• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

⫸Trans and LGBTQIA+ Discussion⫷

Status
Not open for further replies.
JGrimez said:
there is kids music created for children which they enjoy (and adults don't enjoy as much - since adults and children are different).
I'm not against showing other types of music to young children (with discretion obviously, consider lyrics etc).
Click to expand...
that isn't the question. would you make it illegal to let kids listen to the second led zeppelin album? would you have wanted to make it illegal to bring kids to an elvis show in 1958?

JGrimez said:
some churches cover-up for priests = therefore God isn't real
Click to expand...
i would never make such a fallacious argument. there isn't any good evidence for a god or gods, therefore i cannot, in good faith, accept the claim that they (or she) exists.

JGrimez said:
performing outlandishly.
Click to expand...
i find show- tunes to be boring myself, but this is some wild hyperbole. drag can involve some highly sexualized stuff, but that's not what it is, and you (iirc it was you) even admitted before that it is not inherently sexualized.

the dudes doing stripper style exotic dancing is not representative of all drag shows.

so please clear it up... you want to ban child beauty pageants? and ban children from going to beauty pageants? and fashion shows? even if there is not sexualized content?

i guess i just never really assumed anyone that is on a drug website would be advocating for a nanny state.

what about football games? cheerleaders can be pretty sexual, if your standard is "showing some leg".

and how do you enforce a ban on shit like the video of the dude twerking in front of toddlers? ban specific gestures and dance styles? have a certain amount of clothing allowed and do the whole "if your fingers can reach past your booty shorts" bullshit?

Jennn said:
didn't have sexual education class until I was 13
Click to expand...
imo, that's too late to start sex ed. this is how you get pregnant 12 year olds with aids and shit like that.

JGrimez said:
We literally watched the same video. There was a man wearing women's underwear, buttcheeks and legs showing, rolling around the floor and spreading their legs open.
I know the standards for decency have been stretched quite far recently, but in the real world that would be considered "extremely sexual" (and kinda weird tbh).
Click to expand...
i had to go back and watch it again (it's tough to. i honestly can't stand it, even ignoring the fact that there were toddlers there), and you're right, i guess it could certainly be construed as sexual, because it imitates sexualized dances like strip teases.

...but i still don't believe that this alone will harm children or cause them to become more sexually active and at a younger age. i don't buy it. they aren't going to learn what sex is from that dance any more than they would from this:



jerk-off.gif


the video (and i'm pretty sure that shit is rare af)... it's gross, hard to watch, and pretty disturbing.... and i don't see how people want to take their kids there, except to engage in culture war... but i am wary of putting more restrictions into society, unless it can be demonstrated to directly lead to measurable harm. i think victorian style shame around sex is more likely to lead to harm (like my christian school elementary teachers telling us 'masturbation is a sin' and that sinning will send us to hell.); and yeah, the thong was WAYY too far - i'd probably not be too butthurt if you all banned people in general from dancing in thongs in front of kids; but honestly, i want to see studies and data and shit on the harms of the activities you want to ban.

JGrimez said:
your opinion is not really valid because you seem to be unaware of what is actually happening in the world regarding all this stuff.
Click to expand...
you misrepresented it. first, you said they were shoving money into his clothing... and the way you put it made it seem like he was literally stripping down to his skivvies or something.

honestly, it's gross... and i don't know why tf grown ass bald ass fucking men are watching him (unless they are pedophiles), and i would not sponsor my kid's foray into imitating stripteases... but like... you're talking about banning dudes in dresses from reading books to kids (iirc). what the fuck is harmful about that? and what i'm really against is the shit like montana where they have such stupid and vague wording that beyonce wouldn't be able to read to kids. and i don't even like beyonce.
 
Las Veghost grower said:
Because we find it offensive…derp
Click to expand...
just finding it offensive isn't enough for me. the glorify obesity crowd considers celebrating reaching a weight loss goal to be 'fatphobic', so no... i need a better explanation if i'm gonna buy what you're selling.

and i think it is important to note that although musk is telling the word 'cis' to kick rocks, he also now allows repeated, deliberate misgendering on his platform, which ACTUALLY is bullying. musk is clearly a bigot.
 
nepalnt21 said:
that isn't the question. would you make it illegal to let kids listen to the second led zeppelin album? would you have wanted to make it illegal to bring kids to an elvis show in 1958?
Click to expand...
I wasn't alive in 1958 so I couldn't put myself in that situation but they definitely had stricter standards of decency then.

nepalnt21 said:
i guess i just never really assumed anyone that is on a drug website would be advocating for a nanny state.
Click to expand...
lol, all the people who supported lockdowns, forced masking and vaccine mandates...

nepalnt21 said:
...but i still don't believe that this alone will harm children or cause them to become more sexually active and at a younger age. i don't buy it. they aren't going to learn what sex is from that dance any more than they would from this:
Click to expand...
I'll just say I'm glad you're not in charge of making the rules.

nepalnt21 said:
you misrepresented it. first, you said they were shoving money into his clothing... and the way you put it made it seem like he was literally stripping down to his skivvies or something.
Click to expand...
Removing items of clothing, taking money. At the very least you have to admit it's grooming. It's close enough that we shouldn't be arguing the fucking technicalities of it. Everyone should agree that it is inappropriate. If you don't want it to be illegal then people need to stop doing it. I saw another clip of some adults stuffing bills into this kids clothes but I honestly I don't care to view it again. If people want to know what's going on then they will find out. If people want to deny it or pretend like it's OK or should be normalized then they are part of the problem.

nepalnt21 said:
you're talking about banning dudes in dresses from reading books to kids (iirc). what the fuck is harmful about that?
Click to expand...
Why do dudes in dresses want to read around children?
Worst-case scenario the children will be indoctrinated with gender dysphoria.
On the other hand, some transvestites will be sad that they cannot publicly act out their kink around kids.
 
indoctrinated with gender dysphoria for knowing there are people our there that don't care to keep arbitrary rules of who can wear which articles of clothing without being called nasty names? giiimme a breeeeak!

you can't shield your kids from everydangthing, and even if you could... it would lead to worse outcomes to try.

@JGrimez
 
nepalnt21 said:
lol at elon cispus musk. how the fuck is it a slur? it's a descriptor. cis and trans fat, cis and transgender humans. not really all that offensive, unless you're a transphobe.

seriously, can someone explain how it's a slur?
Click to expand...

you guys spend half your life telling us what words we can and can't say, how important and valid feelings are, etc, yet when countless people ask you "please don't call me cis", you're completely dismissive and disrespectful. It really just reinforces the hypocritical nature of your entire worldview.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top