“LGBTQ” has become a poor catchall for unrelated groups

[Mims44 1,879]

19 hours ago, homersapien said:

So apparently, you think every "non-normal" human belongs is in their own  separate "basket" as opposed to just one big "human basket". 

So how many baskets do you think we should have? 

Care to name them?

 

Based off that post are you against the LGBTQIAPK+ community also?

Since, ya know... that's removing them from the "human basket" and putting them in a separate group?

 

And if not, can you at least admit it doesn't logically follow to lump things together that don't match. IE: sexualities, personal identities, and skin color apparently.

It's like making a basket of colors, and the colors listed being orange, blue, red, pizza, hamburger, dog, camel.

[homersapien 11,393]

2 minutes ago, Mims44 said:

Based off that post are you against the LGBTQIAPK+ community also?

Since, ya know... that's removing them from the "human basket" and putting them in a separate group?

 

And if not, can you at least admit it doesn't logically follow to lump things together that don't match. IE: sexualities, personal identities, and skin color apparently.

It's like making a basket of colors, and the colors listed being orange, blue, red, pizza, hamburger, dog, camel.

You'll have to be more explicit.  That makes no sense to me.

But to clarify, I am not arguing the logic one employs to segregate people into categories. I am arguing that such segregation is potentially harmful sociologically speaking.  It's the starting component for propagation of racism, xenophobia and similar evils.

[Mims44 1,879]

40 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You'll have to be more explicit.  That makes no sense to me.

But to clarify, I am not arguing the logic one employs to segregate people into categories. I am arguing that such segregation is potentially harmful sociologically speaking.  It's the starting component for propagation of racism, xenophobia and similar evils.

So it is not a good idea to have categories of say: Heteronormative white folk and then another category of LGBTQIAPK+ which contains, basically everyone not heteronormative and white?

[Mims44 1,879]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

I am arguing that such segregation is potentially harmful sociologically speaking.  It's the starting component for propagation of racism, xenophobia and similar evils.

To add on to that, I'd say I'm in 100% agreement that the government should not be doing it. And steps need to be taken to stop businesses from doing it. I've never wrote down a race on any application. If it's an internet form where it's impossible to skip I click 'other' and write American.

If I'm only going to get a job to try and fill a quota based on my gender/skin color/perceived heritage. Then I'd rather just not work that job.

[TexasTiger 12,964]

On 6/4/2023 at 10:25 AM, alexava said:

Hurry up and watch it for free. 

Matt Walsh is a jerk and a bigot with anger issues and I would never align with him. Nonetheless, he poses valid questions to a number of “experts” and “professionals” and they reveal themselves to be irrational and incapable of logical discourse. It reminds me of someone posing valid questions to fundamentalists and hearing the nonsense and circular definitions that follow. There’s a real religiosity to their responses. Having grown up around fundamentalists the comparisons are phenomenal.

[homersapien 11,393]

2 hours ago, Mims44 said:

So it is not a good idea to have categories of say: Heteronormative white folk and then another category of LGBTQIAPK+ which contains, basically everyone not heteronormative and white?

For what purpose?

[Mims44 1,879]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

For what purpose?

Up for interpretation I guess, what do you believe is the current purpose of having hetero whites in one category and LGBTQIAPK+ containing everyone else?

(actually there's a more correct one than that. (LGGBBDTTQQUIAAAAPPP2SNBGVGQGNC+) 

Feel free to use either  

[TexasTiger 12,964]

12 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Matt Walsh is a jerk and a bigot with anger issues and I would never align with him. Nonetheless, he poses valid questions to a number of “experts” and “professionals” and they reveal themselves to be irrational and incapable of logical discourse. It reminds me of someone posing valid questions to fundamentalists and hearing the nonsense and circular definitions that follow. There’s a real religiosity to their responses. Having grown up around fundamentalists the comparisons are phenomenal.

 

[TexasTiger 12,964]

Even more absurd:

LGBTQIA+ is an inclusive term that includes people of all genders and sexualities, such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, queer, intersex, asexual, pansexual, and allies. While each letter in LGBTQIA+ stands for a specific group of people, the term encompasses the entire spectrum of gender fluidity and sexual identities.

 

Why would we lump same sex attracted people in with asexual people? Pansexual people? Intersex people? And if you’re merely Questioning, are you really in this group yet?

It aligns with corporate marketing— wanting to expand the target population that feels catered to; fundraising— after Gays & Lesbians finally won the right to marry fundraising slowed; and for heteronormative folks who just want to simplify those “others.” But is it meaningful for gays & lesbians? Is it, as many believe, counterproductive to maintaining their rights? Can’t trans rights stand alone as a cause? And what protections do pansexuals and asexuals really need?

[I_M4_AU 7,874]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Can’t trans rights stand alone as a cause?

No, this group can not stand alone and they know it.  As you commented on the documentary “What is a Woman” the argument falls apart when the professionals are asked probing questions.  It is based on non science such as a man can get pregnant and menstruate. 

[TexasTiger 12,964]

7 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

No, this group can not stand alone and they know it.  As you commented on the documentary “What is a Woman” the argument falls apart when the professionals are asked probing questions.  It is based on non science such as a man can get pregnant and menstruate. 

People can live as transgender if they choose and should be free from discrimination in the workplace, housing and education. Live and let live. What breaks down in those interviews are vague and meaningless definitions that advocates insist meaning be given to. Gender and sex are two different things. Live as any gender you want. But don’t insist the world embrace a reality one can’t even coherently define.  Folks should treat others with respect. Trans rights groups can be very successful if they are reasonable.

[I_M4_AU 7,874]

37 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

People can live as transgender if they choose and should be free from discrimination in the workplace, housing and education.

I can agree with this statement and haven’t said anything different if you are an adult when these decisions are made.

37 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Live and let live

This is not what is happening today.  This would imply that if it doesn’t affect you it should be fine.  Today we have EOs and legislation that forces the ideology on the population.  This is not the intent of *live and let live*.

37 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

What breaks down in those interviews are vague and meaningless definitions that advocates insist meaning is given to.

So, they talk nonsense trying to convince the audience to believe their world view.  And then you come up with this following?

37 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Gender and sex are two different things.

No they are not.  They are the same thing.  Let me ask; can a man menstruate and get pregnant?  Should tampons dispensers be installed in all bathrooms?

 

37 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Folks should treat others with respect.

I don’t have hate in my heart for trans people, I do feel sorry for them for having to live in a delusional world. It does go from live and let live to alarm when an activist that is a bureaucrat forces children to consider their gender is fluid during the child’s formative years.

37 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Don’t insist the world embrace a reality one can coherently define.

Does this also include people like Jordan Neely who threatened passengers on the subway in NY because he could not coherently define who or what he was?  Is this why NY and other Dem run cities have given up on any type of policing of the criminal element, because they live in their own world and we shouldn’t insist they conform to a civilized world?  What are you really trying to say here?

Edited June 6, 2023 by I_M4_AU

[TexasTiger 12,964]

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I can agree with this statement and haven’t said anything different if you are an adult when these decisions are made.

This is not what is happening today.  This would imply that if it doesn’t affect you it should be fine.  Today we have EOs and legislation that forces the ideology on the population.  This is not the intent of *live and let live*.

So, they talk nonsense trying to convince the audience to believe their world view.  And then you come up with this following?

No they are not.  They are not the same thing.  Let me ask; can a man menstruate and get pregnant?  Should tampons dispensers be installed in all bathrooms?

 

I don’t have hate in my heart for trans people, I do feel sorry for them for having to live in a delusional world. It does go from live and let live to alarm when an activist that is a bureaucrat forces children to consider their gender is fluid during the child’s formative years.

Does this also include people like Jordan Neely who threatened passengers on the subway in NY because he could not coherently define who or what he was?  Is this why NY and other Dem run cities have given up on any type of policing of the criminal element, because they live in their own world and we shouldn’t insist they conform to a civilized world?  What are you really trying to say here?

Not following a few points.

Read closely. Where are we disagreeing?

 

Look at the context of my statement above— and I corrected the typo “can” to “can’t.”

I don’t even know where you’re wandering off to, but my point, if you look at the context, is that a person can choose to largely live a gendered role that differs from their sex, but the tension arises when they insist others define reality as they do.

[I_M4_AU 7,874]

27 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Not following a few points.

Read closely. Where are we disagreeing?

 

Look at the context of my statement above— and I corrected the typo “can” to “can’t.”

, but my point, if you look at the context, is that a person can choose to largely live a gendered role that differs from their sex, but the tension arises when they insist others define reality as they do.

I did misinterpret your statement of gender and sex are two different things as a statement and not as an example of vague and meaningless definitions. My apologies.  I also took your last statement as an admonishment rather than agreement.  I thought it odd as we have agreed in most part about this subject which is unusual.  Carry on.

38 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

a person can choose to largely live a gendered role that differs from their sex, but the tension arises when they insist others define reality as they do.

Good statement.  Thanks.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

The political right is making this an issue for a reason.  It is a distraction.

Why are we giving so much oxygen to those on the extremes.  In general, society is doing a pretty good job on it's own.  The vast majority are willing to tolerate, if not accept.

Do not teach your children that it is acceptable to bully those who are different.  Treat them with dignity and respect.  Ignore the unreasonable demands of the radicals.  Protect minors, particularly those whose "dysphoria" is more about self than, sexuality/gender identification.

 

[TexasTiger 12,964]

1 minute ago, icanthearyou said:

The political right is making this an issue for a reason.  It is a distraction.

Why are we giving so much oxygen to those on the extremes.  In general, society is doing a pretty good job on it's own.  The vast majority are willing to tolerate, if not accept.

Do not teach your children that it is acceptable to bully those who are different.  Treat them with dignity and respect.  Ignore the unreasonable demands of the radicals.  Protect minors, particularly those whose "dysphoria" is more about self than, sexuality/gender identification.

 

The right wing is doing that for cynical political purposes. The Democratic Party and others opposed to right wing politics need to be mindful to not simply react to the Right by feeling they have to blindly defend and embrace any excess that’s wrapped up in issue they disagree on. Reasonable people make reasonable distinctions. Reactionary people merely react, much like MAGA reacts in total opposition to whatever position a Democrat takes. Since Trump, those opposing him typically do the same thing.

This plays out over 50 states in the USA with different outcomes. Oregon goes to one extreme, Florida to another. Being more centralized, in the UK plays out a bit different with conservative & liberal meaning different things and some policy issues not being so polarized. For example, the big issue on transgender “rights” now is Self ID— a person simply declares their gender one day and is treated accordingly under the law. This is a change in the law being pushed by many activists on the left and it’s framed as any opposing it are horribly transphobic and should not even be allowed to speak on it. They are labeled as TERFS and deemed deserving of violence and even death. It’s that extreme. They’re accused of genocide and wanting trans people to not exist, even though most support the current law that allows a legal change in gender after certain steps including a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The trans right activists don’t think being diagnosed as gender dysphoric should be required to change one’s gender. No “gate keeping.” And yet, these gender extremist have managed to paint those opposing Self ID as extreme.

This ideology isn’t limited to the UK. Much of it is shared by the US “experts” Walsh interviews. 
 

I agree the vast majority will tolerate and many “accept.” Where many folks draw the line is “embrace.” Tolerating and treating someone respectfully requires behavior. Expecting folks to share your version of reality involves telling them what to think. It’s like a religious fundamentalists— they don’t care if you act “correctly”, It’s about belief. 

The appropriate and politically wise place to be is to do this:

“Do not teach your children that it is acceptable to bully those who are different.  Treat them with dignity and respect.  Ignore the unreasonable demands of the radicals.  Protect minors, particularly those whose "dysphoria" is more about self than, sexuality/gender identification.”

…While not aligning with every concept, thought or position just because the Right Wing opposes it.

[TexasTiger 12,964]

I’ll add, if you get people to just agree on tolerance, relationships will start to develop and acceptance will usually follow. 

[PUB78 1,361]

4 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

The right wing is doing that for cynical political purposes. The Democratic Party and others opposed to right wing politics need to be mindful to not simply react to the Right by feeling they have to blindly defend and embrace any excess that’s wrapped up in issue they disagree on. Reasonable people make reasonable distinctions. Reactionary people merely react, much like MAGA reacts in total opposition to whatever position a Democrat takes. Since Trump, those opposing him typically do the same thing.

This plays out over 50 states in the USA with different outcomes. Oregon goes to one extreme, Florida to another. Being more centralized, in the UK plays out a bit different with conservative & liberal meaning different things and some policy issues not being so polarized. For example, the big issue on transgender “rights” now is Self ID— a person simply declares their gender one day and is treated accordingly under the law. This is a change in the law being pushed by many activists on the left and it’s framed as any opposing it are horribly transphobic and should not even be allowed to speak on it. They are labeled as TERFS and deemed deserving of violence and even death. It’s that extreme. They’re accused of genocide and wanting trans people to not exist, even though most support the current law that allows a legal change in gender after certain steps including a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The trans right activists don’t think being diagnosed as gender dysphoric should be required to change one’s gender. No “gate keeping.” And yet, these gender extremist have managed to paint those opposing Self ID as extreme.

This ideology isn’t limited to the UK. Much of it is shared by the US “experts” Walsh interviews. 
 

I agree the vast majority will tolerate and many “accept.” Where many folks draw the line is “embrace.” Tolerating and treating someone respectfully requires behavior. Expecting folks to share your version of reality involves telling them what to think. It’s like a religious fundamentalists— they don’t care if you act “correctly”, It’s about belief. 

The appropriate and politically wise place to be is to do this:

“Do not teach your children that it is acceptable to bully those who are different.  Treat them with dignity and respect.  Ignore the unreasonable demands of the radicals.  Protect minors, particularly those whose "dysphoria" is more about self than, sexuality/gender identification.”

…While not aligning with every concept, thought or position just because the Right Wing opposes it.

WTH??

[TexasTiger 12,964]

38 minutes ago, PUB78 said:

WTH??

Over your head.

[PUB78 1,361]

21 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Over your head.

I guess so. Bunch of nonsense.

[alexava 6,973]

The right wing is not doing anything for cynical or political purposes. They are protecting children and women. “Cynical and political purposes” should be the official motto for the democrats. The party that also refers to itself as “the party of science “. 
       Does anyone here think that biological men should be allowed to compete in women’s or girls sports? Because every single democrat in the House voted to allow it. 

[TexasTiger 12,964]

22 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

 

About a year Matt Walsh reached out to JK Rowling hoping to somehow “align.” Her response:

[PUB78 1,361]

12 hours ago, alexava said:

The right wing is not doing anything for cynical or political purposes. They are protecting children and women. “Cynical and political purposes” should be the official motto for the democrats. The party that also refers to itself as “the party of science “. 
       Does anyone here think that biological men should be allowed to compete in women’s or girls sports? Because every single democrat in the House voted to allow it. 

And the Democrats do it so well with great assistance from the MSM.

https://wng.org/opinions/anatomy-of-a-sneer-1685965582?mkt_tok=NzEwLVFSUi0yMDkAAAGMK30Zj8P7ym13Gx_3_aWQ6qtwSs7nMcF_sw6sj_LSynPuB1-ny3_UPPOMr9vQdxd64my0UR5GsVqfjGu60titpefYrynZ4HXJiGlbObMitiJY

[alexava 6,973]

32 minutes ago, PUB78 said:

And the Democrats do it so well with great assistance from the MSM.

https://wng.org/opinions/anatomy-of-a-sneer-1685965582?mkt_tok=NzEwLVFSUi0yMDkAAAGMK30Zj8P7ym13Gx_3_aWQ6qtwSs7nMcF_sw6sj_LSynPuB1-ny3_UPPOMr9vQdxd64my0UR5GsVqfjGu60titpefYrynZ4HXJiGlbObMitiJY

Yea, the emotional blackmail about suicide is really lame. Walsh actually showed the trans crowd is mostly likely to commit suicide on average 7 years AFTER transitioning. 

[alexava 6,973]

“Historians of the future will have a hard time figuring out how so many organized groups of strident jackasses succeeded in leading us around by the nose and morally intimidating the majority into silence.“….Dr. Thomas Sowell