>About the whole “existence” bit - I think you’re unintentionally arguing a straw man? I never asserted that not having a rainbow logo meant that you must clearly hate the gays.

Then I misunderstood what you were saying. I guess that goes to show the risk we take when we try to read more into the text than what it says.

>For certain? Not from the text, no. I’ve been clear this whole time that I feel it is likely what motivated it

The OP either posted well after an app changed their icon or an app took 20 days to change their icon (or something in between).

It could be related to pride month, but I don't know that you can draw that conclusion.

Juneteenth seems more likely and makes his argument more poignant since the icon is going to change back in a day.

Regardleas, changing an icon for a day or a month is ridiculous and annoying.

>That said, I found a few transphobic comments in the authors HN history with no real effort, so I feel pretty comfortable with the assumption.

Do you have examples? Also, I don't consider dead naming or using pronouns the trans person used to use but not longer to be transphobic, so if you have posts other than that I would like to see them.

>I would encourage you to learn to recognize this kind of dog-whistle. The explicit omission of what political group motivated a rant centered on politics is a common rhetorical technique.

You know what else is a rhetorical technique, calling people transphobic based on nothing more than conjecture.

We are at a point where everything and nothing can be considered a dog whistle.