LGBT rights discussion

I think it's happening bit by bit. I've heard the term LGBTA being thrown around from time to time.

Maybe I should suggest it to the party's LGBT network, they could even change it with a coordinated press release in the summertime here, and maybe get some traction on it in the media *shrug* (I have no idea how receptive they would be, but it could make asexuality an awwareness issue ove rthe summer at least).

Some use QUILTBAG. Not saying that's not ridiculous, but hey, they're making an effort to be all-inclusive.

KysenMurrin wrote:Some use QUILTBAG. Not saying that's not ridiculous, but hey, they're making an effort to be all-inclusive.

okay, I'm gonna need a deacronymizar for that one (mostly for QUI)

I'm not entirely sure about U myself. Rest is: Queer, Intersex, Lesbian, Trans, Bi, Asex, Gay.

Edit: Ah, it's Undecided.

It'll be so much easier when we stop worrying about others' sexual preference. Then we can all be non-acronymical "people".

Last I heard it was LGBTQQUIIA, which doesn't exactly lend itself to an easy scrabble-ization of an acronym

(Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Queer, Questioning, Undecided, Interested, Intersexed, Asexual)

Laser focus, guys and gals and otherwise. One issue at a time.

I'm not surprised that gays have taken over as the face of "alternate" sexuality, because they're a significant portion of the population. And pretty much includes representative portions from every slice of the global population - asexuals, on the other hand, are a different matter entirely. Asexuality is still a new concept and it's easy to go your entire life without feeling any different than anybody else because it doesn't have the visibility that the pride march invitees ensure for the LGBT community.

Sex isn't something that's considered "polite" to talk about, so not enjoying it or not feeling sexual attraction as "hey, I'd like to put my (appendage) in/on (the other person's appendage)" so much as "hey, I genuinely like this person and want to spend more time with them" doesn't feel abnormal to most asexuals because they have no other frame of reference. Sure, the media is hypersexualized and we're constantly bombarded with sex, but it's just how the world is to an asexual.

I also don't see asexuality becoming an issue on par with homosexuality. Since everyone experiences sex differently, not experiencing it at all isn't something that really requires visibility or equal rights legislation. I mean hell, everyone's heard the old saw "once she says 'I do,' she doesn't" (or some variation on that basic theme).

Fivelives wrote:Last I heard it was LGBTQQUIIA, which doesn't exactly lend itself to an easy scrabble-ization of an acronym

(Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Queer, Questioning, Undecided, Interested, Intersexed, Asexual)

Well, if you drop the "Questioning" since it's a combination of "Undecided" and "Interested", or alternately drop the "Queer" as that's covered by "Gay" and "Lesbian", you end up with LGBTQUIIA. That becomes the acronym "A BIG QUILT" which is kinda poetic since it's a lot of different people combined to form one group, and amusing in that quilting is a traditional craft, and traditional folk tend to have the most issues with the "A Big Quilt" community.

Klaudandus wrote:http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/In-S-F-Rick-Perry-compares-homosexuality-to-5546544.php
"Whether or not you feel compelled to follow a particular lifestyle or not, you have the ability to decide not to do that," Perry said. "I may have the genetic coding that I'm inclined to be an alcoholic, but I have the desire not to do that, and I look at the homosexual issue the same way."

Lovely. So you can be born gay, but if you're a good upstanding citizen you won't act on it. There's a brilliant solution.

Klaudandus wrote:http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/In-S-F-Rick-Perry-compares-homosexuality-to-5546544.php
"Whether or not you feel compelled to follow a particular lifestyle or not, you have the ability to decide not to do that," Perry said. "I may have the genetic coding that I'm inclined to be an alcoholic, but I have the desire not to do that, and I look at the homosexual issue the same way."

Obviously, because we all know homosexuality is a terrible, terrible offense that harms millions of innocents each day in car crashes, domestic violence... wait.

once again the US makes international news. Y'all should be so proud.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/international-politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503226&objectid=11273301

A Tea Party candidate running for office in Oklahoma has appeared to endorse the practice of stoning gay people to death.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/19/j ... delicious/
“All these people who are prominent in the antigay right and in the ex-gay movement itself who get caught with dicks,” Savage said, “it’s because they’ve externalized this internal conflict.”

Savage cited a 1992 University of Georgia study that measured levels of arousal in men exposed to gay porn. The study found a strong correlation between homosexual arousal and men who identified themselves as anti-gay or homophobic.

“Homophobia correlates very strongly with gay desire and arousal,” he said.

“Isn’t it amazing that homophobes actually agreed to sign up for that?” Rogan said.

“I think we need to look at the research methodology, but I do believe they didn’t say, ‘We need homophobes for this study where we’re going to see if you’re actually fags or not,’” Savage quipped. “They didn’t recruit quite like that.”

Rogan said that there are only two reasons people oppose same-sex marriage. “You’re either really dumb,” he said, “or you’re secretly worried that dicks are delicious.”


mmmmm.... delicious gay dicks

So this happened: http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from ... e-27904621

Ah what idiocy. With respect to transgender rights I don't see why we need to move away from she/he for them. If transgender man who then feels like a woman then sure, call her she I see no problem.

But fuck this gender neutrality BS.

> Another change will allow children to choose to use any toilet facilities they prefer

There's no possible way this can go wrong.

fuzzygeek wrote:> Another change will allow children to choose to use any toilet facilities they prefer

There's no possible way this can go wrong.

Well I know several schools over here thats been doing that for... years and years... (Unisex toilets, no urinals, just booths, and several single booth toilets)

Edit:
Now we just have to teach the damned kids to lock the doors... anecdote - last time I was an election monitor (in november, not the EP elections) I needed to go to the bathroom, and open the door while talking to someone else, stepping in to the single booth toilet, starting to close the door, turning my gaze and there was a kid sitting on the toilet...
That could have "gone horribly wrong"* if I had closed the door while talking.. :(


*appearance wise - there is a sort of running scare of child molesters - so far as to have male pedagogues not be allowed to change diapers or have kids sitting on their laps in some integrated institutions, because someone might get the wrong idea....

six-year-olds aren't qualified to understand identity issues and that as some of them can't even use the toilet yet

Is this a common issue amongst six year olds? I thought the majority were potty trained well before then... or is it that six year olds don't usually go without assistance? I'm asking seriously because it's been a long time since I was six... or dealt with anyone that was...

Skye1013 wrote:

six-year-olds aren't qualified to understand identity issues and that as some of them can't even use the toilet yet

Is this a common issue amongst six year olds? I thought the majority were potty trained well before then... or is it that six year olds don't usually go without assistance? I'm asking seriously because it's been a long time since I was six... or dealt with anyone that was...

They're supposed to be potty trained around 3-ish. Can still fail from time to time, but he should grasp the idea. Do note the mention of "some of them". Gather two 6yo's and voilà! "Some of them".

I'm lucky I only got a boy, but I sure as hell already feel awkwrad going into women's bathroom for emergency diaper changes...

Wow...
Skimming the article, I spotted this quote "But to others on the Left, sex by or with children was just another repressive boundary to be swept away" - I wasn't aware it was a left/right political issue (if anything it would be liberalism versus authoritarianism). The way it is used, it seems almost slanderous towards "the left", I sense repressed anger at "free spirits" (hippies or the like) from the author of the article.

That said, I was reading up on sexuality in regards to politics (more specifically, legislatively) due to some calls for tightening some liberal laws we have in denmark some years back. I found several studies (that seemed legit and from institutions that still are legit) suggesting that 'the natural order' for sexual attraction in human males would be characterized as ephebophilia - 'natural order' being pure biology/reproduction.
(Coincidentally, ephebophilia would be quite legal to act on in denmark with the age categories given on the wikipedia article; age of consent is 15, no "statutory rape" laws either for 15+ persons - it isn't something that would be well liked socially, but it is legal).

There is quite a ways from ephebophilia to hebo- or pedophilia though (Excluding the fact that another wiki article says hebo- and ephebophilia is the same, but differentiating genders, ephebo- being attraction to males and hebo- being attraction to females - not in agreement with what it says on the respective pages -- in other words, reservations here taken for the understanding of the words, as wikipedia is not in agreement with itself)

Right there, we see the danger of the ability to pick and choose what gets taught in school based on preexisting prejudices....

yikes...

Nooska wrote:Right there, we see the danger of the ability to pick and choose what gets taught in school based on preexisting prejudices....

yikes...

Not to mention it makes no sense. Wouldn't a super gay soldier race die within one generation? XD (Yeah, I am being cheeky)

Klaudandus wrote:

Nooska wrote:Right there, we see the danger of the ability to pick and choose what gets taught in school based on preexisting prejudices....

yikes...

Not to mention it makes no sense. Wouldn't a super gay soldier race die within one generation? XD (Yeah, I am being cheeky)

No, you see, being gay is a choice (though apparently breedable ?!?), so they would just keep a horde of slave women to breed with when they needed to make new gay babies - reverse amazon.

*tongue in cheek*

(I assume noone takes that seriously coming from me, right?... right???)

Nooska wrote:

Klaudandus wrote:Not to mention it makes no sense. Wouldn't a super gay soldier race die within one generation? XD (Yeah, I am being cheeky)

No, you see, being gay is a choice (though apparently breedable ?!?), so they would just keep a horde of slave women to breed with when they needed to make new gay babies - reverse amazon.

*tongue in cheek*

(I assume noone takes that seriously coming from me, right?... right???)

Remember that quote about human stupidity? Consider yourself lucky if no-one finds this that actually gets offended.

What I find doubly insulting in this clusterfuck of a quote is how it tramples the graves of the thousands of homosexuals that were hauled off to the gas chambers, alongside the romani, the *abnormals*, the political dissidents and, yes, the jews.

Which leads to an interesting parralel - what if we switch homosexual and jew in the quote? what *exactly* does it say about the quoter? Remember that other quote about learning history's lessons?