All Things LGBTQ+ (1 Viewer)

[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.

 

[MT15]

This, BTW is the other side of the sports issue, and individual who's allowed the use of PED's (steroids/male hormone) to be able to compete, whereas males are not.

Off topic from my post, but what if the levels of hormones are tested and are within normal ranges for cis males? Should we test all cis males who want to compete for testosterone levels, since the naturally occurring range is pretty broad and therefore some cis men have an advantage? I think each sports’ governing bodies are perfectly capable of setting guidelines governing participation. I think broad bans on participation for trans people are probably not a great idea.

The point of my post was the idiocy of forcing the man pictured into using women’s public restrooms. The sports angle is actually a minor part of the entire trans issue, to me. I know you disagree, but I had hoped you might see the bathroom issue as affecting far more people.

 

[brandon]

I'll give a nuanced answer to that, if I may. For the purposes of discussion on this board, I accept that idea. In real life or on other boards, I take a different position. I would only ask that we be consistent that gender is different from biological sex.

Sounds good. I'll play along. Sex with sex things, gender with gender things. Got it.

Based on the definition that I just agreed to, I can say that a transgender woman should have all the rights of a CIS woman. But that does not mean she would have all the rights of a biological female.

Well, I'm not sure I agree in 100% of cases, but for the sake of argument, ok. Playing by your rules. A transgender woman should have all the rights of a cisgender woman, but not necessarily all the rights of a biological female. Woman = gender, female = sex. Got it.

Agreement on that would be the simple solution to the debate about biological males going into restrooms set aside for biological females and playing on teams set aside for biological females.

For example, a 16-year-old biological male who is trans can identify as an adult woman. They should have the right to dress as they please be called by the pronoun they choose, and by the name that they choose.

But, they would not be allowed to vote because they cannot simply identify as being 18 when they are only 16.

By the same token, they cannot simply identify as a biological female and therefore cannot use safe spaces for biological females, including sports teams, locker rooms, and bathrooms.

Allowing biological males to enter those safe spaces removes the right of biological females to have access to safe spaces.

Well, hold on a minute. Have you ever been to the "male's room"? I haven't. I've only been to the men's room.

Setting aside the fact that I've thoroughly debunked any safety arguments regarding bathrooms, I've never seen a bathroom labeled "Female's Restroom." They're always labeled "Women's Restroom".

Female = sex
Woman = gender

Ergo, if a trans woman is to have all the rights of a cis woman, per your argument, they should have access to the women's restroom, as that is their gender.

 

[SystemShock]

Off topic from my post, but what if the levels of hormones are tested and are within normal ranges for cis males? Should we test all cis males who want to compete for testosterone levels, since the naturally occurring range is pretty broad and therefore some cis men have an advantage? I think each sports’ governing bodies are perfectly capable of setting guidelines governing participation. I think broad bans on participation for trans people are probably not a great idea.

The point of my post was the idiocy of forcing the man pictured into using women’s public restrooms. The sports angle is actually a minor part of the entire trans issue, to me. I know you disagree, but I had hoped you might see the bathroom issue as affecting far more people.

It is off topic to your post, yes.

 

[SystemShock]

No, I freely admit that human males cannot transform into human females and vice versa.

Was that so hard?

What I said was that this question is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. No one is making this argument. It's a straw man.

I asked you, if that statement was part of why you stated I aligned with the bigotry of the Bible. You said yes. Very germane to our exchange.

It is a biological fact that gender in humans is a spectrum, and humans may be a different gender than their birth-assigned biological sex. This is the thing you keep ignoring.

What is the biological fact that makes someone a drag queen? Or Two-spirited? Or ambimegender? Adamas? Ambomec? I am not going to list all 72, but let's start with the biological facts about those.

It seems like you agree on this particular issue. Maybe not to the degree of "abomination," but your views align with typical American conservative/Christian views on transgenderism, no matter how much you stamp your feet in disagreement.

The color commentary is getting tiresome... none of my arguments have anything to do with anything conservative or Christian.

I'll give you some reading that generally shows that if someone is a Christian, there's room for interpretation on these subjects:

I don't need to read that to know that Christians are fond of re-interpret the Bible to fit modern morality standards.

But, most important to this discussion, you don't have to believe the Bible to be a bigot.

So now I am a bigot. GG.

Do you believe gender is a spectrum, and that someone can be a different gender than their birth-assigned biological sex?

Yes, but so what? Practically, gender has become "what I think I am/what I identify as". Yet, you identifying as something doesn't mean you are that something.

Do you believe this is a completely natural part of human biology, and that these people should have the same rights, priveleges, and if necessary, accomodations, as everyone else?

It is part of the psyche, and those people should have the same rights, privileges, accommodations, and even protection as everyone else. Just remember than "everyone else" should also have rights, privileges, accommodations, and protection too.

 

[brandon]

Was that so hard?

It wasn't hard at all. In fact, I addressed it in other posts. I gave you a more nuanced answer before that you ignored.

I asked you, if that statement was part of why you stated I aligned with the bigotry of the Bible. You said yes. Very germane to our exchange.

Your reasoning for asking the irrelevant question is also irrelevant.

What is the biological fact that makes someone a drag queen? Or Two-spirited? Or ambimegender? Adamas? Ambomec? I am not going to list all 72, but let's start with the biological facts about those.

How about we just start simple? Do you believe a transgender woman and a transgender man can exist without it being a mental illness?

We're gonna need some middle school transgender courses before we can graduate to the Ph.D level courses.

The color commentary is getting tiresome... none of my arguments have anything to do with anything conservative or Christian.

I have not once said that your comments have anything to do with Christians or conservatives. What I am trying to express to you is that your particular biases are completely aligned with the biases of Christians and conservatives. As I said, you don't have to be a Christian or a conservative to be a bigot share common beliefs.

I don't need to read that to know that Christians are fond of re-interpret the Bible to fit modern morality standards.

I don't disagree. But at the end of the tunnel, I come out with a belief system that affirms the LGBTQ+ community, and you don't.

So now I am a bigot. GG.

Again. It's your mirror, I'm just holding it up for you to see.

Yes, but so what? Practically, gender has become "what I think I am/what I identify as". Yet, you identifying as something doesn't mean you are that something.

So you believe gender is a spectrum, but you don't believe it means you "are" something. That's you again conflating gender and sex.

Being a transgender woman doesn't make you a biological female. But it does make you a person who deserves all the rights, privileges, accomodations, and protections afforded to women.

It is part of the psyche, and those people should have the same rights, privileges, accommodations, and even protection as everyone else. Just remember than "everyone else" should also have rights, privileges, accommodations, and protection too.

What sorts of rights, privileges, accomodations, and protections are you suggesting "everyone else" needs that they don't already have?

 

[Snarky Sack]

Sounds good. I'll play along. Sex with sex things, gender with gender things. Got it.
.
Well, I'm not sure I agree in 100% of cases, but for the sake of argument, ok. Playing by your rules. A transgender woman should have all the rights of a cisgender woman, but not necessarily all the rights of a biological female. Woman = gender, female = sex. Got it.

Thank you for accepting the premise, even if only for this conversation.

Well, hold on a minute. Have you ever been to the "male's room"? I haven't. I've only been to the men's room.

Setting aside the fact that I've thoroughly debunked any safety arguments regarding bathrooms, I've never seen a bathroom labeled "Female's Restroom." They're always labeled "Women's Restroom".

Good points. It's so happens that when I was in the Army we had bathrooms labeled mail latrine and female latrine, but those are exceptions and your point is well taken.

Female = sex
Woman = gender

Ergo, if a trans woman is to have all the rights of a cis woman, per your argument, they should have access to the women's restroom, as that is their gender.

There is a simple solution, due to the fact that it is not set in stone that we call bathrooms women's men's girls and boys. That convention comes out of a time when we were less enlightened and did not realize that biological males could be women.

We can just as easily call them female or male bathrooms. Same for sports teams.

So maybe the question is which should we do? To find the answer, we should ask ourselves why women/female's bathrooms are for women? Is it because of gender or biological sex?

The answer seems obvious to me that it is because of biological sex. Women are not concerned about privacy or feel unsafe if a man comes into their bathroom just because men don't wear dresses lipstick and high heels. That's not the point. The point is that biological males in a woman's bathroom present safety and privacy concerns that biological females do not.

Even more so with locker rooms and sports teams. Almost no young females would be comfortable with a male walking into the locker room while they are changing and then stripping down himself. Or herself if her gender is woman or girl. She may walk in wearing a skirt and a blouse, but when the skirt comes off and Mr. Willie pops out, females will be embarrassed and some will be frightened.

I wonder why we never see stories of females who are transboys wanting to get into the boys locker room?

For sports, the reason we separate males from females is that males go through a puberty that gives them far more strength and speed and somewhat more height than women. So males competing against females is patently unfair. If left to grow that phenomena will be the end of female sports.

Now here is the beauty part. Agreeing on all this means that there is an element of choice now. Let each organization decide whether it's bathrooms will be male/female or women/men. If a shop owner decides your bathrooms will be women/men therefore biological males are welcome in the women's room, their customers can decide whether that is the place they want to shop. Same if the store owner makes the opposite decision.

The same goes for the organizers of a sports leagues and teams.

This also introduces the element of informed consent. A female who sees a sign on the bathroom door that says "women" will know that this will include biological males. Seems like a good way for shop owners to avoid lawsuits also.

Government organizations like school districts can't make that decision based on input of citizens to school boards.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I have not once said that your comments have anything to do with Christians or conservatives. What I am trying to express to you is that your particular biases are completely aligned with the biases of Christians and conservatives. As I said, you don't have to be a Christian or a conservative to be a bigot share common beliefs.

This exactly. He may not like to hear it, but it's true.

 

[Snarky Sack]

A General in the Space Force openly states that she will consider discriminating against service members who are LGBT-Q+, or who have children who are trans. She will consider doing this by rejecting them in favor of a less qualified candidate in a position that would require them to live in a state not LGBT-Q+ friendly enough.



According to the Space Force website:

In addition to its Headquarters, the Space Force has major operations in California, at Los Angeles Air Force Base and Vandenberg Space Force Base; in Colorado, at Buckley Space Force Base, Peterson Space Force Base and Schriever Space Force Base; and in Florida, at Patrick Space Force Base.

I think we can make the logical leap that of the three states, California, Colorado, and Florida, it is Florida that she is concerned about. Florida only has one Space Force base. California and Colorado two and three bases. So my question is this:

Why unlawfully discriminate against LBGT-Q+ Space Force members, when the much more obvious solution is to move Patrick Space Force Base out of Florida, or simply shut it down and assign its various units to the more trans-friendly states?

 

[Snarky Sack]

This same kind of thing happens to parents who try to speak at school board meeting about LGBT-Q+ issues. In this case, it happens to be a teacher who wants to talk about the new leadership and policies of the Houston Independent School District that was taken over by the state board.

Teacher who wanted to speak at Houston ISD board meeting arrested, charged with criminal trespassing | Houston Public Media

The arrest of Jeremy Eugene, a 30-year-old teacher from the Houston area, occurred as community members expressed opposition to limited seating in HISD's main boardroom.

www.houstonpublicmedia.org

Seating in the public school district's main boardroom, which has the capacity for hundreds of people, was limited to fewer than 50 for last Thursday's meeting, a week after protesters demonstrated during the proceeding. The June 8 meeting was the first for the nine managers appointed by the Texas Education Agency as part of a long-planned takeover of the state's largest school district, which in recent years had issues with low academic performance at certain schools as well as alleged mismanagement by elected trustees.

Most of the community members who showed up last Thursday at HISD's Hattie Mae White Educational Support Center were instructed to sit in an overflow room and participate in the board meeting virtually, prompting pushback from some who chanted, "Let us in!"

Jeremy Eugene, a 30-year-old teacher from the Houston area who had asked to speak during the meeting, ended up being arrested and charged with misdemeanor criminal trespassing, according to Harris County court records. He was released from jail on bond Friday, and his next court appearance is scheduled for Aug. 14, court records show.

Kravetz, who said she has been attending HISD board meetings since the 1990s, said the boardroom has the capacity for more than 300 and that the overflow room has typically been utilized only when there is a large crowd of community members. Those in the overflow room have historically been ushered into the main room when it is their turn to speak, Kravetz said, and also when seats become available in the board room as visitors leave during the course of a meeting.

"That also didn't happen (last Thursday)," Kravetz said.

Now, I probably disagree with what Jeremy Eugene wanted to say about the state takeover. HISD has long been a disaster for its kids, due in my opinion to oversized administrator salary, undersized teacher salaries, and failure to adjust to the disadvantages that children in an inner-city grow up with.

But, whatever he wanted to say, he had the right to say it. Maybe he would have changed my mind.

Having him in another room talking over a webcam was just a way for the board to "let him speak," but to comfortably ignore him. Not just him, but all the people who showed up to speak, other than the selected few they allowed in the main boardroom.

This is the new board's attitude towards those who have the audacity to want to speak:

"Members of the public who could not be seated in the boardroom were seated in our overflow room," Sam wrote in an email. "The room was set to allow for a more productive discussion among board members about the district budget. The board will determine room configuration for future meetings based on the requirements of each agenda and in full compliance with the law and policy."

IOW, we can't make our important decisions if the peasants keep annoying us with their speech that we are not interested in!

 

[Snarky Sack]

Company promotes anti-woke message in new Ad.



I should say "pro-female," not "anti-woke."

 

[LA - L.A.]

Is this really how you want to represent yourself:

Believe people when they show you who and what they're truly all about.

aren’t you a medical professional? If you can’t give me a definition of what a woman is that would be concerning.

The word "woman," like all of the words we use when referring to objects and concepts, doesn't have any inherent definition. It only has the definition people give it.

Some define being woman as being biologically born with XX chromosomes as opposed to XY. Those same people believe that everyone who belongs to XX or XY should think of themselves and behave in a way which conforms to their demands of how XX or XY people should think about themselves and how they behave themselves.

Some define woman as a gender identity concept that is not dictated or limited by whether or not a person has XX or XY chromosomes. These people believe that only the individual knows and has the right to define their gender and they should be given the freedom and respect to think of themselves and behave in a way that best fits them personally.

So, what is your definition of woman @el caliente?

 

[Snarky Sack]

Laudon County, home of the bathrooms turned rape rooms, has a great idea for educating its young people with disabilities /s:

Loudoun County School Board spends $11M on new bathroom design, cuts special ed funds

Loudoun County special education teachers have persistently asked the Loudoun County School Board to hire more special education teachers.

wjla.com

LOUDOUN COUNTY, Va. (7news) — Over the last three weeks, Loudoun County special education teachers have persistently asked the Loudoun County School Board to hire more special education teachers, teaching assistants and speech-language pathologists (SLP).

. . .

Instead, the school board is cutting three speech pathologists, one special education supervisor, three occupational therapists and fourteen teachers, according to an LCPS spokesperson. The LCPS spokesperson added that the school district is adding 13 teaching assistants, which would be a net decrease of eight positions.

Lest you think that these school board members are thrifty pinchpennies, they have no qualms about spending money on what they consider important - i.e. things other than educating children with disabilities.

The call for additional special education investments and resources comes as Loudoun County Public Schools is allocating funding elsewhere, including $11 million for new bathroom designs at two high schools.

“I simply cannot understand why we would justify funds to allow boys and girls to co-mingle in the bathroom and not consider the unintended consequences there while also turning our cheek and looking the other way,” Polifko said.

The Loudoun County School Board is considering floor-to-ceiling bathroom stalls with shared sink areas for all school bathrooms. This would be in place of all gender-separated bathrooms. LCPS is also considering building private bathrooms in schools, in addition to keeping gender-separated bathrooms to accommodate transgender and nonbinary students.

 

[el caliente]

Is this really how you want to represent yourself:

Believe people when they show you who and what they're truly all about.

The word "woman," like all of the words we use when referring to objects and concepts, doesn't have any inherent definition. It only has the definition people give it.

Some define being woman as being biologically born with XX chromosomes as opposed to XY. Those same people believe that everyone who belongs to XX or XY should think of themselves and behave in a way which conforms to their demands of how XX or XY people should think about themselves and how they behave themselves.

Some define woman as a gender identity concept that is not dictated or limited by whether or not a person has XX or XY chromosomes. These people believe that only the individual knows and has the right to define their gender and they should be given the freedom and respect to think of themselves and behave in a way that best fits them personally.

So, what is your definition of woman @el caliente?

What is your definition of a woman? You told me how some people define a woman, but not how LA -LA defines a woman. So, what is a woman?

 

[Snarky Sack]

"What is your definition of 'woman?'" was a question that stumped a USSC justice nominee. So of course transactivists and their supporters were asked it repeatedly in later hearings and on debate forums. Dodging the question was the typical response. Early one, I would ask posters on another forum "is it just 'anyone who identifies as a woman is a woman?'" but they would not answer.

Maybe they thought that I was putting words in their mouths.

Now, that seems to be the standard response. It is the classic case of circular reasoning:

"Anyone who identifies as a bleem is a bleem."

"What is a bleem?"

"A bleem is someone who identifies as a bleem, duh!"

But it is especially odd for people who claim to be champions of "women's" rights to say that I, a short, chubby, goatee-wearing, balding husband and father of five would indeed be a woman who is entitled to all of the rights women have fought for, if I decide this afternoon to identify as a woman.

 

[LA - L.A.]

What is your definition of a woman? You told me how some people define a woman, but not how LA -LA defines a woman. So, what is a woman?

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.

 

[MT15]

"What is your definition of 'woman?'" was a question that stumped a USSC justice nominee. So of course transactivists and their supporters were asked it repeatedly in later hearings and on debate forums. Dodging the question was the typical response. Early one, I would ask posters on another forum "is it just 'anyone who identifies as a woman is a woman?'" but they would not answer.

Maybe they thought that I was putting words in their mouths.

Now, that seems to be the standard response. It is the classic case of circular reasoning:

"Anyone who identifies as a bleem is a bleem."

"What is a bleem?"

"A bleem is someone who identifies as a bleem, duh!"

But it is especially odd for people who claim to be champions of "women's" rights to say that I, a short, chubby, goatee-wearing, balding husband and father of five would indeed be a woman who is entitled to all of the rights women have fought for, if I decide this afternoon to identify as a woman.

You have to be joking, right? What rights would you be entitled to as a woman that you don’t already have?

 

[Snarky Sack]

You have to be joking, right? What rights would you be entitled to as a woman that you don’t already have?

The right to enter women's showers, bathrooms and changing rooms. The right to play on women's teams (softball in particular, for me), and play in individual women's sports, like women's power lifting.

 

[MT15]

The right to enter women's showers, bathrooms and changing rooms. The right to play on women's teams (softball in particular, for me), and play in individual women's sports, like women's power lifting.

You are hilarious.