All Things LGBTQ+ (3 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.

 

[SystemShock]

No drag queens at Disney? You've never seen Little Mermaid have you?

The Ursula character, her makeup was inspired on the makeup that Harris Glenn Milstead wore as Divine, but the character itself is not a drag queen, and the makeup not really that exaggerated, even for a cartoon.

 

[SystemShock]

i like you posted this, because it shows how people focus on the exception rather than the normal. Even you know this kind of stuff is the exception and not the norm.

Is it, now?

Like Boy scout leaders and Priests who molest children is the exception of the trade, not the norm.

Sure, but neither priests or boy scout leaders are night club performers sexing it up.

But i still can't understand why you are still wondering why we are focusing on this.. YOU POSTED IT IN THE LGTBQ THREAD. obviusly you want to focus on that part of the video, otherwise you wouldn't have posted it in this thread... And there is nothing wrong with expanding the discussion of the topic, it is done in EVERY SINGLE thread.
So if not to focus on LGTBQ part of that video, please tell us what the video suggestes?

No, I do NOT want to focus on that part of the video. I am simply replying to what you and others post. YOU are the one who seems focused on that part of the video.

You are telling me that you don't get the point of the video? The premise is explained in the 1st 30 seconds.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Sure, but neither priests or boy scout leaders are night club performers sexing it up.

is that a FACT or an ASSUMPTION?
i would bet most Drag Queens have never 'sexed it up' at a night club..

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

No, I do NOT want to focus on that part of the video. I am simply replying to what you and others post. YOU are the one who seems focused on that part of the video.

You are telling me that you don't get the point of the video? The premise is explained in the 1st 30 seconds.

he mentions priests also. Have you posted this in any religeon threads?
what part of the video would you like to focus on then? because when you posted the video, you left no comment. why not? you left no discussion on you original post of the video? why not? but now you don't like someone picking apart the video.
And yes, i have a problen comparing Drag Queens to Priests, Boyscout leaders and TV executives that moeste children. in that case, you can add every single profession..
But like i said, if you think its irrelevant to the video, ok, fine. Why are you so against discussiong the topic seperately?

 

[SystemShock]

is that a FACT or an ASSUMPTION?

Have you ever seen a scout master or a priest sexing it up during a jamboree or mass?

i would bet most Drag Queens have never 'sexed it up' at a night club..

???
Sexing it up as in making it sexy, not as having sex.

 

[SystemShock]

he mentions priests also. Have you posted this in any religeon threads?
what part of the video would you like to focus on then? because when you posted the video, you left no comment. why not? you left no discussion on you original post of the video? why not? but now you don't like someone picking apart the video.
And yes, i have a problen comparing Drag Queens to Priests, Boyscout leaders and TV executives that moeste children. in that case, you can add every single profession..
But like i said, if you think its irrelevant to the video, ok, fine. Why are you so against discussiong the topic seperately?

The highlighted part, that wasn't the point of the video. The video was a comment on the over-exposure of kids to sexual innuendo and all things straight and not-straight, in the name of ideology, to the point that feels less like inclusion/awareness and more like promotion.

But some of you saw drag queens, got your jimmies rustled, and came in hot.

 

[coldseat]

The highlighted part, that wasn't the point of the video. The video was a comment on the over-exposure of kids to sexual innuendo and all things not-straight, in the name of ideology, to the point that feels less like inclusion/awareness and more like promotion.

But some of you saw drag queens, got your jimmies rustled, and came in hot.

So does the sexual innuendos on kids programming on Nickelodeon, Disney and other kids media classifies as "all things not-straight"?

Is there a problem with kids being exposed to "not straight" things that aren't sexual innuendos?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

The Ursula character, her makeup was inspired on the makeup that Harris Glenn Milstead wore as Divine, but the character itself is not a drag queen, and the makeup not really that exaggerated, even for a cartoon.

While you were Googling Divine's birth name, the point went sailing over your head.

 

[CoolBrees]

Oh my god you haven't seen drag queens inside Disneyland?!? Um you must not go very often.

By the way- the after dark parties are one of, if not the only, nights adults can dress up.

Here's some help-

https://www.undercovertourist.com/blog/disneyland-gay-days/

 

[SystemShock]

So does the sexual innuendos on kids programming on Nickelodeon, Disney and other kids media classifies as "all things not-straight"?

No, it doesn't. That's my bad. I'll edit. I got syphoned into drag queens, when the video and the comment touches upon a range of things.

 

[SystemShock]

While you were Googling Divine's birth name, the point went sailing over your head.

Which point was that? What there some hidden meaning in your comment about the little mermaid I missed?

 

[SystemShock]

Oh my god you haven't seen drag queens inside Disneyland?!? Um you must not go very often.

By the way- the after dark parties are one of, if not the only, nights adults can dress up.

Here's some help-

https://www.undercovertourist.com/blog/disneyland-gay-days/

Not in Disneyworld. Last time I was in Disneyland was 1981-82. I'm more familiar with Disney Downtown in Orlando. Haven't been there since covid, but before covid, I went to Disneyworld every year, sometimes twice a year.

But to be clear, I was referring to the Disney brand, not park attendees. The link you provide states they are not affiliated with Disney. Also, keep in mind the context of my comment, if is possible for you. Seems context is an endangered species around here. I thought the princess to Disney connection would be obvious, and that kids would be familiar with a pricess.

On a side note, I have seen an actual princess in Disneyworld, but she was wearing shorts, shirt, and tennis shoes.

 

[LA - L.A.]

For anyone that wants to know Bill Maher's real agenda with the "Kid 'n Prey" portion of his New Rules segment, re-watch it very carefully, while reminding yourself that in 2002 Disney cancelled Bill Maher's show Politically Incorrect.

Bill Maher was not speaking out of concern for children being exposed to to much sexualization, which was not Bill's point by the way.

Bill's alleged point he states very clearly at the end of the segment. He wants adults to stop talking to children about inclusion of all gender identities, because Bill thinks that it entraps children into doing things they wouldn't "normally" do.

Bill was arguing, if you pay really close attention to what he actually said, that teaching children to be inclusive of LGBTQIA+ has become promoting of LGBTQIA+, and that it gets kids to do things they "normally" wouldn't do, which he means some of the kids might become LGBTQIA+ as well, even though it's not "normal" for them to be so.

It was a passive aggressive attack on Disney and LGBTQIA+ inclusion under the guise of "protecting" children.

However, the only reason Bill was passively aggressively attacking LGBTQIA+ is because of Disney's association with LGBTQIA+ inclusion. Bill's real agenda in that segment was to yet again grind his axe with Disney as a disgruntled, fired employee. He's been doing that every chance he gets since 2002. Every harm to children he discusses in the segment, he always brings it back to Disney.

Don't take my word on it. Re-watch it and take a shot every time Bill says Disney. You're going to need a full bottle and a designated driver.

Anybody that takes anything Bill says seriously is only hearing what they want to hear, and only when they want to hear it.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Which point was that? What there some hidden meaning in your comment about the little mermaid I missed?

Beyond the obvious preexisting connection between Disney and Drag Queens, the fact that you are using "seen in Disney World" as any sort of measure is ridiculous.

 

[CoolBrees]

Not in Disneyworld. Last time I was in Disneyland was 1981-82. I'm more familiar with Disney Downtown in Orlando. Haven't been there since covid, but before covid, I went to Disneyworld every year, sometimes twice a year.

But to be clear, I was referring to the Disney brand, not park attendees. The link you provide states they are not affiliated with Disney. Also, keep in mind the context of my comment, if is possible for you. Seems context is an endangered species around here. I thought the princess to Disney connection would be obvious, and that kids would be familiar with a pricess.

On a side note, I have seen an actual princess in Disneyworld, but she was wearing shorts, shirt, and tennis shoes.

The context I was originally replying to was that Drag Story Time is an issue needing to be dealt with. I was replying to you specifically because you were the one who brought up story time.

I tried to discuss the point by offering a different perspective, where a woman dressed up in costume to read to children. I asked for differences that must be too nuanced for my public school brain.

In counter, you made the point regarding Disney parks.

Odd comparison aside, I assumed you hadn't been to Disney because they host all kinds of events and even carve out an exception to their "No adults in costume" rule explicitly for them on a specific night.

This is also the original reason why DeSantis picked a fight with Disneyworld, if you recall.

So I am confused where I ignored context; I believe I added it. I even indulged your strawman about Disney.

So would you mind answering my original question-

What's the difference between the two people dressed up and reading to children that makes one worth this discussion?

 

[Farb]

No. I refuse to pretend you don't think there aren't many thousands of examples. They aren't going to write news articles about 17 year olds who get a nose job or butt implants.

I guarantee that trans people don't make up anywhere close to the majority people under the age of 18 who have had some type of cosmetic surgery.

Ok. So you consider breast removal on the same level as a nose job. At least you are honest.

Ok, if there is so little as to be almost non-existent, then why not just ban non-reversible medical procedures on minors, like they do tattoos?

 

[Farb]

A. That supposedly happened in Canada and it is the first described case. And 2. Doesn’t Daily Signal make shirt up? I may have my propaganda sources confused, lol.

Oh, and Clinical Case Reports is essentially just a journal to publish weird cases. It’s not a study or anything.

So, unless you got something else, this means nothing.

Are you saying this was a made up case or an actual case of doctors removing fingers?

 

[samiam5211]

Ok. So you consider breast removal on the same level as a nose job. At least you are honest.

Ok, if there is so little as to be almost non-existent, then why not just ban non-reversible medical procedures on minors, like they do tattoos?

So your problem isn't with minors getting permanent cosmetic surgery like you say.

Your problem is with trans kids having surgery.