The voter suppression sure didn't help. Millions of key votes blatantly ignored because of the race of the voter. Only one to report on it is the Guardian.
Honestly on board with this. 196 took up more of Blahaj than I liked and always had a weirdly dissonant feel to the rest of the instance. I'm not really a fan of 196 personally, though, so my opinion is colored by that.
Nothing they said there seems unreasonable. They/them seems like a perfectly normal (and more importantly neutral) default way of referring to people. If I was in person with someone, and they started throwing a fit because I defaulted to they/them for them (which I usually do), I would assume they were a bigot who doesn't understand pronouns.
Not saying that's the case with these other people, but I believe there's a reasonable limitation on how much you can expect strangers to assume/understand on first meeting.
Idk, retusing to date someone based on their race does seem pretty racist to me. I know it's not the point of the post but like... It's murky moral territory.
You can't help who/what your attracted to, true. Even if it might be defined by subconscious prejudice, that might not necessarily be something you can change, totally. But having that conversation... It's gonna be hurtful, yeah? I think if you have that kinda preference the only easy way to accommodate it is by you advertising it in a general way.
Which only really works for dating apps, the absolute worst way to meet people.
Also, not a big deal, but it's best to put a space between 'trans' and 'men/'women'. It's an adjective. They are trans, they are men/women. 'Transmen' and 'transwomen' makes it seem like you're designating them seperately.
The voter suppression sure didn't help. Millions of key votes blatantly ignored because of the race of the voter. Only one to report on it is the Guardian.