Assuming you are asking genuinely, here’s an answer.
Q wasn’t created as a result of V’s(or P’s) intolerance, it’s a specialisation of a larger group, P.
P and Q aren’t mutually exclusive, you can be both.
V can and do enjoy both P and it’s subgenre/offshoot Q.
If you don’t understand in general why larger social groups might sometimes give rise to more specilaised subgroups or offshoots (for reasons other than exclusion) then any answer you receive is not going to make sense to you.
Incidentally, the same explanation works for the cooking show example, as it’s the same basic premise.
I’m not the person who replied to you but I’m fairly confident that person was mimicking your phrasing with an example they thought was simpler for you to understand, in order for you to see how it sounded incorrect.
It seems you didn’t get the context of that, which is probably why it seemed like an odd reply.
in contextual translation:
If television viewers were accepting of cooking then why did they have to create a subgenre of cooking shows?
becomes
In the same way that cooking shows exist as a sub-genre of TV shows in general without requiring broadcasters to have first banned cooking on TV , queercore can exist without requiring punk to have first been intolerant of it’s LGBTQIA+ members.
If punk was “extremely LGBTQ+ acceptant”, then they did they have to create an offshoot? 🤔
I don’t think you understand punk
There’s no “have to” about it
I don’t, which is why I posted the question.
edit: I don’t understand punk, to be clear.
If television viewers were accepting of cooking then why did they have to create a subgenre of cooking shows?
Stop it with your relentless “logic”!
Hahaha. It was a stretch to be sure. The point is one doesn’t need to be exclusive of the other.
Shame on you for not recognizing a famous line from Futurama! 😛
Man, I’m old and too uncool for Lemmy.
sorry, I guess I’m also too old to make a good joke ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That… doesn’t make sense. Viewers don’t make new shows.
Ok. Your question also didn’t make sense.
Punk is genre P LGBTQ+ are viewers V Queercore is subgenre Q
I said:
P accepts V V creates Q If P accepts/includes V why V create separate Q?
TV viewers are V Cooking show is P Cooking show subgenre is Q
You said:
V accepts P then why did V create Q
How should your response make sense to what I’ve said, logically speaking?
Assuming you are asking genuinely, here’s an answer.
Q wasn’t created as a result of V’s(or P’s) intolerance, it’s a specialisation of a larger group, P.
P and Q aren’t mutually exclusive, you can be both.
V can and do enjoy both P and it’s subgenre/offshoot Q.
If you don’t understand in general why larger social groups might sometimes give rise to more specilaised subgroups or offshoots (for reasons other than exclusion) then any answer you receive is not going to make sense to you.
Incidentally, the same explanation works for the cooking show example, as it’s the same basic premise.
I’m not the person who replied to you but I’m fairly confident that person was mimicking your phrasing with an example they thought was simpler for you to understand, in order for you to see how it sounded incorrect.
It seems you didn’t get the context of that, which is probably why it seemed like an odd reply.
in contextual translation:
becomes