Call me some kinda phobe or whatever, but I prefer the sites I go on to be free of forceful political pandering. It's much better this year than previous ones, but I'd still prefer for there would be an option to disable rainbow flag outside of using my ad-blocker.

whyudothis said:
Call me some kinda phobe or whatever, but I prefer the sites I go on to be free of forceful political pandering. It's much better this year than previous ones, but I'd still prefer for there would be an option to disable rainbow flag outside of using my ad-blocker.

https://e621.net/static/theme

its under logo here. just set to default.

whyudothis said:
Call me some kinda phobe or whatever, but I prefer the sites I go on to be free of forceful political pandering. It's much better this year than previous ones, but I'd still prefer for there would be an option to disable rainbow flag outside of using my ad-blocker.

Yes, here you go:
https://e621.net/maintenance/user/deletion

manitka said:
https://e621.net/static/theme

its under logo here. just set to default.

I appreciate the idea of giving the user the option to choose the flag of choice (or even disable it). This is amazing. <3 The kind of customizability that sets e6 apart from other art platforms.

I even made an announcement on our discord that you can disable it or set it to something else. That said, celebrating Pride Month is not political pandering. It's not even political unless you make it. Please, don't make it.

rainbow_dash said:
I even made an announcement on our discord that you can disable it or set it to something else. That said, celebrating Pride Month is not political pandering. It's not even political unless you make it. Please, don't make it.

I guess it's the matter of how you personally interpret it. People from different spheres of influence and/or generations can differ in perception. In my country, the pride symbolism is unfortunately misused by shitty politicians to get cheap votes. A lot of my compatriots thus, have developed an unfair stigma against it. But if you take that for granted, they're really nice and chill people.

rainbow_dash said:
I even made an announcement on our discord that you can disable it or set it to something else. That said, celebrating Pride Month is not political pandering. It's not even political unless you make it. Please, don't make it.

yeah. i get not liking when big corporations turn rainbow for pride month despite being anti-lgbt. but e6 is is a very lgbt friendly site all year long lol

manitka said:
yeah. i get not like when big corporations turn rainbow for pride month despite being anti-lgbt. but e6 is is a very lgbt friendly site all year long lol

Exactly. Like, for example, Disney is a notorious example of doing this fake diversity pandering for show, looking contrived from light years away. This website is fucking legit. ❤ Besides, E6 got you covered no matter what fetish and type of sexual (or sfw) stimulation you prefer. xD Its bulletproof tagging system is incredible.

manitka said:
https://e621.net/static/theme

its under logo here. just set to default.

Thank you for being helpful instead of trolling or complaining!
Also why is 'French' an option lol

somerandomvoir said:
Thank you for being helpful instead of trolling or complaining!

Same!

Also why is 'French' an option lol

Guess that's because they got the metric system there.

It’s not political to love

mega_disappointment said:
It’s not political to love

Agreed.

czyszy said:
Since it was proven to be exploitable by dishonest politicians. Alas.

Just about everything is exploitable by dishonest politicians.
I don't know why this taints celebrating pride events, but not everything else. I don't see people condemning charities, for example, just because politicians use them to get good publicity.
I am of the opinion that people who are eager to condemn "pandering" are almost always just using it to hide their own bigotry and prejudices.

Personally, I think that "rainbow capitalism" is a good thing.
Sure, that's just corporations trying to get some brownie points with the general public in order to earn more money... but it also indicates a widespread societal acceptance of the LGBTQ+ movement.
That is especially important now, in the time when this movement receives strong pushback from the highest levels of the goverment – both in the US and abroad.

cinder said:
Just about everything is exploitable by dishonest politicians.
I don't know why this taints celebrating pride events, but not everything else. I don't see people condemning charities, for example, just because politicians use them to get good publicity.

Historical context. The pride movement is a very difficult concept to explain to people unfamiliar with it (because it was and is taboo in a lot of societies and/or because there's way too much misinformation about it), as opposed to charities and other less controversial concepts.

I am of the opinion that people who are eager to condemn "pandering" are almost always just using it to hide their own bigotry and prejudices.

IMO it's, sadly, true. But I've had a lot of friends have a change of heart over time. I think it's better to give the OP the benefit of the doubt instead of getting all aggressive.

Personally, I think that "rainbow capitalism" is a good thing.
Sure, that's just corporations trying to get some brownie points with the general public in order to earn more money... but it also indicates a widespread societal acceptance of the LGBTQ+ movement.
That is especially important now, in the time when this movement receives strong pushback from the highest levels of the goverment – both in the US and abroad.

It boils down to who the target it. There are some people (who grew up in isolated cultures for example) that misinterpret the push of "acceptance" as brainwashing. I think it's totally fallacious, but being semi-rude to those people, might only push their stigma further. The fact that people like the OP feel betrayed by the shitty use of pride symbolism by politicians they hate doesn't help, does it?

And now, to make things even more bittersweet, within the LGBT society itself, there seems to be a bit of a civil war-tinged split between those who are against furry porn and those who are positive about it.

czyszy said:
And now, to make things even more bittersweet, within the LGBT society itself, there seems to be a bit of a civil war-tinged split between those who are against furry porn and those who are positive about it.

That's always been a thing. The sex-negative (anti-porn) and sex-positive (pro-porn) dichotomy exists in all facets of society, including feminism, LGBTQ+, religion, furry, etc.

watsit said:
That's always been a thing. The sex-negative (anti-porn) and sex-positive (pro-porn) dichotomy exists in all facets of society, including feminism, LGBTQ+, religion, furry, etc.

*Sigh* True.

cinder said:
Just about everything is exploitable by dishonest politicians.
I don't know why this taints celebrating pride events, but not everything else. I don't see people condemning charities, for example, just because politicians use them to get good publicity.
I am of the opinion that people who are eager to condemn "pandering" are almost always just using it to hide their own bigotry and prejudices.

Personally, I think that "rainbow capitalism" is a good thing.
Sure, that's just corporations trying to get some brownie points with the general public in order to earn more money... but it also indicates a widespread societal acceptance of the LGBTQ+ movement.
That is especially important now, in the time when this movement receives strong pushback from the highest levels of the goverment – both in the US and abroad.

I'unno, mate I can kinda understand how the commodification of pride symbology by fairweather supprters would leave a bad taste in one's mouth. e6 definitely isn't just another corporation trying to make a buck off the gays though.

to me stuff like rainbow capitalism isn't good or bad in and of itself, really, it's more of a litmus test as to where society currently is at, more than it is really pushing anything forward. big companies support pride stuff because because its already proven to be something worth doing for their bottom line. companies seeing pride as a worthwhile avenue is a good sign for the movement but it's still just a sign.

czyszy said:
And now, to make things even more bittersweet, within the LGBT society itself, there seems to be a bit of a civil war-tinged split between those who are against furry porn and those who are positive about it.

this is really a whole other can of worms.

At the end of the day, the sheer fact that the OP is still on E6 is a good sign. To me, that means, they're still questioning their place in this subculture. :P I know for sure that being able cope with other people having different preferences regarding your niche of choice is an acquired skill. At first, it's easy to fall into the pitfall of feeling insecure. Especially if previously exposed to the "you're with us or against us" mentality.

manitka said:
https://e621.net/static/theme

its under logo here. just set to default.

Thanks friendo

cinder said:

whyudothis said:
Call me some kinda phobe or whatever, but I prefer the sites I go on to be free of forceful political pandering. It's much better this year than previous ones, but I'd still prefer for there would be an option to disable rainbow flag outside of using my ad-blocker.

Yes, here you go:
https://e621.net/maintenance/user/deletion

Well... That does not seem kind.

czyszy said:
I appreciate the idea of giving the user the option to choose the flag of choice (or even disable it). This is amazing. <3 The kind of customizability that sets e6 apart from other art platforms.

It's nice to have the ability to disable support for political stuff on porn sites.
Especially when the support is pandering to groups notorious for supporting questionable ideals that involve trying to tear down the human rights of others. Supporting human rights should be a higher priority than such pandering.

And feeling like people are trying to group all gay people under one big politically-motivated umbrella to take advantage of us doesn't help one bit. I really wish people would stop stereotyping us and treating us like tools.

fapinator2 said:
It's nice to have the ability to disable support for political stuff on porn sites.

This is not a porn site.

fapinator2 said:
It's nice to have the ability to disable support for political stuff on porn sites.
Especially when the support is pandering to groups notorious for supporting questionable ideals that involve trying to tear down the human rights of others. Supporting human rights should be a higher priority than such pandering.

And feeling like people are trying to group all gay people under one big politically-motivated umbrella to take advantage of us doesn't help one bit. I really wish people would stop stereotyping us and treating us like tools.

What...

fapinator2 said:
It's nice to have the ability to disable support for political stuff on porn sites.
Especially when the support is pandering to groups notorious for supporting questionable ideals that involve trying to tear down the human rights of others. Supporting human rights should be a higher priority than such pandering.

And feeling like people are trying to group all gay people under one big politically-motivated umbrella to take advantage of us doesn't help one bit. I really wish people would stop stereotyping us and treating us like tools.

Your ability to browse this website is a privilege, not a universal human right.

It is fine if you don't want to support Pride, you are given the option to opt out of it as mentioned above.
However, your "rights" as a user does not supercede the rights of the site owner/administration from showing their support of Pride on the site's logo itself.

If you do not like it, you are free to take the admin's advice above instead.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Your ability to browse this website is a privilege, not a universal human right.

It is fine if you don't want to support Pride, you are given the option to opt out of it as mentioned above.
However, your "rights" as a user does not supercede the rights of the site owner/administration from showing their support of Pride on the site's logo itself.

If you do not like it, you are free to take the admin's advice above instead.

I don't think that's what Fapinator2 means.

Acknowledging basic human rights for everyone is not 'political'.

Well, except for bigots, who claim it's political and then demand to 'keep politics out of MY <insert medium here>!'

electricitywolf said:
I don't think that's what Fapinator2 means.

"And feeling like people are trying to group all gay people under one big politically-motivated umbrella to take advantage of us doesn't help one bit. I really wish people would stop stereotyping us and treating us like tools."

It honestly looks like they banned someone LGBT for the duration of pride month because they felt disenfranchised with the pride colors themselves, due to most companies and sites using them as a revenue tool and immediately abandoning them once the month is out. Even if this site is not guilty of the same thing. It's finding malicious intent where there likely is none. A very common response with topics so heated.

Well, I'm a straight furry but I'm pro-LGBTQ+ rights. You might imagine how it's pretty much impossible for me to explain it to people. xDDDDD
Anyway, I'm pretty sure that Fapinator2 didn't make that post in good faith and it's just a good ol' classic troll. So, in the long run, I think Cinder made a wise choice to give them a big gleaming ban hammer. ;p

jester89 said:
"And feeling like people are trying to group all gay people under one big politically-motivated umbrella to take advantage of us doesn't help one bit. I really wish people would stop stereotyping us and treating us like tools."

It honestly looks like they banned someone LGBT for the duration of pride month because they felt disenfranchised with the pride colors themselves, due to most companies and sites using them as a revenue tool and immediately abandoning them once the month is out. Even if this site is not guilty of the same thing. It's finding malicious intent where there likely is none. A very common response with topics so heated.

That's not what they said though.
I banned them for saying that LGBTQ groups are "notorious for supporting questionable ideals that involve trying to tear down the human rights of others."
I don't care how much you twist it around and look for hidden meaning in it. They said what they said.

And if you do agree with that statement, please do let me know.

jester89 said:
"And feeling like people are trying to group all gay people under one big politically-motivated umbrella to take advantage of us doesn't help one bit. I really wish people would stop stereotyping us and treating us like tools."

It honestly looks like they banned someone LGBT for the duration of pride month because they felt disenfranchised with the pride colors themselves, due to most companies and sites using them as a revenue tool and immediately abandoning them once the month is out. Even if this site is not guilty of the same thing. It's finding malicious intent where there likely is none. A very common response with topics so heated.

I'm really not sure what "us" was in refrence to this user's comment, but I don't believe that the user is gay, if that's what was trying to be conveyed. I know this dosn't mean much, but prior to being banned the account had visible favourites and it was pretty much all just m/f or female characters presenting.

and, either way, I don't know how else you can interpret the rest of the comment, because unless it was just supremely misworded, the it's all just anti-pride BS.

czyszy said:
Well, I'm a straight furry but I'm pro-LGBTQ+ rights. You might imagine how it's pretty much impossible for me to explain it to people. xDDDDD
Anyway, I'm pretty sure that Fapinator2 didn't make that post in good faith and it's just a good ol' classic troll. So, in the long run, I think Cinder made a wise choice to give them a big gleaming ban hammer. ;p

I mean, this site completely and purposely made it an option to DISABLE seeing the pride emblem in the first place. I don't see the hostility from adding onto the OP's post that the person banned is happy to have the option on sites.

The very open hostilty to the OP from staff as a response, compared to the friendly regular user that answered OP's question speaks volumes to intent and emotional temperament.

The fallacious stance that the pride movement is by nature anti-heterosexual is still prevalent and commonly parroted, methinks. What a shame.

People getting triggered and crashing out over LGBT shit is so funny, especially on this site. Like 50% of furries are LGBT. You gotta be a sensitive af and braindead to be mad over this

jester89 said:
I mean, this site completely and purposely made it an option to DISABLE seeing the pride emblem in the first place. I don't see the hostility from adding onto the OP's post that the person banned is happy to have the option on sites.

The very open hostilty to the OP from staff as a response, compared to the friendly regular user that answered OP's question speaks volumes to intent and emotional temperament.

Besides, changing the logo on your end, doesn't have to be related solely to your identity. Honestly? I personally have the E6 theme set to "autumn", and the bright colorful rainbow logo felt visually distracting for me. xD So I set it to default.

oneohthrix said:
People getting triggered and crashing out over LGBT shit is so funny, especially on this site. Like 50% of furries are LGBT. You gotta be a sensitive af and braindead to be mad over this

50%? I'm under the impression that it's 70-75% or more xD But yeah, complaining about Pride Month being celebrated on a fucking FURRY website is like complaining about dry sand in the desert or trees in the woods. ;p

jester89 said:
I mean, this site completely and purposely made it an option to DISABLE seeing the pride emblem in the first place.

No, absolutely not. And I do not appreciate you re-contextualizing my actions in this way.
I added the alternative icons earlier in May. The Pride Month event simply made the rainbow version the default.

I did not disable the default version because it could have caused problems down the line.
Stuff like someone having a setting saved for an icon that is no longer available.

jester89 said:
I mean, this site completely and purposely made it an option to DISABLE seeing the pride emblem in the first place. I don't see the hostility from adding onto the OP's post that the person banned is happy to have the option on sites.

The very open hostilty to the OP from staff as a response, compared to the friendly regular user that answered OP's question speaks volumes to intent and emotional temperament.

if anyone would know why there's an option to disable or change the logo I'd reckon it'd be Cinder, seeing as he's the one that programmed the logo stuff and all the options.

I kinda wish default was actually default and not "turn gray because Bloodlust theme". Maybe just because it's new. I'll get used to it eventually...

So it's an unintentional site feature. Alright then.

All of this could've been avoided if you just simply asked "Hey, is there a way to switch the e6 logo back to the default logo?" You didn't need to dig yourself into a grave from the start.

With that said, I like the pansexual e6 logo, it's coolio

thehuskyk9 said:
All of this could've been avoided if you just simply asked "Hey, is there a way to switch the e6 logo back to the default logo?" You didn't need to dig yourself into a grave from the start.

With that said, I like the pansexual e6 logo, it's coolio

Personally, besides the default one, I find the "lesbian" variant to go quite well with the autumn leaves motif. :) bloodlust+autumn+lesbo=instant chillout vibe

"I have a dream... To be free from the shackles of forceful gay political pandering on e621.net" - MLK

crocogator said:
I kinda wish default was actually default and not "turn gray because Bloodlust theme". Maybe just because it's new. I'll get used to it eventually...

I'd be more bothered that it's the wrong colour, it's darker than it's suppose to be. the default logo colour in Bloodlust and Pony are just the same as --color-section whereas the Hexagon theme logo is a unique color that's brighter/more saturated.

thehuskyk9 said:
All of this could've been avoided if you just simply asked "Hey, is there a way to switch the e6 logo back to the default logo?" You didn't need to dig yourself into a grave from the start.

With that said, I like the pansexual e6 logo, it's coolio

OP is unharmed, so they did not dig their own grave. Somebody else posting on OP's thread dug their own grave. I just attempted to let them grab hold of the shovel so they could pull themselves out.

The straight furry thinks he is not also a degenerate subhuman in the eyes of the state!
post #5269237

jester89 said:
OP is unharmed, so they did not dig their own grave. Somebody else posting on OP's thread dug their own grave. I just attempted to let them grab hold of the shovel so they could pull themselves out.

Sorry, I meant to say that OP backed themselves into a corner by immediately starting the thread on the defensive, when they could've just asked a question without explanation.

thehuskyk9 said:
Sorry, I meant to say that OP backed themselves into a corner by immediately starting the thread on the defensive, when they could've just asked a question without explanation.

No need for apologies.

jester89 said:
I mean, this site completely and purposely made it an option to DISABLE seeing the pride emblem in the first place. I don't see the hostility from adding onto the OP's post that the person banned is happy to have the option on sites.

The very open hostilty to the OP from staff as a response, compared to the friendly regular user that answered OP's question speaks volumes to intent and emotional temperament.

Noting that you are glad to see an option to disable seeing the Pride-themed logo is one thing, but spewing fringe and harmful thoughts about how Pride actually harms human rights is another thing entirely.
It is really offensive when you consider major human rights groups all support Pride, regardless of whatever "controversy" people can think of.
We simply do not need that kind of talk here, especially during Pride month.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Noting that you are glad to see an option to disable seeing the Pride-themed logo is one thing, but spewing fringe and harmful thoughts about how Pride actually harms human rights is another thing entirely.
It is really offensive when you consider major human rights groups all support Pride, regardless of whatever "controversy" people can think of.
We simply do not need that kind of talk here, especially during Pride month.

Keep in mind that it was NOT the OP who brought that sketchy human rights take into the discourse. It was Fapinator2 trolling the shit out of us.

czyszy said:
Keep in mind that it was NOT the OP who brought that sketchy human rights take into the discourse. It was Fapinator2 trolling the shit out of us.

OP had the sense to stop while still behind, but calling pride "forceful political pandering" and seeming to praise how many companies and local governments are having reduced or no pride stuff this year? Not a good look.

I just ignore it like I do every year, thankfully it's subtle

regsmutt said:
OP had the sense to stop while still behind, but calling pride "forceful political pandering" and seeming to praise how many companies and local governments are having reduced or no pride stuff this year? Not a good look.

It's toxic. However, I have my fingers crossed that the OP's negative prejudice will thaw. The glimmer of hope is there imho. Unless one's a desperate fanatic, that person's beliefs can shift when presented new information.

cinder said:

jester89 said:
"And feeling like people are trying to group all gay people under one big politically-motivated umbrella to take advantage of us doesn't help one bit. I really wish people would stop stereotyping us and treating us like tools."

It honestly looks like they banned someone LGBT for the duration of pride month because they felt disenfranchised with the pride colors themselves, due to most companies and sites using them as a revenue tool and immediately abandoning them once the month is out. Even if this site is not guilty of the same thing. It's finding malicious intent where there likely is none. A very common response with topics so heated.

That's not what they said though.
I banned them for saying that LGBTQ groups are "notorious for supporting questionable ideals that involve trying to tear down the human rights of others."
I don't care how much you twist it around and look for hidden meaning in it. They said what they said.

And if you do agree with that statement, please do let me know.

I honestly believe banning them will only make whatever beliefs and feelings they have about Pride Month stronger. You risk giving your enemy more personnel.

They'll likely spend pride month in places that are less friendly to LGBTQ+ things.

electricitywolf said:
I honestly believe banning them will only make whatever beliefs and feelings they have about Pride Month stronger. You risk giving your enemy more personnel.

They'll likely spend pride month in places that are less friendly to LGBTQ+ things.

Regardless, rules were broken and they are now paying for it.
Banning them for a month instead of an instant permaban is a courtesy. They will still be welcomed back after the month is up.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Regardless, rules were broken and they are now paying for it.
Banning them for a month instead of an instant permaban is a courtesy. They will still be welcomed back after the month is up.

Truly, they are extremely lucky to not have gotten permanently booted for spewing shit like that during pride month of all months

electricitywolf said:

I honestly believe banning them will only make whatever beliefs and feelings they have about Pride Month stronger. You risk giving your enemy more personnel.

They'll likely spend pride month in places that are less friendly to LGBTQ+ things.

I used to believe stuff like this. But my experience in online communities is that letting people say (or even hint at) bigoted shit without consequences makes more feel emboldened to be louder about it.

The comments made by op and fapinator are temperature tests. They're saying enough to communicate what they are while avoiding getting specific to try to maintain plausible deniability. The goal is to see how staff and users respond- are they going to get push back? Are people who call them out going to get banned? How mask-off can they be?

It's painfully obvious what it is when you've seen it repeatedly.

electricitywolf said:
I honestly believe banning them will only make whatever beliefs and feelings they have about Pride Month stronger. You risk giving your enemy more personnel.

They'll likely spend pride month in places that are less friendly to LGBTQ+ things.

By far one of the worst takes I have ever seen on this forum.

If reactionaries must be handled with kid gloves for fear of entrenching them in their beliefs by reminding them of minorities whose very existence is "political", does that not imply that they take umbrage with even knowing that these people exist? Clearly the only reasonable options for "political" minorities are to turn the other cheek, thank people for spitting in their face, or to disappear from the public sphere forever. If you truly believe in the power of the former approach: even Martin Luther King Jr.'s approach to racial inequality got him smeared by the press as an agitator, and later murdered.

Besides, that sort of forum reply doesn't come from a neutral commentator. Consider what it implies if a person thinks gay people are being unfairly lumped in with other gender/sex minorities.

This discussion's got dark pretty fast. 💀

lafcadio said:
By far one of the worst takes I have ever seen on this forum.

If reactionaries must be handled with kid gloves for fear of entrenching them in their beliefs by reminding them of minorities whose very existence is "political", does that not imply that they take umbrage with even knowing that these people exist? Clearly the only reasonable options for "political" minorities are to turn the other cheek, thank people for spitting in their face, or to disappear from the public sphere forever. If you truly believe in the power of the former approach: even Martin Luther King Jr.'s approach to racial inequality got him smeared by the press as an agitator, and later murdered.

Besides, that sort of forum reply doesn't come from a neutral commentator. Consider what it implies if a person thinks gay people are being unfairly lumped in with other gender/sex minorities.

I see what you mean, but i don't think they was saying minorities' existence was political, but rather just the symbols used to represent them.

It's just that posts like that reminded me when many LGBTQ+ people were ostracized in 2020 for disagreeing on hot topics. These were not bots or newly-created accounts, these people had been there for years prior. Many of them received messages along the lines of "If you don't support [insert controversial thing here], you cannot possibly be gay" or "If you don't support [insert controversial thing here], you are a traitor".

cinder said:
That's not what they said though.
I banned them for saying that LGBTQ groups are "notorious for supporting questionable ideals that involve trying to tear down the human rights of others."
I don't care how much you twist it around and look for hidden meaning in it. They said what they said.

And if you do agree with that statement, please do let me know.

I just want to make sure to clarify that the above does not mean i agree with the human rights thing Fapinator2 said. I, in fact, suspect there might be a trolling element to what they said, but i'm not entirely sure.

To be honest, I think this thread should be locked.
OP's question was answered and things are spiralling into a weird
direction, Dood =‿=;)

This thread just reminded me of this post from topic #57292:

daeeb1a said:
Personally, I wouldn't downvote anything short of an overt call to violence, but over the years I've found that there is a specific subset of internet users who seem to post flags and other identity symbols specifically to rile others up. See it happen often enough, and you'd build a negative view of those symbols. This goes for all ends of the political spectrum and plenty of non-political group identities as well. Anything from a sports team to a website logo, if given a suspiciously-prominent display by an in-group acting hostile to an out-group will build resentment.

When it comes to gender identity symbols, there are layers upon layers of both direct and passive-aggressive hostilities to be found flying every which way, overt and implied insults, and a hell of a lot of people who talk about each other far more than they talk to one another. It's an utter mess, and even if you try not to be involved, echoes of it will readily spill over to affect you. A particularly subtle poison is to think that your side's the righteous one, so your peers couldn't ever be in the wrong. Every bell curve has its long tail, and somewhere out on it you'll find trolls harming your reputation by association, inspiring future negative responses to symbols you hold dear.

Even if you want nothing to do with the hatred and squabbling, to remain fairly neutral? Inevitably, people will proclaim that's not allowed either. What do you think that does to the reputation of whatever group they're representing at the time? Perhaps you want to reconsider the half-formed reply currently in your head?

For a comparable analogy, how would you feel about seeing a religious bumper sticker? I've been around enough redditors to know it would have at least a few percent of the population grumbling; no idea how e6's regulars compare. Neither symbol's actually harming anyone on its own, the people bearing them see the symbols positively, while the people grumbling think of all the reasons they dislike the group it represents. Each person thinks their views are fully justified based on their own personal experiences, interactions, news sources, and the attitudes of the communities they frequent. I'd say the only remotely-plausible cure is to have a diverse enough social media diet that you regularly see others of all sorts simply being people rather than only knowing them as caricatures you've been told about.

notkastar said:
To be honest, I think this thread should be locked.
OP's question was answered and things are spiralling into a weird
direction, Dood =‿=;)

I agree.

electricitywolf said: ...

Okay, so the thread is obviously getting locked.
However, I want to tell you specifically that you have NO place to speak on the subject of LGBTQ+ movement. None.

Both you and I know that you consider pedophilia and zoophilia to be sexualities. You explicitly stated as much.
You complained ceaselessly when self-identifying as such was banned, and you reported someone for calling pedophilia immoral.
And we have not forgotten your transphobic comments either.

When you wax lyrical about how banning someone for saying bigoted stuff is only going to make them more bigoted, we know where you stand.