this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2026
415 points (93.5% liked)

Not The Onion

21277 readers
2401 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/62754614

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Oyml77@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ok. Your question also didn't make sense.

[–] NostraDavid@programming.dev -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Punk is genre P LGBTQ+ are viewers V Queercore is subgenre Q

I said:

P accepts V V creates Q If P accepts/includes V why V create separate Q?


TV viewers are V Cooking show is P Cooking show subgenre is Q

You said:

V accepts P then why did V create Q


How should your response make sense to what I've said, logically speaking?

[–] Senal@programming.dev 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Assuming you are asking genuinely, here's an answer.

Q wasn't created as a result of V's(or P's) intolerance, it's a specialisation of a larger group, P.

P and Q aren't mutually exclusive, you can be both.

V can and do enjoy both P and it's subgenre/offshoot Q.

If you don't understand in general why larger social groups might sometimes give rise to more specilaised subgroups or offshoots (for reasons other than exclusion) then any answer you receive is not going to make sense to you.

Incidentally, the same explanation works for the cooking show example, as it's the same basic premise.

I'm not the person who replied to you but I'm fairly confident that person was mimicking your phrasing with an example they thought was simpler for you to understand, in order for you to see how it sounded incorrect.

It seems you didn't get the context of that, which is probably why it seemed like an odd reply.

in contextual translation:

If television viewers were accepting of cooking then why did they have to create a subgenre of cooking shows?

becomes

In the same way that cooking shows exist as a sub-genre of TV shows in general without requiring broadcasters to have first banned cooking on TV , queercore can exist without requiring punk to have first been intolerant of it's LGBTQIA+ members.