Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Yrcrazypa t1_j6bfau2 wrote

Reply to comment by Drag0nfly_Girl in Dickens' David Copperfield: Were men more affectionate with each other in the 18th century? by angelojann

> It was already "demonized" in Dickens' time, so your argument holds no water.

What does this mean if not that they need to be demonized again? I know they were demonized back then, that much is obvious to everyone. You're victim blaming, plain and simple.

−3

BladeDoc t1_j6datpm wrote

This is the “is/ought” fallacy. Someone describing a situation does not mean that they think the situation is good. To be specific it is quite possible to think that the decline of non-sexual same-sex public intimacy was an unfortunate side effect of the otherwise beneficial rise of homosexual relationship acceptance.

Hopefully, if homosexual relationships are completely destigmatized this process will slowly reverse as people will not care if they are classified as being “gay“.

0