Drag0nfly_Girl t1_j6b7n3z wrote on January 29, 2023 at 2:12 AM

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

Jailed, usually, rather than murdered. Murder was illegal.

And you're attributing an argument to me that I haven't made, then arguing against it. At no point did I advocate any particular course of action. I simply presented a sociological reason for the decline of non-sexual same-sex physical affection that was omitted from the comment to which I was responding.

Yrcrazypa t1_j6bfau2 wrote on January 29, 2023 at 3:12 AM

> 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.

Drag0nfly_Girl t1_j6bnjw8 wrote on January 29, 2023 at 4:20 AM

No, you're putting thoughts & opinions in my head/mouth.

BladeDoc t1_j6datpm wrote on January 29, 2023 at 3:17 PM

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“.