• SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    You are correct that there is very little that MLK had to say about gay rights, however that does not mean that you can take that absence of evidence and ascribe whatever meaning you want to it.

    When did MLK state that was his reason for staying silent on gay rights?

        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Why do his reasons matter?

          He decided that LGBTQIA+ wasn’t a priority. Can you prove otherwise?

          • SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            His reasons matter because you claim to know his reasons:

            “King never spoke out publicly about gay rights because he knew it would be a giant distraction.”

            He was largely silent on LGBTQIA+ matters and so his reasons are unknowable. You cannot take the lack of evidence and ascribe whatever meaning you would like to it. Double so for proving the negative using that lack of evidence.

            • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Have you ever actually spoken to anyone who was alive before the year 2000 AD?

              You can actually make reasonable inferences based on what we know of the time.

              By your logic, we couldn’t know why FDR didn’t draft women into the military or why Lincoln didn’t have a Native Vice President.

              • SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                You can actually make reasonable inferences

                You can not infer someone’s motives and opinions whole cloth. Let’s use your example:

                we couldn’t know why FDR didn’t draft women

                There is a lot of documentation surrounding that with FDR explicitly making a push to draft women as well he explicitly stated his reasoning why and urges Congress to do so. You can go through the historical record on why it passed the house, why it was restricted to nursing roles etc. Had the war not ended it almost certainly would’ve been enacted.

                FDR did explicitly want to draft women even though it was contrary to public opinion at the time, however the lack of dictatorship powers is why history played out the way it did.

                • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  FDR did explicitly want to draft women even though it was contrary to public opinion at the time, however the lack of dictatorship powers is why history played out the way it did.

                  Kind of proving my point there.

                  FDR had way more power than King, but found his hands tied because of public opinion.

                  If you’d done any research at all, you’d have known that homophobia in the 1960s was so common that even the barest hint of it in a movie was considered shocking.

                  And since you have been doing so much reading, let me reverse the question back to you.

                  Provide me one other reasonable explanation for King not mentioning LGBTQIA+ besides the one I gave.

                  • SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    You are completely missing the point.

                    You first made an unprovable claim based on pure speculation.

                    King never spoke on gay rights because he knew it would be a giant distraction.

                    You then made a bogus strawman, again, based entirely on speculation.

                    We couldn’t know why FDR didn’t include women in the draft.

                    I was using that strawman to demonstrate how your personal perspectives on a time do not constitute reality and how you have to do some actual fucking research before you say dumb shit like you keep doing.

                    Provide me one other reasonable explanation for King not mentioning LGBTQIA+ besides the one I gave.

                    I was hoping you’d be semi-competent and be able to find one of, if not the only, times that MLK did speak about LGBTQIA+ issues which was in an advice column written in 1958.

                    Find it, and tell me what you think.