White people - Hated for WW1, WW2. Hated for taking land from and killing Native Americans.
Black people - Hated for underdeveloped edumacations and tendency towards criminal behavoirs. Most of Africa is underdeveloped and third-worldy. (Although has high-speed trains. Africa Do what Ameridon’t.)
Native Americans - Hated for harassing and warring with settlers.
Jews - Hated for being wealthy, taking over politics, taking land from and killing Palestinians. Their religion and some of their rabbi says some odd things.
Muslims - Hated for trying to invade people and enslave people. They look down on all non-Muslims as second class citizens, infidels.
There are reasons LGBT are disliked. For one thing LGBT is correlated directly and indirectly with various markers of genetic instability, including things like autism, left-handedness, politically left wing opinions, poorer health outcomes including being rated as less physically attractive, and advanced paternal age. This reveals a connection between genetic instability (higher levels of harmful gene mutations) and being LGBT.
Therefore a natural tendency should exist in society to oppose LGBT, because there would be selection pressure to oppose things that relate to poor health and bad genetic outcomes.
For another reason, it is just gross to a lot of people. Who wants to build a supposed moral and cultural edifice on things like promiscuity, anal sex and gender identity disorders? These people are free to express themselves and do whatever they want as long as everyone is consenting and they are not harming anyone else, but I mean, cmon. You cannot expect people to just go along with pretending things like perverse fetishes, delusional personality disorders and hypersexuality are normal and healthy. Because we all know they aren’t. And no, that is not a reason to “hate” anyone. I don’t hate people with cancer or diabetes either, but I am certainly not going to pretend they are healthy and that we should celebrate cancer and diabetes as societal goods.
That is all grouped inside the same term and the distinction is important:
I’d say mostly nobody has problems with LGB. That’s about private decisions in the bedroom.
Now, the T+ stuff is quite different, has mostly nothing to do with private things inside the bedroom, and all to do with how the attention from others is drawn
Mostly nobody has problems with LGB… unlike Senegal (a mostly muslim country), that just made homosexuality have double the prison time.
Plus, it’s mostly not a matter of hate, but of disliking. And more than disliking people per se, disliking being forced to do stuff about that, in particular when criticism about that is shunned. So, it’s mostly disliking special treatment and avoiding criticism towards the T+ stuff. Are you for it?
By ‘T’ I assume you mean those entitled male pricks who think they have a right to invade women’s spaces, cheat at women’s sports, and even steal the word ‘woman’ for themselves and make women a subset of their own sex. You mean THOSE men? Yeah. I hate those men. Is that illegal? Do you feel entitled to our personal feelings as well? What are you going to do about it?
And by the way, the ‘LGB’ ‘acronym’ is about a mile long now. You’ve left out every absurd addition except the ‘T’ which was insidiously tacked on in the 90s and which opened Pandora’s box to every opportunistic pervert with no connection whatsoever to the original group of 3 letters.
Why would anyone dislike cross-dressing weirdos who have bizarrely acquired so much power that they’ve even managed to get laws put in place that make it a crime to not indulge their fetish and alter your knowledge of biology and grammar to accommodate their extreme male entitlement? Why would anyone ‘dislike’ the sexualising and brainwashing of children into believing they have the ‘wrong body’ just because they don’t conform to some perverted freak’s stereotypical bullshit about how they are ‘supposed’ to act and look?
‘Hate’ is too charged of a word. It has like apocalyptic overtones and a Pantera mosh pit feel to it. And really only something with freewill could be hated… all else, if it is a pain in the ass, is because it has to be, and it would be unfair to hate on it.
Hatred, therefore, is metaphysically impossible for the rightminded philosopher. Feelings of discontent that are expressions of sensual repulsion are perfectly normal (for example anal sex between two dudes would make me throw up while between a dude 'n a chick it wouldn’t… even though i have no real interest in anal sex because I’m sketched out with getting poo on my pee-pee, maybe. It’s risky, mates.)
Another kind. Agents of the law in a country like America. You gotta be a total sadist or retard to want to be a soldier or a cop or a lawyer or a judge in the U S of A.
But that’s beside the point. The point is that no amount of adequate Spinozean knowledge about gay dudes havin’ butt sex or people becoming copz as the expression of the perfect order of god would ever deter the real tangible feeling of grossness, physical uneasiness, etc. But i would not, therefore, hate em because of that. All things flow with a certain necessity… even bro-sex, copz and transdressing drag-gender pedophiles tryna get on the girls swim team so they can see those sexy little beasts nekked in the locker room and pwn em all in the pool.
Two ways you can do it. You could run the general search terms “i hate my moms” and then run through all the posts to see if one is mine, or you can scroll through whole threads for dayz in my post search history.
So, we should hate people with diabetes 1 och childhood cancer. Do you hate children with cancer? compromised immune systems? Down’s Syndrome?
Ah, you wrote dislike, the title of the thread has ‘hated.’ But still.
The only one that I can understand is they tend to have politically left wing opinions. I can understand not because I dislike people with left wing opinions (or right wing ones, for that matter) but because at least this has something to do with things that matter. But then it’s pretty natural to gravitate towards what is more likely to accept you: be it individual, group or party.
Selection will take care of itself. There’s no need to oppose. If you’re not attracted, then the selection pressure needs no aid from dislike (which is not the same thing) nor from opposing them. This seems a hallucinated issue. You’ve even said they are less attractive so there you go. And of course gay men would be out if you are a woman, anyway, no selection issues.
Should we oppose and dislike redheads because they have a much higher chance of developing melanomas and Parkinson’s? Should we oppose overweight children and dislike them? Should teachers and parents dislike and oppose them?
Short people are more likely to get heart disease?
Flexibly jointed people are more likely to get osteoarthritis and IBS.
At the end you are not going to celebrate LGBT. That’s a heck of a lot milder than disliking and opposing.
I don’t think we need to build a cultural edifice on that. To me that’s private.
But this argument could be used against men - who are much more likely to watch porn. Americans also (Philipinos come in second).
If we look at problematic levels of porn watching bisexuals have the highest amount, but heterosexuals come in higher than gay/les. Not by much, but hey.
Let’s come back to men. They are by far more likely to visit prostitutes. They are far more likely to sexually abuse children (and otherwise abuse)
So, can we now rewrite your post but focus on men. Should we oppose men (who do tend to die younger by 6-7 years also) and dislike them?
