>>9867>>4920>it makes me uncomfortable, so it must be idpol
<if you dislike idpol you're just closeted!
<bourgs supporting idpol? Nah fuck that, u just hate gays
See pic related
I know plenty of gay people who, for example, think gay parades as repulsive because it turns their private lives into a public circus and creates an association with perversion and fetishism in the public mind. The fact that capitalism pushes this as "major step in progress" and actively funds such activities should speak for itself>no real reasoning behind it
<I'm just going to ignore the clear evidence that focusing on idpol as something important to be flaunted is a liberal idea created by the CIA and which actively divides people by telling minorities they're special and oppressed, rather than the actual oppression of the working class
Most identity oppression is of material basis, perpetuated by material conditions and thus can be solved through the change in material conditions by institution of socialism. Everything else is attention-whoring. Dividing focus for petty issues before revolution is counter-productive, period. Trans issues and gay issues should not be tip-toed about. There is no doubt on leftypol that gay people are humans, the debate is that, for example, "(little) kids can be gay too!" is retarded and ought be discouraged from socialist discourse.>seen more IRL work done and more people convinced by a blue-haired punk trans anarchist
Sure, you're totally not making that up. But fine lets pretend this is real. Was their IRL work independent from their identity of being a "trans anarchist punk? If yes, then you're confirming the point; identity is irrelevant and shouldn't need to be brought up. If you start bringing it up as something important to support, then you're being just like /pol/ about "muh trannies" from the other side of the coin>muh blue hair punk
No-one has a problem with dying your hair, so stop emphasizing that. No-one brought up punk at all considering that punk-rock is pretty well known and supported here. >internalised reaction and bigotry masquerading
<People CAN'T have legitimate arguments against idpol, you're just hiding reactionaries and bigots! Help, help I'm oppressed!
Stop making shit up>by any Iron headed, straight laced communist
Yeah, no honey. For every gay and trans person in America there are far more straight people. This difference of population is reflected in socialist movements as well. It is far more likely that because your supposed "trans, punk, blue-hair, anarchist" stood out, you noticed them in comparison to others. >if any of those actually managed to pry themselves away from their keyboard
<ur all keyboard warriurs
1) A large number of /leftypol/ users are active IRL
2) Doing shit doesn't exclude posting online considering the sheer ease of this
3) Online agitation and debate is also important in the internet age>they would realise that its not the 1970's
LOL for all the bitching about how "its totally not idpol guyz" you chose the wrong time-period to reference, considering how most liberal idpol movements started then. Moreover said movements were confirmed to be
A) The basis of things like third-wave feminism and other related political movements today
B) Involved CIA assets who were sown to shill "cultural marxism" and "degenerate Americans"
In short, that's a bad example>he average worker was born anywhere between the early 80's to the late 90's
You don't seem to realize that the 1990s was 30 years ago>don't piss and shit everywhere at the site of someone slightly different breathing the same air
Woooow you sure showed us… by stating obvious facts and trying to relate the utter indifference of most people to blacks and gays and /leftypol/'s 'outrage' against blatant obnoxious faggots and deliberate snowflakes.
You're proving the point again by pointing this out, because people don't care about gays or race as long as its not some overt identity politics and isn't flaunted in public.
TL;DR: Idpol is trash and no amount of 'muh white cis leftypol!' will change that