What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

LGBT, LGBTQ, LGBT+ Thread (2 Viewers)

The question is whether to make it public. Even with this change, they are doing the record keeping. The government knows the gender designation, and is taking accurate measurements. They are making it harder for another citizen to find out what gender someone is. Why are you entitled to know someone else's gender? 

Perhaps you are projecting some fear of where this eventually leading, but if we limit it to this particular change, it seems to increase someone's liberty to tell the government they cannot publicize this information about you.

Why are you entitled to find out what gender someone is biologically?  If they have gender based dismorphia (like the legend about Jamie Lee Curtis), are you entitled to this information too? Are you entitled to know the race and religion of the parents? Are you entitled to know the political orientation of the parents, assuming they are educators in Florida?
Full stop. When you can use "gender" and "sex" correctly, then we can discuss substantive issues. You're not using it right, and I just don't have the time to deal with other issues with someone who can't get the basics right. 

Check your manual and your playbook for further instructions. I'm through with the conversation. I've been doing this for over twenty-five years, having debates about feminism and LGBTQ+ issues, and I really just do not have the time for activist crap from someone who can't use the two terms correctly. 

Peace. 

 
Full stop. When you can use "gender" and "sex" correctly, then we can discuss substantive issues. You're not using it right, and I just don't have the time to deal with other issues with someone who can't get the basics right. 

Check your manual and your playbook for further instructions. I'm through with the conversation. I've been doing this for over twenty-five years, having debates about feminism and LGBTQ+ issues, and I really just do not have the time for activist crap from someone who can't use the two terms correctly. 

Peace. 
I get your point and also understand why you answered the way you did.

 
I get your point and also understand why you answered the way you did.
I'm not sure anybody who uses "sex" and "gender" interchangeably gets the point when the whole point is to eliminate "sex" as a biologically fixed, possibly deterministic classification for taxonomical and census-concerning purposes, replacing it with "gender" which is a social construct by definition and by its definitional nature fluid and social.

Like the McBain joke in the Simpsons. 

Your utter confusion? 

THAT'S THE POINT.

THE ACTIVISTS WANT TO ACHIEVE, BY CHANGING LANGUAGE, A CHANGE IN OUR UNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT  BIOLOGY IS AND SHOULD ENCOMPASS BY CHANGING THE ULTIMATE DESIGNATION OF SEX TO GENDER. THEY DID THAT. NOW THEY WANT TO ELIMINATE THE CONCEPT OF SEX AND SEX DIFFERENTIATION. AND YOU'RE A DUPE ALONG FOR THE RIDE. 

Obama saw this is promptly got rid of the only form that said "gender" on it in the federal government. That's how you know what was up. That he saw it, recognized it, and purposively changed it says everything to me about it. 

 
I'm not sure anybody who uses "sex" and "gender" interchangeably gets the point when the whole point is to eliminate "sex" as a biologically fixed, possibly deterministic classification for taxonomical and census-concerning purposes, replacing it with "gender" which is a social construct by definition and by its definitional nature fluid and social.

Like the McBain joke in the Simpsons. 

Your utter confusion? 

THAT'S THE POINT.

THE ACTIVISTS WANT TO ACHIEVE, BY CHANGING LANGUAGE, A CHANGE IN OUR UNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT  BIOLOGY IS AND SHOULD ENCOMPASS BY CHANGING THE ULTIMATE DESIGNATION OF SEX TO GENDER. THEY DID THAT. NOW THEY WANT TO ELIMINATE THE CONCEPT OF SEX AND SEX DIFFERENTIATION. AND YOU'RE A DUPE ALONG FOR THE RIDE. 

Obama saw this is promptly got rid of the only form that said "gender" on it in the federal government. That's how you know what was up. That he saw it, recognized it, and purposively changed it says everything to me about it. 
Admirable job of diverting the discussion. Hope you have a nice evening.

 
The question is whether to make it public. Even with this change, they are doing the record keeping. The government knows the gender designation, and is taking accurate measurements. They are making it harder for another citizen to find out what gender someone is. Why are you entitled to know someone else's gender? 

Perhaps you are projecting some fear of where this eventually leading, but if we limit it to this particular change, it seems to increase someone's liberty to tell the government they cannot publicize this information about you.

Why are you entitled to find out what gender someone is biologically?  If they have gender based dismorphia (like the legend about Jamie Lee Curtis), are you entitled to this information too? Are you entitled to know the race and religion of the parents? Are you entitled to know the political orientation of the parents, assuming they are educators in Florida?
As rock pointed out, you're confusing sex and gender.  

Also, I'm not clamoring to know anybody's sex.  I'm not really that familiar with any arguments for or against birth certificates being public records, so I'll pass on that one.  It's worth noting for the record, though, that the other things you mentioned -- race, gender, religion, political orientation -- are all either social constructs or belief systems that people choose for themselves (debates about free will notwithstanding).  Sex is different because it's immutable and exists in surface-level reality.  It's more like "date of birth" than "political allegiance."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
As rock pointed out, you're confusing sex and gender.  

Also, I'm not clamoring to know anybody's sex.  I'm not really that familiar with any arguments for or against birth certificates being public records, so I'll pass on that one.  It's worth noting for the record, though, that the other things you mentioned -- race, gender, religion, political orientation -- are all either social constructs or belief systems that people choose for themselves (debates about free will notwithstanding).  Sex is different because it's immutable and exists in surface-level reality.  It's more like "date of birth" than "political allegiance."
Both you and RA are "passing" on the only part of the discussion I found interesting, so that's fine. This specific Webmd article was about "sex designation at birth" being on the public record.  That information can still be recorded, just kept confidential. As the article points out race of the parents was removed from the public part of birth certificates at some point for similar reasons.  

Sex should be removed as a legal designation on the public part of birth certificates, the American Medical Association (AMA) said Monday.

A person's sex designation at birth would still be submitted to the U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth for medical, public health, and statistical use only, report authors note.

 
I don't think any sort of surgery changes a person from producing small gametes to large gametes or vice versa.  So this is obviously correct.  A person can always re-roll their gender identity to whatever they want, but it's not possible to re-roll one's sex.


Aren't there all different kinds of intersex people? And Klinefelter folks? 

Don't they expand the male/female dichotomy?

 
Aren't there all different kinds of intersex people? And Klinefelter folks? 

Don't they expand the male/female dichotomy?
I don't believe so, no.

But that's not really relevant for trans issues.  The overwhelming majority of trans people are conventionally male or female, just like the rest of us.  "Intersex" is an actual, physical thing that exists in surface-level reality.  Gender identity isn't.

 
The Taliban raped and beat a gay man in Kabul after tricking him into a meeting with a promise of escape from Afghanistan, says report

The Taliban raped and beat a gay man after duping him into meeting them, a report from ITV says.

The outlet said that Hanan, a pseudonym given to protect his identity, had been speaking to a man on social media who promised to help him find a safe way out of Afghanistan.

Many LGBTQ people have been desperately trying to flee the country following the Taliban takeover.

Hanan agreed to meet the man in Kabul after speaking for three weeks online, who unbeknownst to him were actually Taliban men.

When Hanan met the men, they raped and beat him, Afghan LGBTQ rights activist Artemis Akbary told ITV.

Akbary told the outlet that Taliban fighters are likely to do this again.

"They'll make a profile account and deceive LGBT+ people by pretending they're a member of the community," he said.

Insider recently spoke to men from Afghanistan's secret gay community, who said they are living through a "nightmare" and in fear of their futures under Taliban rule.

During their previous rule, the militant group executed gay men. In July, German newspaper Bild reported that a Taliban judge vowed to sentence gay men to death by stoning or being crushed by a nine-foot wall.

Afghan activists told Insider that gay men would be lured to their deaths through social media even during the previous governments.

"Social media was basically used by the government to create honey traps to bait gay and bisexual men," LGBTQ activist Nemat Sadat told Insider. 

"National security officials would make fake profiles and go on Grindr and different Facebook groups and say 'hey look, I really want to meet you' and then basically would take them out and kill them and then throw away their body."

"And this wasn't under the Taliban. This was under Ashraf Ghani and Hamid Karzai," he said.

Hamid Zaher, an Afghan author and gay rights activist, told Insider that gay people would often vanish after meeting up with men they met on social media, who turned out to be government officials in disguise.

He warned that the Taliban were likely to use the same tactics.

"If the Taliban don't close Facebook or other apps, like Grindr, they will also use them to arrest people," he said.
The future of LGBT in Afghanistan. 

 
The Afghan government was raping and murdering gays? 
No clue who these people are but from your post

"National security officials would make fake profiles and go on Grindr and different Facebook groups and say 'hey look, I really want to meet you' and then basically would take them out and kill them and then throw away their body."

"And this wasn't under the Taliban. This was under Ashraf Ghani and Hamid Karzai," he said.

 
No clue who these people are but from your post

"National security officials would make fake profiles and go on Grindr and different Facebook groups and say 'hey look, I really want to meet you' and then basically would take them out and kill them and then throw away their body."

"And this wasn't under the Taliban. This was under Ashraf Ghani and Hamid Karzai," he said.
Color me a bit skeptical this was done under government order. The new ruling party will order this. 

 
Color me a bit skeptical this was done under government order. The new ruling party will order this. 
So you decided to post something you are skeptical of and then claim this is the future when what you posted said it’s already been happening.  Um, ok.

Look there’s plenty of things to bash Biden on and lots of things to bash him on related the Afghanistan but the Afghans were already over the top homophobic - it will just continue.

 
So you decided to post something you are skeptical of and then claim this is the future when what you posted said it’s already been happening.  Um, ok.

Look there’s plenty of things to bash Biden on and lots of things to bash him on related the Afghanistan but the Afghans were already over the top homophobic - it will just continue.
You think the afghan government was signing off on rape and murder of gay people while the US is out there flying pride flags on the embassy? I think if that was really happening on a reoccurring basis the state dept would say something. We were out there promoting this and now people will be killed in the public square under the current govt. That's a problem. 

 
You think the afghan government was signing off on rape and murder of gay people while the US is out there flying pride flags on the embassy? I think if that was really happening on a reoccurring basis the state dept would say something. We were out there promoting this and now people will be killed in the public square under the current govt. That's a problem. 
I’m only replying to what you posted - I honestly have no clue.  I think murdering gay men is wrong whether it’s done overtly by those in charge or is done covertly by those in charge with a wink and a nod. This overall issue is one in a litany of reasons why I wish we would just stay the hell out of the region - they don’t share the same ideals as us and forcing our ideals on them doesn’t seem like a good idea.

 
I’m only replying to what you posted - I honestly have no clue.  I think murdering gay men is wrong whether it’s done overtly by those in charge or is done covertly by those in charge with a wink and a nod. This overall issue is one in a litany of reasons why I wish we would just stay the hell out of the region - they don’t share the same ideals as us and forcing our ideals on them doesn’t seem like a good idea.
Just another thing we keep screwing up. It's why flying the pride flag was a poor decision. Its not that people dont agree with LGBT rights. It's the potential fallout from it. 

We told a culture to be proud and open about being gay and now anyone who did has to worry for their life. 

It's another representation of how America doesn't need to be pushing its values on other countries who aren't ready for this yet. 

 
Just another thing we keep screwing up. It's why flying the pride flag was a poor decision. Its not that people dont agree with LGBT rights. It's the potential fallout from it. 

We told a culture to be proud and open about being gay and now anyone who did has to worry for their life. 

It's another representation of how America doesn't need to be pushing its values on other countries who aren't ready for this yet. 


So what is happening in Afghanistan now against LGBT+ people is a direct result of the US Embassy flying a pride flag?  :mellow:

You can't make up this stuff. 

 
I read my brother this thread.  He asked whether it is ironic that the Taliban, to punish homosexuality, rapes homosexuals before or while killing them.  He then remembered a joke about Death by Boola Boola.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You're comprehension skills need some work. A lot of work. 
 My comprehension skills are fine thank you, in an earlier post you said:

You think the afghan government was signing off on rape and murder of gay people while the US is out there flying pride flags on the embassy? I think if that was really happening on a reoccurring basis the state dept would say something. We were out there promoting this and now people will be killed in the public square under the current govt. That's a problem. 


You seem to pretty clearly link the embassy flying a pride flag and
"promoting this" with LGBT people now being killed "in the public square."

 
 My comprehension skills are fine thank you, in an earlier post you said:

You seem to pretty clearly link the embassy flying a pride flag and
"promoting this" with LGBT people now being killed "in the public square."
The US did promote LGBT pride. The LGBT community is at risk under the Taliban. It isnt a direct result. 

The direct result is people were likely encouraged to come out or say something seeing the US embassy support. Now that support is gone and replaced with a group who has zero tolerance for that sort of thing.

 
 My comprehension skills are fine thank you, in an earlier post you said:

You seem to pretty clearly link the embassy flying a pride flag and
"promoting this" with LGBT people now being killed "in the public square."


Sad truth is the gays are in serious trouble there now.  I really feel bad as they will be killed or tortured under sharia law.  God Bless them.

 
Boston Pride

Interesting read into the implosion of Boston Pride...unfortunately you probably won't be surprised as to how.
not to hijack the thread, but this begs the question....how woke can you be? 

I completely understand and respect the need to bring attention and change to certain things, but at what point to you stop? Or at least, change the tone?  Situations like this are examples where good intentioned groups eventually eat itself from the inside. We've built this world where people hang on every word said and action scrutinized. We actively seek to dismantle larger things where a very small minority of members disagree with. I guess the old "Glass houses" analogy fits here whereas if you live to target others for their mistakes, eventually there will be someone looking to target you. 

IDK if i'm saying that right, but I just think we've entered an area where no one person or group can be so perfect that the hate and vitriol we've been breeding doesn't eventually come for them. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
not to hijack the thread, but this begs the question....how woke can you be? 

I completely understand and respect the need to bring attention and change to certain things, but at what point to you stop? Or at least, change the tone?  Situations like this are examples where good intentioned groups eventually eat itself from the inside. We've built this world where people hang on every word said and action scrutinized. We actively seek to dismantle larger things that a very small minority of members agree with. I guess the old "Glass houses" analogy fits here whereas if you live to target others for their mistakes, eventually there will be someone looking to target you. 

IDK if i'm saying that right, but I just think we've entered an area where no one person or group can be so perfect that the hate and vitriol we've been breeding doesn't eventually come for them. 
I think is a great take.  The problem is you get this approach where they make a list of demands (which using that word in itself sounds too aggressive) and when they do not get all of them, they act like there is a war on them, and anyone who isn't in lock step with every little thing they want is viewed as "against us."  I think most reasonable Americans would be on board with a reasonable list of things to help the progression of their rights in a fair society (which sounds a lot nicer than "demands"), but it seems like the approach far too often is what many would deem as unreasonable, and it hurts both their cause and their chances of acceptance on a broader scale. 

 
For some reason when I read the thread title i can only think about Chapelles bit on them, and I laugh so hard it hurts...


The Alphabet People as he likes to call them.  Chappelle is king.  Glad to see he isn't backing down like a slug to the deranged mobs of woke BS.

And then they went out and proved his point.  :doh:

I mean, c'mon.  How easy are they going to make it for him? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's cute that you think many of your posts would challenge anybody's thinking about topics.   RA? IK? BB? sure, and several others in that vein.   Those are the types of posters people come to engage with. 

What it feels like is the threads about SM where people complain about conservative voices being shut down or ignored.  People not being able to handle other POVs.   Meanwhile, there are plenty of quality conversations are happening around them between conservatives and others.   Maybe, just maybe, it's not your conservative POV but your tone and attitude? (especially towards certain groups of people you've been called out on a few times).  

 
It's cute that you think many of your posts would challenge anybody's thinking about topics.   RA? IK? BB? sure, and several others in that vein.   Those are the types of posters people come to engage with. 

What it feels like is the threads about SM where people complain about conservative voices being shut down or ignored.  People not being able to handle other POVs.   Meanwhile, there are plenty of quality conversations are happening around them between conservatives and others.   Maybe, just maybe, it's not your conservative POV but your tone and attitude? (especially towards certain groups of people you've been called out on a few times).  
Speaking of tone and attitude, how do you think it comes across when you address a poster but don't quote him? What message do you think that sends?  Seems like maybe you should take some of the same advice you're giving out. 

I'm not going to compare myself to those guys because I'm not those guys. I'm a completely different individual. Maybe what you should do first is address the people on your side of the aisle that are doing the same things you're accusing me of.  You're so quick to point out tone and attitude on the other side of the aisle but you never address it when it's happening on yours. Maybe if you guys cleaned up your act the responses might be better. 

But let's get real here: the only reason you're complaining is because you don't want to address the concerns of the other side of the aisle. You just want the bubble.  And if that means gaslighting posters that don't agree with you then so be it.  Most of you aren't interested in honest dialogue.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am doing that more because I understand the annoyance of having people on the ignore list and other constantly quoting them.   Posters like you and SC are pretty heavily ignored, so I figure I won't add to that.  

I have called people out or said so when I disagree with them.   I am sure a lot of the snark and attitude is in the Trump thread and I am making an effort to stay out of there for you guys too.   There's only a handful of posters that have the anger towards others and aggressiveness that turn people off.  Yet they continue to post like they believe people ignore them for their political leanings.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top