Why can't other tech companies be this courageous?

>>105593286 (OP)
You mean this contagious.

>>105593317
Will I get STDs after installing this?

>>105593286 (OP)
>>105593317
iFAGGOTS BTFO

>>105593477

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_ZjBueTD6c

>>105593286 (OP)
Do itoddlers not have the ability to change their wallpapers

>>105593769
Globohomo will be enforced, no matter what

>>105593286 (OP)
Epic ragebait! Except, of course, it's a complete lie. I don't have that wallpaper on my MacOS system. Are you ready to admit you're braindead?

>>105593286 (OP)
Imagine seething over a fucking wallpaper option.
Chuds should executed.

>>105593924
>t. itoddler

>>105593933
If windwos did this everyone would send death threats.

>>105593946
Sorry, that's not an admission that you're braindead. Try again.

I got the wallpaper. It's called "Pride", but that's just its name; it has nothing to do with rainbows or LGBTQIA+. You niggas got ragebaited, again. Retards.

Can Android do pic related? No? Then I will stick with iPhone devices, thanks. Apple is the only company giving a shit.

>>105593286 (OP)
They’re tying to play both sides. But all the leftists are still butt hurt about little Timmy’s donation to Trump’s inauguration fund.

>>105593286 (OP)
The rainbow flag used to be just a symbol including everyone, cause the rainbow has all colors in it.
Now they made a flag that literally has a brown stripe in it for brown people, a black stripe for black people, and pink and blue for transgender (get it? pink is girl, blue is boy). Plus some shit I don't even know what it means anymore.
But now white people are complaining that there isn't a separate yellow stripe for yellow people and another red stripe for red people.
Even if you're gay and promoting trans rights, that shit makes no sense and is frankly old-school racist.

>>105593989
verifiably false, unless you want to show me the death threats from the time windows put a fag flag into the taskbar itself of every single one of their computers with no obvious way to disable it

>>105593511
b

>>105593286 (OP)
>force-installing
read: pushing out a regular update that you don't have to install if you don't want it
>"Pride" wallpapers
new* pride wallpapers, old ones have already been there for years now
>Whether you want them or not.
you will always have the option to simply not use them. they're just a setting you CAN choose if you like.
>Apple is also selling a "Pride" watchband.
that you absolutely do not have to buy.

god the future is so lame. people are fucking dumb.

>>105596315
>>>105593286 (OP)(OP)
>>force-installing
>read: pushing out a regular update that you don't have to install if you don't want it
>>"Pride" wallpapers
>new* pride wallpapers, old ones have already been there for years now
>>Whether you want them or not.
>you will always have the option to simply not use them. they're just a setting you CAN choose if you like.
>>Apple is also selling a "Pride" watchband.
>that you absolutely do not have to buy.
>
>god the future is so lame. people are fucking dumb.

>>105594684
So the newest iteration of the flag is just "everyone except straight white guys" now? Aren't straight white guys only like 30% of the population even in the west?
So the flag that was supposed to be for marginalized groups now represents a supermajority of all humans. Are white men that powerful that everyone else needs to ally against them?

>>105596315
>installs hepatitis c in your body
>that's fine it's dormant and optional

>>105596382
in what way is a wallpaper you don't have to use at all analogous to a virus

>>105596380
>Are white men that powerful that everyone else needs to ally against them?
I don't think they're allying *against* anybody. It's not a war.

>>105596454
The point is that it's pushed in your computer, and like some viruses it won't do anything unless you are feeling weak

lmao @ Apple I refuse to update my phone until they get rid of that crap...I have already started to de-Apple. This just makes more motivated to de-Apple even sooner.

>>105596473
>The point is that it's pushed in your computer,
it's an option that you have to go out of your way to enable.
>and like some viruses it won't do anything unless you are feeling weak
???
elaborate?

Remember Lunduke was shilling apple as some conservative company at some point

I'm scared of the wallpaper. The wallpaper is going to hurt me.

>>105596524
Hepatitis C is a dormant virus, it just stays there until your immunity is low or some random body occurrence

I'm saying that you have an hostile wallpaper that wants to prey on your sexuality if you are feeling weak or marginalized, and push an entire agenda into you just because you like men

>>105596315
>ugh can you just stop complaining??? uuughhh

>>105596552
>I'm saying that you have an hostile wallpaper that wants to prey on your sexuality if you are feeling weak or marginalized, and push an entire agenda into you just because you like men
this is where you lose me. none of what you just said makes any sense at all.

>>105596576
correct. your complaints make no sense. you are not being harmed in any way. this is so minuscule it makes no material difference in your life. I genuinely do not understand what the problem is.

>>105596459
Kinda is.

>>105596596
No, it's not really.

>>105596589
>can you please just let my hedonism be forcefed to you
>I will literally kill myself if you don't
It really feels good knowing I'm not and never will be an applefag

>>105596619
Yeah, it pretty much is. I mean, not if you're a libertarian, but yeah if you aren't.

>>105596627
>>can you please just let my hedonism be forcefed to you
it's a flag, not hardcore gay porn. there's no hedonism to speak of here. if you see the flag and immediately think of gay sex that's a (You) problem. being gay isn't inherently sexual.
>I will literally kill myself if you don't
who are you quoting?

>It really feels good knowing I'm not and never will be an applefag
that makes your reaction even more confusing. your problem is that some company whose products you don't even use anyway and have no intention of buying in the future is adding pride flags to those products? what?

>>105596589
Imagine if an OS installed a communist wallpaper, trying to prey on poor people that are angry with the rich

>>105596628
How?

>>105596665
that'd be pretty based 2bh. not seeing how that's predatory.
teenage engineering already did something similar with the op-1 back in like 2011. the sketch sequencer came preloaded with a drawing of Karl Marx next to text that said MARX WAS RIGHT. lmao

>>105596674
Derailing weak people into ideologies is predatory
Same thing those "masculinity" youtubers do, selling products and dumb ideologies for men who just wanna be confident and look cool

>>105596655
NTA, but the problem IS that it's a flag
Gay sex is honest, a flag tries to derail sexuality into identity politics
It's not because I like men that I want to join your movement, sadly not everyone is aware enough to see that

>>105596689
I mean it's not like identity is by default separate from politics before some company comes along and gives you the option to signify aspects of both using their product if you want. your romantic and sexual preference are absolutely going to inform your sociopolitical manifestations whether you choose to acknowledge that or not. the "lgbt" community isn't a monolith. diversity within community is not just possible but inevitable. the inclusion of an optional pride wallpaper is little more than an invitation toward mundane self-expression and a gesture signifying vague social support from the company that makes the product, arguably cynical because they're probably only really doing it because they want to look good, but it's not like they're trying to push you into joining a cult. i'm still struggling to see how you could interpret it otherwise.

>>105596380
If it makes you feel any better, everyone hates that flag. In fact, gays and lesbians hate it the most because it is pushing them out of their own spaces. Most gays and lesbians don't even see a need for any flag or pride at all anymore.

>>105596689
>Gay sex is honest
Gay sex is honestly disgusting. I was on your side until you said this faggot shit. Kill yourself.

>>105596715
The LGBT movement pushes homosexuals into a "safe" and democrat-oriented shape, the flag includes transgender and black people that are completely unrelated

What's more marginalized than the "village people" kind of gay today? Or gays that aren't political or are right-leaning like libertarians?

>>105596729
>Most gays and lesbians don't even see a need for any flag or pride at all anymore.
What's the pay like at the CIA these days

>>105596731
But I never asked you to be on my side?

>>105593286 (OP)
>Apple is promoting sodomites and pedophiles
Reminder, "trans rights" is just a thin veil for pedophile activism, and pedo activism has always been a part of fag activism. What are "trans rights"? access to kids, poisoning kids, mutilating kids, taking kids from parents who don't want to embrace lies and delusions and want to protect their kids, locking people up for not playing make believe with delusional freaks.
https://odysee.com/The-Sodomite-Deception:3

>>105596748
Not sure about them but Army pay sucks

>>105596742
>The LGBT movement pushes homosexuals into a "safe" and democrat-oriented shape,
not really. again, it's not a monolith. it's not a centralized movement. nobody's in control of it. what you're seeing is just the prevailing political stances of the people who comprise that community. lgbt republicans exist. lgbt independents exist. this is what i said earlier about variation and diversity in community being inevitable. that's kind of what a community is, common threads among diverse people.
>the flag includes transgender and black people that are completely unrelated
trans people are intrinsically related to the lgbT community, and this version of the flag includes queer people of color for intersectional purposes as a countermeasure against what was perceived as the community's growing racism problem, which makes it relevant.
but all of this is irrelevant anyway because, again, including an optional flag isn't predatory by any stretch of the imagination.

>>105596751
I don't care what you asked for, you have to kill yourself with a mortar launcher you degenerate faggot

>>105594218
>>105593808
check your wallpaper options

>>105596782
>lgbt republicans exist. lgbt independents exist
They rather call themselves gays and lesbians than lgbt

>trans people are intrinsically related to the lgbT community
Yeah I forgot the acronym is already cursed

The thing is, the community and "lgbt" brand doesn't own homosex either, it's predatory as installing a jehovah witness wallpaper in your computer

>>105596788
Not happening, but thanks for proving my point that gays who don't care about bullshit community are between the devil and the deep sea

>>105594610
>rainbow
>called pride
>nothing to do with lgbt
pick two and only two

>>105596804
No Globohomo there

>>105596805
She's me.

>>105596805
>They rather call themselves gays and lesbians than lgbt
this isn't unanimous. again, that's my point.
>The thing is, the community and "lgbt" brand doesn't own homosex either,
nobody's claiming it does? it's just a label that describes a group of people, and the flag is just a visual insignia of that group. saying you're gay but don't identify with the lgbt community is like saying you don't eat meat or eggs or dairy but you're not "vegan."
>it's predatory as installing a jehovah witness wallpaper in your computer
how is that predatory? religious paraphernalia is easily accessible. you can use your fm radio to tune in to a Christian station. you don't have to, but you do have the option. introducing people to ideas isn't inherently predatory. I kinda don't think you fully understand what it means to prey on people.

>Tran tran tran

>>105596782
>not really. again, it's not a monolith
you keep saying this, but I keep being maeginalized for being an incorrect type of gay.

>>105596836
Yes, someone can not eat meat, eggs or dairy without using the word "vegan"

>I kinda don't think you fully understand what it means to prey on people.
You just don't get it how collectivism ruins the individual
Can't you see how beauty standards for women are a problem for example?

You have behavior standards for homosexuals, doubly actually
>one side wants you loud and noisy to propagate the ideology for "pro-lgbt" politicians
>the other side wants you quiet and puritan

>>105596836
>nobody's claiming it does?
when one political diaspora shames and shuns anyone who doesnt conform to their image of lgbt, then yes they are claiming to own it.

>>105596881
what do i call myself when i want gays to shut the fuck up and not be degenerate sex addicts?

>>105596900
Nobody's having sex in the thread anon

>>105596890
>>105596884
>>105596875
>>105596866
>>105596857
>>105596848
>>105596835
>>105596827

>>105596866
>>105596890
>>105596835
droidsissies what is this

>>105596908
>in the thread

>>105596868
that's how popularity works.

>>105596881
>Yes, someone can not eat meat, eggs or dairy without using the word "vegan"
that's not quite what I said. I didn't say you can't describe yourself as not consuming meat, eggs or dairy without also using the word "vegan." I said that drawing the distinction is nonsensical because there is none. "I don't eat meat or dairy or eggs — but I'm NOT vegan!!! don't you dare classify me as vegan!" like...that's what that is. that's specifically what that word means. lmao
>You just don't get it how collectivism ruins the individual
>Can't you see how beauty standards for women are a problem for example?
relevance? you're really bad at presenting analogies.
>You have behavior standards for homosexuals, doubly actually
no, I don't. in fact I intentionally explained in detail how I don't. I just don't think including an optional wallpaper that signifies support for queer people is predatory. you still haven't really explained this.

>>105596918
>its not a monolith
>t-thats just how popularity works!
anything you can do to not call it what it is lol

>>105596892
what you are witnessing is two factions of a sociopolitical movement...disagreeing with each other. neither is "claiming ownership" over gay sex. it is not a common stance that if you are a man who has sex with or dates men and you voted for Trump last year, you are not a man who has sex with or dates men.

>>105596922
>its not a monolith
>t-thats just how popularity works!
these two statements aren't contradictory lmao

>>105596929
>two factions of a sociopolitical movement...disagreeing with each other.
disagreeing with each other over... how gays should be.

>>105596933
Did I say they were contradictory you illiterate nigger cattle? You are bending yourself backwards to not call a monolith a monolith.

>>105596918
Here: "I don't eat meat, eggs and dairy"
Problem is that words lose their meaning over time, vegan for example being associated with the preachy type, people already expect you to act like that if you use the label

>relevance? you're really bad at presenting analogies.
Lgbt propaganda is behavior standards anon

>you still haven't really explained this
A lot of things is pushed along with the lgbt ideology, like totally unrelated democrat stuff

It's like enjoying chocolate but only the fine kind, then you can't find it among the slop that's produced for money and you are supposed to be happy because you like chocolate

how much of lgbt is just kids needing to hop on a trend to seem open minded?

>>105596955
too much

>>105596938
>disagreeing with each other over... how gays should be.
no. they're disagreeing on sociopolitical conduct within the context of sexuality, but not who gets to call themselves gay and who doesn't. each faction will tell you that gay people who disagree with them are still categorically gay, just gay and retarded.

>>105596941
you didn't explicitly use the word "contradict" at any point but your juxtaposition of those two statements heavily implies an intent to highlight some conflict between them.

>>105596953
>Here: "I don't eat meat, eggs and dairy"
that's veganism. you're describing veganism. veganism is not eating meat, eggs or dairy. "I'm not human, I'm Homo sapiens."
>Problem is that words lose their meaning over time, vegan for example being associated with the preachy type, people already expect you to act like that if you use the label
but that's literally not what the word means though. you can be a vegan and not "act" like how they're generally expected to act.
>Lgbt propaganda is behavior standards anon
no, they're not. it's advocacy, not a particular set of rules for gay people to follow.
>A lot of things is pushed along with the lgbt ideology, like totally unrelated democrat stuff
yeah, no you've said that before, but you haven't explained how adding an optional signifier of support for queer people is inherently predatory. there's a difference.
>It's like enjoying chocolate but only the fine kind, then you can't find it among the slop that's produced for money and you are supposed to be happy because you like chocolate
you are REALLY bad at presenting analogies.
1.) all chocolate that is produced on a commercial level is produced for money regardless of quality, that doesn't make any sense.
2.) the lgbt flag is literally just a signifier of support for gay rights. that's literally it. there's nothing selective about it.
3.) what the fuck are you talking about anymore

>>105596991
>veganism is not eating meat
Jesus christ anon you don't have the notion of action and words being different things

>>105597020
>veganism
>the act of eating only food not derived from animals and typically avoiding the use of other animal byproducts
anon. veganism is LITERALLY NOT EATING MEAT. LIKE, DEFINITIONALLY. THAT'S WHAT THAT MEANS. if you don't eat meat and also don't talk much about not eating meat, you're still vegan.

>>105597032
>veganism is LITERALLY NOT EATING MEAT
if you drink milk that's not veganism
if you eat eggs that's not veganism

>>105596991
>that's literally not what the word means though
What matters is not what's in the dictionary, but what's understood

Imagine shouting really loud "I'M REALLY GAY", people will think you are really homosexual instead of the old definition that would be really happy (like when Johnny Comes Marching Home)

Come on anon, if you tell someone you are "LGBT" they expect you to follow a certain behavior, if you say you are "LGBT" while not following it you are marginalized, the loudest groups and companies do OWN the meaning of the word

How do you even say you are the village people type of gay without saying 'village people type of gay'? The word macho works way better than the word gay in this case

>>105596991
>sociopolitical conduct within the context of sexuality
so... how gays should be?

>>105597043
you're right, I stand corrected. veganism is literally not eating meat as well as other animal byproducts. a central argument still stands: you're a vegan if you don't eat meat or animal byproducts, regardless of whether or not you're a "preachy" person.

>>105596991
>heavily implies
dont make assumptions

>>105596955
i wonder how actual ones feel about all the bandwagoners

>>105596715
>arguably cynical because they're probably only really doing it because they want to look good
Any other year you could make this argument, but I don't think it's true in this case. Tons of companies have cancelled any sort of pride month or LGBT support due to the rabid chud menace. Not even in a subtle way either, just instant switch as soon as the regime changed. And Tim Apple is gay, so.

wouldn't be the first time Apple forced faggot shit on their userbase, remember the U2 gay porn album cover

where's the Israel flag wallpaper?

>>105597106

>>105597082
...your statement literally proves the one youre replying to

>>105597072
no. it's not about how gays should "be" in general, but rather how they should be perceived by others regardless of their behavior. queer advocacy is aimed at people who are not queer, obviously. otherwise you'd be defeating the purpose. it's about achieving and securing social progress, not regulating the behavior of the homosexual.

>>105597052
> What matters is not what's in the dictionary, but what's understood
dictionaries are descriptivist, not prescriptivist. how they define words is informed by how people generally understand them in the first place, which is why dictionary definitions are helpful in instances like these.
>Imagine shouting really loud "I'M REALLY GAY", people will think you are really homosexual instead of the old definition that would be really happy (like when Johnny Comes Marching Home)
yeah, because at this point, gay has come to mean homosexual, homoromantic or both. this isn't a revelation.
>Come on anon, if you tell someone you are "LGBT" they expect you to follow a certain behavior,
yes, that behavior is engaging in sexual or romantic relationships that differ from the statistical norm particularly relating to gender identity and attraction. anything more than that is just stereotyping.
>if you say you are "LGBT" while not following it
following what? you're not making any sense.
>you are marginalized,
not really. people might disagree with your political views but that doesn't influence your categorization as LGBT+.
LGBT people will tell you that LGBT people deserve rights, yes including the ones that voted for Trump. that's kinda the point of the whole thing.
>the loudest groups and companies do OWN the meaning of the word
no, they don't. they can't. it's not a trademark. it's not an intellectual property.
>How do you even say you are the village people type of gay without saying 'village people type of gay'?
you just did.
>The word macho works way better than the word gay in this case
ok?

>>105597121
No it doesn't, retard.
If it were just about optics they would have changed their tune to appeal to chuds just like every other tech company in existence.

>>105597077
lmao. I have to interpret the things you say to me, anon. otherwise words have no meaning.

>>105597161
Ok anon, at this point you simply don't want to understand that not everybody wants to be under the umbrella term along with the types of people they dislike, behavior pressure and stereotypes

I'm not using your retarded term for something that existed for centuries, in the same way gravity existed before Isaac Newton

>>105597199
if you don't want to be classified under the umbrella term...don't set the wallpaper that represents that term on your phone. still not seeing a reason it shouldn't be available to anyone at all as an option.
have fun telling people you fuck dudes but you're not gay because being gay means fucking dudes and also voting for Obama or whatever

>>105593286 (OP)
MacOS doesn't install any wallpapers by default except the stock "OS edition" wallpaper, you have to download anything else you want even if it's listed in settings. Personally I just use the regular Sequoia daytime wallpaper.

Dumb jeet nigger.

>>105597161
>no, they don't. they can't. it's not a trademark. it's not an intellectual property.
Holy shit you really can't think of things in the real, DE FACTO sense

I firmly believe that if sub 100iq retards weren't allowed to vote, LGBT rights would have been resolved hundreds of years ago.

>>105593286 (OP)
I like how they force this on us like trannies force themselves on kids.
Or how parents force their kids to be gay (aka, mentally ill)
Very thematic indeed.

>>105597161
>he still thinks we are only talking about apple
holy illiterate

>>105597173
have you ever considered asking for clarification? stop pretending to be stupid.

>>105597219
he's a typical fagtivist

>>105597221
Yup, we would've solved the gay problem.

>>105597238
He refuses to see how the word is an abstracted and charged term, like if "LGBT" existed since the big bang

>>105597241
so true sir

>>105597219
what, am I supposed to think about this metaphorically? what argument is even being made here? argue with clarity and precision.

>>105597231
I have, on multiple occasions. this didn't seem to require classification because it seemed clear enough. all you've done is say "that's not what I meant" without clarifying what it is that you DID mean. somehow that's my fault for not prompting you to even though you were free to if you felt you were being misunderstood.
the only reason you haven't and still won't clarify your position is because you can't. you're not trying to communicate, you're trying to win. you're just evading argumentative maneuvers.

>>105597226
everything I've said applies in principle. I didn't say anything about Apple specifically; I said including an optional price wallpaper isn't a predatory transgression. this applies on any other OS as well.

>>105597263
>classification

>>105597246
>arguing by proxy
anon this is just depressing.
anyway I've always acknowledged that the term "LGBT" is a constructed term. newsflash: all terms are constructed. that's what language is. I just think you're misunderstanding what it even is or means. I think you're misunderstanding how the term is perceived as a social signal. you're reading too much into it. I've said this in different forms multiple times now and all you've done is...read more into it. lmao

I wasn't gay until I saw a bunch of sexy twink pics on /fit/...
go on without me... don't fall for the psyop bros...

>>105597272
clarification*. autocorrect.

>>105597281
Yeah you're cooked lol

>>105597263
The term DE FACTO is owned by the loudest groups, since they shape what society thinks of it

>>105597293
ur mad, I'm unbothered, you're washed, I won

>>105597263
>this didn't seem to require clarification because it seemed clear enough.
>all you've done is say "that's not what I meant" without clarifying what it is that you DID mean.
Jokes aside, do you see the problem here?

>>105597281
You're just pretending that it's a clean definition while it's clearly not

I don't accept it being used to me in the same way trannies can refuse certain pronouns based on their fantasy

>>105597299
why would those who comprise the majority of the movement and most influential shape its image "own" it rightfully?

>>105597305
yes. the problem is that you don't even know what point you're making anymore because you never really had one in the first place, it seems. unless you're willing to prove me wrong by clarifying what you meant, but you won't, because you don't even know what that looks like. lmao

>>105597307
actually, it is. things are simpler than you make them.

>>105597308
NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS DE JURE FOR GOD'S SAKE

YOU'RE SAYING A HOUSE IS CLEAN BECAUSE SOMEONE WROTE "HOUSE IS CLEAN" IN A PIECE OF PAPER AND SIGNED IT

>>105597316
No anon, the problem is that you recognized a lack of clarity and instead of seeking clarification you made assumptions.

dont make assumptions.

>>105597316
It's not, it's a charged definition in the same way nigger is to blacks

I'm convinced that the mythical "anti lgbt gay/lesbian/bi person" is made up. I've never met anyone like that. You would have to be extremely retarded to hold that position. Like 99th percentile retardation. Like Association of German National Jews tier retarded.

>t. gay

>>105597330
Were you today years old when you realize that "homophobia" and "anti-thing" were misnomers used against people who merely disagree?

>>105597330
>t. american

>>105597330
>Like 99th percentile retardation
Anon, that's not how percentile works....

>>105597343
The only place that matters

>>105597318
that's another terrible analogy lmao.
I'm saying you're LGBT because you meet the qualifications that define LGBT. you're tacking on all that other shit because you've misinterpreted what the movement even means or functions as. you're telling me a perfectly clean house isn't clean because the guy that owns it wears leather sometimes. you see how retarded that shit sounds?

>>105597323
there was no lack of clarity though, that's the problem with what you said. it seemed more than clear enough. then you said "actually that's not what I meant" without clarifying what you DID mean even though you've had every opportunity to, and you still won't even though that opportunity remains. because you can't, and we both know it. if you could, you certainly would've by now.

>>105597326
actually, it's not. "LGBT" as a term in no way functions in the same way as a racial slur. "LGBT" is closer to "black" than "nigger." if you expect to genuinely disconcert or intimidate someone by calling them LGBT you'll fail.

>>105597330
Most of the openly gay men I've met irl were far right lol
They were all the kind of normal-presenting gay where you have no idea they're gay until they tell you though. maybe it's the flaming ones who are the leftists

>>105597352
Waste of time and effort, you truly don't want to understand

>>105597352
>all you've done is say "that's not what I meant" without clarifying what it is that you DID mean.
>there was no lack of clarity though
you have autusm

>>105597353
>it's the flaming ones who are the leftists
The ones who are promoted by brands under the umbrella term sadly

>>105597365
He does, there's no way someone can really take words so to the letter they are unable to comprehend the difference between de jure and de facto

>>105597363
I understand what you're saying just fine. I'm just DISAGREEING with you. I understand the concept and reject it because it's retarded.

>>105597365
my autism is specifically the thing that makes me so good at arguing with you lmao. I obsess over the little stuff and employ legalistic accuracy. the point remains: there was no lack of clarity, you're just retroactively placing false ambiguity on a statement that was actually quite clear in a desperate attempt to backtrack.

>>105597378
good at arguing =/= being correct

just some food for thought

>>105597378
You're disagreeing with base on "legalistic accuracy" like you say, which makes you unable to see reality outside words

In your head the term "LGBT" has the de jure meaning, while in reality what people remember when hearing it (de facto) is the shape that's pushed by brands and loud minorities

>>105597353
I am a "normal-presenting" gay. I am not a far right extremist retard at all.
It's actually annoying. Chuddies will say all sorts of heinous shit when they think you agree with them.

>>105597407
sweety i promise you, you are not normal-presenting

>>105597402
He's probably a zoomer that had debating classes on school or uni, he's proud of obsessing over little stuff instead of seeing the meaning behind the words

>>105597415
Semiotics should be a required topic in every grade. That would solve this nonsense.

>>105597402
acktually, thoughts don't eat food.

>>105597407
>Chuddies
baiting larper spotted, I've never seen a real leftist outside of this place use that term

>>105597378
>all you've done is say "that's not what I meant" without clarifying what it is that you DID mean.
>the point remains: there was no lack of clarity,

>>105597413
>erm... sweaty? we can le always tell
Straggot gaydar is worse than turdie Iranian soviet era air defense.

>>105597425
reddit

>>105597433
It's funny because I'm not straight. Get rekt.

>>105597425
Nobody with half a brain would say chuddy outside of 4chud. Might as well shout
>THE NARWHAL BACONS AT MIDNIGHT FRIENDO!!!
in the middle of the street

>>105597402
I agree. you're still wrong though. it's the reason you're so bad at arguing your point. you've proven you're articulate enough; if you had a good point to make you'd make one.

>>105597404
>which makes you unable to see reality outside words
incorrect, the accuracy in referring to is argumentative. I understand the abstract concepts you're referring to and I think you're interpreting them wrong. if anything, you're worse at understanding the world that lies outside language than a literal autist lmao. you are wrong, people are capable of understanding the diversity of queer people and do in practice. it's not they who are small-minded, but you.

>>105597415
no debate classes or anything like that. I literally just think you're wrong lmao. it's kind of insane that your ego is so swollen that you delude yourself into thinking that anyone who disagrees with you either doesn't fully understand what you're saying or doesn't have a valid perspective because the thing that makes it invalid is the fact that is opposes yours. you're not just wrong, you're stupid.

>>105597447
Quick question, what's my point that's wrong?

>>105597459
you've made many wrong points but to fixate on the main one: the idea that including optional pride wallpapers is somehow predatory.

>>105597447
I gave many examples of when they clearly aren't, yet you don't understand the examples as you keep focusing on technicalities

You are unable to understand, someone who disagrees but understands the point would say that there's other viewpoints on the word "LGBT" and pride flag, some more aligned with brand/politics/corporations and others less, yet you insist in the dictionary definition, your definition

You also keep contradicting yourself, like saying the community is not a monolith, then saying
>people are capable of understanding the diversity of queer people and do in practice

You're an autist, and that's just sad

>>105597474
That wasn't me. Perhaps that was... unclear?

the pride band is the biggest scam lmao

it's like $50 for silicone and they re release it yearly and nothing goes to any groups

>>105597514
>nothing goes to any groups
based apple stealing money from the gays
going out to buy a macbook right now

>>105597497
>I gave many examples of when they clearly aren't,
of when they aren't what? highlight what you're responding to.
>yet you don't understand the examples as you keep focusing on technicalities
I'm not focusing on technicalities or semantics; I'm attacking your arguments at their most fundamental levels.
>You are unable to understand,
I understand just fine. I also disagree with you. you refuse to accept this because it's likely that you, too, have some form of autism.
>someone who disagrees but understands the point would say that there's other viewpoints on the word "LGBT" and pride flag,
don't be so sure; I understand your point and think it's retarded for the aforementioned reasons. that's kind of what disagreement is. I've explained in detail what's wrong with your logic and you've come up with next to nothing in response. you've been told that everything is valid one too many times it seems. the sky is blue. water is h2o. 2 + 2 = 4. facts are facts.
>some more aligned with brand/politics/corporations and others less, yet you insist in the dictionary definition, your definition
it's a pretty colloquially agreed-upon definition. you keep trying to redefine it to better fit your argument, but ironically that's the reason your argument is so weak to begin with. lmao. you're so self-destructive.
this next one is my favorite:
>You also keep contradicting yourself, like saying the community is not a monolith, then saying
>people are capable of understanding the diversity of queer people and do in practice
anon. do you not see how those two statements are perfectly compatible? I can't stop laughing.
>You're an autist, and that's just sad
my autism enables me to beat your ass up and down the thread. that makes be happy. sorry you got demolished :/

>>105593286 (OP)
>glance at iphone
>it's the same bg as usual
fake news

>>105597510
>heh, jokes on you; I deliberately obfuscated important details through omission in order to make a flimsy point that wouldn't stand if I hadn't done that, loftily indicating I'm not actually as concerned with communication in earnest as I pretend I am — just like you've been saying I have a tendency to do. gotcha
ever wonder why so many people use terms like "nta but" around these parts anon? or have you not heard that one because you just drifted over from Reddit?
(you still haven't clarified anything btw.) (why do I get the feeling you're never going to?) (lol)

>>105597584
>obfuscated important details through omission
You. Are. Autistic.

I quite literally told you that you made an incorrect assumption. What was your response, to step back and reasses? No, your response was to assert your assumption as truth.

>>105597584
If you want clarification, ask for it.

>>105597599
>You. Are. Autistic.
we've established that.
>I quite literally told you that you made an incorrect assumption.
the assumption was contextually justified and reasonable to make. you refuse to rectify my ostensibly incorrect assumption because you intended for your actions and statements to be misinterpreted. because you can't make an argument without intellectual dishonesty. because your argument is weak.

>>105597615
I don't have to. if you feel you're being misunderstood, you can preemptively clarify your statements to make yourself better understood. this has always been an option. you won't use it though. you never will. because you operate only within the confines of confusion.

>>105597630
>the assumption was contextually justified and reasonable to make.
And yet it was wrong. What did you learn here?

>>105597634
You're autistic. This is not a good thing, it is in fact a bad thing.

>>105597630
>because your argument is weak.
What is my argument?

>>105597634
>if you feel you're being misunderstood, you can preemptively clarify
derp

>>105597642
we learned that you rely on intellectual dishonesty, we just went through this.

>>105597648
you have hold a candle against an autist, which is worse.

>>105597653
>What is my argument?
I guess we'll never know, but I do know that the reason you'll never voluntarily state it with any absence of ambiguity is because you believe it benefits your rhetoric, as you just demonstrated. (you're wrong about that, too. it doesn't strengthen anything; it just makes you look like a snake.)
(that's a metaphor btw. I'm well aware that you're a human being. just clarifying)
(see how easy that was?)

>>105597667
:P

>>105597682
>you have hold a candle
you can't*

>>105597682
>because your argument is weak.
>I guess we'll never know
Once you stop pretending you didn't make a mistake, I'll clarify my argunemt.

The point, autist anon, is that you don't deserve clarification if you make assumptions.

>unironically being proud of lacking the ability to process social cues

>>105597696
you presented two statements I made that, on their surface, appear contradictory even though in actuality they aren't. you did this without any further elaboration in anticipation that this presentation would be interpreted as some attempted juxtaposition highlighting a rift between the two, and when I REASONABLY ASSUMED this because your signals weren't as ambiguous as you think they were and countered the position you put forward, you dropped it entirely and explained that that actually wasn't the argument you were putting forward at all. but then refused to elaborate there too. and still won't until you're explicitly asked.
genuinely convinced this isn't the most painfully obvious maneuver you could've pulled, you consistently decline to make a definitive statement so that you can do it again.
and I'M the autistic one. lol.

you LITERALLY do not have an argument. not a static one, at least. not until you prove you do. but you won't, because you can't.

>>105597703
I'm unironically glad my brain isn't structured the way yours is, because holy fuck you're dumb.

>>105597752
>you presented two statements I made that, on their surface, appear contradictory even though in actuality they aren't
That was not the argument I made. That came AFTER you made the assumption.

>>105597765
>still doing the thing
lmao

>>105597752
>I'm unironically glad my brain isn't structured the way yours is, because holy fuck you're dumb.
You're confusing winning the argument with being correct. You still have not redressed your false assumption.

point in case
>>105597770

>>105597765
I have to say I admire the rigidity in your thinking. maybe you ARE autistic after all.
still glad my brain isn't like yours though.

>>105597770
>the thing
being correct? lmao

>>105597777
so we both agree I won the argument.
the reason I won is because I'm correct. of course you'll disagree, but what do you know? you lost. cry about it.

>>105597779
>consistency is autism
only autistic people think this

>>105597785
Replace "the" argument with "my" argument. You won because nobody was opposing you, anon. Quite literally nobody has argued against the false assumption you made.

We've been waiting for you to stop throwing a sperg fit this whole time.

>>105597781
"the thing" is being very obviously intellectually dishonest.
see how easy it was for me to just go ahead and proactively clarify my position for you beyond merely answering the question with a simple "yes" or "no?" you can do it too. I believe in you!

>>105597786
overly rigid thinking is very literally a symptom of autism listed in the dsm. I didn't say anything about consistency.

>>105597796
anon do you really think if you just keep doubling down on the obvious backtrack it'll look more convincing eventually?

spergs - not even once

>>105597816
>everyone I fail to gaslight is a sperg

>>105597819
That's a different anon, spergy.

>>105597829
ok
>everyone that refuses to be gaslit is a sperg
better?

>>105597809
Still waiting for you to redress your assumption. The moment you do that is the moment the discussion can continue.

>>105597835
>Still waiting for you to redress your assumption.
you'll be waiting until you're on your deathbed. assumptions are good when they're reasonable, you're just a liar and a dipshit. the discussion could continue whenever you want, but you don't really want it to because it wouldn't benefit you to make a statement you have to actually commit to and we both know it.

Oh he mad

>>105597849
>the discussion can continue whenever you want [to give way to my unreasonable behavior]
The thing about dealing with autists is that you have to remind them that they are communicating, not dictating. They have a tendency to think their thoughts are the only relevant and important factor.

>>105597889
>[to give way to my unreasonable behavior]
lmao, but that's the fun part: it wasn't unreasonable! and you explaining yourself without waiting for me to explicitly ask you to or admit that my assumption was unreasonable when it was actually perfectly logical isn't "giving way" to anything. and it's weird that you interpret it as some sort of power play. it's just communication. but, again, effective communication would actually work against you in this instance, which is why you refuse to "give way" to it. fucking lmfao

Yeah he's big mad

>>105597878
>>105597912
[your attention, sir]

Platinum mad

>>105597928
no u

>>105593477
I opened up my iPad this morning and got Stage 4 Double AIDS

He mad

Apple had a rainbow logo even before the Pride flag was a thing. You could just consider it a throwback to their 1970's logo

>>105597938
he = you

He big mad

>>105597957
please refer to the previous post listed here >>105597957

>>105593286 (OP)
Because they don't make enough money on this "courage." Apple will drop Pride Month sooner or later, too.

>>105597957
whoopsie, I mean here >>105597943

yeah hes mad

>>105598000
>yeah hes mad

mad

>>105598083
I know you are

big mad

>>105598193
yeah we know, you don't have to announce it

he mad

>>105598262
(he = you)

they're malding lads

>>105598287
y u so mad?

bros actually mad

>>105598362
yeah you are lmao

whys he still mad?

>>105598393
idk, why are you?

he mad

>>105593769
They're not forced, their optional. Android (or at least the Pixel) does the exact same thing.

>>105598437
Weird, I don't have any fag flags on my anjeet.

>2_fags_arguing_about_who's_gayer.tiff
Why don't you two homos make out already

>>105596729
>If it makes you feel any better, everyone hates that flag
Nice cope but no.

@105598432
oh yeah I forgot to mention, ur mad lol.
also no more sweet parentheses for you. sorry :(

yeah hes mad

>>105598437
Not a problem on my samsmug

@105599162
cry about it