• vzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Note that the problem here is the fact that they are staffers. The abuse of power involved.

    Leading with the “lesbian” angle, or the infidelity angle, is just sex negative muck raking designed to play on the reader’s moralism and homophobia.

    Edit: also, the hush money angle is also very concerning. It’s not good to have leaders that are subject to blackmail. Some blackmailers want something more valuable than money.

    • Obituarykidney@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      I think it’s a fair critique to make when it’s from someone who is historically both homophobic and anti-feminist, it’s pointing out the hypocrisy.

      • vzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        All right wingers, and fascists specifically, are what we would consider to be hypocrites. But that’s part and parcel of their ideology: that rules only apply to the inferiors.

        To them, and to their followers, it’s a display of dominance and personal fortitude to be a hypocrite.

        People really should catch up on Sartre and Eco. They had these fuckers down pat over fifty years ago.

      • slacktoid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Yes but the power imbalance is the main problem, hypocrisy is shitty but whatever. I think of how that would affect gay people at that point more than how that highlights her hypocrisy.

        • Obituarykidney@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          It’s the main problem in this recent development, but not the main issue with Boebert by a long shot. I still think it’s fair game for discussion, and I’m so far down the queer acronym that I’m usually just part of the +