LGBT activists don't want anthropologists to ID remains as male or female

Status
Not open for further replies.

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
21,368
12,237
39
Ohio
✟925,685.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
In any valid left/right dichotomy the objective Truth is in the center.

I would concur...

With many of these polarized subjects, it quickly devolves into both sides trying to get "the upper hand", or just do whatever they think will agitate the other side the most, rather than an actual pragmatic look at the situation.

The pendulum keeps swing, and reaching out to the further extremes with each movement.

Which is why in 2022, the debate is

"Anyone who doesn't want to conform to the traditional view of sex/gender/gender roles is just a pervert who wants to sexually assault anything that moves"

vs.

"We need gender-affirming hormones for kids, and my pronouns change weekly, so you have to ask me what they are and if you dare use the wrong one, you're a bigot"
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
21,368
12,237
39
Ohio
✟925,685.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
03SPamU.jpeg

I don't know how accurate this meme is in terms of the big picture....

While it's true that you have some legitimate racists who would prefer to whitewash history, I don't think that's most people (even among staunch conservatives).

The problem is the concept of "bundled ideologies", where people take a concept that most people would see as noble and be on-board with, and bundle in a bunch of extraneous ideologies with it as a "package deal", and when people object to those extraneous ideologies, they're accused of not caring about the noble purpose that they saddled a bunch of baggage to.

It's the ideological equivalent of the poison pill tactic that the legislature uses, where their goal is to either guilt people into voting against their own interests, or run the risk of being labelled as "not caring" about something important.

IE:

Activists: "our message centered around stopping the practice of dog fighting, and also <controversial cause XYZ>"

Joe Smith: Well, I don't support that controversial cause XYZ so I'm not okay with that

Activists: "Joe Smith is pro - dog fighting!!! see!! he just said he opposed our movement!"
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
36,315
18,259
US
✟1,199,081.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, she doesn't. She was at an Americans with Disabilities Act engagement and the description was for those with visual impairment. Other speakers were doing the same.\

Identifying one's preferred pronouns has nothing to do with visual impairment.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
36,315
18,259
US
✟1,199,081.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If I'm understanding you correctly, what you're seeing is what I describe as the spirit of the devil working both ends against the middle. It's a form of deception. Fundamentally cynicism works both ends against the middle and faith works both ends towards the center.

I've been saying for some time in these forums that there is a spirit of delusion working both sides of the aisle.
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
21,368
12,237
39
Ohio
✟925,685.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Identifying one's preferred pronouns has nothing to do with physical disabilities.

Correct...

And visual impairment has nothing to do with it. (despite them using that as an explanation of why she did it)

Are there any Americans (visually impaired or otherwise) that don't know that Harris is the Vice President and a woman? The news coverage was pretty clear on the fact that she was the first woman to be vice president.

She did the pronouns thing because that's the "cool" "progressive" thing to do that scores some instant points with a lot people on that side of the political fence, plain and simple.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
36,315
18,259
US
✟1,199,081.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I agree, we need to go back to the good old days when football and basketball coaches could give everyone a friendly pat on their butt every day after P.E. and not have it be gay.

You may have meant that post ironically, but it used to be true.

There used to be a number of ways men physically expressed emotion with each other without it being considered gay. It was American homosexuals who began calling all those things "gay" in the 80s. Now, men who don't want to be labeled gay eschew expressing emotion with each other, except with a silly caveat to warn onlookers that it's not gay.
 
Upvote 0

childeye 2

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
4,071
2,342
64
Denver CO
✟132,733.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I've been saying for some time in these forums that there is a spirit of delusion working both sides of the aisle.
Every lie of the devil attempts to undermine the two great commandments. To Love God and love others as myself, I feel I must try to see others as myself no matter how misguided others appear to be. I actually view wickedness as wanting to believe bad about others.

In a wicked world where the wicked people project their own wickedness onto others, it is The Spirit of Christ that empowers me to pick up my cross and pray for those who would crucify me.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
26,581
11,386
Seattle
✟668,735.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
You may have meant that post ironically, but it used to be true.

There used to be a number of ways men physically expressed emotion with each other without it being considered gay. It was American homosexuals who began calling all those things "gay" in the 80s. Now, men who don't want to be labeled gay eschew expressing emotion with each other, except with a silly caveat to warn onlookers that it's not gay.


It was? I don't recall that.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
32,747
9,413
✟351,230.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I agree, we need to go back to the good old days when football and basketball coaches could give everyone a friendly pat on their butt every day after P.E. and not have it be gay.

This never happened at my school and maybe you should see if old "coach" has a record.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
32,747
9,413
✟351,230.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Think of it more like piece of cloth... Where the ends are frayed and wild; chaotic. Those frays tend to loosen the center, and ruin the whole thing.

Fortunately I have a solution. Support me as dictator for life and there won't even be a political spectrum.

Take that fringe elements.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
32,747
9,413
✟351,230.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I would concur...

With many of these polarized subjects, it quickly devolves into both sides trying to get "the upper hand", or just do whatever they think will agitate the other side the most, rather than an actual pragmatic look at the situation.

The pendulum keeps swing, and reaching out to the further extremes with each movement.

Which is why in 2022, the debate is

"Anyone who doesn't want to conform to the traditional view of sex/gender/gender roles is just a pervert who wants to sexually assault anything that moves"

They actually took ownership of this position in a recent study.

Accusations of 'grooming' are the latest political attack — with homophobic origins

This NPR article provides 3 examples of the "grooming" slur.

Notice that it doesn't actually mention any specific kind of groomers in the examples.

And....

New Study Finds LGBTQ+ Hate Increased Online After FL’s “Don’t Say Gay” Bill

Again, the study itself says the term "groomer" refers to a homosexual who tries to sexualize children.

The bill itself clearly prevents anyone of any sexuality from sexualizing schoolchildren.

The crowd on the left that is trying to own this term should own it. We can always slide to "child predator" if social media wants to protect groomers.
 
Upvote 0

Zoii

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2016
5,754
3,953
22
Australia
✟88,855.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel using Breibart as your "news" source. Well known for conducting conspiracy theories and far-right nonsense. This is a very low standard for a Christian site to post as so-called news.

From Wikipedia
Breitbart News Network (known commonly as Breitbart News, Breitbart, or Breitbart.com) is an American far-right[5] syndicated news, opinion and commentary[6][7] website founded in mid-2007 by American conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart, who conceived it as "the Huffington Post of the right".[4][8][9] Its journalists are widely considered to be ideologically driven, and much of its content has been called misogynistic, xenophobic, and racist by critics, including liberals and traditional conservatives.[10][11] The site has published a number of conspiracy theories[12][13] and intentionally misleading stories.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Landon Caeli
Upvote 0

Landon Caeli

Patience is a Virtue
Staff member
Red Team - Moderator
Supporter
Jan 8, 2016
13,096
5,048
45
OC california
✟360,341.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Fortunately I have a solution. Support me as dictator for life and there won't even be a political spectrum.

Take that fringe elements.

That would be like totally radical, dude.
 
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
5,143
5,576
PA
✟242,269.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
When they insist that the word refers to them uniquely (when it really doesn't refer to them uniquely), they're owning it.
You do realize that this is classic dogwhistle justification, right? The fact is that "grooming" is being used almost exclusively by right-wing media and proponents of these bills to refer to any discussion of homosexuality or transsexuality. The dictionary definition of the term and the actual language of the bill are irrelevant.

ETA: I would suggest reading the actual study, not just articles about it. The authors make it clear that they were specifically looking at instances where the words "groomer" or "pedophile" were used in conjunction with discussions about the LGBTQ+ community, not all uses of the words.

CCDH-HRC-Digital-Hate-Report-2022-single-pages.pdf (counterhate.com)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.