The New Lounge

[Ghost of Dattier]

So you think there’s less heterosexual couples percentage wise than what’s depicted in commercials? Datt, I’m just curious, but what percentage of people do you think are homosexual? I’m sure it’s going to get higher with the way they celebrate it with PRIDE month. I doubt if Mac has a problem with homosexuals, he’s probably like me and doesn’t care to celebrate it. I’m a Christian and I think people like to judge us and expect us to be perfect. We’re all sinners. People expect us to be tolerant and nonjudgmental, but the Bible says that you’re to judge your neighbor fairly. It doesn’t say we are to accept everything.

Here's exactly what I said, bold emphasis added: "I would venture a guess that the percentage of heterosexual couples depicted doing something romantic/affectionate in commercials and other media and entertainment is way higher than the actual % of couples who are heterosexual."
I'm open to statistics proving otherwise, but as stated, it is clearly my personal opinion and guess that if heterosexual couples are X% of all couples, then they are depicted in advertising, media, and entertainment X+%. I'm not particularly concerned with perfectly proportionate representation. @Mac9192 brought it up, not me. You have a different opinion? Cool.

I have a very different interpretation of the Bible and how we are called to act in accordance with Christ's example. If you're not leading with love and leaning heavily into love -- if all anyone sees is judgment, and mean-spirited, oppressive judgment at that -- you're definitely not doing it right.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

Exactly @dukesince91. I’m also not against Muslims. I just don’t think they should hold political positions. It’s made worse when they admit to being socialist.
Datt has learned well. Take a portion of what is said, then spin it.

Why are you making this personal? Why not stick to what I actually said? It's not about me.

You're not against Muslims... but you favor restricting their rights as citizens. What do you think "against Muslims" means? That's kind of like saying you're not against X, Y, or Z people... as long as they know "their place."

I am addressing exactly what you said and clearly, thoroughly, logically, patiently, and repeatedly explaining how it sounds and why it is anti-American, anti-Christian, and bigoted. I am not calling you the person names. I am clearly, thoroughly, logically, patiently, and repeatedly explaining how your words are anti-American, anti-Christian, and bigoted. That's not spinning anything. That's connecting the dots clearly, thoroughly, logically, patiently, and repeatedly.

 

[dukesince91]

Here's exactly what I said, bold emphasis added: "I would venture a guess that the percentage of heterosexual couples depicted doing something romantic/affectionate in commercials and other media and entertainment is way higher than the actual % of couples who are heterosexual."
I'm open to statistics proving otherwise, but as stated, it is clearly my personal opinion and guess that if heterosexual couples are X% of all couples, then they are depicted in advertising, media, and entertainment X+%. I'm not particularly concerned with perfectly proportionate representation. @Mac9192 brought it up, not me. You have a different opinion? Cool.

I have a very different interpretation of the Bible and how we are called to act in accordance with Christ's example. If you're not leading with love and leaning heavily into love -- if all anyone sees is judgment, and mean-spirited, oppressive judgment at that -- you're definitely not doing it right.

I agree with your statement that you should lead with love, but you should still judge what is right and what is wrong. I think you can do both. I can disagree with what a person is doing and still love them. That’s what Christ does for each of us.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

I agree with your statement that you should lead with love, but you should still judge what is right and what is wrong. I think you can do both. I can disagree with what a person is doing and still love them. That’s what Christ does for each of us.

I agree. I don't think conservative Christians do a good job of leading with love under those circumstances, and I disagree w/ interpretations of the Bible condemning homosexuality. Not eager to get into why, but go ahead and tell me I can't. I dare you. lol

 

[BOOGIEMAN1914]

Judge not.....
You can show someone the error of their ways through the light that shines in you and the word of God

 

[KDSTONE]

Judge not.....
You can show someone the error of their ways through the light that shines in you and the word of God

It’s a tricky subject, because I don’t suspect most gay people see their sexual identity as solely expressed through behavior, but also as core to who they are as humans, and when you try to sever one from the other it’s doomed to fail imho.
I don’t think people choose to be gay, but I agree with the sentiment that positive reinforcement is more effective than condemnation in a more general sense but gay conversion therapy has proven to fail time and again

 

[BOOGIEMAN1914]

Wasn't

It’s a tricky subject, because I don’t suspect most gay people see their sexual identity as solely expressed through behavior, but also as core to who they are as humans, and when you try to sever one from the other it’s doomed to fail imho.
I don’t think people choose to be gay, but I agree with the sentiment that positive reinforcement is more effective than condemnation in a more general sense but gay conversion therapy has proven to fail time and again

Wasn't necessarily talking about homosexuality...all things, but we do agree, I don't think homosexuality is a choice, I think people are wired that way...hard to fathom you choose that with all the scrutiny and judgement that comes your...sense you kind of opened the door, thoughts on identity???....i have a tough time believing thats a choice either, seems ti be wiring as well when your brain doesn't agree with your physical???

 

[dukesince91]

Homosexuality is a hard topic for me to grasp. I’ve seen many heterosexual relations sour and then the person decides to become homosexual. Were they homosexual to begin with or choose to become? I think as a society we will see more people becoming homosexual due to.how it is celebrated with PRIDE parades etc…

 

[KDSTONE]

Homosexuality is a hard topic for me to grasp. I’ve seen many heterosexual relations sour and then the person decides to become homosexual. Were they homosexual to begin with or choose to become? I think as a society we will see more people becoming homosexual due to.how it is celebrated with PRIDE parades etc…

We’re probably all familiar with the story about the guy who leaves his wife and family and goes full on gay. Was he knowingly living a lie or did he have an epiphany of sorts? A social structure of repression against gays keeps some in the closet, but in certain circles there seems to be social incentive to identify as something other than straight and white. No one wants to be an oppressor; much cooler to be brown, Black, gay, trans, etc. Now you’re no longer merely a white interloper at the intersectional hootenanny; you can sit at the head of the table.

 

[KDSTONE]

Wasn't
Wasn't necessarily talking about homosexuality...all things, but we do agree, I don't think homosexuality is a choice, I think people are wired that way...hard to fathom you choose that with all the scrutiny and judgement that comes your...sense you kind of opened the door, thoughts on identity???....i have a tough time believing thats a choice either, seems ti be wiring as well when your brain doesn't agree with your physical???

Social contagion seems to play a role. How much of one can be debated. The research isn’t settled. The notion that any of these studies could be politically neutral at this point is dubious at best. In some areas, the kids identifying as non-binary is as high as 30%. In some as low as 2%.
So the question practically asks itself: do repressive social structures artificially keep the numbers low in some areas ( think Red states) or does increased social acceptance and status inflate the stats in politically active liberal areas?

Gender dysphoria in adolescence: examining the rapid-onset hypothesis - PMC

The sharp rise in the number of predominantly natal female adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria and seeking treatment in specialized clinics has sparked a contentious and polarized debate among both the scientific community and the public ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Mac9192]

I have a cousin who’s gay. She’s a super nice lady, and played softball when she was growing up. I remember watching her play when we were younger. She had a cannon for an arm, and she acted and played like a boy. I do struggle with the whole is “gay a choice” narrative from seeing what I saw with her. She has an older brother who’s straight, as well as both parents are still alive and married.

The transgender, non binary… things? I believe it’s mental illness. Some I think are these yahoos seeking attention, but I still think it’s mental illness. I’m not mean to them, but have no idea why they are the way they are.

I think our tolerance of a lot of these things have spun completely out of control. The future of our country is looking grim. We’re making very soft people. Freedom of speech is good, but the pendulum is leaning too far to a where it’s close to a dangerous point.

 

[KDSTONE]

I have a cousin who’s gay. She’s a super nice lady, and played softball when she was growing up. I remember watching her play when we were younger. She had a cannon for an arm, and she acted and played like a boy. I do struggle with the whole is “gay a choice” narrative from seeing what I saw with her. She has an older brother who’s straight, as well as both parents are still alive and married.

The transgender, non binary… things? I believe it’s mental illness. Some I think are these yahoos seeking attention, but I still think it’s mental illness. I’m not mean to them, but have no idea why they are the way they are.

I think our tolerance of a lot of these things have spun completely out of control. The future of our country is looking grim. We’re making very soft people. Freedom of speech is good, but the pendulum is leaning too far to a where it’s close to a dangerous point.

I think it’s mostly genetic, but environmental factors play a role as well. For example, sexually abused boys are significantly more likely to identify as gay later in life, but some believe that nascent same sex orientation predisposes someone to be victimized, so the maltrtx stems from the preexisting identification rather than the maltreatment being causal to later same sex ID.
Re: trans, my understanding is that it used to be labeled gender dysphoria. Mental heath prof are less likely to use that diagnosis now . Whether that’s evolving with new data or if they’re succumbing to political pressure, it’s hard to say.

 

[dukesince91]

We’re probably all familiar with the story about the guy who leaves his wife and family and goes full on gay. Was he knowingly living a lie or did he have an epiphany of sorts? A social structure of repression against gays keeps some in the closet, but in certain circles there seems to be social incentive to identify as something other than straight and white. No one wants to be an oppressor; much cooler to be brown, Black, gay, trans, etc. Now you’re no longer merely a white interloper at the intersectional hootenanny; you can sit at the head of the table.

I actually know more females that left their husbands and family for a lesbian relationship. As a former middle school teacher I could probably pick a lot of kids out who I thought would be homosexuals as adults by their appearance, mannerisms and actions. I remember one girl who was very feminine dating a girl that looked more masculine than the boys. She had a buzz haircut and a chain attached from her jeans belt loop to her wallet. I couldn’t figure that one out. I thought why don’t you just date a guy. They didn’t look any different.

 

[BOOGIEMAN1914]

Homosexuality is a hard topic for me to grasp. I’ve seen many heterosexual relations sour and then the person decides to become homosexual. Were they homosexual to begin with or choose to become? I think as a society we will see more people becoming homosexual due to.how it is celebrated with PRIDE parades etc…

Woman to a woman or a man to man?....definitely have seen the woman going to a woman a lot

Edit: just saw your last post

Really think the woman to woman after a man is an emotional connection..???

 

[BOOGIEMAN1914]

I actually know more females that left their husbands and family for a lesbian relationship. As a former middle school teacher I could probably pick a lot of kids out who I thought would be homosexuals as adults by their appearance, mannerisms and actions. I remember one girl who was very feminine dating a girl that looked more masculine than the boys. She had a buzz haircut and a chain attached from her jeans belt loop to her wallet. I couldn’t figure that one out. I thought why don’t you just date a guy. They didn’t look any different.

A guy had the wrong parts and the girl probably played to her emotional side more...???

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

Homosexuality is a hard topic for me to grasp. I’ve seen many heterosexual relations sour and then the person decides to become homosexual. Were they homosexual to begin with or choose to become? I think as a society we will see more people becoming homosexual due to.how it is celebrated with PRIDE parades etc…

Pride and the improved acceptance of LGBTQIAMQE+ has nothing to do with it. Nobody is "turned gay" by seeing a parade or a same-sex couple holding hands. After all, exposure to nothing but heterosexual relationships hasn't stopped people from being gay. Now, someone who already has those latent tendencies might be more prone to explore them, but that's really just giving them the encouragement to be their authentic selves. That's very different. At face value, I don't think any of us would agree that it's good to suppress through law or medicine something natural about ourselves, psychopathy being one obvious exception.

I do wonder if population growth and density have anything to do with it. Like if sexual orientation trends away from heterosexuality when we're overpopulated, but that's some bio-socio woo stuff I certainly couldn't begin to analyze.

I think women's empowerment has given women better options than being compelled to partner with a man for safety and support, or staying in an abusive relationship. That's a good thing. Whether nature, nurture, or some combination of both, my impression is that more women are flexible in their sexual orientation and if they aren't willing to put up with male toxicity -- and they shouldn't be -- they may tend toward partnering with like-minded women.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

We’re probably all familiar with the story about the guy who leaves his wife and family and goes full on gay. Was he knowingly living a lie or did he have an epiphany of sorts? A social structure of repression against gays keeps some in the closet, but in certain circles there seems to be social incentive to identify as something other than straight and white. No one wants to be an oppressor; much cooler to be brown, Black, gay, trans, etc. Now you’re no longer merely a white interloper at the intersectional hootenanny; you can sit at the head of the table.

I know at least 3 men who were married to women and had kids, then sometime in their 40s (all 3 in their 40s) decided/realized they were gay. I'm Gen X and I think we are the last generation where there has been widespread suppression of gay tendencies in favor of the appearance and trappings of heterosexuality. Of those 3 dudes, there were rumors and suspicions one of them was gay as far back as high school, and another since I knew him in our 20s-30s. I think Millennials have grown up with more widespread acceptance of LGBTQIAMQE+ and therefore been more comfortable coming out at earlier ages.

I do not think anyone does it to be cool. I think they feel more accepted pursuing a natural tendency, or even a temporary curiosity.

I get where you're coming from about the social incentive, but I think that as a conservative, you're somewhat of an outsider with that culture, and you're likely viewing it through an outsider's lens that really doesn't align with what's really going on. I get accused of having white guilt periodically, and I just don't see it or feel it. It doesn't harm me to recognize white supremacy and it doesn't make me ashamed of who I am. I think that's also an outsider's take on it.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

So the question practically asks itself: do repressive social structures artificially keep the numbers low in some areas ( think Red states) or does increased social acceptance and status inflate the stats in politically active liberal areas?

2 sides of the same coin, and I do think there's truth to it. I do not, however, think inflation happens among people who had no tendencies toward a divergent orientation or identity to begin with. I'd say social acceptance allows people with those latent traits to be more honest about it. In Red states, I suspect there are a lot of people who might have identified as gay eventually had it been more acceptable, but who are absolutely living happily as a heterosexual, blissfully unaware of a possible alternate timeline.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

The transgender, non binary… things? I believe it’s mental illness. Some I think are these yahoos seeking attention, but I still think it’s mental illness. I’m not mean to them, but have no idea why they are the way they are.

I think our tolerance of a lot of these things have spun completely out of control. The future of our country is looking grim. We’re making very soft people. Freedom of speech is good, but the pendulum is leaning too far to a where it’s close to a dangerous point.

On the bold, if you support bans on gender-affirming care, call them by pronouns and given names they don't use, and support banning them from bathrooms, you are being beyond "mean" to them.

Just about every generation hits an age where they catastrophize what the world/country is becoming. It has almost always been rooted in fear of and discomfort with the unknown.

Either you support rights or you don't. There's no such thing as going too far. There may be applications you struggle with, and perhaps applications that really do warrant exceptions, but rights are rights are rights. There are already constitutionally aligned laws against speech intended to incite a riot, slander, libel. That's speech within a context that makes it illegal, not something based on beliefs.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

Re: trans, my understanding is that it used to be labeled gender dysphoria. Mental heath prof are less likely to use that diagnosis now . Whether that’s evolving with new data or if they’re succumbing to political pressure, it’s hard to say.

I definitely think its the former. That's been the case throughout history and scientists have far more often risked backlash to go with where the science led them. I think the latter option is largely manufactured by people who don't want to accept it themselves, so they accuse the scientists of political corruption. If it is the latter, it won't last.

I am hesitant to go into this because I certainly don't understand it myself, but there are many scientists who talk about how XY is sometimes XXY and the Y is suppressed despite the presence of male genitalia, or XX is sometimes XXY where one of the Xs is suppressed despite the presence of female genitalia. They sound smart and "sciency," but I have some reservations about promoting it whole hog because it seems like that would already be getting more attention if it were completely accurate and sound.

With sexual orientation, I suspect it's part nature and part nurture, but I really don't care that much. If someone tells me they're gay, I believe them and I accept them. Same with gender identity. If someone tells me in good faith that they are trans, I believe them and accept them. I don't need to know exactly how and why it came to pass. It doesn't harm me in any way, and it is far more likely to harm them if I reject them.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

I actually know more females that left their husbands and family for a lesbian relationship. As a former middle school teacher I could probably pick a lot of kids out who I thought would be homosexuals as adults by their appearance, mannerisms and actions.

Oof! Middle school! Doing the Lord's work there. That's the hardest level.
Very much relate to the experience of being able to predict it about some, and also about observing women being more likely to have a later-in-life switch.

I remember one girl who was very feminine dating a girl that looked more masculine than the boys. She had a buzz haircut and a chain attached from her jeans belt loop to her wallet. I couldn’t figure that one out. I thought why don’t you just date a guy. They didn’t look any different.

lol Same can be said about really effeminate guys: why not just date women? Obviously these are poorly informed ideas, but I can empathize.

My wife says she finds butch women more attractive than traditionally feminine women, and she doesn't identify as lesbian, bi, or *****. I guess if I had to choose, a transwoman who looked like a woman would probably catch my eye more so than a transman who looked like a man, despite what they have in their pants. All bets are off if the pants come off, though. lol

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

...and she doesn't identify as lesbian, bi, or *****. I guess if I had to choose...

^Oh, wow, the Q word is censored here. Huh.

 

[Mac9192]

On the bold, if you support bans on gender-affirming care, call them by pronouns and given names they don't use, and support banning them from bathrooms, you are being beyond "mean" to them.

Just about every generation hits an age where they catastrophize what the world/country is becoming. It has almost always been rooted in fear of and discomfort with the unknown.

Either you support rights or you don't. There's no such thing as going too far. There may be applications you struggle with, and perhaps applications that really do warrant exceptions, but rights are rights are rights. There are already constitutionally aligned laws against speech intended to incite a riot, slander, libel. That's speech within a context that makes it illegal, not something based on beliefs.

Couldn't disagree more. A person does have the right to be gay, transition, or whatever, I'm really not being mean about it. Just because I don't agree, and understand, doesn't make me "mean" as you say. Believe it or not, but in my town, I've had a few people that come in to my shop where you don't know what to call them. I am not rude, but identifying a man or woman shouldn't be hard.

Your example of the bathroom? Why is one side having to be the one's to 'tolerate' what others are doing? Should a straight women take issue with going into the bathroom with a man transitioning? Is the woman mean to not want to share the bathroom?

The word tolerate is not a one way street.

 

[KDSTONE]

I definitely think its the former. That's been the case throughout history and scientists have far more often risked backlash to go with where the science led them. I think the latter option is largely manufactured by people who don't want to accept it themselves, so they accuse the scientists of political corruption. If it is the latter, it won't last.

I am hesitant to go into this because I certainly don't understand it myself, but there are many scientists who talk about how XY is sometimes XXY and the Y is suppressed despite the presence of male genitalia, or XX is sometimes XXY where one of the Xs is suppressed despite the presence of female genitalia. They sound smart and "sciency," but I have some reservations about promoting it whole hog because it seems like that would already be getting more attention if it were completely accurate and sound.

With sexual orientation, I suspect it's part nature and part nurture, but I really don't care that much. If someone tells me they're gay, I believe them and I accept them. Same with gender identity. If someone tells me in good faith that they are trans, I believe them and accept them. I don't need to know exactly how and why it came to pass. It doesn't harm me in any way, and it is far more likely to harm them if I reject them.

Fair. I wouldn’t go as far as labeling it “ political corruption”, though, suggesting that the mental health field has completely abandoned core principles or sold its soul to the highest bidder as much as that they’re influenced by changing societal norms. I do feel some in the field worry about political backlash if their research could be labeled as transphobic
The mere suggestion of social contagion has become taboo in some quarters. I get it. If I were trans, I wouldn’t want to be accused of being that susceptible to outside influences.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

Fair. I wouldn’t go as far as labeling it “ political corruption”, though, suggesting that the mental health field has completely abandoned core principles or sold its soul to the highest bidder as much as that they’re influenced by changing societal norms. I do feel some in the field worry about political backlash if their research could be labeled as transphobic
The mere suggestion of social contagion has become taboo in some quarters. I get it. If I were trans, I wouldn’t want to be accused of being that susceptible to outside influences.

"Politically compromised," then?
Overwhelmingly, scientists go with the truth of their findings regardless of consequences.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

Couldn't disagree more. A person does have the right to be gay, transition, or whatever, I'm really not being mean about it. Just because I don't agree, and understand, doesn't make me "mean" as you say. Believe it or not, but in my town, I've had a few people that come in to my shop where you don't know what to call them. I am not rude, but identifying a man or woman shouldn't be hard.

Your example of the bathroom? Why is one side having to be the one's to 'tolerate' what others are doing? Should a straight women take issue with going into the bathroom with a man transitioning? Is the woman mean to not want to share the bathroom?

The word tolerate is not a one way street.

Hang on... you said "mean." I quoted you. It's not "as [ I ] say." It's what you said. I've seen conservatives here use "mean" to mock, diminish, and dismiss problems people have with our President too often to let that slide.

If you seek to limit their rights, you are harming them, which is being "mean."

You would call William Bill if he requested it. You switch to calling newly married women by their new last name all the time. No different from respecting people's preferred name & pronouns. I make mistakes sometimes, calling someone by the pronouns they look like according to me rather than what they prefer. That's a me problem, not a them problem. I accept correction, apologize, and move on.

The fear of transwomen in women's bathrooms is unfounded. Women are far more likely to be assaulted by a cis man who snuck into the bathroom without a disguise. It makes some uncomfortable because of what cis men have done, not what transwomen have done. There's a high likelihood that many women have already unknowingly shared a public restroom with a transwoman without incident.

I've addressed your tolerance line already. Did you look into the Paradox of Tolerance like I recommended? Being intolerant of intolerance is not the same level of intolerance. Tolerating intolerance leads to the spread of intolerance. I shouldn't have to repeat myself this often when there are so many undeniable facts and well-supported, irrefutable, ironclad positions in my favor.

 

[Mac9192]

Hang on... you said "mean." I quoted you. It's not "as [ I ] say." It's what you said. I've seen conservatives here use "mean" to mock, diminish, and dismiss problems people have with our President too often to let that slide.

If you seek to limit their rights, you are harming them, which is being "mean."

You would call William Bill if he requested it. You switch to calling newly married women by their new last name all the time. No different from respecting people's preferred name & pronouns. I make mistakes sometimes, calling someone by the pronouns they look like according to me rather than what they prefer. That's a me problem, not a them problem. I accept correction, apologize, and move on.

The fear of transwomen in women's bathrooms is unfounded. Women are far more likely to be assaulted by a cis man who snuck into the bathroom without a disguise. It makes some uncomfortable because of what cis men have done, not what transwomen have done. There's a high likelihood that many women have already unknowingly shared a public restroom with a transwoman without incident.

I've addressed your tolerance line already. Did you look into the Paradox of Tolerance like I recommended? Being intolerant of intolerance is not the same level of intolerance. Tolerating intolerance leads to the spread of intolerance. I shouldn't have to repeat myself this often when there are so many undeniable facts and well-supported, irrefutable, ironclad positions in my favor.

Yes I first said I'm not mean to them. I don't hate them either. What's your point? Can someone be nice to someone but not understand them without you branding them with the left wing insults?

Calling someone by a pronoun is proof of how much our society is deteriorating. If Bob decides to be Barbara, then I'll call him Barbara. Will I understand it? No. Does that make me racist, transphobic, mean? I don't think so.

The fear of transwomen in women's bathrooms is unfounded? Where is the study, and who conducted this survey? If a woman knowingly sees Bob, now Barbara, but still strongly favors looking like Bob, how many might hesitate until he walks out? What you're also saying though is that women should be tolerant of these people, and just shut up and share the bathroom. There's that pesky word tolerance.

You lost me on the whole intolerance of intolerance, who tolerates intolerance, the Paradox of tolerance... the one thing you are doing is acting as the great white savior for the gay, trans... community. Again though, let me see these 'undeniable facts' you say are so well supported.

 

[dukesince91]

Oof! Middle school! Doing the Lord's work there. That's the hardest level.
Very much relate to the experience of being able to predict it about some, and also about observing women being more likely to have a later-in-life switch.


lol Same can be said about really effeminate guys: why not just date women? Obviously these are poorly informed ideas, but I can empathize.

My wife says she finds butch women more attractive than traditionally feminine women, and she doesn't identify as lesbian, bi, or *****. I guess if I had to choose, a transwoman who looked like a woman would probably catch my eye more so than a transman who looked like a man, despite what they have in their pants. All bets are off if the pants come off, though. lol

Your last sentence made me laugh. It made me think of the song, “Funky Cold Medina”!

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

Yes I first said I'm not mean to them. I don't hate them either. What's your point? Can someone be nice to someone but not understand them without you branding them with the left wing insults?

Calling someone by a pronoun is proof of how much our society is deteriorating. If Bob decides to be Barbara, then I'll call him Barbara. Will I understand it? No. Does that make me racist, transphobic, mean? I don't think so.

The fear of transwomen in women's bathrooms is unfounded? Where is the study, and who conducted this survey? If a woman knowingly sees Bob, now Barbara, but still strongly favors looking like Bob, how many might hesitate until he walks out? What you're also saying though is that women should be tolerant of these people, and just shut up and share the bathroom. There's that pesky word tolerance.

You lost me on the whole intolerance of intolerance, who tolerates intolerance, the Paradox of tolerance... the one thing you are doing is acting as the great white savior for the gay, trans... community. Again though, let me see these 'undeniable facts' you say are so well supported.

What left-wing insults?

We've used pronouns for centuries. What are you talking about?

I didn't call you racist, transphobic, or mean. I identified behavior that would be transphobic and mean. It did not include not understanding. I've acknowledged imperfect understanding of it myself. It did include supporting the limitation of their rights. You can smile to someone's face and be polite. If you are voting for platforms that deny them rights, it causes harm, which is, to use the word you used, mean.

I understand that it could be unnerving for a cis woman to see a transwoman who still presents as masculine in the women's bathroom. That's because of what cis men have done to women. Does she feel the same way about very butch looking lesbians? a group of loud teenage girls? If I need to drop a deuce in a public restroom, I'd prefer to have the whole place to myself. What does that have to do with anyone else's right to use the bathroom?

Not sure what study you want to see. There is no data to support the idea that transwomen are a risk to cis women. Banning them from the bathroom is a solution in search of a problem for the sake of scoring political points.

I've summarized the Paradox of Tolerance twice and provided links to 2 other places you can read about it. You keep saying tolerance should be a 2-way street and that it isn't; I'm telling you that not all intolerance is equal. When your beliefs guide what you do, that's freedom of religion/belief. When your beliefs tell me what to do, that's authoritarianism. It is appropriate to tolerate the former. It is not appropriate to tolerate the latter. The latter would be intolerant of other's freedoms. The only righteous response to that intolerance is to be intolerant of it. Those are not equal intolerances. The tolerance you are criticizing and claiming is missing is related strictly to intolerance of people who try to impose on others' rights. I'm not sure I can explain it any more clearly without understanding where you're confused.

 

[Mac9192]

Hang on... you said "mean." I quoted you. It's not "as [ I ] say." It's what you said. I've seen conservatives here use "mean" to mock, diminish, and dismiss problems people have with our President too often to let that slide.

If you seek to limit their rights, you are harming them, which is being "mean."

What left-wing insults?

We've used pronouns for centuries. What are you talking about?

I didn't call you racist, transphobic, or mean. I identified behavior that would be transphobic and mean. It did not include not understanding. I've acknowledged imperfect understanding of it myself. It did include supporting the limitation of their rights. You can smile to someone's face and be polite. If you are voting for platforms that deny them rights, it causes harm, which is, to use the word you used, mean.

I understand that it could be unnerving for a cis woman to see a transwoman who still presents as masculine in the women's bathroom. That's because of what cis men have done to women. Does she feel the same way about very butch looking lesbians? a group of loud teenage girls? If I need to drop a deuce in a public restroom, I'd prefer to have the whole place to myself. What does that have to do with anyone else's right to use the bathroom?

Not sure what study you want to see. There is no data to support the idea that transwomen are a risk to cis women. Banning them from the bathroom is a solution in search of a problem for the sake of scoring political points.

The first part, your words, not mine. Left wing insults? You serious? This is what a lot of this is about. One side is now supposed to tolerate all of this, and if there's any objection to this whatsoever, then yes, the insults do start to fly. I can have empathy for someone but also not like what they do, or how they are.

You just don't seem to get it. It seems like if conservatives don't fall in love with everything that is happening in front of them, then they are branded insults. You can't even watch tv without a commercial for HIV medication showing gay couples. Can they not just do an advertisement hailing the medication for what it does, without the added actors?

 

[KDSTONE]

What left-wing insults?

We've used pronouns for centuries. What are you talking about?

I didn't call you racist, transphobic, or mean. I identified behavior that would be transphobic and mean. It did not include not understanding. I've acknowledged imperfect understanding of it myself. It did include supporting the limitation of their rights. You can smile to someone's face and be polite. If you are voting for platforms that deny them rights, it causes harm, which is, to use the word you used, mean.

I understand that it could be unnerving for a cis woman to see a transwoman who still presents as masculine in the women's bathroom. That's because of what cis men have done to women. Does she feel the same way about very butch looking lesbians? a group of loud teenage girls? If I need to drop a deuce in a public restroom, I'd prefer to have the whole place to myself. What does that have to do with anyone else's right to use the bathroom?

Not sure what study you want to see. There is no data to support the idea that transwomen are a risk to cis women. Banning them from the bathroom is a solution in search of a problem for the sake of scoring political points.

I've summarized the Paradox of Tolerance twice and provided links to 2 other places you can read about it. You keep saying tolerance should be a 2-way street and that it isn't; I'm telling you that not all intolerance is equal. When your beliefs guide what you do, that's freedom of religion/belief. When your beliefs tell me what to do, that's authoritarianism. It is appropriate to tolerate the former. It is not appropriate to tolerate the latter. The latter would be intolerant of other's freedoms. The only righteous response to that intolerance is to be intolerant of it. Those are not equal intolerances. The tolerance you are criticizing and claiming is missing is related strictly to intolerance of people who try to impose on others' rights. I'm not sure I can explain it any more clearly without understanding where you're confused.

I’m not sure the opposition to biological men in women’s bathrooms is connected all that much to fear of sexual assault as much as it is about comfort and decorum. To dismiss the concerns because “ well you’re probably not going to get raped so shut up” is inappropriate. Most women have spent their entire lives going to men- free bathrooms. To reduce their concerns to “since you weren’t raped you have nothing to complain about” seems an odd stance to take.

 

[KDSTONE]

The first part, your words, not mine. Left wing insults? You serious? This is what a lot of this is about. One side is now supposed to tolerate all of this, and if there's any objection to this whatsoever, then yes, the insults do start to fly. I can have empathy for someone but also not like what they do, or how they are.

You just don't seem to get it. It seems like if conservatives don't fall in love with everything that is happening in front of them, then they are branded insults. You can't even watch tv without a commercial for HIV medication showing gay couples. Can they not just do an advertisement hailing the medication for what it does, without the added actors?

They could, but then the DEI pimps who green light the ads wouldn’t be happy.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

The first part, your words, not mine. Left wing insults? You serious? This is what a lot of this is about. One side is now supposed to tolerate all of this, and if there's any objection to this whatsoever, then yes, the insults do start to fly. I can have empathy for someone but also not like what they do, or how they are.

You just don't seem to get it. It seems like if conservatives don't fall in love with everything that is happening in front of them, then they are branded insults. You can't even watch tv without a commercial for HIV medication showing gay couples. Can they not just do an advertisement hailing the medication for what it does, without the added actors?

I can't really comment on insults other Leftists have directed at you without having observed them myself.

I've said that your beliefs are yours and should be respected... until the point you leverage them into dictating what others are allowed to do. I have explained multiple times that you aren't getting it. If your politics are intolerant of others, your intolerance will not be tolerated. That's not an equal form of intolerance. Being intolerant of who other people are and being intolerant of what people do to harm others are not the same.

Why does it bother you so much that a gay couple is in -- of all things -- an HIV commercial? That you see them and have a problem with it is a you problem. Do you complain about other commercials for having human beings in them? Do you even notice when it's a heterosexual couple? Probably not because it's normalized. It doesn't even register. What you're suggesting/preferring is for gay people to be pushed into the shadows and be invisible. You are advocating for limiting them for your comfort.

You don't have to fall in love with something, but if you put an opinion out there for others to hear/read, you should be prepared to receive feedback. And if you're basically complaining about a marginalized group being represented and visible, the feedback you receive is likely to be harsh.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

I’m not sure the opposition to biological men in women’s bathrooms is connected all that much to fear of sexual assault as much as it is about comfort and decorum. To dismiss the concerns because “ well you’re probably not going to get raped so shut up” is inappropriate. Most women have spent their entire lives going to men- free bathrooms. To reduce their concerns to “since you weren’t raped you have nothing to complain about” seems an odd stance to take.

Who are you quoting there?

Why does one person's comfort determine what someone else is allowed to do in public? You think a bearded, deep-voiced transman belongs in a women's restroom because he has a va-jay-jay? You think cis women would be more comfortable with that?

Ultimately you are dismissing transwomen as women. That's what this all boils down to.

 

[Ghost of Dattier]

They could, but then the DEI pimps who green light the ads wouldn’t be happy.

Is there an agenda behind every person ever featured in a commercial? Would we even be discussing this if it was a heterosexual couple in the HIV commercial? Has anyone other than a straight white man ever earned anything?

 

[KDSTONE]

Who are you quoting there?

Why does one person's comfort determine what someone else is allowed to do in public? You think a bearded, deep-voiced transman belongs in a women's restroom because he has a va-jay-jay? You think cis women would be more comfortable with that?

Ultimately you are dismissing transwomen as women. That's what this all boils down to.

Paraphrasing your argument. Your argument essentially was that “studies” that you haven’t linked or referenced showed that trans in women’s bathrooms didn’t increase the risk of sexual assault. Therefore, everyone should just shut up and stop playing political games. You ignored genuine concerns about other women’s comfort.

 

[KDSTONE]

Is there an agenda behind every person ever featured in a commercial? Would we even be discussing this if it was a heterosexual couple in the HIV commercial? Has anyone other than a straight white man ever earned anything?

“ Would we even be discussing this if it was a heterosexual couple?” Probably not, because that would be unrelated to the topic.
I don’t answer for “white men” so I’ll let someone else answer that.

 

[Mac9192]

I can't really comment on insults other Leftists have directed at you without having observed them myself.

I've said that your beliefs are yours and should be respected... until the point you leverage them into dictating what others are allowed to do. I have explained multiple times that you aren't getting it. If your politics are intolerant of others, your intolerance will not be tolerated. That's not an equal form of intolerance. Being intolerant of who other people are and being intolerant of what people do to harm others are not the same.

Why does it bother you so much that a gay couple is in -- of all things -- an HIV commercial? That you see them and have a problem with it is a you problem. Do you complain about other commercials for having human beings in them? Do you even notice when it's a heterosexual couple? Probably not because it's normalized. It doesn't even register. What you're suggesting/preferring is for gay people to be pushed into the shadows and be invisible. You are advocating for limiting them for your comfort.

I get it, I just don't like the notion of a bio man walking into a women's bathroom. What KD said sums up how I feel about that. Not sure why you are arguing this. I really don't.

The HIV commercial is just a sad depiction of our times. Sorry, not sorry for feeling this way. An HIV commericial where the most likely cause was unprotected sex that caused them to get it.

 

[Mac9192]

Paraphrasing your argument. Your argument essentially was that “studies” that you haven’t linked or referenced showed that trans in women’s bathrooms didn’t increase the risk of sexual assault. Therefore, everyone should just shut up and stop playing political games. You ignored genuine concerns about other women’s comfort.

Datt was in a helluva pickle with whether to side with women or transwomen.

 

[dukesince91]

Is there an agenda behind every person ever featured in a commercial? Would we even be discussing this if it was a heterosexual couple in the HIV commercial? Has anyone other than a straight white man ever earned anything?

Wow! Your last sentence is showing your white guilt. You’ve been trained well. My father has been deceased for 31 years. He told me a couple of years before he passed that the white man would be hated in this country. I didn’t know what he meant at the time, but it all makes sense. You’ve been played Datt.