[Psyk0tik]

Originally Posted by KrazyKat Some of them, including myself see it as blatant propaganda being shoved down our throats, despite never being against the LGBTQIA+ community and agreeing that they can prefer whosoever they choose.

The word "propaganda" is defined as "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view."

Changing a logo's colors to celebrate Pride Month is far from being a biased/misleading political propaganda. It's just a logo and you're reading too deep into it. The staff isn't trying to convince you of anything. You don't have to celebrate Pride Month. You don't have to care about Pride Month. You don't have to talk about Pride Month. Pride Month itself isn't even a political propaganda; it's a month to celebrate the LGBTQIA+ community. What is so "political" about that?

Originally Posted by KrazyKat Many of them, however are genuinely curious as to why only this specific community is given special attention, when there are millions of other communities (including theirs) which would make people more aware and knowledgeable about them. To not acknowledge them but other communities makes people honestly wonder: "Do I have to be Gay/etc. to get such attention?".

AlliedModders isn't obligated to be nor does it present itself as a group/organization that brings awareness and attention to different communities/causes/issues/movements. The staff just want to celebrate Pride Month and anyone is welcome to join them, it's as simple as that.

If the first thing people think of when they see the colorful logo is "Do I have to be homosexual/non-binary to get special attention" then there's a lot of self-reflection that is well overdue.

Originally Posted by KrazyKat Therefore, this seems like forced pandering to me, and not something they really care about in a larger sense, but do just because they look more advertiser/corporate-friendly. This comes out as extremely disingenuous on their part, but they are reluctant to accept it due to their biases.

Changing a logo to celebrate Pride Month is different from the "forced pandering" that you're talking about. You're referring to large corporations who change their logos for the sole purpose of attracting the general population to buy their products/support their company goals. AM gains nothing from changing the logo, and yet they do it every year because they celebrate Pride Month.

Originally Posted by KrazyKat Lets say they do have a few members who identify to be in that community, so what? The majority of this community are people who do not identify as such, and some of them honestly do not even care about what's happening. For example, would you like someone's stances on religion/guns/abortion to show up as a logo too, just because a few people think it deserves attention?

You're making baseless assumptions about the AM community when I doubt you've actually talked to a majority of the members here. Not everyone needs to publicly come out as LGBTQIA+ just to prove that they identify as such.

You mentioned religion, guns, and abortion, so I'll explain why all three of those are irrelevant.

1. Religion - Celebrating Pride Month is not the same as enforcing one's beliefs/views onto others the same way religion is all about.
2. Guns and Abortion - Celebrating Pride Month is not the same as trying to convince people to be either pro-life or pro-choice and to be either pro-gun control or pro-gun rights.

If AM were to enforce their views onto all of us in regards to those 3 topics, then I would agree that it's a political agenda, but labeling the celebration of Pride Month as such is just extremely disingenuous and absurd.

Originally Posted by KrazyKat So why do I care about it? To me, the LGBTQIA+ community divides more than unites each other. I don't like divisions based on sexuality or gender, and treat the people in the community with the same respect that I would give to anyone who's a Male or a Female.

So then we're all in agreement that the LGBTQIA+ community is allowed to exist and celebrate Pride Month? Celebrating Pride Month only "divides" people if some of them refuse to accept the existence of others.

Originally Posted by KrazyKat The less you force it upon people, the more accepting they become (if that's what worries you). I don't want to glorify anyone, but rather treat them as they would treat me. They don't need any special treatment from you, or me, or from this community, to feel that they belong, because they already do, no matter what anyone says.

I get what you're trying to say, and I do share the same sentiment that we should all be treated equally. However, changing the logo to celebrate Pride Month isn't "glorifying" a particular group over everyone else. There's no favoritism or bias attached to the action. If they were banning people for being straight/binary then I would wholeheartedly agree with you, but that's not the case here.

To put it simply, nobody is forcing anything on anyone. You're misconstruing the staff's intention with the logo change.

Originally Posted by KrazyKat A logo isn't going to make them feel any better, and many of them already see through the corporate bullshit that most companies prefer doing during Pride Month. It would rather divide more people who think: "Why doesn't our X community have a logo, a day, a month, etc. too?" like the OP pointed out. Love for all, not for one.

I can see how people would see the logo change as "pandering" to the LGBTQIA+ community, but again, AM gains nothing from the logo change. Once again, the staff are doing it mainly for themselves and aren't forcing anyone to celebrate Pride Month with them, nor are they trying to convince anyone of anything.

Originally Posted by KrazyKat In regards to what you're saying, I know this is an off-topic thread. However, DrugZog talking about me instead of the topic at hand by was definitely off-topic, and I pointed it out. For context though, one of my posts was removed for being on-topic by the incompetent moderator asherkin, which made no sense whatsoever and was to the point. I stated that instead of paying people hundreds of dollars to those who barely code and mostly edit, and then regretting it, they should ask for help in this community, and probably receive it if they told us what issue they were facing for free (which was a little condescending to be honest, to make the author not waste money on stupid ventures). However, due to the mod's personal biases, my post was censored for being "off-topic". Natsheh stated the exact same thing and didn't get censored, and that gave it all away.

I didn't see the post before it was removed so I can't really say much about it. Were you explicitly told that it was removed for being off-topic or are you just assuming that's the reason? With how you've described your own post, it sounds like it got removed for something else.