Feminist tweets for pro-gay marriage gets abused by LGBTI

the "I" must stand for indignation...

how long will their acronym get by 2050...? I'm taking bets

This is what we mean by the left eating their own. Another example would be:

"We must save this species of plant from these damned beetles!"

"No! Let the beetles live!"

To me, this would be like a very rich person who is in favor of programs to help the poor, posting a picture of themself in front of their huge mansion with the hashtag #richiessupportthepoorfolks...

I know she meant well, but it was not the best idea. I wouldn't have been nasty about it, but I would have politely told her that this wasn't the most sensitive way to present her support.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

the ouroboros and the movement will destroy itself

a reply to: Kalixi

I kinda get it. It would be like if Natalie Portman snapped a selfie of herself eating a chocolate cake, saying "All bodies are beautiful".

Or if Trump snapped a shot of himself on a private jet flying over some destitute town in Mississippi, and Tweeted "Everybody should do this, this is awesome. Y'all should have jets like this one. It's pretty sweet".

a reply to: Abysha

But that's not entirely it.

She's trying to say, "I have this and it's awesome and because of that I want you all to have this too." In other words, she's trying to say she empathizes with them and wishes they could be like her and because of that she's fighting for them.

They're the ones who can't seem to get that and decide to spit on her for saying it.

It's more like her saying, "See this? It's a peach, and peaches are damn awesome. And for some reason, the law says certain people can't have them. I think that's wrong, so even though I can have peaches. I'm fighting for the ones who can't have them."

a reply to: ketsuko

What would show more solidarity is to say, "this peach is awesome, but I refuse to buy any peaches until everyone can have them." Instead, it's like she's biting into this delicious peach and saying, "Mmmmm, this peach is awesome and you should be able to get one."

it just doesn't show solidarity with those you are fighting for.

a reply to: kaylaluv

So you want her to get divorced?

Riiiight ...

I'm sure her husband and children would be very understanding of that.

a reply to: ketsuko

No, but she could show herself taking off her wedding ring, saying she'll put it back on when everyone can legally wear one. It's symbolic, but shows a little more solidarity than flaunting the ring on her hand to those who can't get one with legal paperwork attached.

Like I said before, I think she meant well, she just didn't think it through.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Abysha

But that's not entirely it.

She's trying to say, "I have this and it's awesome and because of that I want you all to have this too." In other words, she's trying to say she empathizes with them and wishes they could be like her and because of that she's fighting for them.

They're the ones who can't seem to get that and decide to spit on her for saying it.

It's more like her saying, "See this? It's a peach, and peaches are damn awesome. And for some reason, the law says certain people can't have them. I think that's wrong, so even though I can have peaches. I'm fighting for the ones who can't have them."

No, I get what you are saying. Which is why I am personally not offended by her Tweet.

People need to realize that tone-deaf does not equal maliciousness. There is willful ignorance and then there is innocent ignorance. One of those two should not be met with such derision.

She had good intentions. Great intentions, actually. But tone-deaf folk sometimes triggers other folk who are "woke". Some of these people don't have an "intention" metric when grading the actions of others.

I'm indifferent. If she were a Facebook friend and posted that, I would have hit the "like" button (not "love", mind you) and probably kept my opinion to myself. Lol.

originally posted by: Kalixi
Australian feminist and blogger Mia Freedman of the Website Mamamia posted a selfie to twitter urging people who supported gay marriage to post a selfie pointing to their wedding ring with the hashtag #marriedformarriageequality. Well the LGBTI community didn't like that at all and have flooded her twitter with insults calling her privileged and tone deaf.

Her tweeted appology:

As a passionate advocate for #marriageequality I believe it's vital for the straight community and those of us who are legally able to marry to stand alongside our LGTBQI brothers & sisters, sons and daughters, mothers & fathers, workmates & colleagues & fight for their rights.

Marriage equality is a human rights issue & is supported by the vast vast majority of straight, married people.

If I inadvertently offended anyone by calling for legally married women to raise their voices in support of those who can't legally married, I unequivocally apologise.

I was using my public profile to support #marriageequaility as I always have. I'm mortified if that's been a distraction in any way.

Mamamia & I have worked closely with @AMEquality Marriage Equality for several years & will continue to do so until all Australians can marry.

Some of the outraged tweets:

@leemilton Mia Freedman has GOT to be kidding. Like, this is next level trolling right?

@katejinx OMG @MiaFreedman @Mamamia you are literally rubbing your straight privilege in our queer, cant get married faces. Hide your shame!"

The "offensive" post has since been removed from her website Mamamia and twitter.

It seems like 'you're damned if you do, damned if you don't'. I am struggling with this one. It seems like having good intentions and trying to support a cause aren't enough. This is the problem faced by the militant left; everything's all peachy when you're hurling abuse at the racist nazis of the world but step out of line from the official rhetoric and boom you'll be eaten by your own. The funniest thing about this is that Mia's website is left leaning, full of pro LGBTI and anti racism articles, she has probably done more for marriage equality than the average supporter on the street.

Maybe I'm missing the mark, but is #marriedformarriageequality really that offensive?

I kind of get it, but I don't necessarily condone the reaction. Remember in the US before marriage equality, and you had people like Sarah Silverman and Jimmy Kimmel saying that they wouldn't get married until gay people could? It's the same kind of statement but poorly thought out and executed. I just don't get why some can't just point out the fault without full on attacking her. The sentiment is pretty clear with her message.

originally posted by: Grambler
This is the inevitable end game of cultural marxism.

looks like the start of cultural retardation.