Comics Creators

Diversity in Modern Society


I am from former Yugoslavia. So I know. When you look down on it, it’s practically the same people. Even teasing each as “Catholic Serb” (Serbians to Croats), or “Orthodox Croat” (Croats to Serbians). Other sides, except Bosniaks, didn’t participate in conflict.
You forgot to mention Romanians, Germans Russians in Serbia, Italians in Croatia, Jews and Gypsies are everywhere etc. There are others two, but these are tiny minor groups (so that don’t know they even exist).

One thing I admit. Religiously, US is less diverse than Europe, if we go by the numbers.



Kind of a big deal; SSM became legal in Australia at the start of this year:


I’d go further and say I think people from different countries could have more culturally in common. They have their own flavour of course but there’s a certain commonality in the big cosmopolitan cities of the world. I think there’d be less of a culture clash moving from London to New York and vice versa than moving to rural parts of the same country.


7th :slight_smile:

It’s a rating system intended to give people a general feel of whether the country they are travelling to is, overall, somewhere where LGBT+ people are likely to feel welcome, and to be safe. As I said, the US’ position reflects the fact that while it scores highly for the positive outcomes, it also scores more highly on some of the negative ones.

Exactly why I was curious with both the original blanket statement, presented as fact, that Europe ‘has less diversity than in US’, and Jim’s assertion that Europe is ‘leagues behind’ when (attitudes to) sexual preference is used as an indicator of diversity.

I don’t think either of those statements holds any meaningful value, partly because I think both the US and Europe, as you say, are geographically large and are diverse, meaning different areas are better than others at different things. Individual states in the US, and countries in Europe, provide examples of both excellent progress, but also areas of real concern.

In 2016, the UK Foreign Office took the relatively unusual step of amending its advice to LGBT+ nationals travelling to the US to reflect exactly that:

“The US is an extremely diverse society and attitudes towards LGBT people differ hugely across the country. Laws vary from state to state. When you are physically present in a state, even temporarily, you are subject to that state’s laws. You must carry a passport showing that you have leave to enter or remain with you at all times.

LGBT travellers may be affected by legislations passed recently in the states of North Carolina and Mississippi.”

Jim might think that Europe is ‘leagues behind’ the US when it comes to the specific issue of LGBT+ rights and attitudes; I don’t agree. Would I feel more comfortable in New York City compared to North Carolina? Sure - as Gar says, I think the world’s ‘Alpha Cities’ probably have more in common with each other in many ways than they may do with the more outlying areas of their own countries. But, overall, I’d feel more comfortable being seen to be openly gay across modern Ireland than I would across the whole of the modern USA … a country where my risk of being murdered because of my sexuality is significantly higher than in most of its peers, and where my death by murder would be more likely to receive a less severe sentence if the perpetrator were convicted if they claimed “gay panic” made them do it.

And I do think that arbitrary statements presented as fact deserve to be challenged and to be asked to be supported with data, otherwise this is simply an exercise in who shouts the loudest isn’t it?


Oh, how I wish he was a better person. I wound up being the one to tell the eldest child of my best friends about what he’s been up to online - said child came out as non-binary last year and didn’t know Linehan was a massive TERF


I haven’t heard details of the Linehan stuff. Sounds disappointing.


It’s gone into overdrive since the end of the abortion Referendum for some reason, he claimed that “Gender Critical” Feminists (read: TERFS) were responsible for repeal, while everyone else was too worried about what colour Barbie was or something. Which kinda set a lot of people off, because Trans inclusivity is really important here, and Irish feminism has been attacked by UK TERFs repeatedly as a result.

When ARC put a note on our website acknowledging that not everyone who needs an abortion identifies as a woman, we got hate mail for weeks.

Just before the referendum campaign kicked off, a group of them announced they were going to come over here to talk to Irish women about gender issues. As nobody here knew who they were, they were looked into and found out to not only be Trans exclusionary, they had really dodgy links to right-wing funding. When people here asked who was paying for their trip, they told us to fuck off. So a massive open letter was drafted and signed by pretty much ever feminist group and individual, and many more beside telling them they weren’t welcome.

During the campaign, one TERF, who at least is Irish told friends of mine who were part of the media group for the Yes vote that she spoke for Irish feminists, and if we didn’t stop supporting trans people, she and “everyone she knew” would vote no, because “they’d prefer to take the boat” than see support for trans people.

So yeah, good job, “Gender Critical” feminists. Since people basically laughed in Linehan’s face on that one, he has of course doubled down and gotten nastier and gone further down the rabbit hole. A lot of the people he’s signal boosting onlnine have been involved in harassment campaigns and physical attacks on trans people. And a lot of those same people are actively allying with American Evangelical extremists.


The TERFS thing is so weird. I was completely unaware of it and I read a link Linehan posted when he started on the subject where one of them explained their position. At first it followed some pattern of logic. People can define themselves by gender but a lesbian is attracted to sexual characteristics. They like vaginas and therefore even if someone identifies as a trans woman they won’t find them attractive if they retain male physical anatomy. OK.

Then it entered some fantasy land where they said they should not feel compelled or even forced to date trans women who said they were lesbians. Who does that and when? Someone may suggest I date someone and if I don’t fancy them then I just say ‘no thanks, not my type’ for whatever reasons I may choose. This seems a non-existent problem and actually if someone is forcing anyone into any kind of sexual situation that’s very illegal anyway.

Then you step back and see it’s just the old ‘being tricked into sex’ argument that has been the argument of conservative straight men for an age and just lesbians making it instead. Then you see why right wing groups want to encourage the argument.


Thanks for explaining it. I didn’t have a clue what it was.


A lot of it comes out of pre-dominant thought on consent during second-wave feminism, where it was very common to assert that the power imbalance between men and women meant that women couldn’t really consent to sex, and therefore all sex is rape*. And if you subscribe to that view, and view trans women as “men in dresses”, then it stands to reason (for very generous definitions of reason) that trans women are just looking to infiltrate the few spaces women have carved out for themselves.

I mean, the idea is absolute bollocks, but that’s what it is. Like MRAs spending all their time ranting about women instead of doing good for men, TERFs spend a lot of time yelling about trans people, and doing very little actual advocacy or positive work.

*This is why the antifeminist talking point that second wave feminists are fine, but third wave takeit too far is hilarious. There were a lot of second-wavers who genuinely hated men, while the third wave is far more interested in intersectionality and is more likely to look for common points of concern with men. A woman who I came to the conclusion was far more influenced by the second-wave accused me of wanting to legalise abortion so I could more easily abandon my commitments to women, for example.


I realise that this will make me appear completely ignorant, but I am genuinely surprised that central Africa is the most ethnically diverse area in the world. Aren’t they mostly all… you know… African? :confused:

Ok, before someone calls me out and tells me that “African” isn’t a single country with one culture, I do realise that, but if you look at any one of those dark green African countries, I don’t see how they are any more diverse than, say, the UK. Let’s take the breakdown for Kenya that wiki gives me:

22% Kikuyu
14% Luhya
13% Luo
12% Kalenjin
11% Kamba
6% Kisii
6% Meru
15% other African
1% non-African

Seven named groups of people. Now let’s look at the UK:


That’s seven and I haven’t finished yet, and you’ll notice I haven’t even bothered thinking about immigrant culture.


There’s more ethnic diversity in Africa than any other continent, not just social diversity.


What do the “other African” and “non-African” groups comprise? I’m guessing there’s a lot of diversity in those categories?

Some of this comes from how people actually define themselves. Being a Brummie is an identity, but it’s not directly comparable to a tribal identity in some other cultures. It’s not as distinctive to those within the group.

I didn’t grow up with it so my knowledge is entirely second hand, but it means more to people I;ve spoken to than the town or county they were born in. It’s closer to a nationality, within a nation, and sometimes more important than that.


Again I have to plead complete ignorance. I have no idea what the difference is between, for example, a Kikuyu man and a Luhya man. Is it greater than that between a Geordie and an Etonian?


So kind of like following Newcastle United? :confused: (And I am actually being serious here.)


I almost used football teams as an analogy. :slight_smile:

There can be genetic differences, but my understanding is that it’s primarily cultural, and in modern Africa more likely to be expressed by language. Colonialism means that English and French are the first languages of most countries, but locally people will speak a tribal language a lot of the time and that’s the primary way the ethnic groups are defined.


Haway man.


The link I posted after the map went into some of the reasons for that David; it has to do with things like, for example, numbers of official languages spoken being counted as a proxy for diversity - which is why Switzerland looks more ‘diverse’ than other countries you would think should be considered more diverse than the Swiss.


The western part of NC is very liberal and pretty rural. The eastern has more right wing pockets. As to your link above regarding Colorado, Denver is very liberal. The more rural parts, not so much.

You’re more likely to be murdered in the US because you’re an Auburn fan when Auburn beats Alabama than because you’re gay.