So help them vote. Volunteer with efforts to get out the youth vote. Push for universal mail in voting where you are, or at least early voting. Help get politicians and initiatives on the ballot that they actually care about.

Shaming and complaining about the demographic you want to reach accomplishes nothing.

But both sides are the same or my vote is worthless or it's too hard to vote or something

Yes, but political engagement can't revolve around voting.

It's shit. You have to navigate a beurocracy and don't even always have choices down the ballot. And when you do, you often have no idea who the candidates are beyond some half baked Facebook page. It's also a huge burnout pit. Put months of stress into a binary outcome you can barely control. And even that is if you're engaged in canvassing and etc, otherwise it's just a chore.

Youth need to be mobilized in long term action projects. Something like Encode Justice for example, where they make civic engagement a part of their daily life, is far superior. It's also harder, but that comes with doing something actually impactful.

Sadly some of them are republican

I really hope that they do.

Because I am worried about the camps.

With the exception of millennials, who were born between 1981 and 1996, Gen Z adults are notably less likely than those in other generations to identify as conservative.

Or in simpler terms, both Millennials and Gen Z are equally less likely than those in other generations to identify as conservative.

Because people are already jumping to conclusions without reading the article. Here is the core of the survey data. Identifying as Republican went from 32% in the Boomer Generation to 21% in Gen Z. Identifying as LGBTQ+ went from 4% with Boomers to 28% with Gen Z.

The conclusion I would have jumped to is that the percentage of Gen Z who identified as LGBTQ+ would be greater than that who identified as Republican. So it seems I don't actually need to read it. 😜

28% LGBT is what seems dubious. Lot of spicy straights in that pool I suspect.

I remember seeing this comment on Digg while people speculated that W would be the last republican president elected for a generation.

They're more powerful and influential than you think - they're not going anywhere. They might change their policies to suit the times (remember Lincoln was a Republican) but the so-called "Grand Old Party" ain't going nowhere unfortunately.

They nearly overrode the vote last time around. They faced no consequences and they’re very close to being in a position to do it again and make lasting changes to seize power forever. Nothing good is guaranteed.

And they’re rewriting education including made up history to ensure that more kids are conservative in future generations. Things aren’t looking good.

Tdont kid yourself,, look at the numbers, Trump is propped up by gen x. The demographic loudest against biden are gunna be around a long time.

There are still plenty of ignorant and angry Gen X and Millenials. I agree that the GOP is finished, and it's only a matter of time. There will always be stupid people to pick up their mantle, however.

But what will replace them? Uni-party doesn't work either (e.g. NYC)

I hope so but I think my fellow gen x'ers will just become as hateful and bigoted.

The boomer remover was in full swing and then some asshat said we needed a vaccine and you all ate it up.

The only cool kind of Republicans

Had me in the first half not gonna lie

Vive la république!

Our time will come

To their credit, they are: https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/12/12/near-record-high-numbers-of-young-people-voted-during-the-midterms-signaling-a-possible-shift/

1 out of 4 for a midterm election is nothing to sneeze at.

Golly I remember once on Reddit saying that people should vote and by howdy did a whole bunch of angry people vote me down double digits because, you see, apparently voting doesn't matter and I made people feel sad.

They do vote...they're in areas where their vote doesn't count.

A lot of us aren't old enough to vote yet

The best explanation I've heard is that it's similar to the stats for left-handed people. Way back in the day, almost no one "identified" as being left-handed. But once the stigma against left-handedness was eliminated, the numbers went up.

So in other words, yes, it's a reflection of LGBTQ+ becoming more acceptable, particularly among Gen Z. There could be other factors, but that's probably the main one.

I think it's mostly that very few of them identify as Republican.

But also, the less stigma around gender expression, the more kids will be open to explore theirs.

It's a confluence of factors. LGBTQIA+ is sort of a gender/sexuallity/ phenotype physicality solidarity alliance and the actual boundries has grown in scope since the 80's.

Like take for instance asexual people. Asexuallity became a part of the solidarity when people reached out over the internet and and started realizing that there were a lot of people who just don't feel sexual attraction and that there are certain widely accepted forms of social coercion that revolve around pushing people towards sexual attraction. But asexuallity as a part of the LGBTQIA only really became a thing in the early 2000's. Non-binary trans identities are much the same. A lot of people were feeling the way they did about themselves in isolation but they had no frame of reference to think that they were not just the odd person out.

The other half is a society wide re-examination of compulsory heterosexuallity/cis gender hegemony. There are way more people out there who no longer define themselves by who they've chosen to have physical sexual experience with and now a lot more people are more frank about defining themselves by the range of people they are attracted to. Like if the majority of people artificially penalize a bi-person for choosing a same sex relationship a lot of people will just take the easier path and just narrow their choices or keep their liasons with the restricted choice secret and not assume the label.

I before I came out as trans initially figured I didn't count as trans because I both wasn't physically transitioning and my industry is somewhat hostile to trans people so I was very closeted ao I figured the label only really belonged to the people brave enough to live out of the closet... But eventually someone found me and was like "No, it's not aspirational. Even deep in the closet you are still trans."

This combination of destigmatization, solidarity messaging, the inclusion of whole other groups (like intersex people, gender minorities, asexuals) broadening the scope and outreach to the closeted means that more people generally self identify as LGBTQIA or queer.

Animal kingdom wise we're still less observably sexual fluid than other primates. Bisexuality is actually pretty ubiquitous particularly amongst male primates with it actually being the overwhelming norm in some species so chances are we are probably actually haven't seen the curve level off from suppressive stigma.

I believe it's your first option, acceptance for being yourself is the normal instead of a beating from your parents like pre 2000.

I think most species are more fluid than you realize, and humans are just normal. Especially for apes that share a common ancestor with bonobos.

I would assume they are more honestly/aware of their preference.

I am a gay dude, and I have had friends/coworkers who identified as straight say things like "Why does everyone need to label things? I am 100% straight, but sometimes on a road trip, you just wanna suck the other guy off. Both of us are still straight though"

Every time I have heard thigns like this, it's GenX, or older Millennial. Older than that, they don't bring up "queer" things, younger than that, they just say that they are "mostly straight", or "barely-bi", or "up for whatever".

drastically more sexually fluid than most species

Have you heard about bonobos? They shag anyone for anything and they're one of our closest relatives. Friends have mutual wanks. Enemies have makeup sex. Threesomes, foursomes. Horny bunch of fuckers.

LGBT as a category has been increased a lot over the years. Asexual or people who don't feel they conform to super strict gender norms are all included as "queer" now. So I imagine it's a combo of things, some people being trendy, some people being freer and not feeling the need to hide, some people who previously didn't identify being included.

Left handedness was persecuted and after it stopped being persecuted there was a massive rise in people who were left handed. But it plateaued and has remained pretty stable since then.

The 11% dip for the GOP makes sense. Their policies are just not in line with what young people value.

That said, the +24% gain in LGBTQ+ identification is fascinating and I would love to know how nature, nurture, taboo, and oppression play impact that. This would be a really cool time to be in university and studying human sexuality and gender.

My (admittedly relatively hot) take as a younger millennial indoctrinated by the 2nd wave feminists (who weren’t huge on the third wave) is that what gender means has shifted. I didn’t experience myself as particularly gendered growing up in the 90s and early 00s and certainly wouldn’t consider it part of my inner essence. I don’t give a shit how strangers refer to me or whether they think I’m a dude or not. I found it to be a slightly annoying category imposed by everyone else. Something I needed to understand because it impacted how I was received by others, but not something that was core to my self-understanding. In school I studied the humanities which reaffirmed to me that gender was an annoying external category that put people in boxes—we didn’t want gay female CEOs, we wanted to get rid of gender altogether.

I think gen Z actually has a similar thought but instead of doing away with the gender categories many have chosen, on an individual level, to make them their own a bit more in line with 3rd wave ‘boss bitch’ vibes. This still undermines the oppressive nature of the gender roles because it it kind of divorces gender from the societal gender role.

We are indeed more sexually fluid than most species and given it's "most" and not "all", this isn't unprecedented. It's also not a new phenomena, in Ancient Greek and early-mid Ancient Roman societies queerness was quite common. In fact homosexuality was so prevalent that that the Romans didn't even have a word for heterosexual/homosexual; instead one was either dominant or submissive (e.g. giving or receiving) with the assumption being that most were bisexual and would take partners as they saw fit.

LGBTQ came out if the closet and GOP went in.

Putting sexuality in such a defined state is relatively new in human culture. So most often no one would have the worlds to talk about it or even know it could be classified differently.

fingers crossed it means there's five gen z Republicans and they don't know how to vote

Our closest related species gets it on so much in so many ways it is one STD away from extinction. It might be that we really are like this. Maybe the norm for humans was to have random homosexual and hetrosexual orgies everywhere. It was only because it became important to know who the daddy was that things changed? Or the sampling of the survey wasn't great. You know groundbreaking or meaningless.

I think about cultures that have a focus on same sex sexual contact- most people, if they had been born there would probably participate. If they’re born somewhere where it’s forbidden, most people don’t engage in it.

Some people are hardwired about it in either direction, but the majority are more flexible

Some of it is a rejection of previous values - toxic masculinity and toxic femininity. Some of it may be standing with their peers even if it does not apply directly to them. Some of it is trendiness. Some doctors are even predatory, seeking to sell their extraordinarily expensive surgeries for tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Older, established trans communities in Europe even are shocked at how young we allow surgeries in the USA, before someone knows who they truly are.

Mainly we just have an extremist society here, egged on in large part by our predatory clickbait media that always has to come up with something to say sell, so it ignores the >80% in the middle and focuses exclusively on the flashiest content it can find. And then kids hear that and wonder how they fit into it - ofc they never see the "middle ground", b/c in the media it just isn't there.

Take a look also at how shockingly high rates of suicide and opioid and other drug use are. The younger generations are desperate to become anything else besides what boomers are telling them they must be: literal slaves to the corporate empires.:-(

Shy Tory factor. It hasn't usually been common to see in US polling.

You're dubious because why? Do you think there were only two options? Do you identify as republican or LGBTQ?

This is actually quite interesting. For me, answering a questionaire like this is frustrating because the true answer is much more nuanced than what the given options are and I feel like I know what they're trying to ask but my honest answer is going to give them confusing results from which they're going to pull incorrect conclusions from.

For example: Politically I'm slightly right from centre but I've always voted left. I'm also non-straight but I don't identify as LGBTQ (I literally had to look up the correct way to type that)

The 28% identifying as LGBTQ+ definitely seems like an indication that the sampling might be off. That could be true, but it seems much, much higher than previous estimates.

The gay agenda

Only the third one is an identity, the first two are medical conditions.

Okay, but the bit that relates to politics relates to a deeply and aggressively homophobic and transphobic political party, so...

And yet, there is very little overlap

But the GOP keeps trying to police gender and identity.

it feels like the ownerclass are running pro lgbtq advertisements

Corporations make inclusive advertisement when it makes them more money than not doing so. You can easily see the same movie studios making fairly different advertisement in EU/USA than in China/Saudi Arabia. This is virtue signalling, but I'm fine with it, because when good values get virtue signalled in public, the opposite values are less likely to transmit. They don't have good intentions, but good results come out of it.

There are also less common cases where they purposefully make over the top stunts because it will make far right nutjobs angry, which they count as free advertisement.

Talking in broad strokes all about balancing "freedom of identity/attraction" and "religious freedom" makes for a decent-sounding empathetic viewpoint prioritizing individual liberty. I understand where this is coming from, I don't disagree myself, but then again who would?

And that's why we have to get into the specifics of "forcefully spreading their belief system and values to others" because that's what happens to queer people as status quo. We're legally and socially discriminated out of a lot of aspects of public life and often carry deep trauma from wrath and abuse incurred on the way. Conversion therapy is still legal in many places for fucks sake! The hell is that if not forcefully spreading a belief system?

Often times, the term this is justified under is "freedom of religion" - but really it's freedom to control and abuse others due to religious justification. The two freedoms are not equatable, therefore the balanced center between is not a neutral position.

Corporate pride advertising is super forced and very few queer people are actually on board with it. The term is "rainbow capitalism" and it's pretty derisive. Unfortunately that's all of what some people know of us - they don't know us as people, as communities, just like them; they know us as a rainbow flag on a TV screen and as a Tucker/LWT/[whoever's got opinions about us today] talk show segment, and so that's all they think we are. Nobody likes this, queer people least of all.

Please don't downvote just because it's an unpopular opinion, rather lets discuss the issue 👍

No. 👎

Except one thing is real and the other is not. There is no god, but there is definitely sexual attraction in forms beyond heterosexuality and gender expressions outside the heteronormative form. So there is a difference between spreading misinformation in form of religion or quite useful information on gender and sex.

because it’s an unpopular opinion

This is propaganda and misinformation, not an unpopular opinion.