The user you are replying to has only had issue with Castro “jailing political dissidents,” who were supporters of the fascist (and homophobic) slaver Batista regime. When this was pointed out, they never spoke out against it.
I assert that the Communists taking power was good for the people of Cuba, and that those like Castro are demonized because they liberated Cuba from colonizers, slavers, and fascists. Castro, however, was not a saint free from sin, merely a far better person than Batista with the Cuban people at heart.
I of course detest homophobia, and don’t erase that. However, it remains important to recognize that homosexuality was illegal in Batista’s reign, and that the system Castro helped build was the one that ultimately passed the current Family Code that is among the best for the LGBT community on the planet.
We can agree to disagree on Castro. I’m more concerned with unintentionally offending people’s sexuality. Do you think it reads more as minimization of the offensiveness of the analogy, or illustrating the severity of Fidel’s actions by comparison? Honest answer please.
Given that you already know that I’m pansexual and presumably know that the hill the user you replied to has chosen to die on the hill of defending Batista and the fascists jailed by Castro, one has to see that you calling me hypocritical for calling them out on their use of homophobic insults without them bring up anything about Castro with respect to homosexuality is a minimization of their homophobia.
In this case, again, it was thanks to the democratic institutions put in place by the Communists that even allowed homosexuality to be legalized, rather than continuing to be enslaved and colonized.
I wasn’t being critical of you. I legitimately appreciated our conversation. BrainInaBox is the user that’s being insultingly critical of others without a clear explanation of how it’s offensive. If they handled it the way that you did, I wouldn’t have made the snarky comment.
Again, not to me. My comment was regarding BrainInaBox’s treatment of another user. Had they not repeatedly and angrily vilified the other user, maybe their point would’ve been heard.
You should teach them diplomacy and respect if you really want to support the message. They didn’t want to hear it from me.
Which is exactly why I asked your opinion five comments ago. Lol
All I’m saying is you’ve got a person saying “what you said is homophobic and you’re a fucking idiot bigot if you don’t listen” in the same breath as “Fedel held votes but I don’t have proof and anything you say is stupid imperialist propaganda,” while fully aware of how Castro treated homosexuals, isn’t really the most compelling stance and may be deserving of the same condescension they’re dishing out.
The user you are replying to has only had issue with Castro “jailing political dissidents,” who were supporters of the fascist (and homophobic) slaver Batista regime. When this was pointed out, they never spoke out against it.
I assert that the Communists taking power was good for the people of Cuba, and that those like Castro are demonized because they liberated Cuba from colonizers, slavers, and fascists. Castro, however, was not a saint free from sin, merely a far better person than Batista with the Cuban people at heart.
I of course detest homophobia, and don’t erase that. However, it remains important to recognize that homosexuality was illegal in Batista’s reign, and that the system Castro helped build was the one that ultimately passed the current Family Code that is among the best for the LGBT community on the planet.
We can agree to disagree on Castro. I’m more concerned with unintentionally offending people’s sexuality. Do you think it reads more as minimization of the offensiveness of the analogy, or illustrating the severity of Fidel’s actions by comparison? Honest answer please.
Given that you already know that I’m pansexual and presumably know that the hill the user you replied to has chosen to die on the hill of defending Batista and the fascists jailed by Castro, one has to see that you calling me hypocritical for calling them out on their use of homophobic insults without them bring up anything about Castro with respect to homosexuality is a minimization of their homophobia.
In this case, again, it was thanks to the democratic institutions put in place by the Communists that even allowed homosexuality to be legalized, rather than continuing to be enslaved and colonized.
I wasn’t being critical of you. I legitimately appreciated our conversation. BrainInaBox is the user that’s being insultingly critical of others without a clear explanation of how it’s offensive. If they handled it the way that you did, I wouldn’t have made the snarky comment.
BrainInABox agreed with me regarding homophobia, and likely didn’t think it necessary to repeat what I had already said.
Again, not to me. My comment was regarding BrainInaBox’s treatment of another user. Had they not repeatedly and angrily vilified the other user, maybe their point would’ve been heard.
You should teach them diplomacy and respect if you really want to support the message. They didn’t want to hear it from me.
Put opposite, you defended a user’s homophobia and defense of fascists over someone upset at both.
Which is exactly why I asked your opinion five comments ago. Lol
All I’m saying is you’ve got a person saying “what you said is homophobic and you’re a fucking idiot bigot if you don’t listen” in the same breath as “Fedel held votes but I don’t have proof and anything you say is stupid imperialist propaganda,” while fully aware of how Castro treated homosexuals, isn’t really the most compelling stance and may be deserving of the same condescension they’re dishing out.
You came out defending a homophobe and fascist defender despite agreeing that they were being homophobic, though. Why?