The KKK is feeling pretty empowered

[Princessconsuelabananahammock9]

This is what happens when a man like Donald Trump gets in power.

These are the people who feel empowered.

While MN celebrates the " only two genders ", people of colour in Kentucky are scared.

I've seen threads on here wishing the UK had Trump. Is this really what you want?

Is this really the type of people you want in power?

Those that voted for Trump over trans issues, what about shit like this? Or women dying from lack of abortion access? Or climate change? Or the casual revisiting of gay marriage rights?

According to GLAAD all resources referencing LGBTQ and HIV have been removed from the White House website. Gay, lesbian, no results come up in the search.

" Pages removed include WhiteHouse.gov’s equity report (no longer accessible), a fact sheet with information on expanding access to HIV prevention and treatment (no longer accessible), and information about LGBTQ Pride Month (no longer accessible). Agency page removals include Department of State’s LGBTQ rights (no longer accessible), and Department of Labor’s LGBTQ workers page (no longer accessible). "

glaad.org/releases/breaking-trump-administration-removes-lgbtq-and-hiv-resources-from-white-house-and-other-government-websites/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/22/kkk-immigrants-flyers-kentucky

This is scary shit. I don't get how any one envies?

They did fail to protect them.

But that doesn't take a single percentage of guilt or fault away from the people who actually took them away.

It is 100% Trumps fault that he overturned Roe v Wade.

My understanding is that Trump had no input into deciding each states decision on abortion rights. As it happens I consider it an appaling decision to remove those rights. But it needs the majority of the electorate in each state to change it.

Are people discriminated against for any number of reasons when reaching powerful work or political positions. Yes, of course they are. But if you give special treatment to one group, you discriminate another.

Those discriminated against includes the majority of the male population as well as women, the disabled etc. Working class white people are massively under-represented in parliament. This is down to the education received, the networking opportunites, and most of all the financial position of parents.

How many of our current politicians come from a place of real financial pressure. Look at the mocking of Richi Rish when he said he understood going without growing up as he didn't have sky tv!

Does it really matter if It is 100% Trumps fault that he overturned Roe v Wade.?
Isn't all this a fairly low level of argument?
Politicians (like all of us) will do what they are going to do. Trump will do Trump. No surprises there.
Effective politicians take the measure of their adversaries, and plan accordingly.
The Democrats were guilty of being ineffective. They saw the situation, and failed to act.

I just find it shocking that a self proclaimed feminist appears to be defending Trump by downplaying his responsibility in an event that massively fucked over women, because he did something they like.

So you don't understand equity then because giving a helping hand to people who need to be protected from discrimination doesn't discriminate against people who don't need it.

https://images.app.goo.gl/YZD4C2W6nBf4DCSM8

Are there schemes, assistance etc for eg a regular factory worker in the midlands living paycheck to paycheck to reach these echelons of power? If not then, if you do it for eg a lesbian black woman in Hackney you are being discriminatory.

Do you not believe in racism? Homophobia? Ableism? I'm honestly confused by your points.

Trump is not what I want for the UK. I despair for the next few years 😑

You are proving that you don't understand equity practices.

Equity practices remove barriers for some people that were never there in the first place for others to put them on a level playing field to start from so they can achieve the same outcome if they both work for it.

A white working class person who is straight, doesn't have the barrier of being black, female, or homosexual in their path to success. These ARE barriers because people discriminate against people for these things and have unconscious biases towards these groups. So you give the black lesbian some assistance. You don't give her loads of help and put it on a plate for her, you give her enough assistance that she can obtain the opportunities available to the working class white man, if she works as hard as she does. He doesn't need this assistance, because he is already at that level of opportunity. Once the black lesbian has received a small amount of assistance and the white man has received none, they are on a level playing field which is defined as them both having to work equally hard as eachother to achieve the same things.

Therefore the white man has not been discriminated against, because he didn't need the help the black lesbian needed in the first place. It is only discrimination if the hiring person straight up says we are only hiring a black person for this role because we already have too many white staff. This is called positive discriminated, and is illegal. It would also be discrimination if the black woman was just given the job without the right skills. But she isn't, she is given help which gives her equal opportunity with the white man.

If you think that helping less privileged people reach the same starting point as people who are not in oppressed groups is discrimination then we really have nothing more to talk about because I can't help you.

I know there are any number of people who suffer from various forms of discrimination. But as has been repeatedly explained to you, if you give one group a proverbial leg up, you must then do it for all others suffering that same discrimination.

Is a working class white man or woman that doesn't tick the right box or is not seen as being discriminated against, given the same leg up as the aforementioned black lesbian?

Read the post above.

It's possible to approve of one thing a person does, and deplore another thing that person does. That fact seems to be completely lost on a lot of people who seem to get their opinions wholesale as a job lot.

It is also possible for more than one person or group of people to have played a role in something that happened. The Republicans took out Roe v Wade, that's on them. The Democrats had opportunities while in power to at least try to protect American women's right to choose, and they didn't. That's on them. Both things added up to American women losing the right to choose. The Republicans are more culpable, but the Democrats should carry some blame for what they failed to do when they had the chance. Both screwed over US women.

But she's not deploring him for repealing Roe V Wade. She saying well it's not just his fault...

Who is saying that Trump has no responsibility for the overturning of Roe v Wade?

you think that helping less privileged people reach the same starting point as people who are not in oppressed groups is discrimination then we really have nothing more to talk about because I can't help you.
I utterly fail to understand why you can't see that race/sexuality are not the only forms of oppression.
Class disadvantage is very real. There are many white working class less advantaged than other racial groups.

Of course class disadvantage is real. Who is saying it isn't?

white working class person who is straight, doesn't have the barrier of being black, female, or homosexual in their path to success.
HTH

I didn't say no responsibility. Who is twisting words now?

You are downplaying the responsibility he had in the turning over Roe v Wade by stating that the democrats also have responsibility for it because they didn't protect it. If responsibility is shared then it is diminished.

Being black, female and homosexual garner more discrimination bias than being poor.

Being disadvantaged and being discriminated against are two different things.

HTH.

Why was it left to a legal case which could be overturned as it was to protect what should have been a legislated right that would require democratic support to change?

He didn't go willingly and without a fuss last time, so this isn't surprising news.
It baffles me that after his sore losing /meltdown on Twitter last time (STOP THE COUNT!") etc that people have let him back in.

Completely agree. Definitely don't want him or his like for the UK.

Because it suited the Democrats not to legislate. As long as it remained vulnerable, as long as it could be taken away from women, the Democrats could play that card at elections. 'Don't vote for the Republicans, they'll take away abortion, vote Democrat and we'll keep it'.

It was extremely cynical of the Democrats, holding it over women to ensure women would vote Democrat. They preferred to blackmail the electorate rather than serve them.

I don't know, but why ever it was left in the way it was, it is not anyone's fault or responsibility it got repealed other than the person who did it; Trump.

When people do bad things and hurt people, do you blame anyone other than the person doing the bad thing for not stopping them?

I don't care if you agree with me or not, but like I said, I find it shocking that a feminist is trying to share the responsibility amongst people who did nothing for an act of misogyny, by a convicted sexual predator, just because he has submitted an EO you approve of against trans people in a bid to make him what? Not look as bad so that supporting his policies isn't as shameful? Or so that you can pretend what he did was for women's rights and not just anti wokism to make you feel better about agreeing with him?

Honestly it's really strange, most feminists would just straight up say Trump is a misogynist and bad for women's rights because he overturned Roe V Wade and that would be it, but you're saying it's not only his fault it's everyones fault which comes across as trying to minimise what he did.

Op 1000 x YANBU