Off the top of my head: LGBTQ people are significantly more likely to be assaulted or murdered than the average population: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2022/07/11/violentvictimiz...

Also, Ken Paxton, the Texas AG, has publicly stated he would be in favor of Texas banning being gay again

> I'd be hard-pressed to think of a more exaggerated use of the word "oppression".

How fortunate for you, and how exhausting for the rest of us, that you live in such a world.

You're telling me you haven't even heard of the drag bans popping up all over the country? That's queer culture, if you couldn't tell. (It's also, since you probably won't notice this right away, a veiled instrument for criminalizing trans people.)

> Does the fact that you view this group as oppressed make a difference on whether such a ban is more or less valid?

Well yes, because you won't ever see a ISD try to ban a book because it contains a heterosexual couple.

We can play dumb all day long, and sometimes that can be fun. But after a certain point we have to wade through the bullshit.

It's not about sexuality, it's not about protecting children, it's not about inappropriate content. When 100% of proposed book bans "conveniently" target books which, either tangentially or directly, address LGBT topics then clearly THAT is the reason they are being banned.

Of course, nobody is going to tell you that. Because saying "we want this book gone because gays" isn't very nice and doesn't sound very good. However, as human beings, we have been given the power of logic and deductive reasoning. We can look at patterns, locations, history of regions etc. and come to the conclusion that is what they're doing.