this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
558 points (93.5% liked)

The Onion

4703 readers
1023 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

I agree with you both. I wish we would stop hearing about them because trans rights were no longer under attack.

[–] Schmoo@slrpnk.net -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

trans rights are no longer under attack.

Yes they are, you've just stopped hearing about it because the Democrats mostly stopped playing defense for them. Turns out a tiny minority has a very small voice when it isn't being amplified by people with access to power and privilege. It's similar to the way Democrats now support right-wing border policy despite paying lip service to leftist ideas about the border and immigration. It's just another cause the Democrats cynically co-opted until it was no longer convenient.

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Did you miss the “I wish” part. Jesus, settle down keyboard warrior.

[–] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I misread your comment, that's my mistake. I thought you were saying that trans rights no longer being under attack is why you wish you would stop hearing about them.

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago

I edited the “are” to “were.” Hope that helps the misunderstanding of my comment.

[–] AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ah, yes, trans rights are no longer under attack.

Are you legally brain dead?

https://translegislation.com/

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

ANOTHER ONE that can’t fucking read? 🙄

Note the, “I wish” part

I edited “are” to “were.” I don’t know if that will help or not.

[–] AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's not that I can't read, it's that your syntax is lacking. Good edit. It helps a bit. Can still be interpreted the other way.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

not after the edit