• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How a Lying Youtuber(Sargon) Ruined MTV's attempt to explain BLM

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does it hurt the BLM cause if a white person, like me, just starts beating the shit out of All Lives Matter and anti-BLM people?

I'm becoming genuinely spiteful of my own culture for being so stupid.

Don't resort to violence unless an alt-right person attacks you first.

If you want to be spiteful there are other ways of putting the alt-right in their place, such as finding out their employers and getting them fired for views they express.

If they are self-employed and their job isn't related to social media, then you just find out who their customers are and inform said customers of who they are purchasing goods and/or services from.
 

Anarky

Banned
I listen to both sides of the argument at length and I've watched my share of Sargon videos to find the flaw in his argument. I've never seen anything but a person who tries to be egalitarian and apply his reasoning consistently across topics.

In fact his DePaul university video is actually really good. It's pretty shocking the level of detail he went into. And the level of empathy he had for the man he called into question was tangible.

I think people need a reality check on what discourse means. If you can't listen to the opposition then what fucking use are you in a conversation.

This is pretty ironic considering Sargon refused to watch a response video to one of his vids because it was 'too long' even though it was basically a fucking pamphlet in comparison to Sargon's usual videos that Sargon expects people to watch.
 
I listen to both sides of the argument at length and I've watched my share of Sargon videos to find the flaw in his argument. I've never seen anything but a person who tries to be egalitarian and apply his reasoning consistently across topics.

In fact his DePaul university video is actually really good. It's pretty shocking the level of detail he went into. And the level of empathy he had for the man he called into question was tangible.

I think people need a reality check on what discourse means. If you can't listen to the opposition then what fucking use are you in a conversation.
Reasoning can be consistently bad too.

Or are you his reasoning is sound in this video? If there is, you could have started out by countering the article in question. What sensible opposition is there for us to listen to in the video?
 

Lime

Member
YouTube is largely garbage if ur goal is to find educated commentary on any serious issue

hint hint, the people who should be giving the commentary are mostly not on YouTube making videos for clicks and subs

shocking

it's good for source material and that's about it

Francheska Ramsey, the person affected by all this racist bullshit and mentioned throughout in this thread, is on Youtube and has a lot of insightful and entertaining videos.
 

Khaz

Member
I listen to both sides of the argument at length and I've watched my share of Sargon videos to find the flaw in his argument. I've never seen anything but a person who tries to be egalitarian and apply his reasoning consistently across topics.

In fact his DePaul university video is actually really good. It's pretty shocking the level of detail he went into. And the level of empathy he had for the man he called into question was tangible.

I think people need a reality check on what discourse means. If you can't listen to the opposition then what fucking use are you in a conversation.

Just because the logic is sound doesn't mean the premise is correct.
Him being consistent doesn't mean that he is right.
 
Francesca Ramsey's channel in case anyone wants to see more videos from her.

Also, is Sargon Of Akkad allergic to brevity? It's rare he posts a video that is 5 minutes or less. People who watch his videos mostly must be unemployed, how else would you have the time to watch all his diatribes.
 
I don't get why just making a 'classical Republican' persona and arguing just enough right leaning ideologies while being socially liberal wouldn't work as a counterpoint to this. Most of this 'alt politics' bullshit just seems like a calculated way to make money off angry, directionless people in the first place anyway.
 

Vinland

Banned
This is pretty ironic considering Sargon refused to watch a response video to one of his vids because it was 'too long' even though it was basically a fucking pamphlet in comparison to Sargon's usual videos that Sargon expects people to watch.

How does irony figure in to anything and why are you projecting YOUR seemingly high standard for YouTube social commentators. Anita Sarkeesian doesn't either should I be skeptical of what she says because she refuses to do a response video to one of her critics?

Reasoning can be consistently bad too.

Or are you his reasoning is sound in this video? If there is, you could have started out by countering the article in question. What sensible opposition is there for us to listen to in the video?

His reasoning is absolutely sound to the narrative he has set forth for over a year now on the Black Lives Matter movement.

That doesn't mean I agree with it. At least not all of it. I think he has done some praise worthy investigation on the Collegiate level BLM movements that don't exactly picture the movement in the best of light. And in fact show that college staff are manipulating young black adults for their own agendas. And well... there are plenty of BLM protests that actually been used to further anti-cop pro violence toward cops message.

Those events are documented in video....

Just because the logic is sound doesn't mean the premise is correct.
Him being consistent doesn't mean that he is right.

Never said it was. However, I think his opinion isn't that of a liar. In fact, I think you may find his though process to be at least reasonable on the subject.

You may disagree with the stats he uses, his research methodology or his outsider status as a person looking from the outside in but that does not make him a liar. That is one of the reasons why I will watch him. Because I know where he stands. I know what I am getting. And knowing that I can at least see what a 3rd party perspective thinks about the situation when they have no dog in the race.

But you'd also have to dismiss these guys opinion too:

https://www.youtube.com/user/ThatLibertarianT
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7e57qWIEAZTQAaFwHpKdlw

Black men who actually hold similar opinions... or you can call them Uncle Tom's or victims of stockholm syndrome and hand wave them off too.
 

televator

Member
I've seen little of Sargon, but I imagine he's of the same cloth as ThunderFoot for anti-feminist bigoted blow hards who use words like "regressive left" and bitch about SJWs.
 
I listen to both sides of the argument at length and I've watched my share of Sargon videos to find the flaw in his argument. I've never seen anything but a person who tries to be egalitarian and apply his reasoning consistently across topics.

In fact his DePaul university video is actually really good. It's pretty shocking the level of detail he went into. And the level of empathy he had for the man he called into question was tangible.

I think people need a reality check on what discourse means. If you can't listen to the opposition then what fucking use are you in a conversation.
Logical validity is not a guarantee of truth.
 
I don't agree with much of what this Sargon person is saying, but I don't find many of the post in this thread very appealing either. Sargon might be wrong, but at least he presents an argument you can have a discussion about, rather than throwing out a bunch of insults and labels and pretending that's a counterargument.

Disagreeing with someone, even on something that is fundamentally important to you, doesn't make that person vile or a waste of space, and if BLM and issues such as black rights, mass incarceration, institutional racism and discrimination are going to go anywhere, people at least need to be able to talk to the other side and hash it out with them, not write anyone with a different opinion off as racists, bigots and assholes, that just makes people retreat to their trenches and stop listening, at least in this situation I think.

When you expect the utmost respect, sensitivity and dignity from people around you, then at least don't write off those with a different perspective as horrible people. especially if your mission is to change their mind.
 
I don't agree with much of what this Sargon person is saying, but I don't find many of the post in this thread very appealing either. Sargon might be wrong, but at least he presents an argument you can have a discussion about, rather than throwing out a bunch of insults and labels and pretending that's a counterargument.

Disagreeing with someone, even on something that is fundamentally important to you, doesn't make that person vile or a waste of space, and if BLM and issues such as black rights, mass incarceration, institutional racism and discrimination are going to go anywhere, people at least need to be able to talk to the other side and hash it out with them, not write anyone with a different opinion off as racists, bigots and assholes, that just makes people retreat to their trenches and stop listening, at least in this situation I think.

When you expect the utmost respect, sensitivity and dignity from people around you, then at least don't write off those with a different perspective as horrible people. especially if your mission is to change their mind.
Why would a revolution and dismantling of capitalism and white supremacy need polite conversation? This isn't about people asking nicely enough or being able to discuss their life experiences with people who don't care.
 

dangeraaron10

Unconfirmed Member
Why would a revolution and dismantling of capitalism and white supremacy need polite conversation? This isn't about people asking nicely enough or being able to discuss their life experiences with people who don't care.

Because it will make the opposite side more defensive and entrenched in their own views? Welcome to democracy. In order to make progress you have to have civil discourse with people you don't like and people you don't agree with.

And before anyone jumps the gun, I'm talking as a liberal here. I can't really remain confident with some of the attitudes in this thread, regardless of how justified they are.
 
Because it will make the opposite side more defensive and entrenched in their own views? Welcome to democracy. In order to make progress you have to have civil discourse with people you don't like and people you don't agree with.

And before anyone jumps the gun, I'm talking as a liberal here. I can't really remain confident with some of the attitudes in this thread, regardless of how justified they are.

There are people that are worth being civil to in discussing politics, but with the alt-right and people like SoA, you are better off NOT being civil. There are already studies showing that the more conservative someone is, the less they process information rationally (instead they process information emotionally).

So the best course of action in dealing with those that are gleefully swimming waste deep in bigotry is to put the fear of society back in them by showing them we liberals aren't afraid of them, won't tolerate them, and will do everything we can to make them regret being openly bigoted.

Playing nice with bigots only makes them think their opinion is worth respecting. They need to be taught that's not the case.
 
Why would a revolution and dismantling of capitalism and white supremacy need polite conversation?

Because unless you're planning to assassinate everyone who disagrees with you, you're not going to change people's minds that way, and if you think you're going to accomplish "a revolution and dismantling of capitalism and white supremacy" then on top of your problem of picking the wrong approach, your expectations are unrealistic as well. Hopefully BLM can cause a change in policing, incarceration and institutional racism, and I support that, but you're not going to dismantle capitalism, seriously, get real.

This isn't about people asking nicely enough or being able to discuss their life experiences with people who don't care.

Well since the topic is about a guy making long ass videos on the matter, you can't claim that he doesn't care. Your tactic to changing society by "engaging nobody, insulting those who disagree and making no effort to understand why people think that way" is not going to bear fruit. You're just going to drive the opposition away to their own side instead of directing them towards the right answer, and cause your movement to be seen as aggressive, disrespectful and unable to be reasoned with.

So the best course of action in dealing with those that are gleefully swimming waste deep in bigotry is to put the fear of society back in them by showing them we liberals aren't afraid of them, won't tolerate them, and will do everything we can to make them regret being openly bigoted.

To me this reads like "stoop to their level, be as ignorant and uncivil towards them as they are to you and then they might start saying the same shit behind closed doors, which will magically solve racism". Never mind you're basically writing off millions of people in your reply there, but again, how will this change people's minds and breed civility and understanding towards black people?
 
Because it will make the opposite side more defensive and entrenched in their own views?
We've been entrenched in racism and white supremacy since we stepped foot onto America. You think having nice conversations is going to change this? Seriously? If America actually wanted this shit to stop, we would have done so already.

You're just going to drive the opposition away to their own side instead of directing them towards the right answer, and cause your movement to be seen as aggressive, disrespectful and unable to be reasoned with.
You guys say these things like this hasn't already been and wouldn't continue to be everyone's opinion of BLM no matter what they did.
 

Vinland

Banned
Definition of Bigot by Merriam Webster said:
a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Why would a revolution and dismantling of capitalism and white supremacy need polite conversation? This isn't about people asking nicely enough or being able to discuss their life experiences with people who don't care.


Are you really sure this is your position?
 
I don't agree with much of what this Sargon person is saying, but I don't find many of the post in this thread very appealing either. Sargon might be wrong, but at least he presents an argument you can have a discussion about, rather than throwing out a bunch of insults and labels and pretending that's a counterargument.

Disagreeing with someone, even on something that is fundamentally important to you, doesn't make that person vile or a waste of space, and if BLM and issues such as black rights, mass incarceration, institutional racism and discrimination are going to go anywhere, people at least need to be able to talk to the other side and hash it out with them, not write anyone with a different opinion off as racists, bigots and assholes, that just makes people retreat to their trenches and stop listening, at least in this situation I think.

When you expect the utmost respect, sensitivity and dignity from people around you, then at least don't write off those with a different perspective as horrible people. especially if your mission is to change their mind.

The lengthy counter argument is in the article that started this thread. You seem to have ignored that in your statements here. Do you find that to be rationally cogent?

You may disagree with the stats he uses, his research methodology or his outsider status as a person looking from the outside in but that does not make him a liar. That is one of the reasons why I will watch him. Because I know where he stands. I know what I am getting. And knowing that I can at least see what a 3rd party perspective thinks about the situation when they have no dog in the race.

But you'd also have to dismiss these guys opinion too:

https://www.youtube.com/user/ThatLibertarianT
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7e57qWIEAZTQAaFwHpKdlw

I completely dismiss and disagree with their assorted opinions. No need to resort to other commentary to do so. The latter speaks of "media spinning an epidemic", but statistics do that quite well, for example.
 
You guys say these things like this hasn't already been and wouldn't continue to be everyone's opinion of BLM no matter what they did.

There will always be racists, bigots and hateful people, and those can easily be written off and not reasoned with as that would be a waste of time, but when you write off everyone outside of your movement and refer to insults and labels, whilst claiming to lead a revolution to dismantle capitalism, which is insane, then yes you taint the movement, just like those individuals that assaulted people taint the movement, and those splinter groups that banned whites from their meetings taint the movement. I believe in BLM, I support it, but my interpretation of the movement is sane and one that leaves room for discussion and education. Act to a higher standard and people will treat you by a higher standard. Act to a lower standard and people will treat you by a lower standard.

The lengthy counter argument is in the article that started this thread. You seem to have ignored that in your statements here. Do you find that to be rationally cogent?

Yes, I find it rationally cogent. If more people argued like that there wouldn't be a problem at all. I want BLM to be seen with that kind of rational and civility, because that is what ends up educating the young for the better.
 
There will always be racists, bigots and hateful people, and those can easily be written off and not reasoned with as that would be a waste of time, but when you write off everyone outside of your movement and refer to insults and labels, whilst claiming to lead a revolution to dismantle capitalism, which is insane, then yes you taint the movement, just like those individuals that assaulted people taint the movement, and those splinter groups that banned whites from their meetings taint the movement.
What are you talking about? When did I do this?

Act to a higher standard and people will treat you by a higher standard. Act to a lower standard and people will treat you by a lower standard.
Have you said this to black people's face?
 

Lime

Member
Asking for civil discourse and engagement with people who literally want you killed or oppressed *after* enduring 400 years of genocide and oppression that still to this day seek to destroy Black people is something else.

Maybe White people can be asked to be more. diplomatic, but I would never ever expect a Black person to be asked to engage with fucking racists who defend a system that murders and oppresses them every single day.
 
To me this reads like "stoop to their level, be as ignorant and uncivil towards them as they are to you and then they might start saying the same shit behind closed doors, which will magically solve racism". Never mind you're basically writing off millions of people in your reply there, but again, how will this change people's minds and breed civility and understanding towards black people?

First off, I only said to be a dick to those that are beyond reasoning with. You educate the ignorant, but you absolutely shame the bigoted.

Second off, making bigots feel uncomfortable being openly bigoted immediately changes the discussion for the better. The less they are openly stating their bigotry, the less chance they have to trick the uninformed. The point isn't to hope to change bigoted minds, but to keep them from turning the ignorant into outright bigots.


Are you really sure this is your position?

Please tell me you aren't enough of an idiot to actually make the "please tolerate my intolerance" argument.
 
Act to a higher standard and people will treat you by a higher standard. Act to a lower standard and people will treat you by a lower standard.

image.php


good god what a fucking dogwhistle.
 
I don't agree with much of what this Sargon person is saying, but I don't find many of the post in this thread very appealing either. Sargon might be wrong, but at least he presents an argument you can have a discussion about, rather than throwing out a bunch of insults and labels and pretending that's a counterargument.

Please provide an example of what you can even begin to consider a good 'argument' that he has ever made.
 

BocoDragon

or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I've seen little of Sargon, but I imagine he's of the same cloth as ThunderFoot for anti-feminist bigoted blow hards who use words like "regressive left" and bitch about SJWs.
"Regressive left" is more of a term used by people who are on the left, but are getting tired of others using progressive ideology to sandbag others in liu of open debate.

Those who really are anti-feminist aren't likely to need a distinction between types of people on the left. It's just the left to them.

That said, those who use the term regressive left tend to be in dialogue with those on the alt right, as opposed to considering them totally lost. Strange bedfellows.
 
Have you said this to black people's face?

good god what a fucking dogwhistle.

Really, we've stooped to this? Obviously my comment referred to the responses in this thread, which is what my original post was about, not black people or BLM. See, this is what I mean. I support BLM and even then you can't help but try and paint me like a racist. It's like a twitch you can't seem to do without. If the average response had more in common with the lengthy and rational reply in he OP and less with hatred and insults, then that would do more to educate people and change their mind, rather than give them an impression of BLM that might have an unnecessary and undeserved negative effect.
 
yeah tone policing is basically a racist dog whistle at this point. the status quo doesn't change unless there is pressure applied somewhere and being nice doesn't work.
 
Really, we've stooped to this? Obviously my comment referred to the responses in this thread, which is what my original post was about, not black people or BLM. See, this is what I mean. I support BLM and even then you can't help but try and paint me like a racist. It's like a twitch you can't seem to do without.

Gee, I wonder why.
 
Yes, I find it rationally cogent. If more people argued like that there wouldn't be a problem at all. I want BLM to be seen with that kind of rational and civility, because that is what ends up educating the young for the better.

This ignores those who have argued similar points quite rationally and civilly, for quite a long time without any movement to be done on the issue.

Or do you believe Black Lives Matter is the first organization to speak out about police brutality and minorities?
 

Vinland

Banned
We've been entrenched in racism and white supremacy since we stepped foot onto America. You think having nice conversations is going to change this? Seriously? If America actually wanted this shit to stop, we would have done so already.

You guys say these things like this hasn't already been and wouldn't continue to be everyone's opinion of BLM no matter what they did.

And good white people who do not hold the idea that a man is lesser of a man based on the color of their skin was right there with you the entire time even when their blood was being shed. Otherwise, no change wouldn't have been made at all.

I don't think you want to ostracize your brothers and sisters who look a bit different that you at this pivotal point in American history. And your words are weaponized to do that very thing.
 
Really, we've stooped to this? Obviously my comment referred to the responses in this thread, which is what my original post was about, not black people or BLM. See, this is what I mean. I support BLM and even then you can't help but try and paint me like a racist. It's like a twitch you can't seem to do without. If the average response had more in common with the lengthy and rational reply in he OP and less with hatred and insults, then that would do more to educate people and change their mind, rather than give them an impression of BLM that might have an unnecessary and undeserved negative effect.
"I support you but" posts will never end here or anywhere.

And good white people who do not hold the idea that a man is lesser of a man based on the color of their skin was right there with you the entire time even when their blood was being shed. Otherwise, no change wouldn't have been made at all.

I don't think you want to ostracize your brothers and sisters who look a bit different that you at this pivotal point in American history. And your words are weaponized to do that very thing.
What exactly are you even talking about? What is this "you need white America to free you" bullshit?
 
Really, we've stooped to this? Obviously my comment referred to the responses in this thread, which is what my original post was about, not black people or BLM. See, this is what I mean. I support BLM and even then you can't help but try and paint me like a racist. It's like a twitch you can't seem to do without. If the average response had more in common with the lengthy and rational reply in he OP and less with hatred and insults, then that would do more to educate people and change their mind, rather than give them an impression of BLM that might have an unnecessary and undeserved negative effect.

People are being dicks to you because even after explaining the uselessness of being nice to bigots, you double down with this borderline "both sides are the same" crap.

I'm going to repeat it one more time, and LKBaP will probably even concur that he meant what I am about to say:

You educate the ignorant, but you shame the bigoted. Once someone is past the point of no return, once they are wallowing in bigotry, you fucking shame them, you fucking get their ass fired if you can, you fucking do everything you possibly can to put a muzzle on their bigotry.

And good white people who do not hold the idea that a man is lesser of a man based on the color of their skin was right there with you the entire time even when their blood was being shed. Otherwise, no change wouldn't have been made at all.

I don't think you want to ostracize your brothers and sisters who look a bit different that you at this pivotal point in American history. And your words are weaponized to do that very thing.

At no point did the person you quoted make any claim about the white race. They specifically said "white supremacists" when referring to who to not be nice to.
 

CazTGG

Member
For those that don't know Sargon, i'd recommend this video response which points out how the dude uses whatever he can find from his first search results to support his awful beliefs. It's infuriating to see anything of his become so popular, let alone spread misinformation to avoid an actual discussion of what we can do to solve the structural issues that cause these issues (racial profiling, the predominance of police shooting minorities, etc.) to begin with.

Oh, and to those saying "we should debate this argument he presents, at least he presents one": No. That would only validate a position that, quite frankly, should only be shamed for the racist and anti-intellectual garbage that it is. Sargon does not deserve the courtesy of being a part of any discussion of race, gender or any other aspect of society.
 
This ignores those who have argued similar points quite rationally and civilly, for quite a long time without any movement to be done on the issue.

Or do you believe Black Lives Matter is the first organization to speak out about police brutality and minorities?

Of course not, and of course it's a shame that it took this long for the issue to come to the foreground again, but that doesn't mean that education, civility, peaceful protests and open dialog are suddenly not the answer, that we should just stoop down a few levels.

Look at gay rights for example. Decades long people fought and fought for change, and it seemed like nothing happened. But in the background, those movements caused long term effects, people changing their thinking and raising their kids differently, and in a relatively short time gay acceptance shot up in the polls and now gay marriage is legal.

Did it take a violent revolution, with insults and shaming and chaos? No. It took smart, brave people exposing these issues, engaging the opposition, and most importantly, acting better than the hate from the opposition, for things to change. I want BLM to succeed in the same fashion, and it is my belief that if people remain civil, respectful and focused on education and changing young minds, that will happen, but if we throw out morals, civility and respect, that will create chaos, divisions, misunderstandings and rifts that take years to heal. That is just my perspective on things.
 
Of course not, and of course it's a shame that it took this long for the issue to come to the foreground again, but that doesn't mean that education, civility, peaceful protests and open dialog are suddenly not the answer, that we should just stoop down a few levels.

Look at gay rights for example. Decades long people fought and fought for change, and it seemed like nothing happened. But in the background, those movements caused long term effects, people changing their thinking and raising their kids differently, and in a relatively short time gay acceptance shot up in the polls and now gay marriage is legal.

Did it take a violent revolution, with insults and shaming and chaos? No. It took smart, brave people exposing these issues, engaging the opposition, and most importantly, acting better than the hate from the opposition, for things to change. I want BLM to succeed in the same fashion, and it is my belief that if people remain civil, respectful and focused on education and changing young minds, that will happen, but if we throw out morals, civility and respect, that will create chaos, divisions, misunderstandings and rifts that take years to heal. That is just my perspective on things.
Gay acceptance started with the Stonewall Riots, dude.
 

Toxi

Banned
Of course not, and of course it's a shame that it took this long for the issue to come to the foreground again, but that doesn't mean that education, civility, peaceful protests and open dialog are suddenly not the answer, that we should just stoop down a few levels.

Look at gay rights for example. Decades long people fought and fought for change, and it seemed like nothing happened. But in the background, those movements caused long term effects, people changing their thinking and raising their kids differently, and in a relatively short time gay acceptance shot up in the polls and now gay marriage is legal.

Did it take a violent revolution, with insults and shaming and chaos? No. It took smart, brave people exposing these issues, engaging the opposition, and most importantly, acting better than the hate from the opposition, for things to change. I want BLM to succeed in the same fashion, and it is my belief that if people remain civil, respectful and focused on education and changing young minds, that will happen, but if we throw out morals, civility and respect, that will create chaos, divisions, misunderstandings and rifts that take years to heal. That is just my perspective on things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

You may recognize the Stonewall Inn as a location that was recently named a US National Monument for its importance in LGBT rights.
 
Of course not, and of course it's a shame that it took this long for the issue to come to the foreground again, but that doesn't mean that education, civility, peaceful protests and open dialog are suddenly not the answer, that we should just stoop down a few levels.

Look at gay rights for example. Decades long people fought and fought for change, and it seemed like nothing happened. But in the background, those movements caused long term effects, people changing their thinking and raising their kids differently, and in a relatively short time gay acceptance shot up in the polls and now gay marriage is legal.

Did it take a violent revolution, with insults and shaming and chaos? No. It took smart, brave people exposing these issues, engaging the opposition, and most importantly, acting better than the hate from the opposition, for things to change. I want BLM to succeed in the same fashion, and it is my belief that if people remain civil, respectful and focused on education and changing young minds, that will happen, but if we throw out morals, civility and respect, that will create chaos, divisions, misunderstandings and rifts that take years to heal. That is just my perspective on things.

White people are gay. White people have gay relatives. I think you're vastly underrating why underneath our division has always been race and why things have been slow to change.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

You may recognize the Stonewall Inn as a location that was recently named a US National Monument for its importance in LGBT rights.

Gay acceptance started with the Stonewall Riots, dude.


Many fights for equality, such as for women, blacks and LGBTQ's, involved and were often started through violence, but none of those fights were ever won or resolved that way in the end. It always took smart people with an ability to change minds and shape legislation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom