Search Results
6/21/2025, 5:25:51 PM
>>40128169
>you're a redditor
>red flag
Ok.
>You're gatekeeping marginalization by redefining what it is. Here's what marrium webster says:
What we mean is more relevant to if our ideas are correct than our words. Webster is a tool for sharing ideas, it's irrelevant to what I mean. So if you care about whose ideas when implemented actually align with reality, drop the dictionary.
The purpose of me saying heterosexuals aren't marginalized is to point out the qualifications and utility of becoming apart of the lgbt. It's not to appeal to the dictionary definition of marginalized. So you doing that doesn't prove anything except an unwillingness or inability to engage with the context of my argument around the word. I assume you're not autistic and expect you to engage using some level of intuition as to what I mean, anything else is unproductive.
>And heterosexuals are marginalized if they're incels.
You can use the word marginalized that way if you want but, again, it doesn't align with most of the lgbt's qualifications for inclusion or their stated goals.
Do you see now why we can't just quote the dictionary for credibility in an argument about what people find acceptable, as if marriam webster is organizing your political movement?
>It being normal for people to be hetero and be hated for it doesn't make intervention unneccessary
It's not. That's a fringe positions among the far left. And obviously most people are hetero btw. Just nonsense.
And if it were the case they should make their own movement, because it subtracts from the lgbt movement to include heterosexuals in a community that is preyed upon specifically for their lack of heterosexuality lol.
>you're a redditor
>red flag
Ok.
>You're gatekeeping marginalization by redefining what it is. Here's what marrium webster says:
What we mean is more relevant to if our ideas are correct than our words. Webster is a tool for sharing ideas, it's irrelevant to what I mean. So if you care about whose ideas when implemented actually align with reality, drop the dictionary.
The purpose of me saying heterosexuals aren't marginalized is to point out the qualifications and utility of becoming apart of the lgbt. It's not to appeal to the dictionary definition of marginalized. So you doing that doesn't prove anything except an unwillingness or inability to engage with the context of my argument around the word. I assume you're not autistic and expect you to engage using some level of intuition as to what I mean, anything else is unproductive.
>And heterosexuals are marginalized if they're incels.
You can use the word marginalized that way if you want but, again, it doesn't align with most of the lgbt's qualifications for inclusion or their stated goals.
Do you see now why we can't just quote the dictionary for credibility in an argument about what people find acceptable, as if marriam webster is organizing your political movement?
>It being normal for people to be hetero and be hated for it doesn't make intervention unneccessary
It's not. That's a fringe positions among the far left. And obviously most people are hetero btw. Just nonsense.
And if it were the case they should make their own movement, because it subtracts from the lgbt movement to include heterosexuals in a community that is preyed upon specifically for their lack of heterosexuality lol.
Page 1