Transsexuality
Gender identity has become an interesting issue. Some states have even attempted to pass laws aimed at restricting transsexuals from using public bathrooms. Butt, fortunately, times are changing. Transsexuals are being elected to office.
Danica Roem of Virginia to be first openly transgender person elected, seated in a U.S. statehouse
Virginia's most socially conservative state lawmaker was ousted from office Tuesday by Danica Roem , a Democrat who will be one of the nation's first openly transgender elected officials and who embodies much of what Del. Robert G. Marshall fought against in Richmond.
The race focused on traffic and other local issues in suburban Prince William County but also exposed the nation's fault lines over gender identity. It pitted a 33-year-old former journalist who began her physical gender transition four years ago against a 13-term incumbent who called himself Virginia's "chief homophobe" and earlier this year introduced a " bathroom bill " that died in committee.
"Discrimination is a disqualifier," a jubilant Roem said Tuesday night as her margin of victory became clear. "This is about the people of the 13th District disregarding fear tactics, disregarding phobias . . . where we celebrate you because of who you are, not despite it."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/danica-roem-will-be-vas-first-openly-transgender-elected-official-after-unseating-conservative-robert-g-marshall-in-house-race/2017/11/07/d534bdde-c0af-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html
Transsexuals are even being accepted into the Miss Universe pageant.
Miss Spain makes history as first transgender woman to compete in Miss Universe pageant
Dec. 17, 2018 at 4:52 p.m. EST
Angela Ponce, better known as the reigning Miss Spain, didn’t win the Miss Universe pageant Sunday.
But she didn’t seem to mind.
Simply by representing her country this year, Ponce became the first transgender woman to compete in Miss Universe. After the preliminary rounds, the 27-year-old model said it was “an honor and pride” to be part of the history of the pageant.
Unfortunately, I have witnessed people here on NewsTalkers denigrating transsexuals.
Someone photoshopped a penis on an image of Michelle Obama. It was supposed to be funny. Butt, it was more than a joke, it was a very personal attack on Michelle Obama. Several people (conservatives) who admire Mr. Photoshop immediately began praising his sense of humor and ridiculing Michelle Obama. Those who “piled on” by referring to Michelle Obama as a “tranny” were being both dishonest and bigoted . Butt, the bigotry I’m referring to is not about race, it’s about bigotry toward the LBGTQ community.
Other people (liberals) began ridiculing Mr. Photoshop and accusing him of being attracted to transsexuals. They obviously intended their accusations to be insulting to the photoshopper, butt they were actually insulting transsexuals. It seemed like more bigotry toward the LGBTQ community.
I have a problem with people on both sides of that discussion. There is nothing wrong with being transsexual. Nor is there anything wrong with being attracted to transsexuals. There is nothing wrong with being lesbian, bisexual, gay, transsexual or questioning (or “queer”). People should be accepted as equal regardless of their gender identity.
As many of you know, Cobalt and I founded ButtHeads Nation on NV. We celebrated diversity and we had a transsexual Administrator (Veronikka). She was a highly intelligent and very articulate participant. Veronikka’s sense of humor was legendary. She had a huge impact on my previously naive perception of transsexuals. I wish she was here to provide her perspective to this important issue.
I hope NewsTalkers can accept transsexuals and people who are attracted to them. They are definitely welcome here in the SiNNERS & ButtHeads group.
Tags
Who is online
103 visitors
Gender identity is an important issue. It's not a joke.
In my opinion, widely held by a large majority of the population, Bruce Jenner remains Bruce, until and unless he undergoes reassignment surgery.
I don't care what gender someone thinks or wishes they are. Gays, lesbians, and bi's are a wholly different matter, and I accept what they are, because it is rarely a choice. If that makes me a bigot, so be it.
No one really cares what bigoted people think, thank goodness. A large majority of people once thought that if you floated instead of drowning after being tossed in a body of water, you were a witch and thus burned at the stake. They were just as wrong as those who give a rat's ass what other people do with their lives.
I don't think Caitlyn Jenner is concerned about bigots who insist on calling her "Bruce".
I wonder if Caitlyn is still a Republican?
You're entitled to have your opinion, wrong as it may be.
Jenner is simply a female impersonator, and not even a good one at that.
Back in the day we visited Finocchio's in SFO, and some of those "ladies" would put "Caitlyn" to shame.
They remind me of religious bigots who want to control what goes on in everyone's bedroom.
Many of them are focused on Caitlyn Jenner. She has become the "poster woman" for transsexuality.
I think many of those who hate Caitlyn secretly question their own sexuality.
As are you.
Either that, or just plain ignorant. Although, the two tend to go hand in hand.
Or what people think.
Kind of like those who hate gay people.
Clearly they do.
Otherwise they would leave people alone.
Quick answer: I read Caitlyn is still republican, but has "revoked" support for Trump because of his policies on transsexualism.
Right back at you Greg.
Female impersonators are generally performers who do an act on a stage for compensation.
Jenner was a very public male sports figure, who since April of 2015 exposes herself, publicly, daily and hourly
to the ridicule of people like ...
and yet feels strongly enough about her feelings to persist. She's trans, get over it.
She's also 70 effing years old, what do you expect her to look like, Ru Paul?
Get over it.
Well, let me test that theory:
Finocchio's Night Club San Francisco circa 1978-83
Finocchios
Well, you can tell two things from the above:
He is not a "she". He is a man with gender dysphoria.
A huge part of this resistance to the "transgender movement" is the batshit demand that we all pretend reality isn't really a thing simply because somebody feels a certain way.
Correctly stated, Jenner is a man who wants to become a woman. OK fine. We have a process for that. He is within his rights as an American to undergo that process. It's nobody else's business, and the vast majority of people don't give a damn.
But pretending he's a woman....and demanding everybody else go along with this delusion...just pisses people off for no reason.
She is indeedy.
You do not have to pretend. Heavens, you do not even have to engage. In situations like this, whatever becomes of rendering, "No comment"?
Surgically speaking "he" would be well beyond the safety margins in place for surgical reassignment to become "she" in the minds of many.
as you said earlier, it's nobody else's business...
Righter than right. Why would anyone even care? Does it affect their taxes? Does it empty store shelves? How does anyone's sexuality even have a modicum effect on anyone else's life?
I have to correct my prior statement.
Jenner transitioned in 2017 at the age of 68 becoming reportedly the oldest person known to do so.
So I take it that that means we no longer have to pretend she's a woman
or worry about which bathroom she gets to use.
Thanx for the clarification.
Odds are that some people will still insist on calling her "Bruce".
I wonder what it's like being in a party that doesn't even want to allow you to go to the bathroom?
I agree. I don't care what people "identify" as or what their sexual preference is. I don't treat people based on what they "identify" as. I treat them according to how they ACT. Act like a childish ass, I'll treat them as a childish ass.
probably much the same as being in a party that has to lie and misrepresent the other side's positions.
The Republicans in my state wanted you to have your birth certificate with you to prove which bathroom you can use. Thousands of "potty police" would have to be hired (and potty trained) to enforce the ridiculous law (HB-2).
I would be more worried about the kind of people that would want that job.
Yeah it's a shitty job.
Who carries their birth certificate around?
The HB-2 law was stupid Republican shit.
If a potty cop wouldn't let me use the restroom, I'd pee on him. If I got arrested I'd try to poop in the squad car.
Probably need to turn the channel every now and then.
Caitlyn Jenner Said She No Longer Supports Trump After The Latest Proposal To Roll Back Trans Rights
"I do not support Trump. I must learn from my mistakes and move forward."
Posted on October 25, 2018, at 4:32 p.m. ET
Source :
Donald has always had a 'thing' for LGB. However, it is the "T" that he is cutting out from the acronyms. See military life, etceteras.
So what you got to say about that?
Let me go on record as agreeing with this sentiment. People can choose their own direction in life as long as it respects peace and legality. In addition, a degree of humility can go a long way —Even as one is firm with others. I am proud to learn of Miss Spain's reign and competitive spirit which allows her to best other contestants.
I will be outspoken enough to say that I am yet coming into alignment with with some attitudes in the transsexual community. Admittedly, my understanding is "aging out" since I have not associated with this community in a generation. There does appear to be some high profile people out and about making positive waves and equally big medical events occurring in this discipline and lifestyle.
I applaud your open minded approach.
Al Jizzerror, I am grateful for your understanding. (Smile.)
I liked Veronikka. Wish she would come around.
Veronikka is an amazing person.
She would be a welcome addition to NewsTalkers.
Veronikka's quick wit and well-developed sense of humor is what I miss. Fargo and skydog have both made me laugh til' I almost puked (literally! I had to pull my trash can close from laughing so hard), and you, Veronikka, Biz and Giggles have made me almost piss myself. What a great group of minds ... that's what I miss.
She also has great taste in music.
She's hanging out on Twitter presently. Someone should ask her.
I was kicked off of Twitter. I trolled The Donald there until they accused me of being a "bot". I was told I had to give Google all of my personal information to restart my twitter account. I guess Twitter makes money by selling information to Google.
Fuck that!
Really, care to back that up? They can use the public bathrooms of their biological genders until they get gender reassignment surgery. Unless you can show a law that denies them that.
As for the rest. Agreed, sexual orientation is not a big deal. To each their own. So long as no one is trying to force their sexual orientation on anyone else let them be.
That is my problem with it. There is a massive push by Disney to force acceptance on people who mostly just don't care to hear about it. It's one thing if that is what YOU are, but when you make TV shows, movies, commercials, speeches, holidays, parades yada yada yada, I start to have a problem with it. It exists, yes. No need to try to influence children towards as Disney often does. If a child turns out to be gay or trans it should be because they came to that conclusion through life experience. Not because they saw it on TV, or their teacher tried to convince them of it or some celebrity says it's great or any of this nonsense that goes on in progressive society today. It exists, no need to celebrate it any more than heteros celebrate their sexuality.
You should call the cops if somebody is restraining you or your children, propping up your eyelids with toothpicks, and forcing you to watch Disney movies.
It's not just movies. Disney owns just about every channel that you watch on TV in the US. Sports, news, shows, everything. That's why they are able to keep the same message across all channels and effectively brainwash populations by making them think this is how everybody thinks everywhere.
Are you being restrained and forced to watch?
I'm willing to bet you're not.
Nothing is being forced on you. You're CHOOSING to watch, then claiming victim status.
Ever notice that Disney is always killing mommas? Bambi. Dumbo. Jungle Book. Fox and the Hound. Little Mermaid. Did they make you want to kill your sainted momma?
Holy shit. Are you kidding, or do you mean that?
I'm not sure which concept is more humorous, that you think Disney owns everything or that we are all being brainwashed.
Omigawwwwwd! Hilarious!!!
I'm not choosing to watch anything. I'm woke to these type of brainwashing tactics so even when I do, I can easily point out the liberal agenda to anyone who cares to hear it. Problem is many people just go to watch a movie or a TV show and end up getting some SJW message pushed on them or trying to get them to accept a lifestyle they don't care about. I personally refuse to watch anything coming out of Hollywood not just because they are so loony, but because they just simply cannot produce a good movie or show these days.
So, nobody is being forced. then?
Just as I thought.
Yea did you look at the list in your link? It doesn't do your point justice. The list of companies they owned was larger than the ones they do not own.
Kinda like the shit sometimes spoken from behind pulpits. Is masturbation still a sin?
That is funny and cute!
I guess I should start watching Disney.
I have a filthy mind so I need that free brainwashing service.
How is anyone being forced to accept anything exactly?
What difference does that make? I'm straight, but it doesn't bother me in the least, nor do I care if sexual orientation or gender ID is displayed.
Then don't watch. Change the channel or turn the TV off.
Sexual orientation is not something one chooses.
It's not being celebrated. It just becoming part of the cultural norm, much like how interracial couples were.
If everyone thought that, there wouldn't be any problems. Of course, some people remain prejudiced about it for no good reason. It seems like bigots and homophobes are already brainwashed into hating others.
Now you make it sound like a conspiracy.
Or maybe people just want to watch a movie or show and don't care about some "agenda" in the program. They simply watch for entertainment.
Sounds like no one is "forcing" you to do anything.
Only Sometimes?
I'm there are those who still believe that.
Wow, so inclusion and common decency are just liberal qualities? Good to know.
If you didn't care about it, you wouldn't be whining about it in here. And why shouldn't people accept it, especially when accepting it doesn't impact them in any way?
Forget "A Clockwork Orange." We now have "A Clockwork Disney," Lol
You can't be so ignorant as to think that kids "become" gay or transgender because they saw it on TV, or because they were encouraged to be accepting of others.
Your idea of nonsense is what moral, ethical people consider common decency. Oh, and you might want to educate yourself - you've apparently been brainwashed by your right wing media that gay is contagious.
Much of the bigoted brainwashing is taking place in churches.
Much, if not all. And then it just gets carried home and spreads, like a plague. To be fair, I cannot include all churches/religions in that sentiment.
With some, they feel the need to censor others so they can create safe spaces for their personal opinions. They often see anyone who they have condemned being treated as a normal member of society as an attack on their own faith. They can't abide someone rejecting their faith and supposed "values" publicly with no immediate derision and ridicule heaped on those who don't share their opinions. They also believe its their right to remove what they see as "temptation" away from themselves and their children, thus they attempt to force their opinions on everyone around them. They need their faith to be validated or they feel they are under direct attack. Many simply cannot practice their faith at home and in their churches, keeping it out of the public space and secular society, because they imagine they have a right to "practice" their faith any way they choose, and if they choose to inject it into every cavity of American society, then they believe that is their right regardless of what the constitution says. In fact many religious conservatives believe their faith supersedes the constitution so when in conflict, they ignore the constitution and our nations laws.
The facts are, no one is forced to be gay or transsexual or transgender, no one is forced to get gay married. No one is forced to watch movies or TV shows that present the things they fear in a non-threatening manner in an effort to support inclusion and diversity. No one is forcing any religious conservative to invite their gay neighbors over for dinner. All secular society has suggested is that ALL Americans treat each other the way they want to be treated. All anyone is asking of religious conservatives is to treat everyone in secular society the same regardless of race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, faith or lack thereof. Is that such a difficult ask? I treat all Christians the same as I treat any other customer coming to buy an insurance product or looking for insurance advice, whether gay, straight, Muslim, plumber, roofer, taxi driver, transgender, evangelical, etc. If for some reason I felt I couldn't treat all of my clients the same, I would quit and start working in a profession where I didn't have to discriminate against tax paying, law abiding customers simply because I'd made some unreasonable promise to an invisible wizard that I wouldn't interact with what the invisible wizard told me was "unclean".
Kids are so "Impressionable" !
That's why they're called "Kids" !
Yes I read the whole article? Did you?
It proves they don't own "just about every channel".
Perhaps you can explain to me how watching Sports on TV is a liberal "brainwashing" conspiracy?
I suggest lining your attic space with radiant barrier insulation to keep out the liberal radiations
or buying Disney stocks asap.
Hi Jungkonservative111! Well, that is just it. Society is attempting to portray positive images of what has long been dismissed, ignored, distrusted, disliked, maligned, "bashed," and "cut off" from regular society and culture. All children who are acting acceptable in our society should see themselves in popular culture thriving. Television has been formative media (as has so many other vehicles of communication) in all our development and shaping of ideas about each other. These mediums, these 'stars,' these folks who push up out of our 'silos' change us. That's a positive.
Heterosexuality is so properly inculcated into the history of the world (as well it should be) that people don't even see all the subtleties involved in its myriad of public activities. From hand holding, to night life, to opening doors, to expressions of "gentle man," and "gentle lady," to gender-recognized holidays. We celebrate the sexes, because it is needful to help remind us all to "put forward" one another. All such future changes based on sexuality and inclusion in our culture, traditions, and customs will surely cause a mild shock to the nervous system of society, but we can manage it for it is a just course of action.
Exactly, they act like it doesn't affect kids, but just yesterday, everyone was getting all worked up about a picture of a Nazi on a twitter page. The most common complaint I heard, was they were worried about how good he looked and how kids might look at it and think it looks cool or something. What celebrities say, and what kids see on TV, DOES impact their behavior.
Are you suggesting kids will "learn" to have a different sexual orientation/gender ID just because they see it?
It's not that easy. People choose between gay and straight partners all the time.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160627-i-am-gay-but-i-wasnt-born-this-way
How does sex/gender orientation affects kids or anyone else exactly?
Are Nazi's something to be celebrated or admired?
Choosing a partner is not the same as choosing a sexual orientation.
"Brainwash"?! Now you are using loaded words in a highly opinionated manner. A positive set of actions designed to open up the culture through exposure to new ideas and ending mystery is not the same as its negative set of actions which are brainwashing and propaganda.
Sounds like my daughter and me only it was "The Lion King". I actually have a mug that has Hakuna Matata on it.
I know every word of that song by heart
The more significant problem is insane parents who want to pretend their 4 year olds are transgender.
Kids don't "choose" to be gay or transgender. If they are, seeing only straight cis people on TV isn't going to make them otherwise - and if they're not, seeing gay or trans people on TV is not going to make them otherwise.
Why would you choose a sexual partner that you weren't sexually attracted to? In the article the guy claims to be gay but says he fell in love with a woman and so did a gay friend he had dated. How can that be if they are born gay and can't help or change the way they are?
You are using a series of loaded terms. If your comments are pushed to the side (downplayed, dismissed), you should understand it is because you appear to have an agenda opposite the spirit of the article. This article is about understanding and an opening for a fair hearing, in my opinion. You appear closed off to that.
Of course. Why not when you see "I am Jazz" on TV and how much people love it? What progressive parent doesn't want their little snowflake to be a valued member of such a celebrated and protected minority group?
An athlete who hasn't competed in decades and whose sole accomplishment is taking lots of hormones gets a "courage" award.
That one is obvious, actually.
I'm pretty jaded...but I was astonished at the appearance of that program on Disney.
You kinda expect something like that on MTV, but I didn't expect Disney to pick that up.
Some people are into weird things. Maybe they just wanted to get laid. You'd have to ask them.
I must have overlooked that. Where in the article does it say that? And in what context? But if he dated a gay friend, that seems like he's gay. And being born gay/straight means it's an inborn trait. One does not choose their sexual orientation.
Or he could be bisexual.
I'm kind of jealous of those who claim sexual orientation is a choice; they are clearly bisexual, and they have twice as many options as I have!
This is true.
As Woody Allen once said, "Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night.”
I'm not surprised by anything I see on Disney anymore. Which is why is express disdain for them. They are a propaganda machine as far as I can see.
Then go to see the new Clint Eastwood, Richard Jewell or Dark Waters. Two excellent films.
From the article:
"My sexual journey through college was anything but run-of-the-mill. I came out at a conservative Christian college in the US and was in a gay relationship for around two years with a basketball player who ended up marrying a woman. During that time, we both pal’d around with girls on the side. I even went so far as to fall in love with one. To this day, she and I joke about how she was the only girl I was ever in love with, and how I would’ve been quite happy marrying her."
And a little further down:
"Some people might argue that I am innately bisexual, with the capacity to love both women and men. But that doesn’t feel like an accurate description of my sexual history, either.
I’m only speaking for myself here. But what feels most accurate to say is that I’m gay – but I wasn’t born this way."
Dick Cheney is a progressive and his daughter Mary is a snowflake.
Wow, I'd have never guessed.
HA!
Ain't no passing craze
Sounds to me like he is gay and is being brainwashed by the Christian faith he attends.
You think that doesn't happen all the time? Some people get married and even have children, all the while hiding their true selves...somewhere...oh yeah, in a closet.
I'm an omnivore and often salivate at the smell and sight of a sizzling steak, but I choose to be a vegetarian now for my health. We make lots of choices that aren't all motivated by pure desire. However, I know I'm still an omnivore and I'm not going to try and pretend I'm not attracted to bacon, steaks and burgers. There have been many gay persons throughout history who, most often because of the society pressure to conform, chose to marry the opposite sex. Most will say they do truly love the person they married, they just aren't sexually attracted to them like they are their own gender which is how they were born. The person in your link is recognizing that he is gay, but chose to be in a heterosexual relationship which is his choice, you're not born married. But he's not saying that by marrying a heterosexual he's no longer gay, he's admitting he's gay right there in the article. But saying "I am gay but I wasn't born this way" is in fact his personal opinion and may not be true at all. In fact, it's highly unlikely he wasn't born gay or at least bi-sexual. Why? How likely is it that someone who wasn't attracted to their same sex early on in their life, then chose to marry a straight person choosing the heterosexual lifestyle, is sexually attracted to women in general and specifically his wife, but then out of no where finds out he's also attracted to men but just chose not to act on it? So he was either born bi-sexual, or was born gay and is lying about being sexually attracted to his wife because he desperately wants to stay married and fit some social norm he's been led to believe is the only "right" way to live.
And I am sure as a kid you were as impressionable as other kids. However, the real you is shining out in the end, right? Right?
And you cannot be so ignorant to imagine "gay" and "transgender" to be remotely similar things.
Gay does not require massive medical intervention. Transgender does.
No doubt, kid's are impressionable. However, what impressions you ruled as an adult to be invalid or inappropriate do you incorporate into your being right now? These matters take care of themselves.
There is astonishingly little medical evidence to support this idea. Despite decades of searching, there is no proof that gay people are actually genetic freaks.
Why should a gay man's preference for beards be any different than my preference for blondes with big boobs? Why isn't he entitled to the same treatment I am? Why do we attempt to explain his preferences away like they're some kind of birth defect?
True - but either way, everyone deserves equal rights.
Is Mary Cheney gender dysphoric? Or is she gay?
I partially read and scanned that article. Interesting and rambling. What point are you making from it to us?
True. The problems center around the disagreements on how those rights are defined.
For example, it's a common argument that gay men have always had the same marriage rights as straight men. "You can marry any woman you want, just like we can". But that's bullshit, and now the SCOTUS has put a nail in that coffin.
With TG people, we get to bathroom laws....which are stupid, IMO. Women's rooms all have stalls, and men don't give a shit who's peeing next to them.
But we then get to locker room rules, specifically in public high schools where they tend to be large open spaces with no privacy anywhere...and we have boys claiming that their gender dysphoria guarantees them the "right" to a front row seat watching the HS girls change. No...a third, gender neutral changing room will not do. They demand access to cheerleaders in their underwear.
So now we have a conflict between the rights of those girls to privacy and the supposed "right" of a boy who is claiming a special "right" because he has a medical condition. Conflict is inevitable. It's this kind of scenario that drives opposition to TG "rights" and validates all those complaints about them "forcing their agenda".
Dear Katrix! Do not envy anyone else grasses—ever. Here's why. In my experience, as people we are taught, and develop a knack for putting our best look forward as presentation to the world. We call it putting on a 'brave' face and/or making our 'best impression.' But, boy oh boy where the rubber makes contact with the road - blisters, scars, stench, ruin, and pleasure of traveling! All combined into the experience. Trust me, not everything was 'gay' in my active homosexual days, and they are not 'happy' after either.
Bisexuals, I am sure, can have twice as much the fun - and twice as many the regrets!
All things being considered, life seeks a balance.
The only downside I see is this. WTF are "boys" doing claiming to be girls and competing on that level in sports?
THAT, my friend, is total bullshit. Hell, Jenner at 70 could probably beat some women on the athletic field.
So, I'll put this out there for our other friends. How would you feel if your daughter/granddaughter worked hard her whole school career to make it through all regional competition and head to state finals in track or wrestling only to be bested by some opportunist dick (literally) who decided to take advantage of his perceived gender dysphoria (bullshit) and beat her in more than one event for state title?
Honest answers ONLY will be responded to.....................................
Ah!
Very good points.
When it comes to open spaces, nudity, and that type of privacy ... gym locker rooms are traumatic enough anyway, for many kids. I don't know why a gender neutral changing room wouldn't be considered a good enough option. My gym has a women's locker room, a men's locker room, and a "family" locker room where everyone is asked to change inside locking stalls to respect everyone's privacy.
According to Mary she is gay.
I am going to venture for discussion that this writer needs to share why he feels it is more accurate to describe his life as homosexual. What compels him to think that between the categories, the majority of his 'marks' land in the homosexual category? He does not explain himself as far as I can tell.
You're right. Some people respect their cultural factions that much. They follow the public 'norm' and keep these other things on the side.
I don't know if I would call it respect or fear.
First, girls and women are not driven to sexual "distraction" or "photo-finishing" like boys and men. Second, it won't take long to figure out what is going on with an "all-boy" hangin out in the girl's locker room. Boys, being visual, tend to self-rise to the occasion with obvious proportions—hey you—get out!
Not entirely accurate.
I have a good friend who transitioned to a female so she could come out as a lesbian.
There is no "one size fits all".
Maybe she should ask Jack.
Shit then I am a lesbian..............................
That's hardly a reason to force them to disrobe in front of a boy.
Fair enough. But the boy claims his "rights". Who has the authority to remove him? Are we going to have school administrators deciding who's actually TG and who's not? Or will that be the PE teacher?
"Transitioning" requires a massive medical intervention.
Being a lesbian does not.
Congratulations.
Don't worry, I won't tell anyone.
Not transgender?
So using the Cheney's in response to a comment about transgenderism being pushed by parents? Not exactly applicable?
Or maybe we could all take her at her word and not pretend she's something she doesn't claim to be.
In these cases it can be justified respect and fear. What I mean is some cultures are heavily family-oriented, that is family is everything these people enjoy about their way of life and each other. So they keep traditional marriages and stable families, while having this other way on the side. I can see it working with the right understanding.
Yeah, that was my point.
Because you posted this ( 4.1.57 Jack_TX ):
Wouldn't that go against their so called values?
So get married but have an affair on the side.
Firstly, girls and women are not as sensitive about these matters are you crediting them, in my opinion. Secondly, girls and especially women, will escort the lad or the 'malefactor and his little friend' out and headed in the direction of where he needs to be! (Smile.)
On whose-what authority? The established policy and rule.
Au contraire: Shout it from the roof tops!
Just Jim NC TttH is a Lesbian! And it's marvelous!
I understand your concern. I guess these folks consider it doing what works for their higher/greatest good. Mine you, it is not a choice I made in my own life. Nor did I say it is a spiritual or legal consideration those families make either.
Personal privilege. I will confide this: One of the things in life I will most miss is offspring. Mind you, I am thoughtful, fully content, and feel justified that I did not mess up some woman's life-but, I am living to miss the adoring eyes and favor of a little one all grown up. Thus, I can commiserate with those sentiments which "allow" for children and a stable family life.
That's rather contradictory isn't it?
All of Jenner's many successes were because of his Olympic success in the decathlon and world records,
so I would disagree that her recent hormone therapy is her sole accomplishment.
Did Jenner ask for the notoriety or an award? I think not.
And I am not sure who made the comment where someone said she is not a "she" until she has reassignment surgery
but I have been notified that she did indeed make that transition 2 years ago.
That is apparently on Wikipedia as well, for what Wiki is worth...lol.
Those who think sexuality is a choice are bisexual. No two ways about it (pardon the pun). If they think it's a choice, then this scenario occurs in their life: They see a woman walking down the street and think "I'd totally hit that." They continue down the street and see a gentleman and think "I'd love to tap that ass." I'm straighter than straight, although I get girl crushes on intelligent women with a well developed senses of humor. I don't have a choice. Which sucks because that means that I miss out on 50% of the population that I'm not attracted to sexually. People I could love and share a life with. I don't have a choice.
It stands to reason that the person who claims it's a choice is bisexual. They can hit the sheets with both sexes. If they were straight, they'd know it isn't a choice. Or what day did they choose to be straight?
Omigawd! I just said that somewhere else.
I think you're supposed to spill your seed only to continue the species. So do the religious bury their tissues and put a tiny little cross on it?
Yeah....in response to a comment about the Cheney's being a family where the parents push their snowflake children into believing their transgender.
But Mary Cheney isn't actually transgender, so that whole comment was a bit bullshit.
Gnarly question. Fershure.
The women I know don't like being told what they have to do. But maybe I just associate with too many feminists.
Well...that's the issue. If you let one boy in the girls' locker room, you're going to either have to let all of them in, or somebody is going to have to decide who's actually TG and who's not.
Who's going to make those determinations?
Well, I went to my doctor who said that even though my height and weight looked okay, I have high blood pressure and medium to high cholesterol so she recommended I watch "Forks over Knives" on Netflix which I did and decided to go "cold turkey" back in August of this year. I'd been having some meat with just about every meal since before I can remember, so I wasn't sure If I could stick it out. But within just a few months I've found I have a lot more energy going plant based and really couldn't imagine going back. There are so many good vegetarian options now I hardly even notice missing it anymore. The plant based burgers, vegetable curries, rice, they have some crumbled impossible burger meat that is perfect for tacos and lasagna. It was honestly difficult to tell the difference between the regular meat lasagna I would make and using the plant-based meat crumbles in the red sauce.
First, they're not "freaks" no matter how much you wish to label those different than yourself as aberrant. Just because only 17% of the population have blue eyes we don't consider them "freaks" of nature, so why should anyone consider the roughly 5% of the population who are lgtbq "freaks"?. Second, there is as much proof that they're born gay as there is that I was born straight. Now I can't pull up my gene code and tell you which epi-gene or gene was responsible for me being straight, but I can tell you that I was attracted to girls from as early as I can remember. I barely remember but my family often would tell the story of when I was 4 years old and apparently asked one of my aunts to marry me. Most people I've spoken to through the years, gay and straight, have similar accounts of just knowing who they were attracted to from a very early age, they knew who gave them butterflies in their stomach when they were around. If that's not being "born" attracted to one gender or the other I don't know what is, regardless of any genetic proof.
The fact is, the science so far points to there being no single "gay gene" or "straight gene". Instead, it's likely that thousands of different genes influence sexual orientation, which is what a new study of the genomes of nearly half a million people suggests.
"Another possible misinterpretation is to think that if same-sex preference is genetically influenced, it must therefore be totally genetically determined," Zietsch added. "That is not true. Genetically identical individuals — twins — often have different sexual orientations. We know there are non-genetic influences as well, but we don't understand these well, and our study does not say anything about them."
In what way, exactly?
What exactly has he done that would be considered "courageous"? What makes him more courageous than Usain Bolt?
The point in question was Disney pushing the agenda. The Arthur Ashe Courage Award was certainly part of pushing that agenda.
In that case, she's now a she.
Well it's not exactly something either of us probably invests too much energy on, so Wikipedia is perfect for that.
You are the one attempting to convince everyone that's what they are. I think you should stop.
You tell me. You're the one committed to that idea. Nobody suggests that I was "born" with some sort of affinity for tan blonde women. Yet when one of my friends decides he likes guys with broad shoulders, he was somehow predestined to be that way from his mother's womb.
If there is nothing wrong with his preference, why are you so utterly committed to making excuses for him?
Exactly!!! So we don't need to keep pretending.
Have you looked at the math on the studies? The correlations are cataclysmically weak. They've been studying this for 40 years and they have nothing. Which....is.....O......K.......
So I hate to break this to you, but at SOME POINT we are going to need to decide that if there really isn't anything wrong with being gay we should stop trying to make excuses for being gay.
OK, now that is one of the best lines I have read in a long time. LMAO!
Jack,
I hate to break it to you, but there happens to be a lot of actual medical evidence that gay people are born gay and that their brain structures are different and that these differences show on MRI's. This is not social science. This is medical science. Furthermore, homosexuality occurs in almost all forms of life at about the same rate as it occurs in humans.
But hey, don't take my word for it. Here is some reading
You've got three links referring to a single study (Savic, 2008) that doesn't reference anything prior to a person being born. The study observes brain structure correlation in adults.
So while it is indeed medical science, it doesn't say what you claim it does.
This is a recurring theme, BTW, with many studies of human sexuality. People claim one study or another says one thing or another when the studies just don't.
The larger question we need to be asking ourselves is why we're so desperate to prove something that only matters if you believe there is something wrong with being gay.
? I quoted you and your comment that implied if there was some genetic difference than that must mean they're "freaks", the word you used. That has been a word traditionally only used in reference to gays by religious bigots and homophobes. And after looking through the comments, your comment at 4.1.55 was the first time that word was brought in to the discussion, so it looks far more like you're the "one trying to convince everyone that's what they are."
And like I said, I don't believe there is any specific gay gene, people are who they are and we should simply stop discriminating for such petty opinions.
Who is trying to "make excuses" for gay persons? If someone asked me how I found out I was heterosexual, I would tell them I just always felt this way and was born straight, is that an "excuse"? Why is that any different for a gay person saying essentially the same thing when asked when they knew they were gay? Why would their belief they were born that way be an "excuse"? And who is trying to "excuse" what? Their finding a companion and wanting to spend their lives with someone? Why should anyone need an excuse for that? The only one claiming there's anything wrong with our lgtbq neighbors seem to be the religious conservative's trying to push their onerous views about sex on everyone around them, trying to force society to conform to their opinions instead of just accepting people as they are.
Hormones? There are signs, Jack_TX. Transgender people give off signs and symbols. Transgender boys are softer and gentler by disposition, and transgender girls are tough and sturdy. How come you don't get it, yet?
"Let them all in"? Like a stampede or like an open club or something. NAW! You wouldn't do that.
"Who's going to make determinations"? Are you actually asking me if someone is going to take the 'measurement' of these youthful boys' intentions and seriousness?
This reminds me of this scene from the great movie, "PORKY'S"
Porky's: Principal's office
NOTE: The last laugh at the end of this video will blow you away!
I know. I use it on purpose to demonstrate how the whole "born this way" argument actually supports the homphobes.
You are, even if you don't mean to. "Born this way" is an excuse. It's the precursor to "can't help what they are"....like there is something wrong with them. The ONLY reason it matters is if there is shame attached to the activity.
In your entire life, how many people not on the internet have asked you that question?
They don't. That's the point. It's time to stop making them
On a personal level, "born this way" is a way to justify sexual preference to hostile parents or other family members. How easy would it be if coming out of the closet was like announcing a medical diagnosis of a genetic condition inherited from a parent? It would literally be "you made me this way, you can't be angry or disappointed with me".
"Born this way" has then been taken up by well-meaning usually angry defenders of gay people as a reason why religious conservatives should leave them alone. The thought process is literally "they were born this way, they can't help it". Now...if somebody defended you with that, you'd be thinking how with friends like that you don't need any enemies.
But if there really isn't anything wrong with being gay, then there isn't any reason for shame, and there isn't any reason to need an excuse for why they can't help how they are...especially when the science undermines the excuse at nearly every turn.
Really now? Do share with us this massive amount of data you've compiled to demonstrate this phenomenon.
Because you're spinning some bullshit here, CB. You know full well we can't run schools based on "how soft the boys are" or "how big the muscles are on the girls".
Well that's going to depend on what the law says. During the previous administration, schools were subject to losing their federal funding unless they did exactly that.
Somebody's going to have to. Apparently we'll need some sort of scientific equipment to measure how squishy the boys are.
Moral turpitude.
It fits Jack, since his comments took in both gay and transgender and bisexual were also part of the comments.
Cheers.
Perrie, please take this under consideration. As for me, I will have to 'bone up' on this science over a period of time.
This comment portrays an attitude that is looking for a 'home.' Keep searching. The day I detail for you the specifics of makings transgender youths, we won't be on social media. This falls under, "Give It Up Already."
The coaches were outstanding!
Perfect.
Thanks for that CB. Porky's was awesome and that was one of the funniest scenes. How Ms. Ballbreaker kept a straight face through that is amazing. I was laughing hysterically.
Like the coach in the "Lassie scene"?
What it says is that their brains are different from straight people. You are your brain.
There have been many other studies from medical journals, but I didn't think it would make for an easy read. They all came to the same conclusion. If you want me to get them, I will gladly.
You do realize that was total circular logic. If people were not giving gay people a hard time, then we wouldn't be having this discussion, but because people do, we have to. Personally, I have no issues with gays. How about you?
Don't know how I missed this. I have never had kids either. Though I will say I have had my fair share of taking care of others.
I understand that to a point yet there are other ways to make a mark on ones life.
(If not ways around that)
I guess I just decided long ago that I am better off when I can send the kids home for a while.
Life is unique. Some people have kids that shouldn't and some don't have kids that should.
You have a lot to give and I am sure the people around you reap the benefit.
Miss Balbricker has caught a transsexual 'faker' afoot in the shower wall!
Gordy, I don't know how she kept character throughout. Then, there was the classic scene with the "10-gallon condom 'in' the Balbricker" Insane rush of laughter!
MRIs and PET scans are providing a plethora of data about the human condition. DNA is also providing tons of data about human beings. I don't know what the implications on human sexuality will be butt I hope that we will gain insights on mental illness.
Let me be clear, I don't think gay people are mentally ill. There is nothing wrong with being gay. I don't think there is a magic therapy that will make gay people straight and I certainly don't think you can "pray away the gay".
Butt, maybe research will provide a new gene therapy that will be used to treat mental illnesses like schizophrenia or manic narcissism.
That wasn't "afoot" that she caught, it was a tallywhacker!
Aw! Now that was nice and warm, Ender. Raised quite a few kids, belonging to other, myself. God is good to give me a 'legacy.' Still, this last little one I recently looked at 'pulls at my heart strings.' He causes me to realize just how much some of us give up in our quest for doing the proper thing for all involved. Heterosexuals (in general) are not all wrong about the sound of little tiny feet in the house, because those feet grow up to love their old parents unconditionally (when it is done well).
Well, enough. Nothing I can do about it now, even if I wanted to. That 'ship' has sailed. (Smile.) Looking at the 'Balbreaker' shower image above, reminds me that all our well everything stems from the fact that people 'multiply' themselves. Athough I have slept with a quaint number of women throughout my youth, as far as I know, I will return to the Source 'unsplit.'
Let me end by tying the above to the story in the article. Caitlyn Jenner is a strong woman to have lived the amazing life she has, to have been the envy of men the world over, to bear children, and then to look that wife and those children in their eyes as she planned the next stage of her development—this stage. I admire her for it, too. In the end, it will have been one superlative life and legacy.
Not when you consider her legacy is Kardashian.
And yet, they call others (progressives) snowflakes.
Ironic. And good for a laugh.
oooo......OUCH !
That movie is a classic. I have to watch it again now
Sure. But why would we think sexuality is determined at birth when we know for a fact so much other brain development isn't? It would be especially suspicious given the copious research indicating there is no genetic link to homosexuality.
It isn't.
So the plan here is to use (misinterpreted) scientific research and logic to sway neanderthals who can't understand science and who don't use logic? Riiiiiight.
Does phase two of this plan involve "really moving Powerpoint presentations"? Or how about a series of TedTalks? A black-tie gala?
Whether or not they're "born that way" doesn't matter. Their rights are not based on how they're born. Trying to push bad interpretations of inconclusive science undermines what should be the main focus.
I've been a coach for 29 years. I know a shitty game plan when I see one.
Another recurring theme throughout modern discourse on sexuality is the outright or implied accusation that anybody realistic enough to deviate from the prevailing narrative must be some sort of homophobe.
My issue is not with gay people. My gay friends label me "open and accepting", but really I'm just supremely indifferent about sexual activity other than my own. My problem is with their defenders, who almost always do more harm than good.
Studies suggest that men with lots of older brothers are more likely to be gay, and it could be that it's due to immunological conditions in their mom's womb.
That's an excellent point. While I think it's highly likely that there are some biological factors, if it turned out that there aren't any, my views on gay rights wouldn't change at all. I think the reason so many people point out the likelihood of genetic factors is because that's the one argument that sometimes shuts up the bigots and kills lots of the arguments for discrimination.
My family nixes that study.
"Studies".….. LOL.
Do you have a link?
Is there also research on the socialization of men with lots of older brothers? Or are we just so desperate to swing a hammer that everything looks like a nail?
Here is the absolute most important point.... Nobody else's will, either.
The argument is literally "these people are born different....so you should treat them like they're the same."
But it doesn't. And it never will. That's why this is such a terrible gameplan. It's an appeal that only matters to people who are already on board.
If it ever is proven that people are "born gay", you'll have about 45 minutes before somebody starts talking about "birth defects" and "searching for a cure".
Not surprising that you scoff at scientific studies.
Scientific ?
No one "Studied" my family !
Did they "Study" yours ?
Anyone can "Scientifically" study those they "Want" to study, and come up with an answer they NEED !
It's just a preliminary observation.
There are also two genes that may play a role ... although I think many scientists are skeptical of that.
I wouldn't say it's desperation to swing a hammer, but rather that it seems very likely that there is some biological basis. Scientists are trying to find out what it is, if it indeed exists.
I'm not sure I agree. So many of the anti-gay crowd uses that as their rationale for their support of discrimination ... saying people choose to be gay and they could just as easily choose to be straight. If they have to accept that it isn't a choice, their bigotry becomes a lot harder to justify. Plus, it gives me an excuse to be a smartass and politely explain to these people that if it's a choice for them, that means they are bisexual. It's always fun to tweak people who want to deny equal rights to others.
Again, not surprising that you don't know what the scientific method is, or how it works.
So only 24/7, got ya.
Hey!
At one time, being left handed was considered a sign someone was evil or cursed by God. Many Christians even believed this based on the scripture in Matthew “He shall separate all nations one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats; and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left…then shall the king say unto them on his right hand, come, ye blessed of my father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world… then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels .”
"Michael Salazar wrote that his “fourth grade teacher would force me to use my right hand to perform all of my school work” and that “if she caught me using my left hand, I was hit in the head with a dictionary,”. "left-handedness has been seen as everything from a sign of moral degeneracy to a symptom of neurological deformity to an illegal act."
So how did society move away from such nonsensical notions about left-handedness? Doctors and others came out to proclaim that there was nothing wrong with being left handed and it was completely normal and that the left handed are "born" that way. Was that an "excuse"? If it was, it was only necessary because of the constant negative view some placed on left-handedness back then. There was an active campaign being waged by some who had just been indoctrinated to believe that left-handedness was evil which required a defense of those who, through no fault of their own, found themselves under attack simply for how they were born.
Approximately 10% of the population is born left handed. I rather doubt any of them would object to anyone using the fact that they were born left handed to refute those claiming they are evil or cursed because of it. I do not believe they see that "excuse" as a bad thing but a fact that shows they are not really any different than anyone born right handed, they just happen to be the opposite.
Trying to claim that those standing up for gay rights are the problem because they are proclaiming there's nothing wrong with being gay and being gay is completely normal and some people are just born gay is not in any way proclaiming our fellow gay citizens "freaks", the word you injected into the debate. Humans come in all shapes and sizes, tall, short, white, black, blue eyed, green eyes, left handed, right handed, blonde, brunette, gay, straight. Only when a group within society decides to discriminate and attack people who happen to have been born into one category or another that any defense is necessary at all. And it seems the alternative that you're suggesting would be to just let the discrimination continue and stay silent and it will all just work itself out eventually. To ignore the actions of those attacking and discriminating against a subset of people just to avoid acknowledging that a subset exists would imply support for the discrimination.
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
Martin Niemoller
Perhaps we could add:
Then they came for the gays
And I did not speak out
Because I was not born that way
Whatever.
An iron your belly on the floor roller!
And I respect that. I respect the search for actual knowledge on almost any topic.
Do they? I don't hear that in my Texas Baptist circles. Maybe it's going on and I'm just missing it.
Why do we care what they think or say? Responding to them gives them importance and lends validity to their nonsense.
We need to stop calling it "bigotry". They're not a different race. They're not a different species. The more we keep acting like they're different, the easier it is to treat them differently.
They need to take the victim card off the table, tear it into little pieces, burn it, and pee on the ashes for good measure.
If you tried to tell a straight man who he could or couldn't sleep with or marry, his response would be along the lines of "who the fuck are you to try to tell me what I can and cannot do?", and would probably degenerate from there. That's the mentality gay people ....and their defenders....need to adopt.
That is the mentality homosexuals are holding. However, what victim card are your referring us to? When people stand up for themselves in any capacity that does not involve breaking the law, you should applaud. I do not support a need to "suit" your concept of what constitutes bigotry. If a person is against homosexuality and all other matters being equal: that's a bigot - someone who won't let homosexuals live free and clear without harm, bashing, or legislation against.
Just my view. I realize that I am engaging a closed discussion of some sort. But, I got "full" and I needed to say something.
Niemoller? Really?
People who try to compare the US to Nazi Germany, you need to slap themselves repeatedly until you emerge from whatever Man in the High Castle alternate reality they've imagined themselves into.
You use left-handed people as an example, and it's a great case study....but not for any of the reasons you suggest.
There was never any doubt that people didn't choose to be left-handed. Lots of religious idiots thought that children were born left-handed as punishment for the sins of their parents. Or that they were demon-possessed. Left-handedness was even considered an indicator of homosexuality.
You'll notice that didn't stop the persecution of left-handed people.....
I don't understand why anyone would struggle with the idea that religious idiots don't think like the rest of us. Attempting to reason with them using the same logic that you would accept is like trying to knock down a concrete wall with a pair of scissors.
The more you fixate on how people are different, the more you open them to persecution. That does not change if they are born different. Bullies respect one thing...strength. Phrases like "born this way" or "perfectly natural" are implied admissions of weakness and inferiority. You're triggering a predatory response.
"Born different" only matters to people already on your side of the issue.
The standard position of all gay people should be "it's my preference, and if you don't like it you can fuck right off."
Not if they're trying to convince people that they're "born this way" and "can't help it". Those are positions of weakness.
Lots of people think they're standing up for themselves, but they're terrible at it so it backfires. I don't applaud people being shit at something, especially something that important.
Someday we'll have a discussion on what Colin Kaepernick should have done.....
bigot: noun one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
We need to stop making them their own group. Stop acting like they're from Mars. Stop demanding everybody accept they're some sort of genetic freaks with a birth defect.
Start treating their preferences as no more significant than the difference between guys who like skinny girls and the guys who like big butts......and watch acceptance skyrocket.
Not closed at all. Your opinion is welcome.
Even Valspeak uses punctuation. It's "like, I knew it."
Oh, so we're supposed to just ignore inequality and injustice when we see it just incase pointing it out might get the bullies more angry? What a sick and twisted attempt at logic.
Okay, so we're just supposed to go kick the religious conservatives asses and beat them into submission? Force them physically with "strength" to capitulate? The only way to stop a bully is for not only the victim to stand up to them but everyone who sees the bullying to do the same, to show the bully they are the minority and they are the problem, not the kid getting picked on.
That is your opinion and a very weak one.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
Knowing ones self is key to any victory and the basis for strength. Accepting who and what you were born is the foundation to knowing ones self. Someone who happens to have been born short may know they will never play as a center in the NBA, but does that make them "weak" or "inferior"? Of course not. Hell, I'm 6'2" and I know I'd never be able to play center in the NBA but I've never felt "weak" or "Inferior" because of it, but I can freely admit, I was "born this way" and that's "perfectly natural".
All you're doing by promoting ignoring the injustices by claiming that somehow, ignoring it will make it go away is merely empowering the bullies. It's giving them free reign to do whatever they like and keep trying to pass laws to discriminate and diminish the rights of lgtbq Americans.
The predators have been attacking the lgtbq community for centuries if not longer. Only now are many finally starting to come out of the closets as we create more protections for them and support them as we do other members of society who have been historically abused by the majority.
"All . . . will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect and to violate would be oppression" - Thomas Jefferson
Those supporting gay rights did not create the need for protecting gay rights, vile, inhumane bigots with their heads twisted on backwards after years of religious indoctrination did. To claim it's those supporting gay rights that are somehow inflaming the bigots creating some "predatory response" is hilariously ridiculous. As if religious conservatives would stop attacking gays, stop discriminating, stop firing them when they find out they have a gay employee, stop refusing them the same access as any other mate during health crisis's, stop trying to pass anti-lgtbq laws and attempting to ban gay marriage again if those supporting gay rights would just "shut up about it". The very notion you suggest is stomach turning, to just abandon our fellow citizens under attack because you think what they really need is to just ignore it for another few thousand years of persecution so as not to make the bigots angry.
What a laugh. You act as if it was like they were just deciding whether to wear a blue shirt or a red one, it's just their "preference".
"Billy! Use your right hand or else!"
"No sir, using my left hand is my preference"
What utter nonsense. The fact that you can't see what total hogwash your argument is says a lot.
Jack, let me be check myself, because what I really want to write could be . . . strong.
First, I have seen what bigotry against homosexuals can be - and, I have not seen or experience anything close to the worse treatments (I have heard about). As a homosexual youth 'back in the day' I lived a relatively golden experience, because like you suggest I did not let too many people get the upper hand on telling me who and what I could do or 'get away' with. Okay, there was that.
Secondly, homosexuals were outcasts in this country. We were the 'pits.' And, the only smiles we could get from heterosexuals generally were of the lurid kind -when they 'allowed' themselves to want something from us sexually and definitely secretly. Other than that, we were talked down to like sick, perverted, people who loved to act like sissies and do "doggie-styled" nasty stuff.
Thirdly, heterosexual men used to feel in no ways weird when they deluded themselves into thinking that a "bull-dyke" (pejorative) simply needed a couple of stiff penises to self-correct and 'focus.' And, once the booze kicked in and inhibitions lowered they would take what they wanted or just beat the heaven out of the offender lesbian.
As a young homosexual teen, I once watched a "male-lesbian" friend of mine get brutalized at club closing time as one of the town's "hotty" decided he wanted her girlfriend. My friend made the serious mistake of standing up for herself and her 'partner' - well hot guy tore into her with both fists and near the end he picked her up and slammed her hard on the gutter walls of the sidewalk. Such uncut hatred for another human being. To this day, I wonder if he ever found her to apologize or make amends. Or, if it is was just one of those things that happen in life . . . .
Fourthly, can you imagine how it could have/must have felt to show up at City Hall in say oh 1945 "bright eyes and bushy tails" to inform the clerk there you were arrived to marry your 'best bud' or best "gay" gal, only to be hauled out unceremoniously by building security or state police? No one gave a damn about homosexual protestations or him/her speaking up. The pain was physical and emotional.
The Public, Church, Professionals, Courts, Lawyers, Mothers and Fathers wanted nothing to do with. . ."us."
So Jack_TX, a long-story shortened: Homosexuals are carving out their own way in society today.
It is not your role to prescribe for homosexuals their proper attitudes. I am sure you are being kind to say that you are welcoming, but it could just be that you were never the problem. Not the issue. The bigots who kept me out of their apartment tenements when I really liked the dwelling were an issue in the 70's. The banker that looked at me and my 'partner' and realized our "t," and I saw it in his eyes as he gave us a line about not qualifying when I did what a family had done to qualify before I arrived to be rejected. He was an issue.
Heavens, I had to lie to get to get to serve my country, to get the veteran status I have to day. Funny irony about that too. Some of my fondest memories I will take to the grave will be with young military men and women. No judgement - not really. Even when they 'noticed.' Still, the system was "unrelenting."
Homosexual tax dollars funded heterosexual marriages-because homosexuals apparently had no recourse to 'claw-back' all the tax dollars tax law allowed heterosexual benefactors. And, so forth and so on.
So excuse us who lived it, while we change how the world deals with us in the way we know how. Because we lived it - it kinda makes us experts-officially and unofficially. If all goes well, we will soon have a couple of generations of the freedoms you came up under and flourished in as a norm we can look back on and be calmly and less apprehensive about it
And by the way, President Donald Trump reached out and culled transsexuals from 'unbroken' entering of the military by a bigoted act of self-interest. The military establishment explained itself to President Trump; letting transsexuals in to serve has been properly studied and all the prevailing factors appropriated, settled, and approved. And, Trump cut off some young man's or woman's way into a better life, simply because of something self-interesting between the needs of conservatism and the needs of a Trump Administration.
Exactly. Minorities in this country, of all stripes, do not have the sheer numbers to protect their interests in a sea of power, influence, and wealth. It has always been the case that like abolitionist John Brown, that a member or a group/s in the majority has stood with the powerless or inadequate to see that justice is achieved, prevails, and flourishes.
Thank you DP for giving me a chance to highlight this exceptional point. Never do LGBTQ want to pretend that by our own hands alone has the "impossible" been made do-able!
You are aware of the difference between "more likely to be gay" and "will definitely be gay", yes?
*sigh* Well when you understand logic so poorly, I'm sure it looks sick and twisted.
Contrary to popular liberal debate tactic, there are actually other options besides being totally shit at something or doing nothing.
Rhetorically, yes. These are the same people who have attempted to condemn us straight to hell for everything from whiskey consumption to extramarital sex to interracial marriages to letting our kids watch Disney movies (true story).
Nobody tries to argue...."but I was born to watch Pocohontas....I can't help it". People just tell them to fuck off and mind their own business.
Nobody can bully you without your permission. You don't need a committee to come to your rescue. That's the weakness talking again.
Does that "acceptance" include desperately pretending scientific studies say things they don't?
Yes. And predators attack those they perceive to be weak.
We're not talking about protecting rights. That's the fantasy that the "protectors" convince themselves they're living. Rights are not dependent upon your condition at birth, so it makes not one iota of difference if people are born gay or not.
Yes. Exactly. Why would that be so bad?
Yet you are so indoctrinated to follow liberal dogma over actual science that you can't even bring yourself to consider this eventuality. Do at least attempt to operate with an open mind. Despite decades of research, there is no science to prove that sexual preference is any more than that.
Why are you so desperate to believe that being gay is so terrible nobody would ever do it willingly?
We need a "thumbs up" emoji for statements like this.
And this.
That's a very well put, very wise statement.
My "advice" is targeted more toward angry liberal straight people who manage to presume you're inferior without even knowing they're doing it.
I do hope you find today's America a better place than it used to be.
Well let's do our best to insure it goes well.
Interesting, and I see you Jack_Tx through all of that. Your point is not lost on me. (Smile.) Yes, I have lived through then and now, and NOW is better.
Nice fucking straw man argument. The individual you're replying to never said, "being gay is so terrible nobody would ever do it willingly?"
And you stated:
I'm still laughing at that stupid talking point.
I have no idea what that statement was supposed to mean since there was no "advice" in your comment.
I'm a liberal heterosexual and I do NOT think gay people are inferior. I think most people who think homosexuals are inferior are members of the religious right.
"Stop Saying “Sexual Preference”
"You may mean well, but it makes you sound ignorant."
" You’re more than entitled to continue using “sexual preference” right alongside “the gay lifestyle” or “avowed homosexual” or whatever term you’d like to broadcast just how dense you really are. Just know that it’s simply flat-out incorrect to refer to a person’s sexual orientation as a “preference.” More than that, it’s dangerous."
"It is a " quietly toxic expression. That’s because the very construct of a preference, or the verb “to prefer,” implies that the individual has a choice, that there are options available and yet, all else being equal and as a matter of taste, really, the person would rather “this one” over “that one.” Think how bizarre it would sound if we were to apply the same language to any other unalterable biological trait. “Suit yourself, and to each his own,” we might reason, “but my preference is to have hands this size, not that size.” Or perhaps, “It’s perfectly fine to go with a darker birthmark on your leg, I just preferred to get mine on my arm, and in this lighter shade of brown, too.” In fact, while we’re on skin color, this flawed logic would, of course, also extend to a person’s opting to be black, white, Asian, or any other race or ethnicity as a preference."
"If there’s anything that the science of sexuality has taught us over the past few decades, it’s that human beings have little—if any—conscious control over what arouses them. That’s the case for men and women, gay, straight, or bi. Therefore, to say that one has a preference for males over females, or females over males, makes little sense, since it gives the impression that one had every opportunity to choose what to be turned on by. A straight man who is aroused by beautiful women may wonder how gay men could possibly “prefer” men instead, but from a gay man’s perspective, those beautiful women aren’t even an option—they’re in an entirely different, non-erotic category altogether."
Perhaps he uses that phrase because because he's "asexual" and prefers not having sex.
Or maybe his confusion stems from a being "bisexual" who has made a conscience decision to avoid same sex relationships.
Butt quite possibly he refuses to admit that someone can born with a homosexual orientation because it's his political talking point.
I wonder if he can "pray his politics away".
An expedient way I am aware of to determine sexual orientation is to establish what gender appears in one's "wet" dreams. People can test this theory easily on themselves. What/who is the "turn on" in one's dreams?
Uh-oh.
I once dreamed about fucking a robot.
I must be a "robosexual".
HA!
The operative words are, "'wet" dreams,' plural. Al Jizzerror! How many robots are there, again? Carry on, now.
Geez. It wasn't a robo orgy.
I was just a teenager and I had been reading an Isaac Asimov novel that week.
Butt I get lots of robocalls, so I think the fucking robots are still hitting on me.
It's a lot easier to do when there weren't laws against whiskey consumption, extramarital sex, and so forth within recent memory. Would you have told an interracial couple who wished to marry in the pre-Loving vs. Virginia south to just marry anyway, and tell opponents to fuck off? Would you tell them the crosses burning in their front yard was just bullying for which they had given permission?
Why do you insist that those who acknowledge the existence of anti-LGBTQ bigotry are the bigots, rather than the ones who have enforced anti-LGBTQ laws and policies? They're acknowledging a difference in circumstances, not a difference in the value of the person in those circumstances. You seem unable to tell the difference.
It sure does.
Sphen and Magic - Penguins
Holy shit ... me too~!!
Oooh. Wonder if there's a "pray the idiocy away" establishment?
Interesting. There's that song: "Impossible. . . things are happening everrryyy dayyyyy."
(Never thought I would see the day when. . . . Wonders never cease.)
That's bullshit. Victims of bullying aren't volunteering OR acquiescing. They aren't at fault.
Bullies don't pick on bigger or stronger victims and they rarely act alone. Bullies WANT an audience. Part of what bolsters their fragile egos is to be cheered by their minions. Then there's the witnesses that watch it happen and do or say nothing and the effect that has on them AND the victim.
So your posit is that gay people need to react with violence?
Bullying is intimidation and/or coercion. Every person can choose not to be intimidated or coerced.
True. They're generally cowards who want to hide the fact.
Sadly, cowardice is not uncommon.
There are STILL places in America where whiskey consumption is illegal. Homosexuality is legal everywhere. Marijuana is illegal in most of the United States. Yet pot smokers seem to feel quite confident telling Baptist busybodies to fuck off.
You're conflating the discussion about rights...which have now been established by SCOTUS ruling for both interracial and same sex marriages...with acceptance or whatever it is people hope to achieve with this whole misguided "born this way" assertion.
However the concept of using an aggressive game plan still holds. When a law is passed that violates your rights, don't protest. Don't petition. Those are acts of weakness. Follow the example of powerful people. When they want to protect their rights, they sue. It's worth noting that the right to both same sex and interracial marriages were decided when somebody sued.
Let's make sure we get our terminology right. Burning a cross in someone's yard is vandalism. So is painting a swastika on a synagogue. Bullying is intimidation and/or coercion. People do not have a choice about whether their property is vandalized. They do have a choice about whether or not they will be intimidated or coerced.
You're misquoting me. I don't believe gay people to be a different race or species. Therefore I don't accept the idea of bigotry in association with this issue. That's a liberal melodrama term that they've overused to the point where it's meaningless.
You seem unable to tell the difference between what the defenders intend to communicate and what they actually communicate. Here's a hint: what they intend to communicate doesn't actually matter.
You're using "Slate" as an arbiter of intelligence or scientific knowledge..... Oh for fuck's sake.
Will you next be using Donald Trump as the authority on honesty? Will you get your financial advice from "Men's Fitness"?
One more time........... TRY. Very hard. To open.....your.....mind.
At the very least it is possible that sexual attraction is simply a preference we develop over time. The actual fact is that the science supports that idea more than it supports heredity.
Ask yourself....if science does someday definitively prove that sexual preference is 100% decided based on some outside influence having nothing to do with prenatal development.... why would that be so terrible? What actual difference would it make?
Perhaps you suggest these things because you cannot fathom another possibility besides the one you've adopted as religious dogma.
Or maybe your confusion stems from your inability to process what scientific research actually does or doesn't say.
But quite possibly you either lack the intellectual capacity or are simply too intellectually lazy to absorb information that would challenge your own talking point.
I'll pray for your intellectual development, albeit probably not very optimistically.
Only in self defense in the event they are physically attacked.
My position is that they need to decide once and for all that "Jethro" and "Ellie May" et al are not likely to change their minds and not worth the effort it would take to make that happen anyway.
Well, I guess if you define bigotry extremely narrowly, bigotry looks a lot less common. Of course, there is always the risk of looking desperate to avoid acknowledging bigotry.
Same with bullying.
Of course it does. It also matters that others will dishonestly attempt to twist what they intend to communicate in order to vilify them. Such efforts should be called out.
Perhaps I don't believe in any "religious dogma" since I'm an atheist. It's those whose want to call a homosexual's sexual identity a choice or a preference who have religious reasons based on their dogma.
You have chosen to ignore the FACT that, based on MRIs and PET scans, homosexual brains differ from scans of heterosexual brain scans.
I don't have a religious dogma but I did express my opinion about transsexuality (and homosexuality) in this article (which you probably haven't bothered to read). Bear in mind that the focus of my article is transsexuality.
You certainly have a religious level commitment to inconclusive science.
Are you even putting in the basic effort to read the posts? Or did you miss the FACT that none of the brain structure research is pre-natal? Do you understand what that means? Is the brain currently in your head unchanged from the day you were born, or has it developed at least a little along the way? Are you unable to imagine any post birth influences on brain development? Are you able to understand the irony of that situation?
I have read your article much more carefully than you appear to have read my comments.
Let me summarize the points for you, as they seem to be causing you trouble:
Now...what about those two highly factual positions do you find so threatening as to warrant use of personal attack?
I am willing to accept whichever outcome the science eventually proves. Why aren't you?
Let's check a couple of dictionaries for the real definition of "bigotry".
Obviously, bigotry is not always about race, although there are ignorant people who think bigotry has to pertain to race.
As I pointed out in my article, some people are bigots about gender identity. They like to denigrate transsexuality.
And apparently some people are bigots about sexual orientation too. They like to denigrate homosexuality.
Bigots should be called out. It's too bad the site prevents that.
I have NOT used a personal attack. I have merely pointed out that some of your comments are ridiculous.
Prenatal brain scans are NOT feasible so that's the only evidence you will accept. I think that position is fucking hilarious.
I accept the opinions of homosexuals. Most of them are convinced they were born that way. Why do you presume that they're lying?
If you read my article you should know that the topic I focused on was transsexuality yet you seem to be completely focused on homosexuality.
Maybe you should write you own article about homosexuality instead of hijacking this thread.
@ 4.1.150
Well...maybe your confusion stems from you being asexual. Or bisexual. Or your politics addle your brain.
The science supports my comments....i.e. there is no proof one way or another. What part of that science do you dispute?
If you only have scans of adults....you have no information about the structure of their brains at birth, therefore you can make no assertions about how they were born. I'm not sure how that requires explanation.
Most Presbyterians think they were born predestined for salvation and Heaven. Do you believe them, too?
Do you understand the difference between "lying' and "mistaken", or more accurately... "misled"?
No, it's just that the research everybody cites generally deals with homosexuals instead of TG people. This whole side tangent started when somebody claimed that transexuals are "born that way". I pointed out that there isn't any proof of that, other people jumped on about gay people, and the conversation wound on from there.
Scans show that the brains of male homosexuals more closely resemble the brains of females than they resemble the brains of heterosexual males. So I suppose you think that was their "choice" and they somehow modified their brains after they were born. Yeah, that sounds legit. It certainly more "scientific" than believing homosexuals who say they were born that way.
What makes you think a homosexual who says he was born that way is "mistaken" or has been misled?
I think you need to watch more Disney content.
Oh please. Your commentary here screams otherwise. Good grief.
Wait. What? Well, hell. Somebody should have told this blind kid that.
This article is about transsexualism. But since your statement opened the door for politics, let's see whose "brain is more addled." (Your words, not mine.)
Your politician of choice openly lusts for his daughter, pays off hookers, panders to his supporters' ignorance. He's a crook, liar, cheater and, more importantly, a traitor and there is video and audio evidence of such. He early on realized most of his supporters are thinly veiled racists and played on their bigotry. He also relies on evangelical support knowing there's not a lot of thought process among those ranks. They're just as bigoted when it comes to sexuality.
Bigotry of anything ... race, sexuality, religion ... is nothing but fear and abject feelings of inadequacy. Bigotry is used as a "lift" for insecure, fearful and ignorant people who need to feel superior to something. Why else would anyone feel the need to "judge" anyone for anything that would not and could affect the bigot's life.
Name-calling and derogatory nicknaming are also for the weak and intellectually impotent. Most Trump supporters think civility is for losers. Trump's not even good at being a loser. He's fucking up the republican party and it will take decades to restore. He's called his supporters idiots and they're too deplorably stupid to recognize it. The right in general has lost credibility and they've certainly lost their moral compass. It doesn't take Disney to make that apparent. Criminey ... I wouldn't want any kid to watch any of Trump's rallies.
While your sentence indicates that someone hit a nerve of yours since it makes absolutely no sense and is meant as some sort of insult, I will address it. You are in the midst of many sapiosexual women here. Women for whom intellect, wit and wisdom are a means of stimulation. We can tell the difference between real intellect and someone striving for the appearance of it. I wouldn't care if al was bisexual, and I know that without a doubt al is NOT asexual. But of course you know that. al is hotter than hot. And I can assure you, I'm not alone in thinking that.
Now stop feigning that you don't care about what other people do. We can see by your commentary you do care.
Untrue Jack. Domestic violence and school bullying data proves that to be false.
Your pretense that all a victim needs to do is suck it up and fight back utterly ignores reality. The fact that bullying can cause [coerce] a normally peaceful person to react violently proves that being intimidated isn't a choice.
Kicking the shit out of a bully doesn't guarantee that the bully will change his/her ways either. I know from experience that many bullies just look for more vulnerable targets in the future. It's telling that many abusive men [bullies] are sweet as pie until after they marry their victim.
He seems to think bigotry is always about race. Here's one of his humorous statements:
Jews are not a different "race or species" either so he probably doesn't think Hitler was a bigot.
People who think sexual orientation is a "preference" are probably bisexual. Heterosexuals are attracted to the opposite sex. Homosexuals are attracted to are attracted to their own sex. Since bisexuals are attracted to both sexes, they can choose to have a homosexual relationship (or not). So bisexuals probably think homosexuality is a choice.
Most homosexuals say the were Born This Way.
That's an interesting posit because my position is the same, for a completely different reason.
Bible thumpers oft proclaim that it's their duty to witness and to call out gay people for not towing the line, allegedly for their own good. To the contrary, I don't think most of them give a shit about gay peoples souls, I think they just want to spew their ideology and force their judgement on others.
It was all good until gay people started to have the audacity to come out in the open and refused to slink along the woodwork in the dark. As long as they remained easy targets and the cops and thugs could harass them at will, they were playing their part in the patriarchy, which needs SOMEONE on the bottom to put it's boot on.
The consensus of the patriarchy seems to be that the Ls, Gs and Bs may have won their rights under the Constitution but they're drawing the line @ transsexuals. It's just a bridge too far.
Not that the states aren't going to fight tooth and nail to claw back any gains by the LGBT community. They have and are continuing to dump as may caveats into state law as possible.
You're right, they'll keep insisting that only heterosexual Christian males have inalienable rights.
Oh but it DOES and you can't deny that FACT. We are only entitled to what the SCOTUS has ruled that we are. While the SCOTUS has ruled on marriage, they haven't ruled on a myriad of other rights and that leaves the door open for discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
There are states all over this country the treat gay and transgender people as 'less than'. States all over the country as we speak are passing legislation that denies gay and transgender Americans equal rights. Trump just changed the rules to deny transgender troopers and sailors to serve openly.
So while the concept of your statement is laudable and legally true, it isn't a FACT in this country and religious animus has overshadowed attempts to make inroads.
Is he suggesting that the victim of bullying should be blamed for the bully's behavior?
So if some poor kid gets bullied in school it was his choice?
That's just fucking stupid. Nobody wants to be bullied.
Okay: Didn't see that coming. Quite - Weird Al Yokovich - huh?
That's what it sounds like to me butt I'll wait to see if Jack choses to clarify.
My sister was a bully and there was many a time when I had to take things into my own hands to keep her from hurting people and animals. Once, she came running to get my protection when a group of girls were after her for pouring glue on one little girls hair [remember that weird brown stuff with the rubber tip?]. I told the girls to line up and they could have at her one at a time but no gang bang. Even though my sister was much bigger, they lined up like ducks...I took three of them to finally knock her on her ass but after that she wasn't so fucking cocky. The girl with the glue in her hair never threw a punch.
When she started in on animals I nipped that shit in the bud and warned her that my wrath would have no end if I ever found out she hurt another animal. Ironically, she married a guy who turned out to be abusive.
I don't communicate with my sister but I know enough about her to realize that the ass kicking didn't change her mind or her ways.
Lady Gaga was too obvious.
And Weird Al is much funnier.
You must be an optimist.
Were you born that way?
Al let Ga-Ga 'have it'!!! I remember when he let Michael Jackson's "Beat It" have it. If I thought that was rough: this one is "Yes Ga-ga, No Ma'am"!!!
Yeah.
Weird Al did Eat It. It was great!
I may have been butt I'm too old for that delusion now.
You get it! That is what I was trying to convey in an 'unartful' way @4.5 below. Thanks, SP! Gender neutral bathrooms help with the unspoken "question" a lot I'd imagine.
Gender neutral bathrooms are a great idea.
Unfortunately that's not enough for some people.
While I think they are the solution here, I have to admit I prefer women-only bathrooms because some men have a tendency to pee all over the bathroom
Although ... I have seen more than a few stalls in the ladies' room where women have peed all over the seat. And I can't quite figure out how that is possible unless they are not just hovering, but actually squatting with their feet on the toilet.
That is exactly what they are doing and I think that it's disgusting. I have gotten to the point where I won't use a public bathroom unless I have to, or they have paper seat covers.
Have you ever flown out of O'Hare? The toilets there have a plastic film that covers the seats, and it automatically replaces itself every time the toilet is flushed. I'm sure it isn't environmentally correct, but it sure does make me feel better about using a public restroom.
I fear this issue will cause the return of Pay Toilets
Pay toilets are evil.
Ellen Degeneres did a bit in one of her comedy routines about that. It was flipping hilarious.
Have you ever not looked before you leaped and sat and got your butt wet? Freaking disgusting.
True dat. I wouldn't mind a transgender woman in any bathroom I use. We're all behind closed doors no matter what we empty. Although no woman gives a damn at a sports venue where the line to the use the ladies room wraps itself around the building and there's no one waiting to use the men's room. I've seen ladies dressed to the nines that wouldn't be caught dead in any department store they consider less than Saks run into the men's room at a sports venue faster than Flo Jo (may she rest in peace).
When North Cacalacky passed HB-2 (to require a birth certificate to pee in the ladies room), the Republican argument was that the law would protect women from being molested by transsexuals. After extensive research, the Democrats said they could not find a single incidence of a transsexual assaulting anyone in a bathroom.
It was just another example of the Republicans "protecting people" from a non-existent threat.
Right. There is no need to escalate the fear factor. Or, to deny people decency, civil rights, and a place in regular society. Furthermore, just tell people what the rules are upfront. That way everybody can agree-disagree-and know the difference!
The fucking Republicans love to employ "double speak".
When they proposed laws to make same sex marriage illegal they called it "the marriage protection act". It should have been called the marriage restriction act.
Republicans thought Obama would take their guns, force them to have abortions, institute Sharia Law and make everyone marry homosexuals. It was just fucking idiotic propaganda.
Right. Republicans fail to see the gold medal winner who wants, needs to make his golden years bearable for him; instead they choose to remember the man and reject the dress. Nowadays, it is the dress that informs the story about this woman who came to be.
The Donald needs golden showers too (that's a pisser).
He likely has believed for years that the only way to get his light golden yellow hair color is to have underage Russian prostitutes urinate on it... The tape the Russians have is just dirty Donald at the hair salon getting his hair colored...
Yes, he advocates the "trickle down" theory.
Great statement. Although the threat is more from those who aren't as evolved as you are. There are some for which transsexualism obsession only indicates they're, as one very wise NTer put it, titillated by chicks with dicks. Wish I would have said it. I can guarantee anyone who's that obsessed with it has trans porn in their trunk on top of their spare tire and in the very back recesses of their "closet."
I have to say that the only time I've seen that is when straight people are trying to "fix" someone. Simply being "out" about your orientation or identity is not forcing anything on anyone.
I have been observing "gender neutral" public restrooms with locks on the door for individual privacy, I am not bothered by this. Although, I know this can not work well in highly trafficked areas.
But seriously, the problem you mention can be disturbing to both men, women, boys, and girls - if the facade or 'facing' is not strong (well-kept) or the 'member' is trading across the lines. I will explain what I mean by the latter a bit later in the comments section. In other words, what is a man, woman, boy, or girl supposed to do:
Note - this is an odd comment coming from me, a homosexual male by nature. And, I realize it. However, what I think is we need some straight-talk, no pun intended, about the 'new' transsexualism in our midst. And that includes homosexual males as well.
More from me (as I lay out my 'story') in this section.
One last thing, forgive me, if in my ignorance of this topic, if I come off coarse, uninformed, or 'backwards' - I am a "work in progress," and am teachable.
Hey, Al. Glad you posted this. I miss Veronikka.
I have a feeling that some of the people who should read this are afraid of the message.
I miss Veronikka too. I'm sure Veronikka could have written a vastly superior article on this subject.
Hormone shots suck for cows !
Hormone shots are better for humans !
Do treated humans still Eat cows ?
Dumb Humans.
Hormones are not all created equally.
Humans take hormones all the time. Birth control, menopause, body building, to reduce inflammation. Just FYI.
Just don't eat anything injected with hormones'. It's BAD for you !
So much for "Porn" acting. They're killing themselves every time they perform.
They took the blue pill.
Stop watching snuff films.
Oh.....like you don't.
Good article. Solid points, well expressed.
Thanx!
APA cite
Transgender and transsexual individuals are not lacking in courage. I applaud and admire anyone who remains true to themselves and refuse to let judgmental assholes dictate their lives. Why people would even care makes me question why.
In 1972, I roomed for a while with two transgender women. One worked as a drag queen and the other worked as a bartender at a gay bar. They were two of the bravest people I have ever known. Both were over 6' and had a bitch of a time getting heals that fit. They would get heckled by some men and cat called by others but they always kept their chin up, chest out and carried on. They were a marvel to watch and I looked up to the courage they showed against all odds.
[deleted]
Clearly, you care enough to make snide comments.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I have to wonder: in this day and age, why would anyone care about someone's sexual orientation and/or gender identity? What does it matter whomever identifies as gay, straight, trans, ect.? It's unbelievable such things are still an issue.
It's only an issue if someone brings it up. You do know where and what you are commenting on right? Someone brought it up. For me, it's a non issue and just another damned "look over here! I'm a victim!" piece.
Cue the "but you took the time to comment" bullshit. I tried to inject a little outside the box humor to lighten the attitudes. Should have known better with this "audience".
I wrote this article.
I'm a heterosexual.
I am NOT a victim.
Did you even bother to read the article?
The article is a positive piece about tolerance not about portraying transsexuals as victims.
I think you are confused.
No, I think they have figured out their situations as best they can.
Wally, since you inevitably appear in articles merely to disparage when it's simpler to scroll on past and allow people to share ideas in a rational manner, people with whom you have nothing in common and people whom you believe to be misguided, it's seems you're confused. I didn't think we needed an exit sign here in BH. You're not going to change anyone's thought process, so it makes sense to go somewhere where you and like minded people can gather and share your own ideas and ideals. I can assure you it won't be here.
It's amazing that even when informed:
His response is "they are simply confused".
WTF? I think we can see who is confused.
Stevie Wonder, Ray Charles and Jose Feliciano can see who's confused.
I am aware of that and it really is a non-issue. I suppose the real question is, why do some people think or want to make it an issue? Why is it such a big deal for those making an issue out of something that should really be nothing. I may not be coming across clear on this. No one makes an issue about anyone being heterosexual. So why would they make an issue about someone who is not? To me, it doesn't matter. It's the same thing and is a non-issue. I hope that clarifies my point.
Gordy, you're sexually secure. [Hot!] I have never, ever, never-ever known a sexually secure man or woman to give one iota of a shit about what other consenting adults are doing. Not one.
I think you're forgetting that some of us enjoy porn.
When I watch a "girl on girl on midget on goat" video, it's really just academic research because I'm curious about what that fucking goat is up to. Is it a consenting goat? Is it a "goat yoga" video? Is that why goats faint?
They only faint when they're highly excited.
Speaking of highly excited, when will you be home?
Why thank you
I can't fathom why anyone else would even care in the least.
Only because you're here cobalt
I'm sapiosexual and intellect is my turn-on. Intellect and people secure with their own sexuality, which makes them stand out among those who judge others' sexuality. Those who worry about what consenting adults do behind closed doors show they've got issues of their own that they're not willing to admit.
I reiterate. You're hot, Gordy.
I appreciate and admire intelligence as a quality. Willful ignorance or plain stupidity is a major turn off, and just plain annoying.
Thank you. You are too kind.
Because it means they belong to something. It may be irrelevant but they belong.
So? Belonging is fine. But that's not my point. Why does anyone care if someone identifies as gay, straight, trans, ect.? If I see someone on the street, I could care less how they identify. It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. But some people clearly want to make an issue of it, even going so far as to criminalize certain aspects, as we've historically seen with attempts to criminalize homosexuality or prohibit same sex marriage, just to name a couple examples.
That's exactly what I've been wondering. I really don't care what they identify as. Like I said, it doesn't effect how I treat them.
That is where the real problem is. I think, honestly, much of the country could care less. But because these people THINK they should be treated differently it becomes a problem. They get upset when they aren't acknowledged for and receive special treatment for whatever they identify as.
It's really a distraction.
What "special treatment" are they receiving?
"Special treatment" my ass...
FFS JRNC, they only complain when that entity you say is "much of the country' passes laws discriminating against them to the point of where they should go to the bathroom or where they can or cannot work or which MOS they can have.
It isn't special treatment they seek, it is special treatment they do not deserve and wish to avoid from those that make the laws and those who read from pulpits deriding them.
From me; NONE.
Well put.
They deserve equal protection under the law (14th Amendment).
They should be able to get married and even (gasp!) be able to buy a wedding cake.
And, obviously, they should NOT be hassled about using the bathroom.
Please explain why they're "upset".
And what is this "special treatment" you're talking about?
I can only shake my head at some arguments.
Like with the cake thing, they say, well you wouldn't make a Muslim or Jewish business make a cake that they are against.
It is almost like they don't understand the difference. One cannot make a business sell something they do not offer already. When they offer something to some and not others is the problem.
Sometimes I think some are really that dense.
The marriage thing...like someone else getting married somehow makes their marriage less and not sanctioned.
I swear, I don't think they even hear themselves at times.
Good timing on that comment.
There was a right-wing evangelist (who is featured on White-wing talk radio) bitching about cakes today on CNN (Chris Cuomo's show). His ridiculous example was that you shouldn't force a Jewish bake to bake a "swastika cake".
I doubt any baker has swastika cakes butt most bakers do sell wedding cakes. I bet they would even sell a wedding cake to a Nazi. They should also sell wedding cakes to be used in same sex weddings.
I've never seen a swastika cake. What kind of event are swastika cakes for? Maybe they're for Trump's inauguration?
Here's a cake that had Secret Service protection:
Here! Here! Everything in and out of reality has a classification. It is how we communicate. When you hear or see experience will govern one's reaction to it.
Let's test your theory of the case. You are that young 21-ish transsexual pictured second in @12.2 and all your youthful life you have wanted to be two things as an established goal:
Now in the former president's America you could apply for military service and service to your country with an eye toward fly school. However, in the new administration you will answer a query on a form which seeks to know if you are or have ever been transsexual. It is a yes or no question.
You are this accomplished boy: What answer do you give?
This is the dilemma faced by the transsexual community. There classification is being IDENTIFIED for special treatment under the law. In the same manner there is no question generally ID-ing others. Questions don't often seek to screen out generally accepted people.
Of course! This young boy/man will be upset at having President Donald Trump 'rule' his life dream out of bounds. In the inverse,if your life's dream was snatched away from you by a powerful person without or with limited justification - you would be remarkably upset too.
The military used to accept transsexuals. Trump has changed that and declared transsexuals unfit for military service.
If you have imaginary bones spurs you are also unfit for military service (Trump was 4-F) butt you can be the Commander-in-Chief.
Just saw that. Cuomo was easy on him.
Cuomo should have laughed at the swastika straw man cake.
I like German chocolate cakes butt they're always round.
Butt I searched Google images and guess what? There are a bunch of fucking swastika cakes.
Speaking of CNN, I want to see that Linda Ronstadt special. I love her.
Wouldn't it be ironic if that was chocolate cake.
Did you notice the "101" candles on the cake?
George Lincoln was born March 9, 1918.
So that was his 101st birthday cake.
Shouldn't it have little burning crosses instead of candles?
Haha
From the looks of the cake they are not very creative.
Disgusting attire aside, the cake itself just looks absolutely gross. The red frosting looks like play-Doh.
The only talent I can see looks like it comes from drawing a swastika.
It's a hate cake.
How about you ask THEM why they are upset.
That is YOUR bogus position. YOU posted this statement ( 11.4.2 Jeremy Retired in NC ):
"These people" do NOT want "special treatment". They want to be treated like everyone else.
YOUR statement is totally ridiculous.
Bravo!!! Exactly!
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner.
restricting transsexuals from using public bathrooms
Ten to one, they have been using them all of this time and no one even noticed.
Don't know anyone that would take that bet.
That always gets me. Who the hell is looking at other people in the bathroom anyway...
Let's see, according to some these men should use the woman's room...
Are they transsexuals?
They are their true selves.
The top pic is the first trans-gendered man to be on the cover of Men's Health magazine.
Ender, I hate you. Just playing. (Smile.) Damn. Damn. Damn. When I think about my 'lost' years. . . . The only thing that comes close to making me feel this way, to making me second guess, . . ever posted on NT: Kavika ('way back when').
I think that is great.
That there is gold, honey! Love it ... and you too.
Okay Ender, I am on 'Day 2.' I HAVE to come back to this one. You need to tell us all about the second picture too! Wow!
For two days now a song has been rising up in my spirit, as I look at these two guys pictures. I think I want to be naughty and serenade the two of them. Okay. Time to cool down!
I will share the song. :
Caution: This video is highly romantic. It is mildly risque. No nudity. It is the song I am after. A tasteful production by a Youtube-r.
Going Down To Your River (Patti) LaBelle
Okay! Y'all know that I don't usually vote up my own stuff. But,. . .okay, I'm voting on this one #1.
This is him.
I'm speechless. (Fanning myself.)
Ender, I must admit, I would not believe it if I am not seeing it. It lends truth to a beautiful woman making a beautiful man! And, the narrow hips. . . is that testosterone? I don't know and wonder.
Perfect! Just like there's never been a gay man or woman in the military before 2015.
I just noticed this (on the Front Page - Recent Groups):
I guess they're discussing some Satanic shit.
That sounds interesting, butt, I'm still going to avoid their group.
Yeah. I'd like to think I'm smart enough to scroll past when I haven't the slightest inclination to or interest in stopping by.
Nothing to see there anyway.
I think someone may have noticed that they had 666 discussions and quickly decided to ruin it by starting a couple of new discussions. They now have 668 discussions.
This song has been in my head ever since this article was written.
Okay, now that I am all caught up on my commenting and reading all other comments, I want to may be get feedback on something I saw with my own eyes.
One day while shopping a transsexual male to female person came into the store I was shopping. I was in line as the individual arrived, shopped, and quickly got in line behind me. I turned acknowledged her, she me, and I turned back. No judgement.
As I made it out to the parking lot; got situated; turned on my car. A car crossed behind me, stopped at the corner side of the building, and she got out of the car, moved to the back tire, close to side of it —standing, and pulled "it" out and began to "whiZz."
WhiZz.
I was taken aback. Not only because she had been in the store and could have used it facilities where I know are available to the public; but, moreso that she would stand and break the 'decorum' (illusion?) of herself. I was like 'Girl, please.'
What say you all to this kind of activity? Is it "confusion" or just being real?
To be fair, I've seen many either drunk or just stupid straight people pee in public, either because they were about to wet their pants (or had in fact already started pissing themselves) or because they were such an idiot they just didn't care. So removing the "trans" part of it out, it's still rude, crude and likely illegal within city limits. Being lgtbq doesn't preclude one from being a total idiot or asshole, idiots and assholes come in every flavor.
LOL! I get your point and of course I have seen this in real time across the board. My confusion is why is this trans-female standing and whiZzing like a man? Why not squat in a suitable manner conducive to females? It would be less confusing to onlookers (and little children) who happen by.
At my local store, there is a clerk who is female to male transformation. I saw it over the years myself. He now has the most beautiful sideburns to mustache to beard combo. Also, he is in a relationship with another male! Curious, I researched this phenomenon on the web and up pops a type of gay porn involving transsexual woman to man having vaginal sex with a homosexual man. Here is my question:
Is this "confusion" or just being real?
I used Google to do some research for this article. I too encountered porn. I heard a few years ago that porn was the topic that people searched for more than any other topic. I think UFOs/aliens was the second most popular search topic. Butt that was before the 2016 election. I wonder what the "hot" topic is now.
Further comment desired.
I did some more research. Yes, some transsexuals do porn to pay for the expensive procedures.
I don't know, butt I doubt they would characterize transitioning as "experimentation".
Some transsexuals have written about (and posted videos about) their "journey" so we can research it. Butt threre are probably some transsexuals who consider it very private.
No, I do not mean the transformation is experimentation, I am asking if 'discovery' of the acceptance of an external male appearance and female genitalia exciting enough to stop right there for a period? Not knowing how often or how much you know about this subject; I pose the question to any and all hoping for some sufficiency.
Sorry, that's above my pay grade.
Understood, my friend. Understood. I don't cross paths with many transsexuals and the question is "super-sensitive" even if I do. So, I thought I would reach out in an innocuous setting.
Yesterday someone posted an anti-transsexual seed (probably in response to this positive article about transsexuals).
I clicked on the link to the seed. The source article was published on extremely sketchy site. When I attempted to return to the NewsTalkers seed it had magically disappeared.
I guess the seeder wanted to disparage transsexuals. It's strange that the seeder has not commented on this article. I just want to say that his comments are welcome on this article. I am always happy to hear from people whose opinions differ from mine.
Oooh. Me too!
Isn't it strange that someone was motivated to publish a seed about transsexuals butt hasn't bothered to post a single comment on this article about transsexuals?
I doubt if that seeder is afraid of me.
He may be afraid that you'll fillet him with your sharp wit.