@guest_
But are there common points of morality between a majority of people? There certainly are, and one of those would be that we don't allow explicit shit in public so that children don't get influenced. If you can't view the argument through a different lens, then view it through the lense of harm done.
.
That is without even going into an argument about whether there is a single objective truth of the matter.
.
fyi, for anyone interested as to what I'm talking about above, it's this comment chain: funsubstancecom/fun/537305/never-thought-of-it-that-way/?last_comment=3199317#comment3199317
.
Insert a comma for the com part, since funsub no longer allows links.
Yes, the topic of discussion was nudity and other displays of the human body, sexuality, etc at gay pride parades- with your statement being that a “straight pride parade” would be skewered if the same behaviors were allowed. But such displays are not only common but often intrinsic to events such as Mardi Gras or even Saint Patrick’s day. So why does seeing a topless woman or a naked man suddenly become a danger to children when in the context of gay or “fetish” sexuality but not when college age women bare their breasts for beads or when drunken men streak nude out of drunkenness?
The point isn’t that any of these things are or should be (or shouldn’t be) considered “ok” or legal- but that there isn’t this unfair bias towards gays. That at many public or outdoor festivals, events, even sports matches- that people do behave these ways and it is not something g exclusive to a gay pride parade. People do not go to Mardigras or to Ibiza on spring break and think there is no possibility these thing will occur.
So it isn’t about a collective moral sense but the fact that you’re applying selective morality based on a divide in your perceptions of “us” and “them.” Overlooking the behaviors of people who are different under similar circumstances and singling out one group for doing the same. You’ve made a special case or given special attention to pride parades on the issue simply because they are gay- because nothing discussed is about any of the non gay events which are generationally and universally known for wide spread and often synonymous violation of “majority morals.”
I do not have the sufficient examples to presume that these occurences are endemic to those other events in the same way as these displays are at pride events. It's about the scale, and the repercussions if any. Any event can have one-offs if it grows large enough, but only one has a direct causal and consistent link.
.
And my point wasn't that there would be outrage for the same occurence, but the fact that this occurence would not arise naturally, same as the other events you listed. None of them have anything to do with sexuality of any kind, and these problems are due to scale, not any kind of intent.
.
This is a funny point, but what is stopping the attendees from showing up in suits, for instance? Doesn't make them any less gay. Doesn't change the fact that they can celebrate who they are. The message is still the same, but the degenerate showcases aren't there.
@vitklim why don't people just where suits on the Fourth of July? Jeez, why all the red white and blue?! What's with green on St. Patrick's day? They don't HAVE to turn the Chicago River green...
The movie is called Aligarh. I would really recommend if you guys could it. It's about a language professor who is taken to court, just because he's gay. It's a great movie.
But are there common points of morality between a majority of people? There certainly are, and one of those would be that we don't allow explicit shit in public so that children don't get influenced. If you can't view the argument through a different lens, then view it through the lense of harm done.
.
That is without even going into an argument about whether there is a single objective truth of the matter.
.
fyi, for anyone interested as to what I'm talking about above, it's this comment chain: funsubstancecom/fun/537305/never-thought-of-it-that-way/?last_comment=3199317#comment3199317
.
Insert a comma for the com part, since funsub no longer allows links.
.
And my point wasn't that there would be outrage for the same occurence, but the fact that this occurence would not arise naturally, same as the other events you listed. None of them have anything to do with sexuality of any kind, and these problems are due to scale, not any kind of intent.
.
This is a funny point, but what is stopping the attendees from showing up in suits, for instance? Doesn't make them any less gay. Doesn't change the fact that they can celebrate who they are. The message is still the same, but the degenerate showcases aren't there.