CopperRosePetal
CopperRosePetal
CopperRosePetal

And again, it's a person's way of explaining why they feel the emotion despite not having any obvious connection to the place. If you had a brother who was a heroin addict, and the story of PSH's death made you sad, you might say "my brother is addicted to heroin and I am afraid he might die one day from it, this

That's just something you're reading into it. Nobody's implying they feel WORSE than actual victims, how ridiculous. You just don't want anyone BUT actual victims to feel bad about it because it takes away from the special status victims have, as being the only ones who get to feel feelings about things. It's not

That's how people explain their connection to an event and why they feel badly. What they're saying is "I have a 5 year old too, and I can't imagine what I would be feeling if my child were in that situation but I can understand the fear that something bad would happen to your child and be unable to stop it or

That's not even close to the definition of empathy, though. The ability to share and understand the feelings of another is empathy. The other thing you posted is just what you think empathy should be, not what it is. That coupled with your previous contention that people who don't say the right things in response to

So because they aren't saying the right words, they're not expressing their emotion correctly? Do you think this might be a needless nitpick that just has the effect of telling them that their emotion is not valid and that if they can't express real empathy, they shouldn't express anything at all?

So, serious question: is it not possible to be affected by a tragic event even if you have no personal connection to the event in question? It seems like you're really trying to demonize people for their empathy unless it's justified by something that allows you to feel their empathy is appropriate. I don't think what

They're not saying it's the trans community's fault that every single thing about the trans community isn't widely known, since all of that was in response to the whole "if you don't already know you aren't an ally, it's not my job to answer your questions, I'm not an information robot" bullshit. We're saying that

You mean the privileged view that you entirely made up that is not to be found anywhere in anybody's posts besides those who are claiming it happened? I'm not even talking about Piers Morgan, I'm talking about the posters being attacked in this very thread. So please, enough with this "all the majority thinks it's my

I remember the event you're referring to, and I agree with your position. There is next to no allowance for the type of nuanced discussion that incident needed. Yes, she dressed up like a character and had darkening makeup on. Did she jump around in an exaggerated manner, attempting to mock black people? Did she

I've started to see a bend about the tone of posters here that is really disturbing. It's a weird combination of having a divine insight into a person's intentions even if they are flat out telling you that you're misinterpreting their words, and not giving a shit who they step on to prove who's the most dedicated to

Exactly, people should just tolerate heaps of shit for not being "a good enough ally" and not question it AT ALL because if you do say "hey you're being kind of a dick to people who are coming to you from an honest standpoint" you're not a REAL ALLY! No True Scotsman for the win!

Your definition of "basic shit" coming from a person inside the community is vastly different from the "basic shit" people outside it already know. Nobody's asking you to be an information dispensing robot, I'm just asking that people avoid needlessly being a dick to people who want to help your cause by finding out

Yeah, you're definitely reading your own issues into that. But whatever. I'm fairly sure everyone else can see how you're coming across here, even if you don't.

Nowhere in that post did anybody blame the trans community for not educating them enough. This is purely a figment of your imagination.

So let me get this straight. It's not a marginalized person's job to educate you, but the person using incorrect terminology is totally responsible for that. But they wouldn't know that they were using the incorrect terminology unless a member of the marginalized class told them, but they're under no obligation to

I don't have a personal problem with you. I don't know you. I have a problem with what you said, which was a ridiculous response to someone asking people involved in a conversation about trans issues what terminology they would prefer she use. And you're all full of piss and vinegar and apparently rather than look at

FORCING SOMEONE TO EDUCATE HER. Wow. Yeah, you're a bit much.

Oh good god, what a needlessly vicious response. SHE DID SEEK THE ANSWER. JUST NOW.

YOUR TITLE IS PERFECT YOU DON'T CHANGE FOR ANYBODY YOU HEAR ME

I think a lot of the "congratulating him like he's a pioneer for LGBT rights" is people itching for a fight looking way too much into the public's appreciation for that song. Nobody's really elevating him to the level that his critics are claiming, but it's harder to criticize a guy who just wrote a song that people