Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Why is LGBTQ so important for liberals in terms of foreign policy?
For example, when debating Russia, arguments often amount to Russia is evil because they aren't onboard with pride. Russia isn't putting LGBTQAASASFDSFDSFDSFDSFSD people in concentration camps, they simply seem not to have pride flags while having a don't ask don't tell attitude. Why does that infuriate liberals that much?
Countries in the middle east can engage in all sorts of questionable behaviour but, often it is a lack of LGBTQ flags that infuriates the left. Again, they aren't mass-executing LGBTQ people or having concentrations camps, they simply don't celebrate it or want it rubbed in people's faces.
It seems like existence of pride parades seems to be a key benchmark for judging the moral virtue of a country. Why is this benchmark so central?
About 5 years ago I was hiking in the Grand Canyon with friends and we met a 20-year-old Russian kid at the beach who asked if he could tag along with us for the hike back up to the rim. He spent a lot of the time telling us how great Russia was, which was fine, but one of the things he pointed to in evidence of its greatness was the fact that they could "beat faggots in the street" with no repercussions. I don't know if this kind of attitude is typical, but the fact that any random tourist would find it appropriate to tell Americans he just met that apropos of nothing in particular is at least an indication that the attitudes over there go beyond simply not celebrating it. Hell, even the rural Trump supporter in our group seemed pretty unnerved by it.
The untranslated word in his mind was almost certainly “pidoraz.” He was picturing child molestors where you pictured consenting homosexuals.
Пидорас (not пидораз), and indeed педерастия, is not "pederast"/"pederasty". The primary meaning is homosexuality and pederasty is the less common meaning. See also lurkmore which, after a quick skim, doesn't even seem to mention the second meaning, if you don't like gramota.ru.
Thanks for the corrections.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This word colloqually means simply homosexual, with the non-mangled "pederast" out of use by anyone but historians.
There are other context clues that suggest the man was most likely speaking about homosexuals. Speaking of "beating faggots on the streets" as a particular boon of Russia suggests you can't do so in other places, which is true for open homosexuals and quite untrue for open child molesters. Furthermore, it is a lot easier to find [alleged] homosexuals on the street for the purposes of beating up, since everyone knows those damn faggots wear long dyed hair and tight jeans, or something to that effect. Pedophiles generally don't advertise themselves so, and if you were going by stereotypes you'd have to face down, like, a quarter of middle-aged male population.
Those who want to beat up pedos on the street generally need some sophisticated preparation, such as setting up a honeypot, perhaps take pointers from Tesak. Note his quote: "Are you a pidoras or a pedofil?"
Today I learned. Thanks for the correction.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link