⫸Trans and LGBTQIA+ Discussion⫷

[JGrimez]

Oh, horseshit. It's just someone dressed up in a costume reading a book out loud. It's no different from, and no more sexual than, someone dressed up as Bozo the clown, Abraham Lincoln, or Batman reading a book out loud. in all cases, it's a great big nothingburger that's only notable because you and the rest of the goon squad have decided to make them the target of your little hate party.


Also horseshit. You've obviously never been to a real drag show. Even here in San Francisco, where if they were designed to be erotic they would be at their most; the vast overwhelming majority are just guys dressed up as women lip-syncing to tedious and sad old throwbacks to music that was popular in the '70s, and *maybe* a Madonna or Cher tune from the '80s or '90s. There's nothing titillating about it. In fact, quite the opposite and I specifically avoid going out to the Castro when Drag Race is on because all of the bars and dance clubs turn into an un-fun watch party, which is not at all what I'm looking for when I go out. The only reasons they'd be inappropriate for kids are the venues (where they wouldn't be allowed to enter anyway) and the fact that they'd certainly find them to be even more tiresome dreck than I do. I'm sure there be sexy drag queens out there somewhere whom I'd find sexy. But I've never seen them in 20+ years living and going to gay bars and clubs in San Francisco. So wherever they are, they're a tiny quantity of edge cases.

That's not to take sides with you and your bigot brigade. I'm just not into hackneyed stereotypes like drag. But they're mostly harmless people with a mostly harmless hobby and deserve none of the hate and lies you lot are spewing at them.

Oh look, another child groomer.
I know exactly what drag is and what it represents (and where it historically was performed).
Drag is harmless if performed in gay clubs or for adult audiences. And just because some drag performers are not overtly sexual does not mean that the general theme of drag is not specifically hypersexualized.
I've been to drag shows as early as the early 2000's so I see through your pedophile-apologetic rhetoric and pathetic explanations.
(I'm not saying drag performers are pedophiles, but I am saying that people who want to perform drag and other sexualized performances specifically around children are groomers).

I dislike the drag stuff, it's ridiculous and inappropriate and yet I can think that without seeing phantom paedophiles everywhere. Your obsession is weird and hysterical.

I don't care if you think protecting children is weird and hysterical. That merely makes you look ignorant.

 

[swilow]

I don't care if you think protecting children is weird and hysterical. That merely makes you look ignorant.

I don't think you really care about protecting children because you mainly talk about paedophiles. You seem obsessed with them.

I can't help but wonder why.

 

[Droppersneck]

I don't think you really care about protecting children because you mainly talk about paedophiles. You seem obsessed with them.

I can't help but wonder why.

It’s likely bc we live in a time where sex trafficking of minors is super prevalent, but for w/e reason it’s constantly down played and covered up. And now you have the establishment trying to label you a bigot, and eventually a criminal??, for opposing open attempts at grooming children into this bizarre lifestyle. Shits creepy, and I support lgb people, and all the rest of it.

 

[JGrimez]

I don't think you really care about protecting children because you mainly talk about paedophiles. You seem obsessed with them.

I can't help but wonder why.

Because if everyone was aware that our establishment is run by pedos (and that's how they blackmail people to be controlled) then it would stop.
But unfortunately people like yourself get more angry at the ones exposing the agenda than the actual child abusers in power.
Now child abuse has become institutionalized through government and the medical industry and many people are still too ideologically-brainwashed to realize or accept it.
I was saying this on BL back in 2016 and people were ridiculing and censoring me.
Fast forward to Epstein "committing suicide" in prison and all of a sudden everyone is a conspiracy theorist.

And pedos/traffickers are THE worst threat to children so I don't follow your logic.
I understand why the left are hesitant to call out their own (at least publicly) but in the future anyone who didn't speak up is going to feel deep shame (of course they will say that they NEVER agreed with drag shows for children)....

 

[✿Dai₷y✿]

Because if everyone was aware that our establishment is run by pedos (and that's how they blackmail people to be controlled) then it would stop.
But unfortunately people like yourself get more angry at the ones exposing the agenda than the actual child abusers in power.
Now child abuse has become institutionalized through government and the medical industry and many people are still too ideologically-brainwashed to realize or accept it.
I was saying this on BL back in 2016 and people were ridiculing and censoring me.
Fast forward to Epstein "committing suicide" in prison and all of a sudden everyone is a conspiracy theorist.

And pedos/traffickers are THE worst threat to children so I don't follow your logic.
I understand why the left are hesitant to call out their own (at least publicly) but in the future anyone who didn't speak up is going to feel deep shame (of course they will say that they NEVER agreed with drag shows for children)....

Hey Grimez old mate, how are you going?

Heh, and swilow, alive and hopefully sober and gainfully employed?

looks like pretty much every single thing Grimez commented on over the years eventually has been proven correct.

These lunatic radical left-wingers have started indoctrinating kids and are reclassifying pedos as child preference folk, so good luck with that and have fun trying to defend anything lefties do, they had total control for 2 years and the mainstream media is so awful theres no point in any of it.


Bunch of green haired ridiculous looking ignorant unhinged fuckwits determined to castrate kids , cant even do a decent protest these days


Love ya grimez, jah, xolofth, etc


Things are too nuts, hope Biden dies and Republicsns manage to un-clusterfuck America. This is what would have happened had CH took charge in govt.

 

[Jen X]

@nepalnt21 if you read what i said trans people statistically have experienced less crimes against them then a white male. That's fact and yes usa and canada, i don't follow Islamic countries that would kill them. So why they screaming victim when they don't get hurt anymore then a white male. It's actually more dangerous being a woman. Why change everything to pander to 1% of the population ? And if gender and sex are 2 different things why do tthey call it a sex change?

 

[nepalnt21]

Your position is mental gymnastics so no one calls you a chud, got it.

you've got absolutely no argument to say against my position (which hasn't changed since you were actually seemingly on my side last week) so you resort to banal insults, got it.

it's not "arbitrary",

read the montana law. it IS arbitrary.

you're manipulating language in order to disguise the reality. Very sneaky (and typical of today's Regressive Left).
It's the same reason I wouldn't want a stripper in skimpy or revealing clothing to read to children

again, nobody here is saying we want this. quit imagining things. it's disgusting.

inherently sexual attire

as has been astutely pointed out,

drag is NOT inherently sexual.

quit making shit up. you want us all in a dress code. please move to north korea, leave america alone.

This is what's happening.
I've seen it.

then put your foot down about THAT specific thing instead of tying it all together. we can SPECIFICALLY make it social hot potato to bring strap ons, wear EXTREMELY revealing clothing, etc. at pride, but you putting it all in the same pit is not really helpful.

we can disallow open sexual displays without banning leather and whips... little kids have no idea something has anything to do with sex until you tell them.

actually protecting children.

yeah, ok.... just like you defended the coward that shot ralph yarl and tried to lie and say ralph wasn't a child. ok...

you don't want to protect children, you want to virtue signal... you want a world of Carries.

I don't even have children but I care more about protecting them than you do.

maybe you shouldn't be within a hundred feet of children, you'll likely rot their brains.

OK groomer.

it's like impossible for you to argue without calling ppl names... maybe you skipped school a lot?

anyway, let's talk about school... cause i'm sure you want to ban sex ed.

sexual education helps prevent child sexual abuse. teaching kids the correct vocab is a great tool to help kids not be taken advantage of by child molesters (who are more likely to be a family member or family friend, or a priest/ teacher etc. and DEFINITELY NOT randos at pride parades). it does not neccesitate open sexual displays, like in the movie the meaning of life, just education.

as far as i've seen, it's very rare for kink pride to include openly sexual displays or indecent exposure... and the events that include these make it known beforehand and exclude under 18s. maybe you have some examples i should be aware of? where here in the u.s. kink pride includes overt sex in front of kids? cause i'd want to know about it, and we can fight against it together.

if anyone is trying to making grooming easier, it's people like you that want to shield kids from reality and make it easier for child sexual abusers to take advantage of kids.

why do tthey call it a sex change?

afaik, it's called a "gender affirmation" surgery. colloquial terms are often not technically exact.

trans people statistically have experienced less crimes against them then a white male.

are we talking rates? or total numbers? and are you talking about crimes where white people were SPECIFICALLY TARGETED FOR being white? cause i don't buy that for a second, that white people are killed for being white AT A HIGHER RATE than trans people are killed for being trans.

change everything to pander to 1% of the population

change everything? that's a wide brush, what exactly do you mean?

hope Biden dies

what an awful thing, wishing death on people. SHAME on you.

i hate biden, but you went too far. terrible. shameful.

Republicsns manage to un-clusterfuck America

that's a silly thing to say. how are they gonna do it? by murdering moms via pro- life policy? by going pedal-to-metal on fucking the biome? i'm skeptical, even cynical of that implied claim of yours. republicans, if left to it, would DESTROY humanity.

 

[ovenbakedskittles]

I mean, I can't for the life of me understand why anyone has a problem with the fact that there are people who don't feel aligned with the gender that is associated with their biological sex and happens to feel better about being alive if they live as another gender. Even if they feel the need to go all the way with it surgically. Why does it matter to anyone?

To say something is not aligned has negative connotation. It’s understandable why some people would be concerned about that. Especially if there is surgery involved which can have physical repercussions that can alter your life drastically if things go wrong or if they decide they don’t want to be the gender they transitioned into anymore. I don’t think it’s always a judgement thing. I think people just sometimes feel like certain behaviors can be harmful in the long run and we might not realize the consequences in the present moment.

People come up with all sorts of nonsense arguments to justify their opposition, such as that if we allow people to express whatever gender of their choosing, the next thing that will happen is that people will decide they're not human and are some sort of animal. Setting aside that this is also someone's personal choice and if they have the means and resources to do that than by all means they should, a biological male that decides to live as a female can just as well take part in society and function as normally as anyone else in their careers etc.

I don’t think that’s the concern. Some people associate certain sexual behaviors as excessive or unhealthy or spiritually unclean. So even though it’s true that people should be able to do what they want as long as they are reasonable adults, it still doesn’t take away from the possibility that their actions can have consequences unforeseen. Both collectively and individually.

The other thing I hear is that kids are somehow being indoctrinated to become trans by the media and teachers, which I think is absolute nonsense and can't happen; people, even young people, that don't feel aligned with their biological sex are no more confused or misguided as people who are perfectly happy living out their lives in accordance with their biological sex. They know and understand themselves and nobody's being influenced by anyone. I can't imagine ever being convinced by anyone growing up that I should perhaps identify as female, even if I was surrounded by trans people. I also have a young son and I don't worry about this in the slightest, nor see any signs of even discussing the matter in his schooling.

Do you believe that kids can be influenced at all? I’m sure that most people agree that kids are fragile and susceptible to outside influences more so than adults. That’s why they copy the behaviors of their parents and friends and things they see on tv. It’s not too far fetched that they can be influenced to go in a psychological tangent that can make it more likely for them to embody or identify with a particular gender or sexual orientation or even just mannerisms.

And the religious arguments by Christian conservatives and evangelicals is even more preposterous because the bible says all kinds of crazy shit that none of them pay attention to, like condoning slavery (the southern slaveholders actually used the bible to justify the African slave trade in US during the American Civil War), wife beating.

That has to do with the cruelty in which it is portrayed in the Bible. Saying that we need to stone them or kill them and what not. But the idea that it is spiritually inferior is not one to disregard. People use the Bible for all sorts of justifications. There are gay Christian’s who disregard the homosexual condemnations and focus on that we should love our neighbor as ourself instead. It doesn’t prove anything one way or the other.

But it’s not ridiculous to think that there are some behaviors that have more consequences than others both spiritually and physically.

 

[AlanaaBanana]

@nepalnt21 if you read what i said trans people statistically have experienced less crimes against them then a white male. That's fact and yes usa and canada, i don't follow Islamic countries that would kill them. So why they screaming victim when they don't get hurt anymore then a white male. It's actually more dangerous being a woman. Why change everything to pander to 1% of the population ? And if gender and sex are 2 different things why do tthey call it a sex change?

Statistics can be fun. But this is just misinformed here.
Considering there's a larger population of White Males Vs Transgendered individuals, yes, of course there's going to be a bigger number here *In Total*. But if we just compare it per 1,000, you get a more realistic picture, than just totals.


But if you look into crimes committed against Transgendered individuals being targeted purely because of their identity (hate crimes) per 1,000 people, statistics actually say, transgendered individuals are more likely to be a victim of a crime.


"

• The rate of violent victimization against transgender persons (51.5 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 16 or older) was 2.5 times the rate among cisgender persons (20.5 per 1,000).

Violent Victimization by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, 2017–2020

bjs.ojp.gov

 

[Electrum1]

But if you look into crimes committed against Transgendered individuals being targeted purely because of their identity (hate crimes) per 1,000 people, statistics actually say, transgendered individuals are more likely to be a victim of a crime.


"

• The rate of violent victimization against transgender persons (51.5 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 16 or older) was 2.5 times the rate among cisgender persons (20.5 per 1,000).

Violent Victimization by Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, 2017–2020

bjs.ojp.gov

Where in that study does it say they were victimized because of their identity? Looks like it just says they were victimized and also identify that way. Am I just not seeing it?

Who is the aggressor too? Looks like it's mostly their sexual partners, so likely other LGBT people

• Domestic violence was eight times as high among bisexual persons (32.3 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 16 or older) and more than twice as high among lesbian or gay persons (10.3 per 1,000) as it was among straight persons (4.2 per 1,000).

 

[AlanaaBanana]

Where in that study does it say they were victimized because of their identity? Looks like it just says they were victimized and also identify that way. Am I just not seeing it?

My bad! there were two more links I was meant to add but completely forgot and glided over that.

Transgender people over four times more likely than cisgender people to be victims of violent crime

williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu

Hate crimes against LGBT people: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017-2019

We estimate the prevalence and characteristics of violent hate crime victimization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the United States, and we compare them to non-LGBT hate crime victims and to LGBT victims of violent non-hate ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

We analyze pooled 2017-2019 data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (n persons = 553, 925;n incidents = 32, 470), the first nationally representative and comprehensive survey on crime that allows identification of LGBT persons aged 16 or older. Descriptive and bivariate analysis show that LGBT people experienced 6.6 violent hate crime victimizations per 1,000 persons compared with non-LGBT people’s 0.6 per 1,000 persons (odds ratio = 8.30, 95% confidence interval = 1.94, 14.65). LGBT people were more likely to be hate crime victims of sexual orientation or gender bias crime and less likely to be victims of race or ethnicity bias crimes compared to non-LGBT hate crime victims.

But nevertheless, the additional links I've supplied, all compare within a per 1,000 people statistic rather than a total.

 

[Droppersneck]

I wonder if the establishment is going to push to have Webster redefine ‘banned’ or ‘banning books’. To help fit the propaganda saying that the right is banning books, when they are simply removing pornographic material from school curriculums and libraries.

 

[nepalnt21]

I wonder if the establishment is going to push to have Webster redefine ‘banned’ or ‘banning books’. To help fit the propaganda saying that the right is banning books, when they are simply removing pornographic material from school curriculums and libraries.

i guesa you've never actually read any of the definitions of "ban" in miriam-webster, or ANY dictionary (they don't have change anything for it to be able to apply).

do you imagine that the repubes are not "banning" books from schools? or that the only books they are banning are books about lgbtq+ subjects? or what?

what's "pornographic" about any of them? just curious, just pick one.

what's "pornographic" about "when the emporer was divine", for example?

 

[Droppersneck]

i guesa you've never actually read any of the definitions of "ban" in miriam-webster, or ANY dictionary (they don't have change anything for it to be able to apply).

do you imagine that the repubes are not "banning" books from schools? or that the only books they are banning are books about lgbtq+ subjects? or what?

what's "pornographic" about any of them? just curious, just pick one.

what's "pornographic" about "when the emporer was divine", for example?

Banning pornographic books from school curriculums is quite a bit different from the way they frame it in their propaganda. And they fully well know how dumb the general populace is, and that it will deceive a good few of them. These woke parents can still purchase these grooming materials for their children, they aren’t “banned”. I just get wore out from all of the lies.

 

[Droppersneck]

 

[nepalnt21]

they aren’t “banned”

again, i implore you to look at the various definitions of the word "ban" before you continue to make the same mistake.

 

[Electrum1]

Reminder that the trans school shooter that killed Christian children left a manifesto but the current anti-christian FBI still hasn't released it

 

[Droppersneck]

Reminder that the trans school shooter that killed Christian children left a manifesto but the current anti-christian FBI still hasn't released it

They won’t even say what all was written on her shirt. The establishment is doing everything in their power not to release anything that will prove what everyone already knew occurred. They released a toxicology for narcotics the other day, but nothing about the pharmaceuticals she was on unsurprisingly.

 

[JGrimez]

drag is NOT inherently sexual.

Drag is a man dressing up as a woman, aka presenting as the opposite sex. It is by definition sexual.
It's like saying that a pole-dancer who keeps her skimpy clothing covering her genitalia isn't stripping. Technically it isn't but it's still sexual and I don't think it should be around children.
The question is why do some drag performers want to perform around children in the first place?

quit making shit up. you want us all in a dress code. please move to north korea, leave america alone.

Appropriate attire in front of children is North Korea dress code?

then put your foot down about THAT specific thing instead of tying it all together. we can SPECIFICALLY make it social hot potato to bring strap ons, wear EXTREMELY revealing clothing, etc. at pride, but you putting it all in the same pit is not really helpful.

I don't think that we should have to review every DQSH around the world in order to make sure that these hypersexualized performers don't do anything sexual in front of the children (nor would I wish that job onto anyone). It's very simple - if you want to celebrate your homosexuality or kinks, do so in the appropriate venues (that require ID for entry). Keep kids out of it. If you can't agree with this simple prospect, you are a groomer (or just too scared to speak against the political tribe).

we can disallow open sexual displays without banning leather and whips... little kids have no idea something has anything to do with sex until you tell them.

What the fuck am I hearing? Keep it in your bedroom.

yeah, ok.... just like you defended the coward that shot ralph yarl and tried to lie and say ralph wasn't a child. ok...

I'm talking about kindergartners. You're talking about a teenager, many of whom are as big as full-grown adults

you don't want to protect children, you want to virtue signal... you want a world of Carries.

I honestly wish this wasn't an issue that we needed to discuss. And being anti-sexualization of children must be the easiest and most common virtue signal in the world.

it's like impossible for you to argue without calling ppl names... maybe you skipped school a lot?

If you don't say things that promote grooming then I won't call you a groomer.
Honestly this stuff needs to get directly called out.

anyway, let's talk about school... cause i'm sure you want to ban sex ed.

Sex ed should be age-appropriate.
For example, teaching toddlers about masturbation = no-no.

sexual education helps prevent child sexual abuse. teaching kids the correct vocab is a great tool to help kids not be taken advantage of by child molesters (who are more likely to be a family member or family friend, or a priest/ teacher etc. and DEFINITELY NOT randos at pride parades). it does not neccesitate open sexual displays, like in the movie the meaning of life, just education.

You do not need to teach a small child about pedophilic sex for eg. in order to instruct them on how to help protect them from pedophiles.
"Don't let anyone touch this area. Don't walk off with strangers" etc. I knew about "stranger danger" long before I knew the details of sexual intercourse.

as far as i've seen, it's very rare for kink pride to include openly sexual displays or indecent exposure... and the events that include these make it known beforehand and exclude under 18s. maybe you have some examples i should be aware of? where here in the u.s. kink pride includes overt sex in front of kids? cause i'd want to know about it, and we can fight against it together.

Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it.
It's not even Pink News or some obscure edge magazine it's the Washington Post.

if anyone is trying to making grooming easier, it's people like you that want to shield kids from reality and make it easier for child sexual abusers to take advantage of kids.

Nice try, groomer.

afaik, it's called a "gender affirmation" surgery. colloquial terms are often not technically exact.

It's actually called irreversible child mutilation and will be looked upon like we do on lobotomies.

 

[nepalnt21]

It is by definition sexual.

non sequitor. how is it sexual, by definition? which definition? show me.

your logic makes ZERO sense right here. again, let's take it back to american football... are dudes dressed as women at football automatically sexual? you can't really think that.

iirc you don't believe in trans ppl... if so, do you think a trans woman is inherently a sexual object, definitionally?

it seems to me that you are doing what homophobes and transphobes do: imagining gay and trans people are just inherently sexual in nature... and wanting cultural genocide to force them out of the public pov.

Appropriate attire in front of children is North Korea dress code?

dress codes are a north korean thing. please move there and leave america's freedom alone. do you think trans people need to not dress as the opposite gender to that which they were born? would you mandate that? or only cis men dressing as women?

anti-sexualization

you still have yet to make the case that anything i've said is in support of sexualization.

groomer

i'm not interested in debate if you aren't going to be a decent human being.

i understand you feel strongly about your position, but that doesn't mean you need to keep calling me awful, baseless names.

teaching toddlers about masturbation = no-no.

who the fuck said anything about that? nobody here is in support of that, this is again your disgusting imagination taking flight... please stay on track.

You do not need to teach a small child about pedophilic sex for eg. in order to instruct them on how to help protect them from pedophiles.
"Don't let anyone touch this area. Don't walk off with strangers" etc. I knew about "stranger danger" long before I knew the details of sexual intercourse.

i'm talking about the normal sex education that every normal middle school in the u.s. has done for decades. you're imagining my position instead of reading my post.

Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it.
It's not even Pink News or some obscure edge magazine it's the Washington Post

did you even read it at all? she even says she is not talking about open sexual acts or indecency.

Keep it in your bedroom.

no need, we aren't talking about openly public sex acts. your imagination is again not doing you favors.

irreversible child mutilation

i didn't know surgery on adults was automatically called "child" mutilation. your imagination IS AGAIN derailing this conversation.

honestly, i'm not going to respond to you anymore in this thread if you are going to continue to argue in bad faith. you really fucking suck at this, and it's a waste of my time.