An unsafe environment
Hm. Interesting.
An unsafe environment, Comerford says. So unsafe that there is no choice: it is imperative that such an environment be prevented by canceling the entire gig in every case.
This is a big part of the pathology of this kind of “politics.” It’s pathological to be so extremely fragile that merely being in the presence of people who don’t share your delusions is “unsafe.”
But they’re not actually that fragile, are they. Hardly anyone is. It’s the ideology that’s fragile, and it’s the ideology that’s pathological.
It’s stupid and bad to keep telling people, over and over and in all-caps, that they are as fragile as a spider web, so fragile that they will drop dead or commit suicide if they even share a large space with people who don’t endorse their luxury false “identities.”
This is not a thing. We don’t do this. We don’t tell children their fantasies are real and anyone who doesn’t agree that their fantasies are real is a lethal threat.
Yet here is Comerford saying the opposite. It’s grotesque.
I imagine at least one person has replied to that tweet, “What choice do venues have…” with, “Um, let people attend if they want to?”
THEY’RE terrified by some vague possibilities. But when they shout out to punch women in the fucking face, to raucous cheering, it’s all in fun.
If they’re at a live music event, how do they even know the political views of the people around them?
It doesn’t even make sense but its own lights. If group A starts going, and group B would be unsafe, then group B would be better off not going, leaving group A alone so that no one would be unsafe. Like … whatisthiseven