Straight people 'care more about animal rights than gay equality' Watch

Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Sorry for the clickbatey and provocative title.

https://news.sky.com/story/straight-...ality-11412661
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
Would the reverse be true that gay people care more about animal rights than straight equality?

Animals are lovely and some of them are fluffy.
1
reply
Radioactivedecay
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
If you think about, we're all really just a bunch of animals.
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#4
(Original post by 999tigger)
Would the reverse be true that gay people care more about animal rights than straight equality?

Animals are lovely and some of them are fluffy.
Wouldn’t surprise me if that was true.

I just saw this article on sky news and was interested in hearing others opinions about it.
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by Andrew97)
Wouldn’t surprise me if that was true.

I just saw this article on sky news and was interested in hearing others opinions about it.
Not sure theres much value in conflating the two.

I'm live and let live.

If I saw some discrimination based on gender or sexuality I would oppose, but inequality happens to straight people as well.

If I saw some cruel practice against lots of fluffy animals tbh id probably vbe more concerned. I dont think the two make good comparisons.
0
reply
So Instinct
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
I just care more about animals in general.
1
reply
username2763536
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by 999tigger)
Would the reverse be true that gay people care more about animal rights than straight equality?

Animals are lovely and some of them are fluffy.
Straight equality isn't a thing.Nobody ever got castrated or beheaded for being straight.Animals are lovely doesn't stop people eating them an masse.
1
reply
MongoDB
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
The wording of some (edit: pretty much every single one) of the sentences in this article worries me.

Less than half - 49% - completely agreed that people in the LGBT+ community had the right to live their life as who they are without fear of judgement or prejudice. The use of completely here tells me whatever survey was answered had a varying amount of levels of "agreeing" with the statement, I would imagine the amount of people who picked any level of "disagree" was exceptionally low.

One may think I'm nitpicking here, but this use of "completely" is not repeated at any point in the article.

Many of the questions are also extremely vague. "44% felt threatened by others" ?For all we know someone answering the survey could have interpreted a peculiar look from someone at a bus stop as "feeling threatened".

Of those straight people who are not trans who were surveyed, only 3% said they were concerned about tolerance for individuals with different gender identities or sexualities, 2% were worried about gender inequality, and 6% were worried about racism." Is this not a good thing? Surely low figures of response in the affirmative shows a decline in homophobia and racism? It's all a bit of a double edged sword really, if 100% of people surveyed felt worried about tolerance and equality, then there has to be a mass amount of it in society, if 0% say they're worried, then one can spin it and say that it means that no one cares about gay people, trans people or women. The same concept applies to this "animal rights vs gay rights" spin the article is putting on it. Let's be honest, gay rights has certainly come a lot further in the past 50 years than the treatment of caged chickens, for example (which has probably got worse with the increase in mass factory farming).

I feel the author is most likely cherry picking specific responses to create a sensationalist headline to generate clicks (and controversy). I would much prefer to see the full survey and its responses to gather an actual conclusion of its results, rather than what a journalist deems necessary for one to read.
1
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by Robby2312)
Straight equality isn't a thing.Nobody ever got castrated or beheaded for being straight.Animals are lovely doesn't stop people eating them an masse.
Actually it is just equality and that is a thing.

Doesnt stop animals having rights or people being concerned for their welfare though.
0
reply
username2763536
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by 999tigger)
Actually it is just equality and that is a thing.

Doesnt stop animals having rights or people being concerned for their welfare though.
So why not just say equality and leave it at that? Why mention straight at all? You're probably one of those people who thinks we should have straight pride.People are not really that concerned though.Their concern for animal welfare doesn't stop them eating animals or going to the zoo and gawping at intelligent creatures like gorillas.It doesn't stop them neutering their dogs as though they cannot feel it.It doesn't stop people wearing them either.
.Animals rights are virtually non-existent in this society and even I can see that as a meat eater.People who think different are kidding themselves.
0
reply
J Papi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
Bad surveys give bad results.

Also come on Sky, I expected better of you.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by Andrew97)
Sorry for the clickbatey and provocative title.

https://news.sky.com/story/straight-...ality-11412661
Goodness Me. That is worth a Nobel Prize.

They have discovered that people directly affected by something are more worried about it than people not directly affected.

Did you know that more gay people living in Uxbridge were concerned about the 3rd runway at Heathrow than straight people living in Sunderland?
1
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by Robby2312)
So why not just say equality and leave it at that? Why mention straight at all? You're probably one of those people who thinks we should have straight pride.People are not really that concerned though.Their concern for animal welfare doesn't stop them eating animals or going to the zoo and gawping at intelligent creatures like gorillas.It doesn't stop them neutering their dogs as though they cannot feel it.It doesn't stop people wearing them either.
.Animals rights are virtually non-existent in this society and even I can see that as a meat eater.People who think different are kidding themselves.
Because the thread and the article made a point aboput identifying straight people as a group and gay equailty as the issue. I was going along with the article. Perfeclty logical and reasonable. You seem very bitter.

Look at the thread title. Read the article.

Large sections of society do care about animals though. Just because we eat certain ones doesnt exclude the fact we can care about others.
0
reply
username2763536
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by 999tigger)
Because the thread and the article made a point aboput identifying straight people as a group and gay equailty as the issue. I was going along with the article. Perfeclty logical and reasonable. You seem very bitter.

Look at the thread title. Read the article.

Large sections of society do care about animals though. Just because we eat certain ones doesnt exclude the fact we can care about others.
But even the ones we profess to care about for example dogs are still abused.Like the steralising.You do that to a human you'll be imprisoned for life.Yet there is no reason to suggest that dogs feel any differently from humans.Being less intelligent doesn't mean you feel less pain.And there isn't really a distinction between those animals we do care about and the ones we don't.By all accounts pigs are more intelligent than dogs yet we treat them completely differently.If you profess to care about the welfare about one type of animal but not about the other then you are a hypocrite.We don't treat most animals as though they are sentient beings.Gorillas are highly intelligent and one of them even learned a 1000 words in sign language and owned a pet cat! Yet we'll pay to see them for our entertainment without any regard for their feelings or wellbeing.We put Killer whales in tanks when they regularly travel a 100 miles in a single day in the wild.
0
reply
Sheperd23
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 year ago
#15
Animals don't argue with you ?
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
Anyway back to the thread. Some straight people care more about animals than gay rights. It doesnt surpise me. It is a poor comparison though.
I have no reason to doubt the sincerity of those people.
0
reply
Joel 96
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
I'm not ashamed to say I care about animals more than people. Doesn't mean I don't care about people, to some extent. Depends on the person.
0
reply
Joel 96
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 year ago
#18
(Original post by 999tigger)
Just because we eat certain ones doesnt exclude the fact we can care about others.
It's just the consistency vegans and vegetarians have a problem with. Why is a dog worth anymore than a pig?
0
reply
Ciel.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 year ago
#19
(Original post by Andrew97)
Sorry for the clickbatey and provocative title.

https://news.sky.com/story/straight-...ality-11412661
Good. We can stand up for ourselves. Animals can't. As a gay person, I approve, lol.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 year ago
#20
To be perfectly honest (and I’m aware this is a somewhat controversial personal position to take) but so what? I mean gay rights and equality are great and everything but certain things mean more to people than others.
An example would be most Britain’s own some form of pet and generally rather like cuddly critters - case in point it touches all of their lives. Whilst gay equality rights are a more nebulous, you might say, issue which simply doesn’t touch nor effect people in the same way.
This is leaving aside the rather crass point that it’s somewhat nicer to think on people being nice to bunnies than a some gay chaps getting up to some rumpy pumpy. All things considered as well a great deal of the population will generally hold the opinion that gays rights are already equal (more or less) to those of straight people.

Essentially this doesn’t seem to be an issue to me, you can’t dictate peoples priorities to them.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (66)
23.4%
No (216)
76.6%

Watched Threads

View All