|
|
Post by gameboy on Mar 19, 2017 18:34:39 GMT
There is a movement to drop transgender issues from the goals of our movement. They suggest we just be LGB. (Don't get me started on the letters those idiots have added).
Milo Yiannopoulos in "Breitbart": Here's a retort from the LGBT status quo leadership:
Discuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by theredcrosseknight on Mar 20, 2017 4:45:26 GMT
I voted yes. Those familiar with my posts on the Politics board should be aware that I am fully behind (most of) the goals of the LGB community. However, I'm not really sold on the trans thing. I suspect that many other people feel the same as I do as well. Granted, I'm not an asshole who likes to go around deliberately referring to trans people by pronouns they don't like just to piss them off, (I mostly have a live and let live attitude toward people's quirks as long as they aren't hurting anyone) but I also can't help feeling that there is a major degree of delusion in many of these people (not to mention that I know some trans people and some have had some pretty major mental conditions, which could just be manifesting themselves at a given time that way. I also don't like the way many are trying to pressure children into identifying as trans (I'm not sure I can find it again, but several months ago I posted a very good and well researched article about why children should not be treated the same as adults in regards to the trans movement). Putting aside the fact that the person chosen to defend my choice in your OP is an inflammatory troll who needs to go away, the two groups are not the same thing. There is often some overlap in the groups, and I can understand how they may often ally as they have similar political enemies, but I don't feal they should be treated as part of the same group.
|
|
|
|
Post by bd74 on Mar 20, 2017 18:39:17 GMT
I'd say drop the T but for the sake of the transgender community, not for the sake of the LGBs. Trans folks are just trying to live as their authentic selves, and I don't think it's valid for them to get lumped in with communities that define themselves by their sexual orientation. Another thing, I do not like how more and more letters keep getting added to the acronym. What was originally LGBT is now LGBTQIA (what the hell is that?). When does it ever stop?  ? All it's doing is giving the haters fodder to badmouth these communities.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2017 3:13:55 GMT
I'd say drop the T but for the sake of the transgender community, not for the sake of the LGBs. Trans folks are just trying to live as their authentic selves, and I don't think it's valid for them to get lumped in with communities that define themselves by their sexual orientation. Another thing, I do not like how more and more letters keep getting added to the acronym. What was originally LGBT is now LGBTQIA (what the hell is that?). When does it ever stop?  ? All it's doing is giving the haters fodder to badmouth these communities. Well they are connected in that they both challenge gender roles. For example, living life with a partner of the same sex has obvious correlations. T has been part of it since the 90s. It's an umbrella term which ranged from transsexuality to people who cross dress but don't take hormones at all. The latest acronym may look silly, but intersex and asexual do highlight minority groups who have suffered persecution in the past for not conforming.
|
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 25, 2017 10:32:06 GMT
I agree with falconia. The core leadership of the LGBT community is led by the left, and that’s part of the reason why most feminists are also pro-TG rights. Today, it’s also the left that does most of the actual political work in the fight for rights. The reason women (in the sense of feminists here) are not added to the acronym themselves is because they are not excluded (or do not deviate) either in identity or sexuality from the cultural norm on gender roles, at least not by default, even though they oppose it. However, when you stop to think about how cultural sexism is what’s behind traditional gender roles, it becomes clear that their goals are quite similar, and that’s why feminists and the LGBT social movements are historical allies. Since all groups added to the acronym are interconnected through their deviation to traditional gender roles, it’s highly unlikely that they will be removed. Even if they are removed in the (probably distant) future due to informational purposes, the truth is that they won’t stop siding together in political debate. In that the left leadership may concur, but only because it will serve their aims. The alliance will still exist. That being said, you certainly can create means for people like you to express your anti-TG views or, alternatively, follow others that do. For that, however, you are going to have to become politically active. If you are willing to do so and go through the administrative work, you are certainly free to. What is certain is that you are not going to be followed by the left leadership. Also certain is that it will be seen in itself as a right wing movement, even if some members are grouped with the left for other reasons. The tendency is that you will be grouped with the straight right wing, and the tendency is that they will discriminate and exclude you. Which is probably the reason why your group is politically fragile and has little visibility. Again, though, it’s far from impossible for you to become a formal and vocal political faction, that is, if you are willing to do the work to achieve that
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawk0 on Mar 25, 2017 12:32:50 GMT
There is a movement to drop transgender issues from the goals of our movement. They suggest we just be LGB. (Don't get me started on the letters those idiots have added). Milo Yiannopoulos in "Breitbart": Here's a retort from the LGBT status quo leadership: Discuss. There's no movement of note, nor should there be. Nor is American divisiveness at all emblematic of the greater sphere. Rights issues as regards us pivot on whether government can discriminate on a gender basis. It's the same core issue. Whether that's individually or on the basis of pairings, it's the same legal principle in discussion. Consider Iran. They accept transgender but not gays, so we have the spectacle of gay couples being caught either having to submit (one of them) to a government-funded sex change or both be put to death. Our issues are inevitably linked.
|
|
|
|
Post by scienceisgod on Mar 28, 2017 3:13:47 GMT
Should women's sports be eliminated, or do you support transgender? Same question.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Lost One on Apr 7, 2017 16:12:26 GMT
How about we keep the T and drop Milo Yiannopoulos?
|
|