LGBT Rights & Issues Thread

[The New Great Roman Empire]

I believe that the term homophobia is a misnomer in that situation. Using that logic one could say that feeling dislike to high places is acrophobia.

Because obviously, English is famous for being such an incredibly consistent language, where every single word obeys all of the standard rules.

In my experience, what English does is when they can't stick "ist" onto a word with out it sounding terrible (Homoist?) they but a phobia instead.

[The New Great Roman Empire]

So screw it, i'll bring up the pony fantasy 6 argument here since it syncs well with my own views.

You know that pepsi/coke experiment that proves people don't actually know the difference between the two if you remove the labels?
And will assume the drink they rate higher is the one that they "prefer" (Even when it isn't.)

Well, what makes you think your sexuality is any different.
You think you are gay or straight because that's what your environment made you think and your narrative keeps telling you, but really you are a bisexual.
Sure, you buy coke all the time and think it's better than pepsi, but the fact is if we remove the labels you don't know the goddamn difference.
You could fall in love with someone, assume they must be your normal match, and they could be something entirely different.
Why buy into it at all? Why do people keep fooling themselves in this way?

Yeh sure, you might prefer sex with one set of organs or another, because that's an actual physical difference, but are you such a massive asshole as to think that bad or mediocre sex with a partner would immediately disqualify them?

Yeh yeh, i'm conflating XSexual and XRomantic but they are usually used in lockstep by a lot of people. If you already identify as Bi-romantic then this isn't directed at you.

Whenever someone identifies as gay, lesbian, or straight, I typically get a sense of naiveity, and now I know why.
They remind me of those customers in the pepsi/coke tests.


As an example, if you are a gay person and you meet a nice person with a dick, go out for a while, and woops. Turns out they identify as a female.
I guess you'll be dumping them now, right? After all, you are gay. You buy coca cola, not pepsi. They tricked you by removing the labels. Clearly, this isn't showing you that you were never actually gay and fooled yourself. This instead proves that they must not be your match, obviously.
/sarc

I agree with this completely and utterly

[The New World Oceania]

So screw it, i'll bring up the pony fantasy 6 argument here since it syncs well with my own views.

You know that pepsi/coke experiment that proves people don't actually know the difference between the two if you remove the labels?
And will assume the drink they rate higher is the one that they "prefer" (Even when it isn't.)

Well, what makes you think your sexuality is any different.
You think you are gay or straight because that's what your environment made you think and your narrative keeps telling you, but really you are a bisexual.
Sure, you buy coke all the time and think it's better than pepsi, but the fact is if we remove the labels you don't know the goddamn difference.
You could fall in love with someone, assume they must be your normal match, and they could be something entirely different.
Why buy into it at all? Why do people keep fooling themselves in this way?

Yeh sure, you might prefer sex with one set of organs or another, because that's an actual physical difference, but are you such a massive asshole as to think that bad or mediocre sex with a partner would immediately disqualify them?

Yeh yeh, i'm conflating XSexual and XRomantic but they are usually used in lockstep by a lot of people. If you already identify as Bi-romantic then this isn't directed at you.

Whenever someone identifies as gay, lesbian, or straight, I typically get a sense of naiveity, and now I know why.
They remind me of those customers in the pepsi/coke tests.


As an example, if you are a gay person and you meet a nice person with a dick, go out for a while, and woops. Turns out they identify as a female.
I guess you'll be dumping them now, right? After all, you are gay. You buy coca cola, not pepsi. They tricked you by removing the labels. Clearly, this isn't showing you that you were never actually gay and fooled yourself. This instead proves that they must not be your match, obviously.
/sarc

I agree with this completely and utterly

It's poor practice to quote extremely far back, especially when there's nothing remarkable about the post or you have nothing remarkable to add.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

I think arguing that everybody is bisexual makes the non-mono identities weaker, idk.

Like we are forcing it? I know I'm not.

[Threlizdun]

I think arguing that everybody is bisexual makes the non-mono identities weaker, idk.

Like we are forcing it? I know I'm not.

It's just stupid in general. Hell, insisting that everyone is even interested in sex period is stupid and harmful.

[Immoren]

Reading transcription of Finnish Parliament's debate on law about mandatory sterilization of transitioning trans* people was somehow morbidly amusing and saddening at same time.

[Fabulous Rainicorns]

Reading transcription of Finnish Parliament's debate on law about mandatory sterilization of transitioning trans* people was somehow morbidly amusing and saddening at same time.

That sounds horrible.

[Ostroeuropa]

I think arguing that everybody is bisexual makes the non-mono identities weaker, idk.

Like we are forcing it? I know I'm not.

It's just stupid in general. Hell, insisting that everyone is even interested in sex period is stupid and harmful.

Yeh yeh, i'm conflating XSexual and XRomantic but they are usually used in lockstep by a lot of people. If you already identify as Bi-romantic then this isn't directed at you.

As for "That's just stupid", well, that's just a stupid argument.

[Immoren]

Reading transcription of Finnish Parliament's debate on law about mandatory sterilization of transitioning trans* people was somehow morbidly amusing and saddening at same time.

That sounds horrible.

I find it saddening that there are still politicians whom defend keeping that law up. Because apparently, for example "If biological men can't give birth, then it's logical that neither can transmen".
*sigh*

[Neema]

That sounds horrible.

I find it saddening that there are still politicians whom defend keeping that law up. Because apparently, for example "If biological men can't give birth, then it's logical that neither can transmen".
*sigh*

I am not a fan of that.

[Paid To Troll]

That sounds horrible.

I find it saddening that there are still politicians whom defend keeping that law up. Because apparently, for example "If biological men can't give birth, then it's logical that neither can transmen".
*sigh*

So...wait. Wouldn't they be sterilized as part of the procedure anyway? Unless I'm mistaken, sperm don't magically become ova last I checked.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

So...wait. Wouldn't they be sterilized as part of the procedure anyway? Unless I'm mistaken, sperm don't magically become ova last I checked.

Most trans men (i.e. DFAB people identifying as males) are just fine with their reproductive system intact.

They just have a few aesthetic procedures to make their vulvas more alike male genitals, but in many cases it's not even done. Just testosterone and removal of breasts (in the case it's in a size that won't go away just with exercises) does it for many.

So yes, there are pregnant men. Plenty of them. Finland impressed me.

Props on Uruguay, Chile and us for thinking the question further, in a way that Nordics are refusing to, and Argentina for having already done it.

[Paid To Troll]

So...wait. Wouldn't they be sterilized as part of the procedure anyway? Unless I'm mistaken, sperm don't magically become ova last I checked.

Most trans men (i.e. DFAB people identifying as males) are just fine with their reproductive system intact.

They just have a few aesthetic procedures to make their vulvas more alike male genitals, but in many cases it's not even done. Just testosterone and removal of breasts (in the case it's in a size that won't go away just with exercises) does it for many.

So yes, there are pregnant men. Plenty of them. Finland impressed me.

Props on Uruguay, Chile and us for thinking the question further, in a way that Nordics are refusing to, and Argentina for having already done it.

That wasn't my question. I understand that anyone can become pregnant with the correct procedures, much like my ex-girlfriend.

During the procedure, you don't change the number of x or y cells produced by the genetic issue of the person undergoing surgery.

[Anglo-California]

That sounds horrible.

I find it saddening that there are still politicians whom defend keeping that law up. Because apparently, for example "If biological men can't give birth, then it's logical that neither can transmen".
*sigh*

Transgender people are sterilized in Finland? This seems like it'd be newsworthy.

[Immoren]

I find it saddening that there are still politicians whom defend keeping that law up. Because apparently, for example "If biological men can't give birth, then it's logical that neither can transmen".
*sigh*

Transgender people are sterilized in Finland? This seems like it'd be newsworthy.

Even if transition wouldn't do that anyway, but they want to be officially recognized in gender they'll transition to, yes.

[Liberonscien]

I believe that the term homophobia is a misnomer in that situation. Using that logic one could say that feeling dislike to high places is acrophobia.

Because obviously, English is famous for being such an incredibly consistent language, where every single word obeys all of the standard rules.

Mlurr, you know what, screw it, might as well post my views.

I personally am against homosexuality and alternate sexualities, there, I said it. But no, I will not enforce my views on others, nor will I be biased against a homosexual or alternatively sexual individual in any way, shape, or form. If my (future) son or daughter were to come out as a homosexual or announce they are of some other alternative sexuality, I will not disown, be angered at, or ridicule my child, because it is not my decision about which sexuality they want to be, it's theirs. Not to mention, if a homosexual or alternatively sexual couple can bring up children in a more stable household than what I am being raised in, I will not badger them nor deride them.

And if you still wanna have a screaming fit at me, go ahead, bring your worse, but either way, I have expressed my honest opinion.

Well done.

Touché.

[Liberonscien]

What does it mean to be asexual? I've been thinking I'm asexual but I'm not sure what it means.

[Paid To Troll]

What does it mean to be asexual? I've been thinking I'm asexual but I'm not sure what it means.

It means you aren't attracted physically to anyone. You don't have a physical reaction to a female, or male, or inbetween.

[Anglo-California]

What does it mean to be asexual? I've been thinking I'm asexual but I'm not sure what it means.

Asexual? What are you? A sea sponge?

[Immoren]

What does it mean to be asexual? I've been thinking I'm asexual but I'm not sure what it means.

Asexual? What are you? A sea sponge?

Relevant

[Liberonscien]

What does it mean to be asexual? I've been thinking I'm asexual but I'm not sure what it means.

It means you aren't attracted physically to anyone. You don't have a physical reaction to a female, or male, or inbetween.

Hmm. I thought it meant that one wasn't interested in sex.

[Paid To Troll]

It means you aren't attracted physically to anyone. You don't have a physical reaction to a female, or male, or inbetween.

Hmm. I thought it meant that one wasn't interested in sex.

Yes, but not because you're of heightened intellectual status or any other such hogwash. It's literally because you just don't produce a physical reaction. Truly asexual people are rare.

[Liberonscien]

Asexual? What are you? A sea sponge?

Relevant

I wish I could do that.
I'd take over... Something...

[Liberonscien]

Hmm. I thought it meant that one wasn't interested in sex.

Yes, but not because you're of heightened intellectual status or any other such hogwash. It's literally because you just don't produce a physical reaction. Truly asexual people are rare.

Ah. Hmm. I'm trying to figure where I could go on the chart.

[Neutraligon]

Yes, but not because you're of heightened intellectual status or any other such hogwash. It's literally because you just don't produce a physical reaction. Truly asexual people are rare.

Ah. Hmm. I'm trying to figure where I could go on the chart.

You could be gray a.