A vulgar, reductionist, and tragically short sighted view. Patriarchy and cis-/heteronormativity are integral pillars of the bourgeois superstructure that serve to enable and perpetuate capitalist exploitation (as Engels, Kollontai and others explained, the nuclear family is a product of class society and the vehicle through which unpaid reproductive labor occurs, and both women’s and LGBT liberation are a threat to that, hence why these are twin struggles) in much the same way that white supremacy and ableism do and should be fought for the same reasons. Plus, you only harm your own movement by adopting a bigoted position on gender and sexual orientation in the same way that white workers in the US were harmed by the racism that the ruling classes inculcated in them to break their solidarity with potential black and brown allies. Whether or not the oppressed group is a minority is insubstantial, a reactionary view on these issues only serves capital, it splinters the working class and turns it against itself, it is a typical divide and rule strategy (read Du Bois on “the wages of whiteness”).

Communists are not tailists, we do not pander to the most reactionary instincts of the most backwards sections of the masses (neither the Bolsheviks nor the Chinese communists adopted tailist positions on the question of women’s liberation for instance even though the broad masses were steeped in a traditionally patriarchal culture that necessitated waging a fierce struggle to get them to accept gender equality). We educate them and we elevate the most progressive and revolutionary elements among them. Your position reeks of opportunism and Menshevism.

This has to be one of the dumbest takes I have seen here.

deleted by creator

I’m incredibly disappointed. I haven’t been here long, but from what I’ve seen you had some fairly good takes, at the very least inoffensive.

To see something like this is quite saddening, not only due to the rampant hatred towards LGBTQ+ people, but also how there is no real marxist analysis to your perspective.

I thought it was common knowledge that Pride parades exist due to the triumphs over abhorrent abuses the LGBTQ+ community has had to face, and still continue to struggle against; the fight isn’t over.
When it comes to your comment about “shoving it in our faces”, what do you mean? Pride parades don’t happen everyday so what actually bothers you?
Queer people are literally killed just from holding hands in public. Is that too much for you? If a heterosexual couple walked hand-in-hand, what then?

Let’s not act like Pride is the reason for homophobia; Pride was born from it, in spite of it. You’d know that if you bothered to do even the slightest bit of research. Queerness and Marxism go together like peanut butter and jelly.

Learn from this.

(I know they’re banned but maybe they’ll see these comments anyway)

:/

At this point - genuinely curious what was written here that inspired so strong a reaction. I suspect, however, from a partial quote available in other comments, is that deleted comment reflected a view commonly held by a sizable part, perhaps even majority of people in the discussed country. Perhaps it was phrased in an unconsiderate form? If so, perhaps local ban was called for - if the goal is to create a specificly “safe place”. If the goal is a honest discussion of a regional phenomenon, perhaps it would be worthwhile to investigate historical, cultural and demographic issues that may have lead to such viewpoint being so widespread.

deleted by creator