LGBTQ+ People Or Symbols On Stamps .

I am a graduate of Von Steuben High School. At the time von was the second smallest high school in attendance in the city of Chicago. No football team.

The Cambridge Biographical Encyclopedia says he served at the siege of Prague at 14 years of age.

His Wikipedia page says "at 14 years old, he observed his father directing Prussian engineers in the 1744 siege of Prague" but when you click on the link for the siege it says it was from June to December 1742.

Talk about being exposed to war early! von Stueben turned 12 in September 1742.

On 12 October 2013, Cuba released this AMERICA (UPAEP) stamp for the Fight Against Discrimination: Fight Against Homophobia.

One of a set of 4 stamps, the others being against racial discrimination, child molestation, and discrimination based on disabilities.

https://philatelylately.com/2021/02...s-on-stamps/

I wonder how Cuba is managing these issues?

Bessie Smith is more famous, but I always liked Ma Rainey's singing more.

Frederick the Great, King of Prussia

Germany Scott 355



Here is a Wikipedia article called Sexuality of Frederick the Great

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexua...ck_the_Great

Most of the people in cavedweller's post are in my Cambridge Biographical Encyclopedia, as is of course Frederick the Great.

They're in the book because of their achievements, something I would've thought might be more important than any sexual proclivity.

On the basis that this thread exists, should we not have a thread for the deaf, led off with Beethoven?

How about autism, with Alan Turing (who by rights, assuming he's on a stamp, should also be in this thread, shouldn't he?)

Without mentioning anything about these people, other than that they are/were LGBTQ+, the thread runs the great risk of being reductive.

After all, being LGBTQ+, deaf &/or autistic have one thing in common. It may not be immediately apparent to a casual observer.

It also brings into question what is meant by 'family friendly' according to the rules. Given that LGBTQ+ is such a large component of the zeitgeist these days, I'm sure the average "10 year old daughter" sees enough of it elsewhere. Who would want their children or grandchildren reading the link on Frederick the Great's sexuality?

The subjects on the stamps, I'm quite confident, would want to be remembered for what they did over and above anything else. I'm sure nobody wants to see grist for the Cultural Marxism mill, be it a conspiracy theory or not, but if the only purpose of this thread is to highlight that these people are LGBTQ+, then might those theorists have a point?

This sounds a lot like "lets have people go back in the closet" to me.

Reducing people to their skin color and/or sexual preferences and even further by defying sub-groups is the thing now. It benefits political groups the most and the media jumps on board as well. There is little benefit to politicians in having a unified people but great benefits to them in having a tribal mentality, pitting groups against each other. It is about control and power.

I don't see great harm in celebrating a great singer or physicist or military figure for what they look like or who they slept with but it IS the very essence of reduction.

So long as everyone realizes that the people being celebrated are more than a certain skin pigment or sexual being who cares? Leave children out of it all though. It is hard enough growing up without having someone plant nonsense in your head that you are an oppressor or oppressed or the wrong gender etc.

PS: Who cares if you have a white male or a trans person of color flying your jet to NYC? DO make sure that they are the best at flying the darn airplane and that pigment and sexual preferences were not the hiring criteria.

Of course the average person realizes that there is more to these people. But when a particular group has been marginalized and even hunted down and murdered for being who they are, then when the opportunity arises to show some pride in some important people who happen to belong to that group it should be done. That is not "reduction" but expansion. It is an attempt to make others aware of some important history which they may not be aware of.

I am going to start a thread for great painters with one ear.

I strongly agree with revcollector's last post. Very well stated.

This is about the level I would expect. This is a serious issue and all you can do is trivialize it.

That hurts.