the_post_of_tom_joad [any, any]

Sooner or later they’d get me for one thing if not for another…

[But if] a fellow ain’t got a soul of his own, just little piece of a big soul, the one big soul that belongs to everybody, then…Then it don’t matter. I’ll be all around in the dark – I’ll be everywhere.

  • 0 Posts
  • 44 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 5th, 2023

help-circle


  • Thank you! I understand it’s focused on one person, but ya get what i mean? It invites misunderstanding.

    It’s not wrong to phrase it this way, it’s technically accurate to say" Lone LBGTQ+ Democrat". However it’s definitely clunky and unnecessarily confusing.

    Reading the title immediately raises the question in the reader: "If only one LGBTQ+dem, how many other Dems?

    If his sexuality is the point, then his party affiliation isn’t. If his party is the point, his sexuality isn’t.

    The Advocate speaks to issues in the LBGT+community, therefore speaking to his sexuality is relevant. Titles are supposed to summarize the article with more information as you read. If the article, brings up information it does not then answer, why mention it if not to confuse? Reading the title could easily cause the reader to mistake “Gay Democrat is lone LBGT+ vote” as the lone Dem vote.

    WAS this the Intent? Well that’s harder to parse.

    Really, I’m not like, saying the advocate is trash or w/e, but i AM trying to take into consideration how often our news sources have biases (deliberate or internal) towards the 2 parties. MSNBC et al are known to push for the Democrats, FOX n ONANN etc for the Repubs. No arfument there, right?

    Further, if "The Advocate"does in fact has a pro-Dem bias, I’m not even claiming they’re morally wrong for doing so! But! As someone who personally feels the DNC is not a party for the people of the US, and sees often the cover they get from the aforementioned media who do, i’m very sensitive to and always looking out for examples of wording that give the Ds cover for doing its constituents dirty like they did with this vote.

    80 other Democrats (thanks again btw) sold us out; and that information matters. Leaving that out is an extremely important omission, and for a magazine that frequently interviews Democratic representatives, it’s an omission i cannot believe is unintentional.


















  • Sorry, I’m not quite sure what kind of help you are asking for. I do know one thing though:

    Reddit shows me some weird stuff when I enter it and that distrubs my peace of mind!

    You really should leave that place if you can. My experience is similar to yours, i also feel like crap after spending time there. Quitting that site and never looking back was a relief i hope you can share.

    Unfortunately, I am in a system that handicaps human growth, you don’t/can’t grow up to your full potential when you live in systems like these

    If you’re talking about being surrounded by reminders of a system you hate, i can relate. Can you talk more about them without doxxing yourself? If that’s not what you want to talk about, then maybe

    I am hyperaware of certain things. Small things, they steal my mental peace, it can be someone honking incessantly on the streets or anything loud or unnecessary

    Are you asking about help with anxiety and sensory overload issues? Cuz i can relate there too