Fun fact: representation of vilified, persecuted and oppressed groups is about more than just the thing itself. It’s about equality and defeating bigotry.
It’s a third party tracking ousted athletes, rather than something that’d be much more accurate.
There’s obviously more, but there’s be a very large, “I don’t see how that’s any of your fucking business” cohort. And I’m quite certain many of the athletes on that published list don’t feel comfortable about this at all because when they mentioned they weren’t straight, they weren’t expecting to be catalogued, published, and distributed out all the time so steangers can check out what their fuck is as they compete.
You’re queerwashing and you’re using the same old bullshit terms to try make it look like this is a normal thing to happen for people. This isn’t how your modern equality is achieved in the modern era. Ain’t no other group getting this same shit happening to them.
It’s a third party tracking ousted athletes, rather than something that’d be much more accurate.
If you’d have bothered to actually read the article, you’d know that they ask every athlete before they include them on the list, making it first party information.
I’m quite certain many of the athletes on that published list don’t feel comfortable about this at all
Again, all of them are out and have specifically agreed to be included. You’re making shit up on their behalf. That’s a very weird thing to do and you should stop.
when they mentioned they weren’t straight, they weren’t expecting to be catalogued, published, and distributed out all the time so steangers can check out what their fuck is as they compete
Sounds like you’re either projecting your own privacy vs advocacy preferences onto them or uncomfortable with their openness. Either way, that’s a YOU problem.
You’re queerwashing and you’re using the same old bullshit terms to try make it look like this is a normal thing to happen for people.
Again, stop being weird and trying to make your issues theirs.
Also, you should look up what queerwashing ACTUALLY means, because celebrating more voluntary openness as a result of less oppression and repression ain’t it.
If you’d have bothered to actually read the article, you’d know that they ask every athlete before they include them on the list, making it first party information.
I did read the article, did you? Because that’s not what it said. You could argue it implies it at one point, but it implies opposing things more. The constant call out for people to let them know of people not on the list is not exactly ethically responsible either.
But you’ve side-tracked from the actual point here—one I won’t repeat, but I think makes your use of “equality” so rich, amongst the other regurgitation of words you’ve learned, but out of context. Also, the queerwashing was stated at you, not the article, though something tells me you won’t grasp onto why at all, I wouldn’t expect it.
Fun fact: representation of vilified, persecuted and oppressed groups is about more than just the thing itself. It’s about equality and defeating bigotry.
It’s not, though.
It’s a third party tracking ousted athletes, rather than something that’d be much more accurate.
There’s obviously more, but there’s be a very large, “I don’t see how that’s any of your fucking business” cohort. And I’m quite certain many of the athletes on that published list don’t feel comfortable about this at all because when they mentioned they weren’t straight, they weren’t expecting to be catalogued, published, and distributed out all the time so steangers can check out what their fuck is as they compete.
You’re queerwashing and you’re using the same old bullshit terms to try make it look like this is a normal thing to happen for people. This isn’t how your modern equality is achieved in the modern era. Ain’t no other group getting this same shit happening to them.
If you’d have bothered to actually read the article, you’d know that they ask every athlete before they include them on the list, making it first party information.
Again, all of them are out and have specifically agreed to be included. You’re making shit up on their behalf. That’s a very weird thing to do and you should stop.
Sounds like you’re either projecting your own privacy vs advocacy preferences onto them or uncomfortable with their openness. Either way, that’s a YOU problem.
Again, stop being weird and trying to make your issues theirs.
Also, you should look up what queerwashing ACTUALLY means, because celebrating more voluntary openness as a result of less oppression and repression ain’t it.
I did read the article, did you? Because that’s not what it said. You could argue it implies it at one point, but it implies opposing things more. The constant call out for people to let them know of people not on the list is not exactly ethically responsible either.
But you’ve side-tracked from the actual point here—one I won’t repeat, but I think makes your use of “equality” so rich, amongst the other regurgitation of words you’ve learned, but out of context. Also, the queerwashing was stated at you, not the article, though something tells me you won’t grasp onto why at all, I wouldn’t expect it.
Being queer is normal. Being homophobic is not.
Being queer in the face of homophobia is worth commending, especially when homophobes like you demand that we shut up about it.