Boss takes on LGBTQ+

[bodecea]

"Q" generally refers "questioning" (as in unsure) today.

It used to be "queer" as an umbrella for all the other orientations; I would technically be a Q because I'm bi with a masculine leaning identity. I'm not 'exactly' Bi, I'm not Transgender, I'm not a Lesbian, so I'd traditionally have fallen under the "queer" tag. Frankly I gave the fuck up and don't even use Q much less the rest of the damn alphabet. I say I'm LGBT and if someone wants to know more than that they can ask.

Remember when the straights expected us to be in "roles'?

 

[EverCurious]

Meh they still kind of do, I think I have a bit of a unique 'outlook' or whatever because I've also got Synesthesia, it took me many many years to 'teach' myself what colors mean what emotions so I kind of understand the confusion straights have as far as LGBT goes. I can't really expect them to instantly comprehend the 'feelings' and 'desires' we have and they frankly may never fully understand, rather like I'll never 'fully' understand other peoples emotions, best I can do is guess at it - and I think that's all straights can do as well.

I don't think it's important honestly, 'roles,' 'letter designations,' etc. I know some of my LGBT peeps are hung up on what I consider to be stupid shit, but its mostly because they're insecure and overly judgemental of themselves. We got SSM, now the LGBT community as a whole, needs to stop worrying about what others think and start worrying about what our peeps are thinking of /themselves/ - our suicide rates are messed, and I don't think it can logically all be blamed on persecution, not when it's happening in 'gay friendly' communities across the nation. I think we need to stop playing identity politics and other SJW games and focus on 'our' people; why they aren't finding the support and understanding they need within our own communities. We cannot expect straights to understand, nor to fix this... epidemic really.

 

[Roudy]

Never before in the history of humanity has there been so many people confused as to which restroom they should be using.

 

[Boss]

I don't "get" the distinction of the Q (queers) in LGBTQ. Aren't they all queers? QQQQ should be the acronym.

Well, the "Q" stands for "questioning" ...as in, they don't know what they are yet. The word "queer" strangely enough, started out as a pejorative term is now acceptable within the LGBT community but it doesn't mean "homosexual male" like it once did. It's now an alternative to LGBT or specific label identities.

 

[Boss]

I stopped reading at "libertarian constitutionalist".

I thanked your post because I think it's admirable when closed-minded people are at least honest about it and don't try to pretend they're not.

 

[Roudy]

This is all too confusing to me. If you got a penis you go to the men's room and if you don't you go to the women's. Just like gays do. You can dress up however you want. Case closed.

 

[Political Junky]

This is all too confusing to me. If you got a penis you go to the men's room and if you don't you go to the women's. Just like gays do. You can dress up however you want. Case closed.

Don't forget Giuliani's drag.

 

[Iceweasel]

I really think that is why Lesbians got top billing.

Lesbos are different than gay males. Gays are into it for the sex. Lesbians are male haters. The professional haters are making the noise so they get the attention. The ole squeaky wheel scenario.

 

[Boss]

I really think that is why Lesbians got top billing.

Lesbos are different than gay males. Gays are into it for the sex. Lesbians are male haters. The professional haters are making the noise so they get the attention. The ole squeaky wheel scenario.

But there's actually two types of Lesbians. The bull dyke and the lipstick lesbians. Bull dykes tend to be more man hater, angry, militant... the lipstick lesbians are the ones hetero men fantasize about.

 

[EverCurious]

Bi's have like no agenda because our rights to any complaint are, in general, only "half" abridged. Ask an LG or T, they'll tell you we barely made the 'in club' because we're greedy fucks. ~giggles~

 

[Never3ndr]

And, will do so like a Boss!

First let me say, I am a libertarian constitutionalist. I believe in letting people pretty much do as they please as long as what they are doing isn't detrimental to others. I don't generally favor courts or government getting involved any more than they must in order to protect fundamental rights of individuals.

I've watched this LGBTQAAIGWXYZ+&et.all;etc. Movement evolve from it's humble beginnings. It really took off in the late 70s and early 80s with a raising of social consciousness about the bullying of pansies. 'Pansy' was the name commonly applied to boys who displayed homosexual behavioral stereotypes. Other more graphic pejoratives were "queer" and "homo". In any event, a lot of people could sympathize with these underdogs being bullied by society and it was relatively easy to build public support to protect these poor souls from the relentless attacks. It became more widely accepted in the 80s to be a male homosexual. The term "gay" became in vogue. Then came the AIDS epidemic. A social polarization happened as a result and in order to turn around the damage done to all the headway, the adoption of lesbian women and bisexuals stepped up to claim victimhood and appeal to public sympathies.

This begs my first question, how did "L" leapfrog over "G" in the acronym? I believe it was because of the negative stigma from AIDS. The Lesbian could be the new "front-man" of the movement, pardon the pun, and this could avoid direct connection with the negative stigma. But why not the Bisexual? Surely, these people are the most all-encompassing of sexuality as a whole, you'd think they would be the obvious leading face for the movement. I think the reason for this not being the case, and indeed, the reason they are relegated to a place behind the Gay, is because Bisexuality sort of has an illegitimacy about it. Like it's not really serious with regard to homosexuality, it's often just confused young people experimenting. Such a huge movement couldn't be trusted to the Bisexual who may or may not be homosexual tomorrow. It was far too risky, so they took the backseat to Lesbians and then Gays. We had the LGB movement.

At this point, we're well into the 90s and most places have implemented hate crime laws and protections against the gay community in general, which now included lesbians and bisexuals. So the movement was beginning to fade because there was a lack of "victims" on the news... enter the lowly transsexual. They had always been loosely associated with homosexuals but also had that same air of illegitimacy as the bisexual. But they were targeted victims of bullying and that served the needs of the movement, so they completed the acronym... LGBT and it became one big happy "community" to lobby for our social sympathies.

As the movement grew and obtained more social protections and influenced laws against discrimination, we see they continue to add letters to the acronym. This snowball effect is a direct result of trying to keep the social justice monster alive. In creating a paradigm where "gender" is no longer simply "male" or "female" you create a never-ending supply of victims to exploit. Last report, there are now over 63 gender identities, all of which are protected by The Movement.

This leads to my final questions: What is the logical conclusion here? Where does this thing end? At what point does this movement simply become so diluted with various gender identities that it becomes impossible to reconcile itself? What happens when a transsexual's "rights" are infringed by a bisexual's "rights" or visa versa? And what about the Lesbians, the preeminent leaders of this movement... what if one of them decides to stop being lesbian and settle down with a nice man and raise a family? Are they Forever Lesbians? Is it like being crowned Miss America, you have that title until you die? What about the transsexual who is actually heterosexual in every way, they just dig dressing up like women to get into the ladies rooms? Are we to just ignore them and pretend they pose no threat to the movement's legitimacy? And finally, what does this movement do when approached by the Pedophile? Are kiddie-diddlers deserving of a letter in the acronym?

I think that the biggest issue with this "movement" is that it doesn't really represent what it once was. At its foundations, it used to represent fighting for the equality and freedom of sexual orientation (the "LGB" part). Now, somehow, it has morphed into some sort of gender identity movement...which isn't related at all. Gender identity is not equivalent to sexual orientation...they are two different topics.

Personally, I don't have issue with, and generally support, the rights for freedom and equality of sexual orientation. On the other hand, I'm pretty ardently opposed to the whole "gender identity" movement that, in my mind, is an absurd construct.

 

[EverCurious]

Yeah, I don't think it was the LGBT that did that though. It's higher ups that are shitting in the pool.

I support 'gender identity' but I don't support the idea that others who have zero concept of what one even means by 'gender identity' should be expected to comprehend it. Half the shit this 'next generation' of LGBT came up with is fucking stupid. Transgender bathrooms - seriously shut the fuck up! They just made it a problem where none existed. Back before they got stupid trans women could take a piss in the ladies room and no one even notices, now we've got states pushing for pussy grabbing to take a leak. That's backwards progress caused directly by stupidity pushing dumb shit. Don't even get me started on pronouns, that's even fucking dumber. How the fuck do these /morons/ expect anyone to guess at a pronoun other than with the eyes!? Idiots.

 

[Boss]

I think that the biggest issue with this "movement" is that it doesn't really represent what it once was. At its foundations, it used to represent fighting for the equality and freedom of sexual orientation (the "LGB" part). Now, somehow, it has morphed into some sort of gender identity movement...which isn't related at all. Gender identity is not equivalent to sexual orientation...they are two different topics.

Personally, I don't have issue with, and generally support, the rights for freedom and equality of sexual orientation. On the other hand, I'm pretty ardently opposed to the whole "gender identity" movement that, in my mind, is an absurd construct.

Yeah, but then... that's where this has kind of led you, right? I mean, we were all sold on this notion of "equality and freedom" for those poor unfortunate "gay" people and we went along with it.... now look where that got us? Okay, okay... we'll accept the trannies too.... okay, okay... and the "questioning" ....when do the pedophiles and dog fuckers come? What other depravity will attach itself to the Acronym Snowball?

Oh... no need in opposing it NOW baby.... the snowball is rolling! There is now 63 various gender identities and we're just now getting started with our creativity.

 

[EverCurious]

There's a YUGE difference between gay people and kid and dog fuckers heh

Most of us LGBT draw the line ya know, like I said, it's not really the LGBT folks driving the new agenda shit - it's leaders [Dems and SJW] shitting in the pool.

 

[there4eyeM]

All the population in all these categories put together represent so few in real numbers that the noise and attention are entirely disproportionate. It has been evident for a long time that 'issues' are put forward and maintained by people in positions of power in the organizations in order to remain where they are. They probably learned this from religious movements and politicians.

 

[Boss]

There's a YUGE difference between gay people and kid and dog fuckers heh

Most of us LGBT draw the line ya know, like I said, it's not really the LGBT folks driving the new agenda shit - it's leaders [Dems and SJW] shitting in the pool.

But you've already said there's a big difference between "bi" and "gay" ...and we know there's a big difference between a cross-dresser and gay. We can even say there is a big difference between different types of lesbians. Draw the line? Where? I see the acronym getting longer. When does this proverbial line get drawn and who makes that determination?

What I continue to see happening is, as certain groups become "normalized" by placating their demands... marriage, restroom access, etc., here comes another letter to the acronym. And it's because "The Movement" has to be fed constantly. There has to be a new class of "victims" who need representation. We're already seeing in some places, actual pedophiles making their case... they're just misunderstood people. We just don't get what they're going through. We need to be more understanding and open-minded. We're reminded of how this dates back to ancient Greek cultures where it was normal. Draw a line? Are you kidding? That makes you a bigot, don't you know that?

 

[koshergrl]

Well, the truth is, just like everything on the left, they have to keep pushing the envelope in order to create the outrage that their voting relies on. I mean really the modern Democratic party offers almost nothing but socialism to the general caste - and frankly, there are still a healthy majority that do not want socialism. Just as in the 'racism' claims overblown by the left SJW freaks, so too they went over the line with LGBT issues.

As for why us Bi's aren't 'leading the charge' so to speak, there's a bit of a stigma with us in the fringe community that took over (driven by Democrat politicians) they consider us to be 'not pure enough' in respect to the political agenda. The vast majority of us Bi folks are not worried about all the far end bullshit they are - pushing trans-gender bathrooms, pronouns, and so forth. In general we don't cross dress or play the attention games, we're in general happy with our bodies and with our mental state so we are in a sense immune to the agenda of riling us up and in fact we historically rejected the general idea that we were/are being 'persecuted.' (I think in large part because we are happy with who we are so we don't have the low self-esteem and hyper-emotional over-reaction to every little thing.) So in the long run we were not 'useful' to those 'forwarding the cause' and were thus discarded other than for numbers.

TLDR: We're not gay enough.

Yeah, you aren't completely insane, in other words.

 

[EverCurious]

I agree that a lot of the stuff is nuts.

I'm just asking that you righties, try to understand that most lefties are sheep and that their 'leaders' are the ones shitting in the pool - aka don't take it out on the sheep when the 'leaders' are toppled. Hopefully soon...

/Most/ of my LGBT fans, and I have a lot, are good people who only nominally support a lot of this new agenda stuff just because it's under the LGBT heading, but they're reasonable people and aren't 'that' wrapped up in it as the media presents. I only have one transgender admittedly, but he doesn't like the gender bathroom shit because he's losing on all ends of the deal (the thing about their bitching about it making it worse is from him - and yes, him is is proper pronoun at all times because that's his biological sex, even if his id changes. He's my favorite karaoke partner, his voice is amazing heh - Our Dangerous Games Cover [Phantom of the Opera]: dangerousgame-best )

 

[Never3ndr]

I think that the biggest issue with this "movement" is that it doesn't really represent what it once was. At its foundations, it used to represent fighting for the equality and freedom of sexual orientation (the "LGB" part). Now, somehow, it has morphed into some sort of gender identity movement...which isn't related at all. Gender identity is not equivalent to sexual orientation...they are two different topics.

Personally, I don't have issue with, and generally support, the rights for freedom and equality of sexual orientation. On the other hand, I'm pretty ardently opposed to the whole "gender identity" movement that, in my mind, is an absurd construct.

Yeah, but then... that's where this has kind of led you, right? I mean, we were all sold on this notion of "equality and freedom" for those poor unfortunate "gay" people and we went along with it.... now look where that got us? Okay, okay... we'll accept the trannies too.... okay, okay... and the "questioning" ....when do the pedophiles and dog fuckers come? What other depravity will attach itself to the Acronym Snowball?

Oh... no need in opposing it NOW baby.... the snowball is rolling! There is now 63 various gender identities and we're just now getting started with our creativity.

Well that one is easy. Everybody can agree that rapists and beastiality-people (not sure what the term for that is) are not acceptable because we view children and animals as being incapable of giving consent. On the other hand, the homosexual community was fighting for its right to practice their lifestyle between consenting individuals without being penalized for it. So there is your hard stop. Fighting for the equality and freedom for sexual orientation is different from gender identity, and doesn't involve trying to give those people more rights than an average American citizen (meaning they can engage in conduct that doesn't have to be consensual while everybody else does).

Maybe I'm confused here...but is your issue against the entire movement? Or against the modern absurdity it has devolved into by bringing gender identity into it? Are you against the equality and freedom regarding sexual orientation as well as the absurdity of gender identity? I clearly stated my position as being for "gay rights" while opposed to gender identity...however, I'm still unclear on what your actual standpoint is.

 

[there4eyeM]

It is enough to be in favor of human rights. For one thing, they are the only 'rights' that could possibly be. Second, every real, active-in-the-world person is a human (not talking about legal persons, zygotes, etc.), and must be regarded before the law as equal.