All Things LGBTQ+ (4 Viewers)

[Farb]

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right now

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/sup...y-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.html

• The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a unanimous defeat to LGBT couples in a high-profile case over whether Philadelphia could refuse to contract with a Roman Catholic adoption agency that says its religious beliefs prevent it from working with same-sex foster parents.
• Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion for a majority of the court that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by refusing to contract with Catholic Social Services once it learned that the organization would not certify same-sex couples for adoption.

I will admit, I was hopeful for this decision by the SCOTUS but I was surprised by the unanimous decision.

While I don't think there is anything wrong, per se, with same sex couples adopting and raising children (I actually think it is a good thing as it not an abortion) but I also did not want to see the state force a religious institution to bend to a societal norm.

 

[Snarky Sack]

You are hilarious.

If I'm wrong, explain your logic. No link needed.

 

[MT15]

If I'm wrong, explain your logic. No link needed.

Those are not rights, those are at best social conventions. It’s hilarious that you seriously think women value those “rights” (it seriously makes me giggle) over oh, I don’t know, equal pay for equal work, or bodily autonomy like every male has.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Those are not rights, those are at best social conventions. It’s hilarious that you seriously think women value those “rights” (it seriously makes me giggle) over oh, I don’t know, equal pay for equal work, or bodily autonomy like every male has.

So . . . do you oppose letting biological males who identify as women into women's locker rooms or support it?

Women have nearly every right that men have. Especially bodily autonomy.

 

[MT15]

So . . . do you oppose letting biological males who identify as women into women's locker rooms or support it?

I think that people will find ways to deal with these things. I think it depends on the individual situation, and exactly what the facilities are. Someone who has completely transitioned physically, no problem at all. If they are in between, then it depends. Most people are reasonable and are capable of working out issues without demonizing others.

What is exceedingly stupid is politicians forcing people into the restrooms or locker rooms according to chromosomes, and ignoring the realities of the situation. IMO the right is doing this because they need an “other” to scare their base with. It motivates their voters. Of course, it’s horrible for the actual people involved and will do harm to some trans folks as they are persecuted and hated. But the right only cares about their own privilege and power, IMO, because we see them pushing this issue.

 

[Snarky Sack]

I think that people will find ways to deal with these things. I think it depends on the individual situation, and exactly what the facilities are. Someone who has completely transitioned physically, no problem at all. If they are in between, then it depends. Most people are reasonable and are capable of working out issues without demonizing others.

A bit polyanna, I'm afraid. There is much rancor from the left IMO about this issue, such as this entitled cupcake:



They are not willing or possibly even able to work anything out other than demanding their own way, and throwing a temper tantrum when they do not get it. IMO.

Grown man strips down in a women's changing room where my wife and (hypothetical) granddaughter are changing out of their swimsuits, I absolutely will demonize him. He can work out his own issues by changing in the back of his white van.

What is exceedingly stupid is politicians forcing people into the restrooms or locker rooms according to chromosomes, and ignoring the realities of the situation. IMO the right is doing this because they need an “other” to scare their base with. It motivates their voters.

If so, then the transactivist movement plays into their hands.

Of course, it’s horrible for the actual people involved and will do harm to some trans folks as they are persecuted and hated. But the right only cares about their own privilege and power, IMO, because we see them pushing this issue.

I had come up with an ideal solution to the whole restroom/locker room/changing room problem.

So the idea is this:

Embrace the idea that biological sex and sociological gender are completely different things.

Label restrooms, changing rooms, and locker rooms as either women or men or as either male or female. If they are women/men, then I could indeed use the womens merely by identifying as woman, which I would be doing by walking into the door marked "women." If they are labeled male or female, I would have to be a biological female or male to use the appropriate one.

Who chooses whether the bathrooms are to be women or men, or male or female? Why the restroom owner, of course! Who else?

 

[MT15]

You always fall for this “outrage porn” don’t you? So because one person is upset, we should demonize everyone? Or also how do we know that YouTube video is real and not satire?

We’ve had transgender folks forever. Seen them out and about my entire life. They use the bathroom they need to use. Generally, nobody is the wiser, especially in a woman‘s restroom because there are stalls and nobody sees anything.

Every locker room I’ve ever been in also contains stalls. Women who are uncomfortable changing in front of others can change in the stalls. Gyms usually have shower stalls, or at least the ones I’ve been in. Trans people who haven’t had the bottom surgery won’t be changing in front of everyone. It just wouldn’t happen. If by some chance it would happen, then that would be a problem with that person and it can be dealt with. (I’m talking here about adults in gyms)

Schools routinely make allowances for trans students all the time - they arrange a private changing room, or something similar. You probably know that already, right?

I don’t like your labeling idea at all. Not needed, needlessly complicates things. I just want to use the bathroom when I need to.

 

[Snarky Sack]

You always fall for this “outrage porn” don’t you? So because one person is upset, we should demonize everyone? Or also how do we know that YouTube video is real and not satire?

I agree that with a transactivist, it is often very difficult to tell the difference.

We’ve had transgender folks forever. Seen them out and about my entire life. They use the bathroom they need to use. Generally, nobody is the wiser, especially in a woman‘s restroom because there are stalls and nobody sees anything.

When nobody is the wiser, there is no issue.

Every locker room I’ve ever been in also contains stalls. Women who are uncomfortable changing in front of others can change in the stalls. Gyms usually have shower stalls, or at least the ones I’ve been in.

So you do not believe that females should have female only spaces, because female only spaces often have stalls or dividers?

Trans people who haven’t had the bottom surgery won’t be changing in front of everyone. It just wouldn’t happen. If by some chance it would happen, then that would be a problem with that person and it can be dealt with.

Dealt with, how?

Most of this is Riley Gaines talking about the unfairness of having to compete with Transwoman Lia Thomas, a male swimmer. At 2:20, she decribes having to share a locker room with him.



Do you agree with the way Thomas was dealt with?

You can comment on the issue of males competing unfairly with females if you like.

Also about the mob that attacked Gaines for her speech.

*EDIT* Maybe the mob was being satirical.

(I’m talking here about adults in gyms)

The problem of males wanting to enter female spaces affects females of all ages.

Schools routinely make allowances for trans students all the time - they arrange a private changing room, or something similar. You probably know that already, right?

I applaud schools that do. I disagree with schools who allow biological males in girls spaces. It is such schools that foment hatred for transgender folk.

I don’t like your labeling idea at all. Not needed, needlessly complicates things. I just want to use the bathroom when I need to.

And you don't mind if there is a male in there with you? If so, that is fine.

The women and girls in my life are not and I honor their right to privacy.

 

[MT15]

There aren’t enough eyeroll emojis.

 

[brandon]

I agree that with a transactivist, it is often very difficult to tell the difference.

When nobody is the wiser, there is no issue.

So you do not believe that females should have female only spaces, because female only spaces often have stalls or dividers?


Dealt with, how?

Most of this is Riley Gaines talking about the unfairness of having to compete with Transwoman Lia Thomas, a male swimmer. At 2:20, she decribes having to share a locker room with him.



Do you agree with the way Thomas was dealt with?

You can comment on the issue of males competing unfairly with females if you like.

Also about the mob that attacked Gaines for her speech.

*EDIT* Maybe the mob was being satirical.


The problem of males wanting to enter female spaces affects females of all ages.

I applaud schools that do. I disagree with schools who allow biological males in girls spaces. It is such schools that foment hatred for transgender folk.

And you don't mind if there is a male in there with you? If so, that is fine.

The women and girls in my life are not and I honor their right to privacy.

You spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about penises.

 

[Snarky Sack]

You spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about penises.

Odd response to a post in which I did not say "penis" or "penises."

What's on your mind, brandon?

If it's penises, don't worry. It won't make me find you icky.

 

[RobF]

There aren’t enough eyeroll emojis.

Eh, just ignore them. All they're doing is taking replies as an opportunity to repeat their already addressed irrational rhetoric.

Just watch, they'll probably reply to this going, "Oh, where did anyone address <insert already addressed irrational rhetoric>" in an effort to do exactly the same thing, again. Probably with another shoddy rabble-rousing YouTube video.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Eh, just ignore them. All they're doing is taking replies as an opportunity to repeat their already addressed irrational rhetoric.

Just watch, they'll probably reply to this going, "Oh, where did anyone address <insert already addressed irrational rhetoric>" in an effort to do exactly the same thing, again. Probably with another shoddy rabble-rousing YouTube video.

Amen. I'm pretty sure that what they have referred to as "rhetorical training" was specifically propaganda training. They keep using every propaganda trick that there is. They haven't figured out that most of the people are here to get away from all that dis-informational propaganda on other social media platforms.

They don't get that those propaganda tricks aren't going to get them any traction or converts here. They say that in war you should let the opposing side make mistakes. Disagreeing isn't war and shouldn't be seen or treated as war, but I'm more than happy to let them keep making the mistakes they keep making here.

The mistakes they make gives them some sense of gratification and it drives people away from their line of thinking, so it's a win-win.

 

[zztop]

Another reason why I have disdain for religion:

My parents attend a baptist church and their pastor spoke out against LGBTQ in his sermon. The words "LGBTQ creed", "going after our children", and "libraries/indoctrination" were mentioned. It is sad people focus on hypothetical scenarios with no bearing in reality, instead of real problems and issues in this world.

 

[el caliente]

I've given you two answers to the first question you asked.

I asked the same question you asked.

You refuse to answer that and ask another question instead.

You don't seem to be operating in good faith.

You could show you're operating in good faith by simply answering your own question. The choice is entirely yours.

However you didn’t answer the first question. You have given me two answers, but not THE answer. What is a woman to La-La?

 

[Snarky Sack]

However you didn’t answer the first question. You have given me two answers, but not THE answer. What is a woman to La-La?

*munches popcorn*

 

[LA - L.A.]

However you didn’t answer the first question. You have given me two answers, but not THE answer. What is a woman to La-La?

Let's keep the actual sequence of events straight:

1. You asked the question "What is a woman?." That was your original question in it's entirety.
2. I gave you two definitions of what a woman is based on two different perspectives.
3. I then asked you what your definition of woman is.
4. You replied with "I want to know your definition first."
5. I pointed out to you that I already gave you two definitions of woman.
6. You replied with, "but I want to know LA - L.A.'s definition of woman first."
7. I told you that if you were acting in good faith you would tell me what your definition is, since I already answered your first question.
8. You now reply saying I didn't answer your first question, which I very much absofrickinglutely did and you go on to say that I didn't give you "THE" answer.

You admit that I did in fact answer the question you asked, but because it wasn't the answer you wanted, you're inaccurately saying I didn't answer your question.

Any benefit of doubt that you might be acting in good faith is gone, so I'm disengaging from this conversation with you.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Americans are “frustrated and anxious”, lamented former vice-president Mike Pence. The country is “in a precarious position” assessed North Carolina’s lieutenant governor Mark Robinson. And Glenn Jacobs, a former professional wrestling star and current mayor of Knox county, Tennessee, declared that “these are hard times”.

What could be the cause of such hardship? To the Republican presidential candidates who spoke in Washington DC on Friday at a major gathering of the religious right, the culprit was American society’s acceptance of transgender people and the broader LGBTQ+ community.

The language and imagery is extreme and full of conspiracy theories.

“We are facing the greatest challenge this country has ever seen, certainly in my lifetime,” Missouri senator Josh Hawley said to the crowd of hundreds gathered for the Faith & Freedom Coalition’s annual Road to Majority Policy Conference.

He described the challenge as “a new Marxism that is rising in this country”, one that tells Americans, among other things: “That there’s no such thing as male and female, that there are not two genders. There’s 2,000 genders and it tells our children that the way God made them is wrong.”

“These new Marxists want to give America a new religion. They want to impose on us the religion of woke. It is the religion of transgenderism, critical race theory and open borders multiculturalism, and they are shoving it down our throats,” Hawley said…….

After Roe’s overturn, Republicans target trans rights using extremist rhetoric

Republican presidential candidates attacked trans people and the LGBTQ+ community at a gathering of the religious right last week

www.theguardian.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

Who is more a woman? the butchiest lesbian tomboy without a feminine bone in her body or the girliest transgender woman?

This back and forth over who is a woman is tiring and just keeps going in circles

They both should have the same rights that anyone else has

Either one should be able to be a school teacher if they are qualified to be one

Posted this before