It's not just stopping support; some people lose their jobs or platforms for making valid or harmless points.
...because a significant number of people stopped supporting them, yea. Again, that's literally all it is: if a significant number of people stop supporting, or even start actively disliking, a person/brand because of that person's/brand's own actions or claims, then they may lose money, positions, following, platforms, sponsors, etc. That is simply how life works. No one owes anyone else their time or money or support, and saying/doing things that people don't like will naturally cause you to lose them. There is no grand social force at play, and calling this natural process "cancel culture" just because people or brands you like lost some level of prominence is just silly. And of course, "valid or harmless points" is subjective.
No, it was not transphobic.
Your claim "the myth on society that says a man can be a woman" is absolutely transphobic rhetoric, yes.
When people are overreacting and getting offended to something that is factual, that sounds a lot like bigotry
Not only is that not what bigotry means, but what you had previously said was not necessarily factual either, and even you yourself point out that being trans is not a biological characteristic, so implying that your claim was "factual" is just incorrect.
Again, it's not the same if someone is being bashed for making a valid or harmless point.
And again, "a valid or harmless point" is subjective; for example, I would obviously consider the claim I had called you out on (the transphobic one) to be neither valid nor harmless, as it was blatantly transphobic rhetoric.
Being trans, for example, is based on identity and feelings, not facts.
Why do you assume those can't be both? If someone is happy, and they tell you they are happy, then that is a factual statement, just as if someone is trans, and they tell you they are trans, that is also a factual statement. Just… Read more
Be the first to reply to this disagreement.