBTQ rights and others supporting Palestine. 2) "Leftist Activists"; are a homogenous group, including LGBTQ people, of which they support Palestine (and thus, support a regime that would wish them harm) 3) "Leftist Activists"; are a homogenous group, including LGBTQ people, who will always attempt to ally to the downtrodden, even in cases where the downtrodden would wish them to not exist. Are any of these correct or is there another interpretation I missed?
  - spencerflem 3y ago
    I think you are mistaken that you cannot logically support both LGBT rights and Palestine. For example, I support LBGTQ+ rights and would not want people who opposed them in America to be treated the way Palestinians are.
    - dijit 3y ago
      OK, I see. I suppose my next question would be why we are somehow stoic on the Uyghur issue. But I would guess that the reason is that the US sends support to Israel while actively cutting ties (or going to war economically) with China.
      - spencerflem 3y ago
        Exactly, yeah. What's happening there is awful and very sad, but there's almost nothing I can do about it, whereas our government provides billions in weapons to Israel
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> why is it that rainbow flags (pride, et al) are considered the pro-Palestinian side in the conflict Source? This is the first I’m hearing of this.
- dijit 3y ago
  Uh, first thing I could come up with at short notice: https://19thnews.org/2024/03/lgbtq-americans-gaza-israel-protests/ https://19thnews.org/2024/03/lgbtq-americans-gaza-israel-pro... I hope that's enough, there's a lot of documented evidence of pride flags and watermelons in the bio of pro-Palestinian people, almost to the point where many online forums treat it like a meme.
ImHereToVote 3y ago
I think LGBT people might be against mass slaughter of civilians via bombing campaigns of areas heavily populated by civilians. I don't the the various conservative views held by those civilians matters too much in terms of them being slaughtered. I think this is especially the case when their tax dollars are used for this bombing.
ImJamal 3y ago
Some people consider LGBT+ to be a persecuted minority. They also consider the Palestinians to be a persecuted minority. It is about helping those who are a persecuted minority even if one of the groups wants to kill everybody in the other group.
spencerflem 3y ago
In general, the pro-palistinian side is favored by the progressive left, the same group who are also pro-gay/pro-trans etc. In a lot of ways, the struggles are similar to BLM - there is a great injustice being done by a powerful force funded by the US government. Or again with opposing the US's global war on terror. The people in those groups aren't forced to be on the palenstinians side, but it is logically consistent with the other two.
- dijit 3y ago
  Interesting. I, uh, am not sure how a person can hold those views simultaneously. Success of Palestine will mean oppression of the groups the cause seeks to protect (LGBTQ+ specifically). Isn't this "paradox of tolerance"-esque, or is there a belief that if the Palestinian people were not being bombarded by an oppressive force: that they would be equitable to LGBTQ causes. Or: does it not factor into it at all?
  - edanm 3y ago
    > Success of Palestine will mean oppression of the groups the cause seeks to protect (LGBTQ+ specifically). That depends on what you mean by success of Palestine. Eg if all you're talking about is an end to the current war, that's not really true.
  - spencerflem 3y ago
    Posted a different comment further in, but in my opinion it doesn't factor much. For example, right now the USA is quite progressive in general with gay rights compared to many places, which is great, but I would not support the US government invading other countries, or going back to colonization etc. I can see those two might be opposed if what you wanted was LBGTQ rights at any cost. But for me at least war, and especially one-sided war, is the bigger injustice and other issues are secondary to that.
exe34 3y ago
I have a hypothesis that a lot of the people on the "left" who will stridently defend gay rights (which I'm for, being a gay man myself) are in fact the same sort of bullies that in a previous generation would have bashed gay people. That is, being on "the right side" of a debate doesn't mean one is necessarily more enlightened nor empathetic. Next, remember that not only are there reasonable people on the right that hate/fear the import of hegemonizing cultures into their own societies, but also plenty of bullies on the right who will hate somebody for having the wrong shade of skin. Put the two together, and you get the meme where this guy has to pick one button out of two, one of them is labelled "gay" and the other one is "Islam". That's how we end up in the situation where "queers for Palestine" get attacked at a pro-Hamas rally.
ditton 3y ago
[flagged]
- zrn900 3y ago
  > with very little nuance applied What 'nuance'? Are they expected to say "Oh, is Hamas anti-LGBT? I guess its ok for Israel to murder Palestinian children then..."?
- spencerflem 3y ago
  Without getting into the Palestine/Israel part, something I feel strongly about but cannot phrase nicely in a pithy internet comment - I really think that for someone griping about ignoring nuance or deep analysis you are grossly mischaracterizing trans rights. Being trans is a huge hassle, and not something done as a lark to get into female spaces. You also ignore transmasc people who are equally oppressed by the new laws coming out of places like Florida and Texas.
  - ditton 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - spencerflem 3y ago
      that's a much more reasonable take If I can be annoying about language a bit- insisting on calling trans women "trans identifying males" makes you sound anti-trans rights as a whole instead of trying to add nuance to a complicated subject. I agree there are complications and there's plenty of situations where one oppressed group opresses another and that those are hard to sort out on a purely "support the oppressed" ideology. But when someone starts talking purely about a specific nuance that's been made into a right wing talking point, its hard not to feel like the goal is to deliberately distract from the big picture. In general though, I think you mischaracterize the left as not having nuance, instead of not wanting to debate nuance with people who are staunchly opposed and just trying to score points. I'm not saying that's what you're going for, but your first comment came off as combatative to me and I think you'll find people are more willing to share nuance and work through uncomfortable contradictions if you start by emphasizing what you do agree with. Talking IRL is much better with this too
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jhp123 3y ago
great source lol Israel seems content to keep Palestine as a ghettoized territory, leaving local administrative matters to Palestinians. How will an Israeli victory, no matter how complete, lead to LGBT Palestinians gaining more rights?
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > Israel seems content to keep Palestine as a ghettoized territory, leaving local administrative matters to Palestinians I don't understand this. Are you saying that without Israel in charge, Palestine is and will stay a ghetto?
  - jhp123 3y ago
    What I'm referring to is that Israel is both "in charge" and "not in charge" of Gaza. They control Gaza's borders and move their troops into Gaza at will. On the other hand of course Gazans do not enjoy Israel's constitutional protections, etc.
    - edanm 3y ago
      Israel didn't "move their troops into Gaza at will", not until this current war. After Israel's disengagement from Gaza, it had no soldiers in Gaza at all. It also doesn't "control Gaza's borders" alone, fwiw. > On the other hand of course Gazans do not enjoy Israel's constitutional protections, etc. Not sure what this is "on the other hand" of exactly. Palestinian's want self-determination, Gaza was an incomplete, one-sided and limited form of that, but a form of that. When you're talking about them enjoying Israeli constitutional protections, you're talking about the opposite - Israel essentially conquering Gaza and annexing it officially, turning Gazans into Israeli citizens. Not an outcome that Israel wants and also not an outcome that Gazans want. And in the context of LGBT rights, that's an outcome that is almost guaranteed to lead to a huge erosion of LGBT rights in Israel, as it'd be adding millions of voters who currently live in a place and culture in which homosexuals are ilterally thrown off rooftops.
      - 3y ago
HDThoreaun 3y ago
It's about oppressed vs oppressor narratives. LGBTQ people tend to sympathize with the oppressed because most of them have memories of being oppressed themselves. Ive actually asked a few about this and they tend to agree that Hamas and palestinains in general would not form a government they would support, but theyre not willing to overlook how oppressed the palestinians have been for the past 80 years.
- ahartmetz 3y ago
  This oppressed ~= virtuous and support-worthy logic, whose mainstream popularity is a relatively new thing, frankly doesn't make much sense to me. IMO, if you are oppressed, you have a right to be not oppressed - and that is all. If you are oppressed and also jerk, you are a jerk and deserve to be treated accordingly, by which I do not mean the oppression, but whatever the usual consequences are for such behavior.
  - HDThoreaun 3y ago
    I also think there are a lot of LGBTQ people who support Israel, but are so warry about supporting oppression that they dont voice their opinion. I could go on and on psychoanalyzing the movement but at the end of the day Id say it makes sense that LGBTQ group seems to be so united behind the palestinian cause.
- akhand_bharat 3y ago
  this stray quote on some thread struck a nerve and stuck with me: "just because you are weak, doesn't mean you're a victim" sometimes a tiger initiates a fight against a deer, and wins. sometimes it initiates a fight against another tiger, and loses. the initiating tiger does not get to claim high moral ground in either case.

by dijit 3y ago

zrn900 3y ago

> I might be old but I distinctly remember a humanitarian outcry in the 00's because Palestinians were murdering not only Jews and Christians but also homosexuals[0]. Just because there are anti-lgbt elements in Palestinian society and politics LGBT people wont be pro-genocide and side with Israel. The proposition defies description no sane person who is not a psychoapath will say "Oh, are they anti-LGBT and they may kill LGBT people? I guess its okay for Israel to murder their children then..." > I'm not interested in emotional responses The murder of children cant be reacted to with any other response than an emotional one.

C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 3y ago
> no sane person who is not a psychoapath will say "Oh, are they anti-LGBT and they may kill LGBT people? I guess its okay for Israel to murder their children then..." I'd like to strip that sentence of the LGBT context, and point out that the general line of thinking (that there are legitimate reasons for wanting to kill a group of people's children) is actually popular enough to drive major policy. For example, given the historical record, Israeli society has been conditioned to be okay with murdered children and applying disproportionate and devastating force [0]. That state of mind is achieved through diverting the blame for one's atrocities entirely on the other party, and decrying their insanity and evilness for "making you do that" [2], as if one is not responsible for one's own actions, but is entirely reacting to another's action with no capability to alter course. Think this is far fetched and out of the line? There are 14000 children accounted for as dead as the result of current offensive that strongly suggest otherwise, and the killing is not even over yet. Murdering children does not require an active war against a territory either [1]. It is simply how things are done in their society. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine [1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/23/israel-killing-children-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/23/israel... [2] https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2014-07-28/ty-article/we-can-never-forgive-them/0000017f-e587-da9b-a1ff-edefe0bd0000 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2014-07-28/ty-article/we...
- zrn900 3y ago
  > I'd like to strip that sentence of the LGBT context, and point out that the general line of thinking (that there are legitimate reasons for wanting to kill a group of people's children) is actually popular enough to drive major policy. For example, given the historical record, Israeli society has been conditioned to be okay with murdered children and applying disproportionate and devastating force Yes, Im aware that this 'Kill their mothers/children' thing was brought to top-level public policy by their recent foreign affairs minister who for the first time publicly and openly used that rhetoric and it helped her career a lot. After this, their prominent politicians seem to have stopped hesitating from openly calling for it and this is the result.

spacechild1 3y ago

> But why is it that rainbow flags (pride, et al) are considered the pro-Palestinian side in the conflict. FWIW in the German speaking countries it's the opposite (for obvious historical reasons). Generally, I think it's ok to demonstrate against atrocities even if the victims are not your "friends". What I do find disturbing is when progressives try to justify the Hamas terror as an act of "resistance" (one famous example being Judith Butler). That is truely fucked up.

inemesitaffia 3y ago

anti-Semitic progressives see Jews as White and the Arabs there as people of color. Look for people talking about Europeans, Settler's (i.e) every Jew in Mandatory Palestine is a settler. People that ignore that the war that gained them the land was a final solution attempt and the only embarrassment (nabka) is the failure to succeed at taht

licebmi__at__ 3y ago

There's the idea, that TBH I don't fully subscribe, that solidarity is not transactional. But what I do subscribe is that little kids don't bear the blame of what people do against LGBTQ+ communities.

londons_explore 3y ago

I think because those who perceive themselves with the minority view support others who they perceive to be the minority. There are vanishingly few people from Gaza living in the west, which makes them the minority. You see similar support between the LGBT community and communities of disabilities.

vlozko 3y ago

>... the political divide has fallen such that LGBTQ+ people are almost forced to ally with Palestine. Short answer: they are often one and the same people - leftist activists who have opinions on more than one subject.

dijit 3y ago
I'm sorry but I don't understand and I think I need a longer answer. I could interpret this three ways: 1) "Leftist Activists"; are a mixed group with some supporting pro-LGBTQ rights and others supporting Palestine. 2) "Leftist Activists"; are a homogenous group, including LGBTQ people, of which they support Palestine (and thus, support a regime that would wish them harm) 3) "Leftist Activists"; are a homogenous group, including LGBTQ people, who will always attempt to ally to the downtrodden, even in cases where the downtrodden would wish them to not exist. Are any of these correct or is there another interpretation I missed?
- spencerflem 3y ago
  I think you are mistaken that you cannot logically support both LGBT rights and Palestine. For example, I support LBGTQ+ rights and would not want people who opposed them in America to be treated the way Palestinians are.
  - dijit 3y ago
    OK, I see. I suppose my next question would be why we are somehow stoic on the Uyghur issue. But I would guess that the reason is that the US sends support to Israel while actively cutting ties (or going to war economically) with China.
    - spencerflem 3y ago
      Exactly, yeah. What's happening there is awful and very sad, but there's almost nothing I can do about it, whereas our government provides billions in weapons to Israel

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> why is it that rainbow flags (pride, et al) are considered the pro-Palestinian side in the conflict Source? This is the first I’m hearing of this.

dijit 3y ago
Uh, first thing I could come up with at short notice: https://19thnews.org/2024/03/lgbtq-americans-gaza-israel-protests/ https://19thnews.org/2024/03/lgbtq-americans-gaza-israel-pro... I hope that's enough, there's a lot of documented evidence of pride flags and watermelons in the bio of pro-Palestinian people, almost to the point where many online forums treat it like a meme.

ImHereToVote 3y ago

I think LGBT people might be against mass slaughter of civilians via bombing campaigns of areas heavily populated by civilians. I don't the the various conservative views held by those civilians matters too much in terms of them being slaughtered. I think this is especially the case when their tax dollars are used for this bombing.

ImJamal 3y ago

Some people consider LGBT+ to be a persecuted minority. They also consider the Palestinians to be a persecuted minority. It is about helping those who are a persecuted minority even if one of the groups wants to kill everybody in the other group.

spencerflem 3y ago

In general, the pro-palistinian side is favored by the progressive left, the same group who are also pro-gay/pro-trans etc. In a lot of ways, the struggles are similar to BLM - there is a great injustice being done by a powerful force funded by the US government. Or again with opposing the US's global war on terror. The people in those groups aren't forced to be on the palenstinians side, but it is logically consistent with the other two.

dijit 3y ago
Interesting. I, uh, am not sure how a person can hold those views simultaneously. Success of Palestine will mean oppression of the groups the cause seeks to protect (LGBTQ+ specifically). Isn't this "paradox of tolerance"-esque, or is there a belief that if the Palestinian people were not being bombarded by an oppressive force: that they would be equitable to LGBTQ causes. Or: does it not factor into it at all?
- edanm 3y ago
  > Success of Palestine will mean oppression of the groups the cause seeks to protect (LGBTQ+ specifically). That depends on what you mean by success of Palestine. Eg if all you're talking about is an end to the current war, that's not really true.
- spencerflem 3y ago
  Posted a different comment further in, but in my opinion it doesn't factor much. For example, right now the USA is quite progressive in general with gay rights compared to many places, which is great, but I would not support the US government invading other countries, or going back to colonization etc. I can see those two might be opposed if what you wanted was LBGTQ rights at any cost. But for me at least war, and especially one-sided war, is the bigger injustice and other issues are secondary to that.

exe34 3y ago

I have a hypothesis that a lot of the people on the "left" who will stridently defend gay rights (which I'm for, being a gay man myself) are in fact the same sort of bullies that in a previous generation would have bashed gay people. That is, being on "the right side" of a debate doesn't mean one is necessarily more enlightened nor empathetic. Next, remember that not only are there reasonable people on the right that hate/fear the import of hegemonizing cultures into their own societies, but also plenty of bullies on the right who will hate somebody for having the wrong shade of skin. Put the two together, and you get the meme where this guy has to pick one button out of two, one of them is labelled "gay" and the other one is "Islam". That's how we end up in the situation where "queers for Palestine" get attacked at a pro-Hamas rally.

ditton 3y ago

[flagged]

zrn900 3y ago
> with very little nuance applied What 'nuance'? Are they expected to say "Oh, is Hamas anti-LGBT? I guess its ok for Israel to murder Palestinian children then..."?
spencerflem 3y ago
Without getting into the Palestine/Israel part, something I feel strongly about but cannot phrase nicely in a pithy internet comment - I really think that for someone griping about ignoring nuance or deep analysis you are grossly mischaracterizing trans rights. Being trans is a huge hassle, and not something done as a lark to get into female spaces. You also ignore transmasc people who are equally oppressed by the new laws coming out of places like Florida and Texas.
- ditton 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - spencerflem 3y ago
    that's a much more reasonable take If I can be annoying about language a bit- insisting on calling trans women "trans identifying males" makes you sound anti-trans rights as a whole instead of trying to add nuance to a complicated subject. I agree there are complications and there's plenty of situations where one oppressed group opresses another and that those are hard to sort out on a purely "support the oppressed" ideology. But when someone starts talking purely about a specific nuance that's been made into a right wing talking point, its hard not to feel like the goal is to deliberately distract from the big picture. In general though, I think you mischaracterize the left as not having nuance, instead of not wanting to debate nuance with people who are staunchly opposed and just trying to score points. I'm not saying that's what you're going for, but your first comment came off as combatative to me and I think you'll find people are more willing to share nuance and work through uncomfortable contradictions if you start by emphasizing what you do agree with. Talking IRL is much better with this too

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jhp123 3y ago

great source lol Israel seems content to keep Palestine as a ghettoized territory, leaving local administrative matters to Palestinians. How will an Israeli victory, no matter how complete, lead to LGBT Palestinians gaining more rights?

robertlagrant 3y ago
> Israel seems content to keep Palestine as a ghettoized territory, leaving local administrative matters to Palestinians I don't understand this. Are you saying that without Israel in charge, Palestine is and will stay a ghetto?
- jhp123 3y ago
  What I'm referring to is that Israel is both "in charge" and "not in charge" of Gaza. They control Gaza's borders and move their troops into Gaza at will. On the other hand of course Gazans do not enjoy Israel's constitutional protections, etc.
  - edanm 3y ago
    Israel didn't "move their troops into Gaza at will", not until this current war. After Israel's disengagement from Gaza, it had no soldiers in Gaza at all. It also doesn't "control Gaza's borders" alone, fwiw. > On the other hand of course Gazans do not enjoy Israel's constitutional protections, etc. Not sure what this is "on the other hand" of exactly. Palestinian's want self-determination, Gaza was an incomplete, one-sided and limited form of that, but a form of that. When you're talking about them enjoying Israeli constitutional protections, you're talking about the opposite - Israel essentially conquering Gaza and annexing it officially, turning Gazans into Israeli citizens. Not an outcome that Israel wants and also not an outcome that Gazans want. And in the context of LGBT rights, that's an outcome that is almost guaranteed to lead to a huge erosion of LGBT rights in Israel, as it'd be adding millions of voters who currently live in a place and culture in which homosexuals are ilterally thrown off rooftops.
    - 3y ago

HDThoreaun 3y ago

It's about oppressed vs oppressor narratives. LGBTQ people tend to sympathize with the oppressed because most of them have memories of being oppressed themselves. Ive actually asked a few about this and they tend to agree that Hamas and palestinains in general would not form a government they would support, but theyre not willing to overlook how oppressed the palestinians have been for the past 80 years.

ahartmetz 3y ago
This oppressed ~= virtuous and support-worthy logic, whose mainstream popularity is a relatively new thing, frankly doesn't make much sense to me. IMO, if you are oppressed, you have a right to be not oppressed - and that is all. If you are oppressed and also jerk, you are a jerk and deserve to be treated accordingly, by which I do not mean the oppression, but whatever the usual consequences are for such behavior.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago
  I also think there are a lot of LGBTQ people who support Israel, but are so warry about supporting oppression that they dont voice their opinion. I could go on and on psychoanalyzing the movement but at the end of the day Id say it makes sense that LGBTQ group seems to be so united behind the palestinian cause.
akhand_bharat 3y ago
this stray quote on some thread struck a nerve and stuck with me: "just because you are weak, doesn't mean you're a victim" sometimes a tiger initiates a fight against a deer, and wins. sometimes it initiates a fight against another tiger, and loses. the initiating tiger does not get to claim high moral ground in either case.