Gay cruise rescues refugees adrift in Gulf of Mexico
A gay cruise liner has rescued 11 refugees adrift in a small boat in the Gulf of Mexico in an “emotional” moment.
I think this counts as uplifting news!
You're viewing a single thread.
I am sorry, but why do we have to specify they are "gay cruise" - I am not against LGBTQIA+ folks, but I think one of the things for equality is proper acceptance, and mentioning gay cruise definitely puts a bad light on it (overly emphasising on theee gay part rather than the rescue part). And it also unnecessarily adds to the stereotypes (which I would not be explaining here). Not homophobeic, but i would have prefered if title would have been - A cruise rescues ...
Because most cruises aren't gay cruises, which makes the fact this one was unusual and somewhat interesting
Because most cruises aren’t gay cruises, which makes the fact this one was unusual and somewhat interesting
This. Exactly this.
Hey @sga013@lemmy.world, "gay" isn't a swear word, and like many of the users here, I'm very confused as to your objection (even after reading your paragraphs of posts).
.
Plus, the reason that "gay" being in the title is part of it being uplifting is right there in the article:
“Two of the most reviled groups in America right now are the LGBTQ+ community and refugees. The fact that we were the ones lucky enough to help them, it feels really, really good.”
Yes, the identity does matter.
So drop it. Just drop it.
🏳️🌈 🏳️⚧️
Of course, but the detail of the type of passenger on the ship whose crew is rescuing people from another vessel isn't especially relevant to the main point of the story.
Why would the fact that it's gay put a bad light on it?
(overly emphasising on the gay part rather than the rescue part)
that was my whole point - how rescue does adding the word gay add to conversation - we might as well add there racial identity, ethiniicity and what not /s. Maybe using "bad light" was not appropriate wording - let me rephrase it better - we are focussing on wrong thing here - instead of focusing on rescue, we are focussing on the fact they are gay - I dont have problem with them being gay - but that is not the very fabric of their being is it. Whenever we try to put labels on people we ignore there lives as a whole and just focus on labels.
let my try to show my point of view from an example - just switching one wword from title
In any of these situations did the meaning really change. Just some part of identity of rescuers changed. Now from persepective of this community - Uplifiting news, what is the uplifting news - I am presuming - rescue happened. Does identity matter here.
Maybe I am wrong - then correct me - does the the identity matter here?
Just some part of identity of rescuers changed.
Not even, since it was the ship's crew doing the rescue, not the passengers.
To me headline highlights the intersectionality and solidarity shown when of one group of historically oppressed people (refugees) is rescued by another historically oppressed group (gay people).
The fact that the rescuers were from a gay cruise doesn't make their actions inherently more special than if they were from any other kind of cruise, but there's an importance in having positive media portrayal for LGBTQIA+ folks when the current political climate in many countries is turning more towards intolerance and oppression of queer people again.
but there's an importance in having positive media portrayal for LGBTQIA+ folks when the current political climate
Of course.
But the passengers didn't have any involvement (or decision making) in the rescue. That was entirely the ship's crew.
That's a fair point.
I'm still going to celebrate the gays.
I'm still going to celebrate the gays.
Of course, that was never in question.
Also from perspective who writes stuff (my domain is scientific articles, so may not directly apply) - Your title is the hook for article - and it is the photo of your product which goes in the catalog, and since catalogs have limited space - you can only put a finite amount of details in it, ideally the most enticing one. If you put "Gay" as the very first word in the title, this story (from the perspective of person just reading the title) would see this as the main element in story. This is again putting a label on them and their identity.
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that putting emphasis on the "Gay" description is reductive?
I don't necessarily disagree, but headlines need to be short, capture attention and accurately summarize the content of the article. I think this headline succeeds in all these aspects.
Also it's worth noting that this cruise was chartered by a company that advertises itself as specialising in gay & LGBTQ+ holiday packages. I doubt anyone taking part in this cruise would object to it being described as gay.
What do you think The Pink News reports on?
Sorry, but I have never heard of them (they are not big over where I live). From checking out there about page - they produce media related to LGBTQIA+. I dont have any strong opinionabout them, but If I extrapolate from the little bit that I got from there recommended articles on the linked page
56 celebrities you didn’t know are gay, bisexual or lesbian
this just seems like people who capitalise on people who are fans of these celebs, and also potentially LGBTQIA+ folks who may look upto them. I don't have any problem with latter, It is good to know about people who have a successfull carreer, but I do have problem with first (which has arguably a large audience - any celeb fan). I am in general not interested about any celebs and I dont like this kind of content.
Going to their homepage - I found politics. Mostly statements by US leaders (conservatives vs liberal) views on LGBTQIA+ folks and their rights. And there are other celebrity posts. I am not American, so I don't really care about them.
"Not homophobic", just triggered over hearing about them...
I am not going to reply to your snarkiness. Read my perspective here https://lemmy.world/comment/15354645
And your reply also over generalises my being from 2 words. I am not triggered by hearing gay - but maybe I am too. I have friend who is queer, but even they don't like that their description should start from them being queer. They would much rather prefer if you charecterise them by their name or work, and not just 1 part of identity.
I would also prefer if you would read my original comment again.
"I have a black friend therefore I'm not racist" "I have a trans friend therefore I'm not transphobic"
Highlighting the fact that you're "totally not homophobic" just makes you look exactly that, like you're "just asking questions" as many other bad actors do.
It's disappointing that these are the views of the uplifting community moderators.
Again with the snarkiness. Did you even read it? They do not prefer to be reduced just down to their label, they more than that. I am not really interested in turning your opinion on me, and you clearly do not want to understand what I am saying. Also these are my personal opinions, not as moderators.
First off, is this the perspective of Uplifting News as a community? I posted an article from an lgbt oriented news site on this community before, and got a similar question. You're a mod, so if you think we shouldn't post articles from queer news sites, could you let us know that?
I'm queer, so I read queer news all the time, and sometimes there's something that cheers me up a bit on those sites instead of depressing me, so I'll be like "i should share this with that uplifting news group!" If it's going to be a debate every time we post from lgbtnation, pink news, transvitae, etc, then let us know. They are always going to autofill with headlines about the group they are writing news about and for.
First off, is this the perspective of Uplifting News as a community?
I certainly hope not.
no, I am mod, and this reply is just said as normal comment, if I had to say it as a moderator, i would have spoken other way. This was my opinion.
You are free to post any news, queer related or not. I particularly had problems with the title, and for more detailed explanation read other replies from others and me. As someone else said very concisely, my problem is that using labels is reductive. In my opinion the identity of rescuers is not that important. But someone else said that their opinion - "To me headline highlights the intersectionality and solidarity shown when of one group of historically oppressed people (refugees) is rescued by another group historically oppressed group (gay people)." which is perfectly valid. I think it is okay to have different viewpoints. If you disagree, please correct me.
Just to clarify - problem was not queer website, or someone posting about queer people. And whatever I said was my opinion.
And for clarifications, if a mod wants to, they can check a box for the comment to "Speak as Moderator". For demonstrational purposes, i will do so for this comment.
Okay, cool. I was hoping it was an opinion thing, but the "Mod" next to your name made me concerned this was more of an official opinion and you wanted to discourage the posting of articles like this one. Thank you for the clarification!
(Btw, I can't see the red shield on my instance, but it's clear when I go to the original url. I'll have to see if federating that is an upcoming thing for mbin, or if I'm just missing it somehow.)
Also, the red shield should be already federated I think, it may not be visible because mbin ui may not have added it yet, in case you want to confirm, you can check source for the raw comment (the json), it should have the tag somewhere
Thank you for understanding.
