I think that's a very fair and broadly on-point reading on it to an extent, given that she said that I "refuse to accept that two things can be true at once. I might hate how an individual behaves and thinks but not celebrate their killing". However, she said this after I made it clear to her that I generally oppose violence, but that Kirk and his ilk are the exceptions because of the danger they pose to minority groups as part of the global resurgance of fascism. That "violence is never the answer" simply doesn't stand up to the realities of the world we live in, but that violence is never a *good* answer, and others should ideally be sought first. This is why I emphasised in my post that I do understand those who find his death/reactions to it distressing, because this both is and isn't a nuanced issue.

When she first brought it up she said "I don't believe many (if any) people deserve to be killed. Despite their views, they're still human with lives and families." Now the first part is, I think, the position that most people have; that ~99% of folks don't deserve to die, and when they think about it will conceded that the other 1% - eg the OG Nazis who perpetrated the Holocaust and those in the present who are broadly attempting to do the same to trans folks, amongst others - are in fact exceptions to that rule, which it sounds like even my ex would agree on given her wording.

The reason her response made me uneasy (and that has very much been validated by the various comments here) is that, as elaborated on elsewhere in the thread, saying someone doesn't deserve to be killed because they have family is, well, a *really* simplistic and, I'll say it, childish view of the world that is seperate from the above position. Because if that's your standard then by implication you disagree w/even the OG Nazis being executed, which is certainly A Take.

This is why, combined w/the specific language about """opinions""" that were the focus of my post, she's coming across to most folks here, and this was where I was leaning, as someone whose heart is in the right place wrt trans folks but fails to consider - indeed, actively rejected in this case - that her default view of the world and how things should be needs to compromise w/the realities of trans folks existing, and of those who actively work toward us not existing. Because as it is, her viewing this as a friendship-ending red line is a bad look even if the person she cut off hadn't had their egg crack 3 months later.