• @MaxVerstappen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      -11
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Just that the article happens to align “good” with the Democratic party’s top social stances. I find it extremely hard to believe that the state that left-leaning people are flocking to is the worst in the nation.

      Look, I’m all for equal rights for everyone and the government staying out of people’s personal lives. I just don’t want the constant propaganda.

      • Zorque
        link
        fedilink
        181 year ago

        The propaganda… of judging based on those metrics you supposedly support?

        • @MaxVerstappen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -171 year ago

          It’s propaganda because it’s dismissing the idea that it’s generally a good state to move to economically. Lots of new high value companies setting up shop provide employment opportunities in a state where there is still land to develop.

          I mean, Texas would be too hot for me but it seems a little suspicious that there is not a worse state in the union than Texas according to this.

          By all means, if you can objectively come to the same conclusion as the article, great! I just don’t trust the validity of their findings and therefore categorize it as propaganda.

          • @BigNote@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            141 year ago

            You can call it whatever you want, just know that you are badly misusing the word. Propaganda does not mean “anything I disagree with.” Never has.

          • Zorque
            link
            fedilink
            101 year ago

            Just because there are opportunities doesn’t mean they are good opportunities. And even if there are good opportunities, they don’t necessarily comprise all of them. Just enough to draw in some skilled workers (who are still exploited, just better compensated).

            But that’s beside the point. The implication of your comment is that the social issues are the ones that comprise the propaganda, not the economic ones. Just because you pivot to something else doesn’t suddenly mean you didn’t make that argument.

    • @candio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      -251 year ago

      Your identity is your business, just keep it for yourself instead of trying to abuse women and remove their rights then you’ll become a better person

      • Zorque
        link
        fedilink
        151 year ago

        How is allowing people to identify as the gender that fits them abusive to women?

        • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          -101 year ago

          No one cares what you “identify” as. Identify as a turkey for all anyone cares. The problem is with coerced speech and trying to invade sex-specific places and events.

          • @Nahlej@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            81 year ago

            Coerced speech? Invading? Boy that does sound scary.

            You have any other completely imaginary strawmen we should be hypothetically scared of?

            • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              -9
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Coerced speech like how some places are now looking at making “misgendering” and “using the wrong pronouns” illegal.

              Not sure what word other than “invading” you would user for biological men going in to places designed specifically only for biological women?

              Do you even know what a strawman is?

                  • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    51 year ago

                    From the (fox news, of course) link:

                    A recently passed bill in Michigan could make it a felony to intimidate someone by intentionally using the wrong gender pronouns, according to some legal experts.

                    The article quotes only one person, but I suppose “some experts” is just an oversight, and not because fox knows its credulous audience won’t bother reading too closely or critically. Or looking up the “expert” around whom the story pivots. No huge surprise, he’s the founder of a Christian think tank that focuses on legislating Christianity as law. They’re anti-lgbt, anti-abortion, and antivaxx.

                    Got someone who isn’t an alarmist bent on violating everyone’s religious liberty?

                  • @DeadlineX@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    111 months ago

                    Did you even read your boogey man bill or just take Fox News as gods word? The bill only says someone is guilty of a felony if they cause damage, bodily harm, or threaten a person because of sexual identity. It just adds a protection to people who are being victimize for a specific aspect of their identity.

                    As long as you weren’t planning on any hate crimes you can misgender people as much as you want in Michigan. It makes you an asshole, but not a felon.

                    If you would like to read the bill you’re parroting bullshit about, I can link you to the actual text of it on Michigan’s website so you don’t have to be scared of going to jail for misgendering someone anymore.

                    Again unless you’re planning a hate crime against them. Then you’re n asshole and a felon. Because hate crimes are bad. That’s not a political thing right? Like damaging someone’s property or body is illegal all the time. It’s just more illegal when you do it intentionally because of an aspect of their identity. I mean you don’t think it’s okay to assault disabled folks because of their disability?