• HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    Remeber how when there was a fight for gay marriage a good portion of people said they didnt mind the legal concept and just wanted to call it “civil unions” and we totally did that as a first step to placate those people before going full on equal marriage…

    I wonder why the approach to trans rights has been so all or nothing with people It seems like there is no real desire for progress from eithet side the way things stand now.

    • Ginny [they/she]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      What is there to compromise here? Every building with gendered facilities has to build a third set of toilets for trans people? The government has to build a third set of prisons for trans people?

      • HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        An example of compromise would be to acknowledge that trans women are biologically different from cis women.This is not an extreme or hateful idea. Other issues like sports or bathrooms can still be nuanced discussions that acknowledge peoples concerns and work to educate rather then alienate. Acceptice means different things to different people and it wont come all at once.

        To compare a similar example imagine someone who comes out as gay to parents in the 90s: strict chrisitan parents might kick them out of the house and never speak to them again, - OR- they could be the type of conservative parents who say “well i dont agree with it but i still love you”. Whch would you rather have? Which one would potentially lead to a potentially better outcome/changed mind?

        It seems to me that completely alienating people who have reasonable objections to relatively new ideas is not the best way to go.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well, that whole civil union thing didn’t really work out so well and those same people were still (and are still) homophobic to the extreme so why give them anything? They are clearly not interested in compromises anyway.

      • albert180@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        Deutsch
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        It certainly did work out in many countries, which transitioned from it to Marriage for all in the end

        • taladar@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Thanks to the people who were in favor of marriage equality in the first place, not thanks to the bigots who wanted “civil unions” instead. Those are even more vicious in their bigotry these days.

      • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        And why the fuck is there a compromise position at all? Bigots don’t have a right to discriminate against people. If they don’t want to get on board they can fuck off.

        • HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          2 days ago

          What happens when that attitude ends up creating more biggots and we find ourselves even more outnumbered. I dont know what the best solution is but surely its not to alienate a full third of the entire population and expect that to work out well for everyone.

          On a personal one to one level i do agree they can fuck off. But from an observing the reality of living in a country that just elected a fascist, im worried all the demanding people accept things they disagree with lest they be shunned, its just going to lead to more pushback against trans and other vulnerable people.

          • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I dont know what the best solution is but surely its not to alienate a full third of the entire population and expect that to work out well for everyone

            A full third of the population is already alienated. It’s not working well for anyone. I’m simply saying we should leave a full third behind in the dust if they don’t want to give up bigotry. These people are not helpless, they know that they’re wrong, and they’re doing this shit anyway. Compromising with them is exactly why we elected a fascist.

            And to be clear, conservatives drove this, they had a million opportunities to turn around, and refused every time. I’m not the one who brought us here.

            • HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              Again i agree with this 100% on a personal level, my concern is just that it seems like that third is growing and the other side is shrinking due to increasing in fighting. Im not really sure what the solution for that is, i just think its a bad trend and leads to more hostility.

      • HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        How didnt it work out? It lead to eventually getting marriage equality world wide, in large part because those first states tried to do civil unions.

        • webadict@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          By your logic, when they freed the slaves, they really should’ve done it slowly instead of all at once, because look how many racists it made!

          Or was civil rights too fast as well?

          • HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Im not sure you have my logic correct… Im not saying we should do things slower, im saying its concerning how black or white everything has gotten, everyone has purity tests and if you dont pass you arent worth engaging with and im concerned that will have a lot of negative consequences and lead to increased hostility.

            I am sharing an observation, not suggesting a solution. I am saying the way things are is concering and while i hope for a positive outcome (one where people are accepted for who they are) i see a lot more pushback than acceptance with the current strategy/mindset.