LGBT, LGBTQ, LGBT+ Thread (1 Viewer)

[unckeyherb]

When I went to high school in the 1970s, i can only think of 1 person who identified as gay in a school over 3000 students. Then the HIV/AIDS began in 1981. When a committee I was a member of called people for our 10th year reunion, we realized there were a lot more gay people in our class. If resources to gay students can help their physical and emotional health, I'm in favor. 

I'm not sure how common gender dysphoria is, but it may be much more common than you think. I believe parents should play a role in surgical decisions in minors. Parents need to keep lines of communication open with their kids, and vice versa. Easier said than done.

Mom loses custody of 12 year old daughter after questioning her trans identity

 

[Captain Cranks]

I have a feeling this is going to be a letter of the law argument.  
 

parents take their kids to these because they suck as parents.

Parents who force their kids to learn they are shameful and flawed and must put their faith into an invisible "loving" being for redemption or else they're sent to hell if they don't believe suck as parents.

We could go round and round, but at the end of the day we don't get to control what other parents do unless it's obvious the children are being harmed.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Parents who force their kids to learn they are shameful and flawed and must put their faith into an invisible "loving" being for redemption or else they're sent to hell if they don't believe suck as parents.

We could go round and round, but at the end of the day we don't get to control what other parents do unless it's obvious the children are being harmed.

Lol. This hasnt really convinced anybody the last 57 times you tried it. 

 

[Captain Cranks]

Lol. This hasnt really convinced anybody the last 57 times you tried it. 

Because it's not reality. Guaranteed the same people who are ok with this government overreach would be having conniptions if it were a legit concern. The hypocrisy is glaring. 

We must protect your kids from your values. Government ain't got no right to tell me what I can teach my kids.  

 

[KarmaPolice]

You are COMPLETELY white-washing what is going on.   These are very young children which the vast majority have zero clue about their sexual identity and you have teachers playing doctor trying to shoehorn these highly impressionable children into their baskin-robbin of buckets of gender identities.  And once these children are manipulated to 'self-identify', that is all it takes for these sexual identity doctors to start these medical treatments.  These 'doctors' by their idiotic professional standards they created, don't diagnose gender identity, but are required to accept the self-identification of these children who are absolutely being manipulated by both on-line influences and/or by teachers often avoiding all parental knowledge or involvement.  

The obscene growth rate in children identifying themselves with gender dysphoria should be alarming, especially even after destroying their sexual organs through surgeries they are still 19 times more likely to commit suicide.  This is not helping children, it is destroying the future of these children who are way too young to comprehend what these choices mean and are not informed of the long-term consequences.  

I am not whitewashing anything, I read the examples an understand these things are happening.   What I am pushing back on is the constant grouping of huge groups of people into buckets.  We can agree that we can be concerned about the rising levels that self identify, the lack of psychiatric care given the kids and other things. 

Where I don't agree with you is the intent that is there and how common that intent is.  When you guys use words like grooming and manipulated - to me that means you believe and are accusing these teachers and doctors of purposely wanting these kids to self identify... for why, I don't know.  Pedophilic reasons, liberal agenda, what?     Like I said in another post, it's when these extreme ideas come into play where you lose a lot of people.  I really undercuts the actual examples and concerns we should have.  

We can agree that care shouldn't start just based on self identification, and we can highly disagree that a teacher who talks to a student about these this is a groomer or manipulating the student.  

 

[squistion]

At least pedophiles do not permently destroy the sexual organs of children.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I think these kids seeing a psychologist before starting any steps beyond pronouns/name change is something we all agree should be going on.   I have not seen anybody take a different stance or not agree with that idea in all these threads.   We are all concerned about that point.  

 

[skol asylum]

Again you lie.  But you are a foolish leftwingee, so what choice do you have? I have said nothing which could be construed as defending pedophilia.  What I have done is try to put in perspective just how brutal these gender altering procedures are and how sick it is to preform them on children.  There should be no circumstances outside of cancer where breast or a uterus are surgically removed from a child.  But you don't want to talk about that, so instead you are forced to lie and make false statements. 

So why not address the issue.  Do you support removing breasts, uteruses and penises from children?  Or will you continue to avoid discussing the real issue here?  

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you have never met a trans child.

 

[FairWarning]

Parents who force their kids to learn they are shameful and flawed and must put their faith into an invisible "loving" being for redemption or else they're sent to hell if they don't believe suck as parents.

We could go round and round, but at the end of the day we don't get to control what other parents do unless it's obvious the children are being harmed.

How about we change it slightly and have strippers in their work uniforms read to the kids, would that be ok?  

 

[FairWarning]

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you have never met a trans child.

How old is the child?

 

[jon_mx]

When I went to high school in the 1970s, i can only think of 1 person who identified as gay in a school over 3000 students. Then the HIV/AIDS began in 1981. When a committee I was a member of called people for our 10th year reunion, we realized there were a lot more gay people in our class. If resources to gay students can help their physical and emotional health, I'm in favor. 

I'm not sure how common gender dysphoria is, but it may be much more common than you think. I believe parents should play a role in surgical decisions in minors. Parents need to keep lines of communication open with their kids, and vice versa. Easier said than done.

There is a huge difference between acceptance and actively trying to put labels on young children and then destroying their bodies depending upon their answers.  This is nothing like what went on with gays.  Being gay is not a medical condition which requires hormone blockers or mutilation surgeries which destroys healthy body parts.  Gender dysphoria is a mental condition which in the past required a psychologist to diagnosis.  The numbers has gone up 100 fold. 

 

[Captain Cranks]

How about we change it slightly and have strippers in their work uniforms read to the kids, would that be ok?  

If it's in a private establishment with parents consent, yup. Do you want me to determine what your kids are and are not allowed to see?

 

[FairWarning]

If it's in a private establishment with parents consent, yup. Do you want me to determine what your kids are and are not allowed to see?

State laws prohibit it in Michigan.

 

[jon_mx]

I think these kids seeing a psychologist before starting any steps beyond pronouns/name change is something we all agree should be going on.   I have not seen anybody take a different stance or not agree with that idea in all these threads.   We are all concerned about that point.  

No, I have not seem that at all.  There have been a couple, but that is it.  Suggesting such results in hatred.  See Abigail Shier and her book Irriversiable Damage.  She is a liberal, highly educated, award-winning respected journalist.  That is all she suggests.  But yet she is viciously attacked as a bigot and can't speak on most campuses.  

 

[Captain Cranks]

State laws prohibit it in Michigan.

When was that law established?

 

[FairWarning]

When was that law established?

No clue.  It’s mainly local laws, but none allow people under 18.  I don’t understand why people would think it’s a good idea for little kids though.

 

[squistion]

No, I have not seem that at all.  There have been a couple, but that is it.  Suggesting such results in hatred.  See Abigail Shier and her book Irriversiable Damage.  She is a liberal, highly educated, award-winning respected journalist.  That is all she suggests.  But yet she is viciously attacked as a bigot and can't speak on most campuses.  

 If she is a liberal I am Lady Gaga.  

Here is a summary of her book:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreversible_Damage

Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters is a 2020 book by Abigail Shrier, published by Regnery Publishing. The book endorses the contentious concept of rapid-onset gender dysphoria,[1][2] which is not recognized as a medical diagnosis by any major professional institution[3][4][5] and is not backed by credible scientific evidence.[6][7]

 

[Captain Cranks]

No clue.  It’s mainly local laws, but none allow people under 18.  I don’t understand why people would think it’s a good idea for little kids though.

For me, it's a conceptual issue. I don't want you legislating your morality on me and telling me how I should parent my children. If it's proven that a child is being harmed, that's different. But you guys are not providing evidence of that. Rather, because it's not something YOU approve of, you're using the children as a justification for your argument.  

 

[jon_mx]

 If she is a liberal I am Lady Gaga.  

Here is a summary of her book:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreversible_Damage

Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters is a 2020 book by Abigail Shrier, published by Regnery Publishing. The book endorses the contentious concept of rapid-onset gender dysphoria,[1][2] which is not recognized as a medical diagnosis by any major professional institution[3][4][5] and is not backed by credible scientific evidence.[6][7]

Because wiki is edited by a bunch of crazed idiotic activists.  But that is why you sourced it.  

 

[jon_mx]

For me, it's a conceptual issue. I don't want you legislating your morality on me and telling me how I should parent my children. If it's proven that a child is being harmed, that's different. But you guys are not providing evidence of that. Rather, because it's not something YOU approve of, you're using the children as a justification for your argument.  

Parents have little say in this.  Oppose your child being 'treated' and they will be taken away.  It happens routinely in Canada and there have been a few cased here in the US.  

 

[FairWarning]

For me, it's a conceptual issue. I don't want you legislating your morality on me and telling me how I should parent my children. If it's proven that a child is being harmed, that's different. But you guys are not providing evidence of that. Rather, because it's not something YOU approve of, you're using the children as a justification for your argument.  

Your state will disagree.  Ask your state and HOR rep if you don’t agree.

 

[KarmaPolice]

No, I have not seem that at all.  There have been a couple, but that is it.  Suggesting such results in hatred.  See Abigail Shier and her book Irriversiable Damage.  She is a liberal, highly educated, award-winning respected journalist.  That is all she suggests.  But yet she is viciously attacked as a bigot and can't speak on most campuses.  

Sigh.  Yet again, using these examples in an answer about people around here or what is on these boards.  You know, the people you are actually conversing with.  

 

[KarmaPolice]

 If she is a liberal I am Lady Gaga.  

Here is a summary of her book:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreversible_Damage

Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters is a 2020 book by Abigail Shrier, published by Regnery Publishing. The book endorses the contentious concept of rapid-onset gender dysphoria,[1][2] which is not recognized as a medical diagnosis by any major professional institution[3][4][5] and is not backed by credible scientific evidence.[6][7]

Wait, she can't have that opinion and be a liberal? 

 

[squistion]

Wait, she can't have that opinion and be a liberal? 

She is not a liberal. Jon can call her a liberal but her work and an award from a conservative organization says otherwise. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

So much for "nobody is defending this."

 

[KarmaPolice]

How is rapid onset gender dysphoria separated from gender dysphoria?  

 

[KarmaPolice]

So much for "nobody is defending this."

 

[IvanKaramazov]

For me, it's a conceptual issue. I don't want you legislating your morality on me and telling me how I should parent my children. If it's proven that a child is being harmed, that's different. But you guys are not providing evidence of that. Rather, because it's not something YOU approve of, you're using the children as a justification for your argument.  

If your morality is that you should be taking your six year old kid to your local strip club, then your morality compass is broken, and frankly you shouldn't be raising children.  This isn't a routine letting-things-slide-a-bit moment like letting a kid stay up past bedtime on a school night or something.  

 

[SoBeDad]

For me, it's a conceptual issue. I don't want you legislating your morality on me and telling me how I should parent my children. If it's proven that a child is being harmed, that's different. But you guys are not providing evidence of that. Rather, because it's not something YOU approve of, you're using the children as a justification for your argument.  

If the toddler was being harmed by the drag performer, the state should've called DCF. ASAIK, they didn't. No harm as far as I can tell from the drag part. There may be harm from unrealistic body expectations, but that's a feature of social media influencers.

This is a kid being harmed by parents: Boy, 5, shot in abdomen at apartment in Plantation, police say

 

[BladeRunner]

This feels like a "but they started it first" type of response we see around here a bit.    Don't do the same thing.   

See my last part of the post you quoted - it's wrong both ways, and kills the meaning of these words that used to mean something specific.

Agreed 10000000%. 

Now if you can only convince a bunch of posters around here of that, we would be golden!!

 

[squistion]

If your morality is that you should be taking your six year old kid to your local strip club, then your morality compass is broken, and frankly you shouldn't be raising children.  This isn't a routine letting-things-slide-a-bit moment like letting a kid stay up past bedtime on a school night or something.  

This is not a strip club and you repeatedly mischaracterizing it as one doesn't make it so.

 

[BladeRunner]

If it's in a private establishment with parents consent, yup. Do you want me to determine what your kids are and are not allowed to see?

Uhm, we already do that for like the entire history of our nation. There are LITERAL laws on the books based using age as a qualifier that completely take away any parent's decision.  

This behavior displayed in the video is vile, unacceptable and worthy of a Child Protective Services check.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Again you lie.  But you are a foolish leftwingee, so what choice do you have? I have said nothing which could be construed as defending pedophilia.  What I have done is try to put in perspective just how brutal these gender altering procedures are and how sick it is to preform them on children.  There should be no circumstances outside of cancer where breast or a uterus are surgically removed from a child.  But you don't want to talk about that, so instead you are forced to lie and make false statements. 

So why not address the issue.  Do you support removing breasts, uteruses and penises from children?  Or will you continue to avoid discussing the real issue here?  

I paraphrase (accurately) what you said and you called me a liar. So then I quoted you directly and you still call me a liar. 

Pedophilia -- by which I mean physical, sexual abuse of children -- is one of the most horrific crimes imaginable. (I suppose murder has to be No. 1, but somehow pedophilia feels more ... evil). That's one reason I've been making such a stink about people who keep trying to water down its definition or falsely accuse others. It's not because I don't take it seriously. It's because I take it extremely seriously.

The notion that anything a teacher says in a classroom could be worse than child rape is so self-evidently ridiculous and offensive, there's really no point in engaging with it as if it merits serious discussion.

I'm sorry, but you'll need to find someone else to respond to your paranoid rantings

 

[Captain Cranks]

Your state will disagree.  Ask your state and HOR rep if you don’t agree.

My state will disagree with what specifically?

 

[FairWarning]

My state will disagree with what specifically?

The stance on how one raises their children.  

 

[unckeyherb]

Parents have little say in this.  Oppose your child being 'treated' and they will be taken away.  It happens routinely in Canada and there have been a few cased here in the US.  

I linked to one at the bottom of the last page.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

For the people defending taking children to the strip shows, I'm really curious as to where their line is drawn (there HAS to be one eventually right?) I'm a little afraid of the answer tbh. Is there any point at which you guys go "OK that may be fine with the parent but I personally think that's too far."?

 

[glvsav37]

If the toddler was being harmed by the drag performer, the state should've called DCF. ASAIK, they didn't. No harm as far as I can tell from the drag part. There may be harm from unrealistic body expectations, but that's a feature of social media influencers.

This is a kid being harmed by parents: Boy, 5, shot in abdomen at apartment in Plantation, police say

I thought that was Barbie's fault?

When did 5 year old girls get instagram? 

I couldn't''t imagine a 6ft 3 man dressed as a mermaid in platforms, with their fake plastic Double D cups flopped out for everyone to see and collecting dollar bills from everyone around them would cause any form of questioning in a young female mind. 

 

[jon_mx]

Parents who force their kids to learn they are shameful and flawed and must put their faith into an invisible "loving" being for redemption or else they're sent to hell if they don't believe suck as parents.

We could go round and round, but at the end of the day we don't get to control what other parents do unless it's obvious the children are being harmed.

Isn't the teachers and doctors who are telling the kids they must be flawed and butchering them up to 'fix' them?  

 

[glvsav37]

Visual Sexual Abuse

Children are especially vulnerable because their sexual development is still in process and exposure to sexual themes at different stages can leave emotional and physical impacts on their development. The prevalence of and availability of sexual content make an already confusing topic more complex. Children being exposed to sexual content by others is a reportable event and our duty is to protect and educate children in developmentally appropriate ways. Children can also suffer trauma from in unintentional exposure to sexual content as a result of unmonitored use of connected devices. Parental nudity in the household whether in the bathroom or other wise can also be a confusing and traumatic experience for children at certain ages.

As adults we must be aware of what we are watching to avoid doing harm to others. We cannot assume that our comfort level is shared by others. Being able to say to another adult, “I don't want to watch that. I'm not trying to control what you watch, but let's not have this violation.” is a good way of making your boundaries know and avoiding being unintentionally traumatized by others. If those around you do not respect your wishes on this topic you need to take further steps to separate yourself from abuse and seek help.  

Early exposure to pornography: a form of sexual trauma

Exposing children to pornography should be forbidden and better regulated, as it is violating their spiritual boundaries and evolving beliefs around body, sexual development and intimate relationships, in a similar way that direct sexual abuse on their body does. If this trauma is not identified and processed promptly, the survivor runs the risk of reenacting as an attempt to resolve what once left him or her powerless, or of even engaging in similar criminal behaviors. Or one may trivialize what is considered sacred by many, hence squandering delicate, soulful facets of one’s self, engaging in promiscuous, high-risk sexual activities.  

Etiological research has suggested that it is the interaction of biological and social learning factors that influence the development of sexual offending behaviors [1]. Genetic factors may predispose an individual to pursue a specific human need (e.g., sex or intimacy), but it is the environmental experiences (e.g., child maltreatment) that provide the methods for which these needs are met either appropriately through the development of relationships or inappropriately through the use of sexual violence [2]. This means we have no excuse as a society to not invest resources in prevention of sexual trauma of any kind.  

In a study by Lin et al [3], sexually explicit media exposure in early adolescence was strongly related to three risky sexual behaviors—early sexual debut, unsafe sex, and sexual partners—in late adolescence, and this relationship was very close to causal. The association was dose-response, such that using more modalities of sexually explicit media led to a higher probability of being involved in risky sexual behavior later in life [3].  

 

[squistion]

For the people defending taking children to the strip shows, I'm really curious as to where their line is drawn (there HAS to be one eventually right?) I'm a little afraid of the answer tbh. Is there any point at which you guys go "OK that may be fine with the parent but I personally think that's too far."?

This was not a strip club nor was this a strip show.

 

[KarmaPolice]

For the people defending taking children to the strip shows, I'm really curious as to where their line is drawn (there HAS to be one eventually right?) I'm a little afraid of the answer tbh. Is there any point at which you guys go "OK that may be fine with the parent but I personally think that's too far."?

Have you been reading the same posts?  Pretty sure the answer is:

1.  It wasn't a strip show

2.  There have been a few answers on the lines of being against it if it's shown that harm is being done to the child.   

Not interested in the technicalities of #1, we all can watch the video and draw our conclusions.   I get drawing the line with #2, but the question remains - how would we know and what type of "harm" are we talking about here?     Not my stance, as I don't have an answer to why the kid is there, but just saying I get where some are at least coming from.  

 

[djmich]

Have you been reading the same posts?  Pretty sure the answer is:

1.  It wasn't a strip show

2.  There have been a few answers on the lines of being against it if it's shown that harm is being done to the child.   

Not interested in the technicalities of #1, we all can watch the video and draw our conclusions.   I get drawing the line with #2, but the question remains - how would we know and what type of "harm" are we talking about here?     Not my stance, as I don't have an answer to why the kid is there, but just saying I get where some are at least coming from.  

1.  It was a strip show.

2.  How would you know the harm from giving a 5yr old a lap dance? 

 

[squistion]

Have you been reading the same posts?  Pretty sure the answer is:

1.  It wasn't a strip show

2.  There have been a few answers on the lines of being against it if it's shown that harm is being done to the child.   

Not interested in the technicalities of #1, we all can watch the video and draw our conclusions.   I get drawing the line with #2, but the question remains - how would we know and what type of "harm" are we talking about here?     Not my stance, as I don't have an answer to why the kid is there, but just saying I get where some are at least coming from.  

No, it wasn't a strip show but they keep repeating like parrots that it was, because mischaracterizing this event is all they got. 

If it has been a strip show, there were laws on the books DeSantis could use against this restaurant, but all he could find was a decades old statute against cross dressing. 

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

For the people defending taking children to the strip shows, I'm really curious as to where their line is drawn (there HAS to be one eventually right?) I'm a little afraid of the answer tbh. Is there any point at which you guys go "OK that may be fine with the parent but I personally think that's too far."?

This was not a strip club nor was this a strip show.

OK fine but where is your line? Besides stripping at a  not-a-strip-show in a not-a-strip-club is there any point at which you'd object? Oh is it all "OMG that awful but hey the parents are clapping."

 

[Juxtatarot]

No, it wasn't a strip show but they keep repeating like parrots that it was, because mischaracterizing this event is all they got. 

If someone is prancing around in fake boobs and pasties with dollars tucked in a G-string, it’s close enough to a strip show to not be caught up in semantics.

 

[glvsav37]

Ok.  So it wasn’t a “strip show”.  
 

But we have a person, wearing something that has less square inches of material then one of my socks , with their simulated or not double Ds on full display (although nipples taped), collecting money from random people for strutting around   
 

now we have only seen 10 seconds of the video, but if we can be truthful for a second, I can’t imagine that she collected all that money just for being there  

im going to go out on a limb and assume that the parts we didn’t see involved some lap work, maybe some grinding  a dudes face between the breasts, and some split work that would make an Olympic gymnast jealous   
 

let’s not be so coy to think that they were tipping her/he just for taking a kid for a little walksee around thee room 

but now that we have established that this isn’t a strip joint. Are you ok if your kids teacher showed up for school like this? I mean it’s a school, not a strip joint, right?  How about a family function? A funeral? Or the coach of your kids soccer team? 

 

[squistion]

If someone is prancing around in fake boobs and pasties with dollars tucked in a G-string, it’s close enough to a strip show to not be caught up in semantics.

Nope. That still doesn't make it a strip show. Close enough doesn't qualify under any law in Florida for this drag brunch at a restaurant to be legally considered a strip show. 

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I get drawing the line with #2, but the question remains - how would we know and what type of "harm" are we talking about here?  

Is that the only criteria?

I see the same logic (not from you) when there is sex abuse of a child. When the adult is male and the victim is a female, you often hear people say things like "woodchipper" or "no parole" but when the adult is female, say a teacher, and the child is a male student, one frequently hears things like "lucky kid" or "where were these teachers when I was in school haha". Like no harm high fives all around.

If the performer started physically molesting the child in attendance or performing a sex act on them, are people like "what harm? Lucky kid! Wish my parents had taken me to these places"? 

 

[Juxtatarot]

Nope. That still doesn't make it a strip show. Close enough doesn't qualify under any law in Florida for this drag brunch at a restaurant to be legally considered a strip show. 

Oh, I see. You’re making a legal argument. I missed that.