Apple Announces 2025 Pride Band, Watch Face, and iPhone Wallpaper

[turbineseaplane]

Incredible how these people happily flip-flop between We Can Always Tell and We Need To Ban Trans Healthcare Because Otherwise We Won't Be Able To Tell depending on the needs of the conversation

Yep, and then we get absolutely awful stories like this

Woman says security guard at Liberty Hotel in Boston confronted her in bathroom, asked to prove gender

A couple said a security guard at the Liberty Hotel in Boston challenged their use of a bathroom and kicked them out.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[jblank]

1. "I think it's with the states, where it belongs."
2. "I never called for it to become a state issue"



1. "I didn't equate one to the other"
2. If you don't equate one to the other. "Give.Me.A.Break."



1. "I've supported the gay community for years"
2. Diversity, equity, and inclusion is "toxic"

Is it really strange that people disagree with you when you frequently disagree with yourself?

I don't understand why you continually seem to target me like this. Maybe you don't like the cut of my jib, whatever, but you're misconstruing my comments and blatantly attempting to skew things to suit your narrative.

Let's start at the top:

Yes, abortion is with the states now and yes, it does belong there for the reason I stated, it is not in the Constitution so it's a 10th Amendment issue. ABORTION is with the states, where it belongs, I mixed up the Dobbs case and Obergefell cases. One belongs with the states, the other does not. Two cases had been discussed, I messed up, others knew what I meant and we moved on. I guess I get no benefit of the doubt from you.

Your second attempt is just a complete hatchet job. I explained WHY I said "give me a break" and it's because if one side does something unconstitutional, it's bad, if their side does it, there's nuance and this and that. Dishonest of you!

What's the issue there? Do you believe you have to treat people with special provisions, programs, attitudes, and with money, in order to support them? Can I not just believe that we treat everyone as equals without preferences, quotas, and the other things I mentioned?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Remember though, they are not under any kind of attack. /s

 

[BaldiMac]

I don't understand why you continually seem to target me like this.

Target? I've responded to you in two threads because you posted a few things that I disagree with. That happens all the time in a public form.

Maybe you don't like the cut of my jib, whatever, but you're misconstruing my comments and blatantly attempting to skew things to suit your narrative.

I didn't misconstrue anything. I quoted you directly.

Let's start at the top:

Yes, abortion is with the states now and yes, it does belong there for the reason I stated, it is not in the Constitution so it's a 10th Amendment issue. ABORTION is with the states, where it belongs, I mixed up the Dobbs case and Obergefell cases. One belongs with the states, the other does not. Two cases had been discussed, I messed up, others knew what I meant and we moved on. I guess I get no benefit of the doubt from you.

Except nobody was talking about abortion.

Your second attempt is just a complete hatchet job. I explained WHY I said "give me a break" and it's because if one side does something unconstitutional, it's bad, if their side does it, there's nuance and this and that. Dishonest of you!

You missed my point. You said that you didn't equate the two.. and then repeatedly equated the two. Including in this response. Nothing dishonest about that.

Do you believe you have to treat people with special provisions, programs, attitudes, and with money, in order to support them?

Yes. I believe that you are not supporting people that are being discriminated against when you call programs designed to identify and deal with that discrimination "toxic".

Can I not just believe that we treat everyone as equals without preferences, quotas, and the other things I mentioned?

Sure. But that does nothing to deal with the ongoing discrimination.

 

[CarlJ]

Wish they would stop shoving this stuff down our throat.

It's weird that every time this "we don't like having to face the reality that LGBTQ+ people exist" rhetoric comes around, it is so very often with this "shoving it down our throats" imagery - it could be stated dozens of different ways, by they always come back to this specific imagery. Like they're afraid of something. Or afraid of something they see in themselves. I don't hear that imagery used very often for, oh, people who don't like Italian food or balloons or something, but it always comes up for LGBTQ+ issues.

Nobody is trying to make you (or anyone else) be gay. All they want to do is just exist and live their lives, without fear of being beaten up or killed for something like showing affection to their partner.

 

[Mousse]

It's weird that every time this "we don't like having to face the reality that LGBTQ+ people exist" rhetoric comes around, it is so very often with this "shoving it down our throats" imagery - it could be stated dozens of different ways, by they always come back to this specific imagery. Like they're afraid of something. Or afraid of something they see in themselves.

They think it moved.😅😅😅

 

[wonderings]

Nobody is trying to make you (or anyone else) be gay. All they want to do is just exist and live their lives, without fear of being beaten up or killed for something like showing affection to their partner.

Doesn't everyone? This is not unique to LGBT, you are on the wrong side of politics, you support the wrong sports team, wrong religion and a host of other things. Not that things could not be better, but I am pretty sure gay people living in places like Syria and other similar countries would look at westernized countries as the land of milk and honey in terms of safety and potential for prosperity.

 

[SactoGuy18]

Their iPhone and iPad Pride wallpapers actually look really nice. Their Apple Watch watchbands, not so much.

 

[DeftwillP]

You don't need to announce you're an 'ally'. Just don't be homophobic/commit a hate crime and you're all good.

Thanks for letting me know how to behave.

 

[ThomasJL]

Tim Cook is more concerned about money than the well-being of gay people. He’ll do things that support the well-bring of gay people only when it makes money, and he’ll also stab gay people in the back when it makes money. For example, while HIV/AIDS can harm and kill anyone, in many places, it disproportionately harms and kills gay men. Product Red has been raising money for HIV/AIDS awareness. I am not anti-China and I oppose the anti-China sentiment that comes from the U.S., but I disagree with China’s ban on Product Red. Cook decided to sell red-colored Apple products in China by removing all of the Product Red branding from those products as well as all of the Product Red informational inserts. So Cook is taking money that should’ve gone to Product Red to save lives, including the lives of gay men.

 

[BaldiMac]

Tim Cook is more concerned about money than the well-being of gay people. He’ll do things that support the well-bring of gay people only when it makes money, and he’ll also stab gay people in the back when it makes money. For example, while HIV/AIDS can harm and kill anyone, in many places, it disproportionately harms and kills gay men. Product Red has been raising money for HIV/AIDS awareness. I am not anti-China and I oppose the anti-China sentiment that comes from the U.S., but I disagree with China’s ban on Product Red. Cook decided to sell red-colored Apple products in China by removing all of the Product Red branding from those products as well as all of the Product Red informational inserts. So Cook is taking money that should’ve gone to Product Red to save lives, including the lives of gay men.

I don't follow your logic here. Product RED is banned in China, so Cook is taking money from Product RED by not selling there? I don't see how he has the option. And, of course, you have no idea of what causes Cook supports privately.

 

[ThomasJL]

I don't follow your logic here. Product RED is banned in China, so Cook is taking money from Product RED by not selling there? I don't see how he has the option. And, of course, you have no idea of what causes Cook supports privately.

Tim Cook was selling the red-colored Apple products in China, but without the Product Red branding on them, so no portion of the sales of those red-colored Apple products sold in China went to Product Red. That is unethical, but since Cook is unethical, it’s no surprise.

Of course Cook should not violate any of China’s laws. But what Cook should’ve done is to respect Product Red by just not selling any red-colored Apple products in China, and instead just be content with selling them in other countries with the Product Red branding.

 

[BaldiMac]

Tim Cook was selling the red-colored Apple products in China, but without the Product Red branding on them, so no portion of the sales of those red-colored Apple products sold in China went to Product Red. That is unethical, but since Cook is unethical, it’s no surprise.

(RED) doesn't own the color red. And selling red phones in China doesn't cost (RED) anything.

Of course Cook should not violate any of China’s laws. But what Cook should’ve done is to respect Product Red by just not selling any red-colored Apple products in China, and instead just be content with selling them in other countries with the Product Red branding.

So, you acknowledge you were misleading when you said he was "taking money" from (RED).

And, again, you have no idea what causes Cook supports privately. For all you know, he could be donating to (RED) for each red phone sold in China.

There is enough to complain about in the world. We don't need to continue to make accusations without evidence.