And the point you’re ignoring is that the OP isn’t making bigoted jokes about religious people, they’re making jokes about the bigotry of some religious people.
The difference between that and demonizing people for existing while LGBTQ+ is so vast that your argument is almost exclusively made in bad faith by people who just want to discriminate without being called out for it.
You’re trying to see a difference where there is none, to justify the unequal treatment. They are both making bad generalizations about a hypothetical cashier that belongs to a certain group.
No-one is demonizing people for who they are. Making a joke about a movement is not the same as being hateful to the people it represents. Just like you don’t seem to consider jokes about Catholics being hateful to them.
Clearly, the difference between punching up (making fun of bigotry and arbitrary rules imposed by the powerful) and punching down (making jokes where the punchline is denying someone’s identity or perpetuating hurtful stereotypes and conspiracy theories about already persecuted minority groups) is completely lost on you and you prefer that everyone else think that way.
I’m just going to have to agree to disagree and ask you to argue in the defence of bigotry to someone else. Have the day you deserve.
At least now you’re being honest about the unequal treatment, by arbitrarily calling one minority ‘powerful’, and the other ‘persecuted’, one stereotype ‘fun’, and the other ‘hurtful’, one joke about ‘rules’, and the other about ‘identity’.
Again, you’re missing the point that this joke was about the movement, not the people it represents and who they are. Turning it into hate to those people is almost exclusively done in bad faith by people who want to discriminate one group, while protecting the other.
And the point you’re ignoring is that the OP isn’t making bigoted jokes about religious people, they’re making jokes about the bigotry of some religious people.
The difference between that and demonizing people for existing while LGBTQ+ is so vast that your argument is almost exclusively made in bad faith by people who just want to discriminate without being called out for it.
You’re trying to see a difference where there is none, to justify the unequal treatment. They are both making bad generalizations about a hypothetical cashier that belongs to a certain group.
No-one is demonizing people for who they are. Making a joke about a movement is not the same as being hateful to the people it represents. Just like you don’t seem to consider jokes about Catholics being hateful to them.
Clearly, the difference between punching up (making fun of bigotry and arbitrary rules imposed by the powerful) and punching down (making jokes where the punchline is denying someone’s identity or perpetuating hurtful stereotypes and conspiracy theories about already persecuted minority groups) is completely lost on you and you prefer that everyone else think that way.
I’m just going to have to agree to disagree and ask you to argue in the defence of bigotry to someone else. Have the day you deserve.
At least now you’re being honest about the unequal treatment, by arbitrarily calling one minority ‘powerful’, and the other ‘persecuted’, one stereotype ‘fun’, and the other ‘hurtful’, one joke about ‘rules’, and the other about ‘identity’.
Again, you’re missing the point that this joke was about the movement, not the people it represents and who they are. Turning it into hate to those people is almost exclusively done in bad faith by people who want to discriminate one group, while protecting the other.
Have a good one.
Hey? Fuck you.