Post Left Wing looniness here

FPWcIRSX0AsY0f-
 
A gay man calls for the de-radicalism of the trans-movement. Link. He makes some good points and parallels to the de-radicalism of the gay rights movement as making it politically viable. What I don't think he recognizes is that radical gender ideology is far more widespread and powerful than the radical gay ideology ever was. We didn't have big national politicians, all of academia, the media, and most of corporate America pitching the radical gay agenda. So though I understand the sentiment, I think it's wishful thinking.
 
Last edited:
Really? I thought the gay ideologues were pretty radical. The push for gay marriage was radical. They attacked anyone who wouldn't make them a cake.

There are many gays and trans that aren't pushing politics. They just want to live their lives. But the both groups have pushed prodded and forced American culture to a way more permissive position.
 
Monahorns said:
Really? I thought the gay ideologues were pretty radical. The push for gay marriage was radical. They attacked anyone who wouldn't make them a cake.

There are many gays and trans that aren't pushing politics. They just want to live their lives. But the both groups have pushed prodded and forced American culture to a way more permissive position.
Click to expand...

On substance, I mostly agree. However, there was a definite deradicalization of the tone. In the '80s and early '90s, gay activists walked around in leather freedom pouches and carried whips and chains. It just screamed, "we're effed up and proud of it." In the mid-'90s, there was a definite shift to a more conventional image and a libertarian focus of wanting to be left alone - dump the sodomy laws and allow marriage. There wasn't a lot of focus on schools, children, and screwing with people on an individual basis until later.

I think they're so high on winning the gay rights agenda that they don't feel the need to put their more reasonable foot forward on trans issues. Rather than saying, "hey let us guys who dress like chicks into the women's bathrooms, and we'll leave them alone,"it's "whip those dicks out in the girls' locker rooms all you want." I disagree with both, but the latter offends me much more. And of course, now there's total capture of most institutions with the most radical tones.
 
Do Democrats understand how deranged, screwed up, and frankly just plain gross this looks to normal people? And they wonder why the polls look so bad for them.

20220404_143453.jpg
 
Mr. Deez said:
On substance, I mostly agree. However, there was a definite deradicalization of the tone. In the '80s and early '90s, gay activists walked around in leather freedom pouches and carried whips and chains. It just screamed, "we're effed up and proud of it." In the mid-'90s, there was a definite shift to a more conventional image and a libertarian focus of wanting to be left alone - dump the sodomy laws and allow marriage. There wasn't a lot of focus on schools, children, and screwing with people on an individual basis until later.

I think they're so high on winning the gay rights agenda that they don't feel the need to put their more reasonable foot forward on trans issues. Rather than saying, "hey let us guys who dress like chicks into the women's bathrooms, and we'll leave them alone,"it's "whip those dicks out in the girls' locker rooms all you want." I disagree with both, but the latter offends me much more. And of course, now there's total capture of most institutions with the most radical tones.
Click to expand...
You are making the mistake of lumping gays and lesbians into the groups pushing the trans agenda.

There is a reason some of us have been pushing to "Get the L out" of the alphabet soup. Real lesbians, actual females, want nothing to do with the trans politics and, to a large degree, with anyone IN that demographic. It is NOT the same as the old butch-femme dynamic that existed when I was a kid coming of age...

There are far too many groups that once supported and, indeed, existed specifically for gays and lesbians that have, over the years, been co-opted by the trans contingent. We lost our bars to the men in dresses, we have been losing our sports leagues to the men in dresses, and now we see the men in dresses trying to claim that tomboys are just baby trans-men who need to be on blockers, eventually getting bilateral mastectomies and testosterone. Never mind that MANY of the kids we knew in my generation grew up to be straight...obviously some of us didn't and instead grew up to be phenomenal sports bettors.

I also believe there is a contingent that has managed to bring 4-chan to real life, pushing the boundaries and taking the outrageous into the mainstream and THEN having to invent something even MORE outrageous.

They are a very vocal minority. But they have the government convinced that they are the winners of the oppression Olympics and that anyone who might not be comfortable playing the stereotypical roles just needs better living through medicalization and a lifetime of drugs to make things better AND if you don't go that route, you will become a suicide statistic.

The gay males were largely silent because they haven't been the ones across the past few decades who were being bullied. However, they are NOW on the radar because, just as lesbians don't want a penis in their bed, neither do the gay males want a "front hole" in theirs. And if it is rejected, then somehow, there is a phobia involved.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Do Democrats understand how deranged, screwed up, and frankly just plain gross this looks to normal people? And they wonder why the polls look so bad for them.

20220404_143453.jpg
Click to expand...

It is sick. This is what I hope ANTI-LIBERALS will push in front of all Liberal candidates in televised debates so they can define it for us and tell us why their vision for our country is rational.
 
mb227 said:
You are making the mistake of lumping gays and lesbians into the groups pushing the trans agenda.

There is a reason some of us have been pushing to "Get the L out" of the alphabet soup. Real lesbians, actual females, want nothing to do with the trans politics and, to a large degree, with anyone IN that demographic. It is NOT the same as the old butch-femme dynamic that existed when I was a kid coming of age...

There are far too many groups that once supported and, indeed, existed specifically for gays and lesbians that have, over the years, been co-opted by the trans contingent. We lost our bars to the men in dresses, we have been losing our sports leagues to the men in dresses, and now we see the men in dresses trying to claim that tomboys are just baby trans-men who need to be on blockers, eventually getting bilateral mastectomies and testosterone. Never mind that MANY of the kids we knew in my generation grew up to be straight...obviously some of us didn't and instead grew up to be phenomenal sports bettors.

I also believe there is a contingent that has managed to bring 4-chan to real life, pushing the boundaries and taking the outrageous into the mainstream and THEN having to invent something even MORE outrageous.

They are a very vocal minority. But they have the government convinced that they are the winners of the oppression Olympics and that anyone who might not be comfortable playing the stereotypical roles just needs better living through medicalization and a lifetime of drugs to make things better AND if you don't go that route, you will become a suicide statistic.

The gay males were largely silent because they haven't been the ones across the past few decades who were being bullied. However, they are NOW on the radar because, just as lesbians don't want a penis in their bed, neither do the gay males want a "front hole" in theirs. And if it is rejected, then somehow, there is a phobia involved.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the context (as well as previous posts on the subject). I see trans as gender movement, and not related to gay. In this light, both straight and gay are apart from the gender movement. Gender ideology seems like a tortured attempt (pun included?) to claim the Uber level of victimhood. It’s the sexual cousin of critical race theory.
 
mb227 said:
You are making the mistake of lumping gays and lesbians into the groups pushing the trans agenda.

There is a reason some of us have been pushing to "Get the L out" of the alphabet soup. Real lesbians, actual females, want nothing to do with the trans politics and, to a large degree, with anyone IN that demographic. It is NOT the same as the old butch-femme dynamic that existed when I was a kid coming of age...

There are far too many groups that once supported and, indeed, existed specifically for gays and lesbians that have, over the years, been co-opted by the trans contingent. We lost our bars to the men in dresses, we have been losing our sports leagues to the men in dresses, and now we see the men in dresses trying to claim that tomboys are just baby trans-men who need to be on blockers, eventually getting bilateral mastectomies and testosterone. Never mind that MANY of the kids we knew in my generation grew up to be straight...obviously some of us didn't and instead grew up to be phenomenal sports bettors.

I also believe there is a contingent that has managed to bring 4-chan to real life, pushing the boundaries and taking the outrageous into the mainstream and THEN having to invent something even MORE outrageous.

They are a very vocal minority. But they have the government convinced that they are the winners of the oppression Olympics and that anyone who might not be comfortable playing the stereotypical roles just needs better living through medicalization and a lifetime of drugs to make things better AND if you don't go that route, you will become a suicide statistic.

The gay males were largely silent because they haven't been the ones across the past few decades who were being bullied. However, they are NOW on the radar because, just as lesbians don't want a penis in their bed, neither do the gay males want a "front hole" in theirs. And if it is rejected, then somehow, there is a phobia involved.
Click to expand...

I don't lump them together at all. I think they're very different groups with very different and often conflicting interests. In fact gender ideology is in stark conflict with most assumptions that were used to justify gay rights.

However, the political activist class that pushed gay rights overwhelmingly (but not exclusively) consisted of leftist activists, and they largely overlap with those activists pushing the trans agenda, because they never really cared about gays or lesbians or their interests. It wasn't about them. They simply coopted that constituency (and the much bigger gay-friendly straight constituency) to empower themselves (and rekindle the moral authority and imperative they claimed to have from the civil rights movement). They're doing the same with the trans agenda now. To them, people like you who see the inconsistencies and think for themselves are self-centered sellouts who need to be punished for their ingratitude to try to keep the broader gay and lesbian communities in line. You're like blacks who become conservatives.

And if they succeed, tomorrow they'll find some other constituency that's receptive to leftist empowerment and coopt them even if it screws trans people.
 
I saw a spot-on quote about women's sports. It was something like this, "The entire premise of women's sports is to create a opportunity for them to compete because they cannot defeat equally well-trained men due to the inherent physical differences."
 
bystander said:
I saw a spot-on quote about women's sports. It was something like this, "The entire premise of women's sports is to create a opportunity for them to compete because they cannot defeat equally well-trained men due to the inherent physical differences."
Click to expand...

Frankly, the very existence of women's sports would be an injustice if this weren't true.
 
Someone may have eluded to this already and it's not an original thought but the day will come that if you are not willing to have sex with any gender/whatever (excluding the usual monogamy relationship faithful ethics and you get a pass for at least wanting them to be attractive on some universal level) then you will be considered a homophobe/transphobe.

They will question your attraction hard-wiring and will want to "rehabilitate you" from your "assigned" base instincts.

Later they will want you to consider EVERYONE to be attractive regardless of their actual looks.

Soon we will be purely sexual beings looking to get some from the next carbon unit that walks up and so on and so on.
 
bystander said:
Someone may have eluded to this already and it's not an original thought but the day will come that if you are not willing to have sex with any gender/whatever (excluding the usual monogamy relationship faithful ethics and you get a pass for at least wanting them to be attractive on some universal level) then you will be considered a homophobe/transphobe.

They will question your attraction hard-wiring and will want to "rehabilitate you" from your "assigned" base instincts.

Later they will want you to consider EVERYONE to be attractive regardless of their actual looks.

Soon we will be purely sexual beings looking to get some from the next carbon unit that walks up and so on and so on.
Click to expand...
Sounds like prison...
 
bystander said:
Someone may have eluded to this already and it's not an original thought but the day will come that if you are not willing to have sex with any gender/whatever (excluding the usual monogamy relationship faithful ethics and you get a pass for at least wanting them to be attractive on some universal level) then you will be considered a homophobe/transphobe.

They will question your attraction hard-wiring and will want to "rehabilitate you" from your "assigned" base instincts.

Later they will want you to consider EVERYONE to be attractive regardless of their actual looks.

Soon we will be purely sexual beings looking to get some from the next carbon unit that walks up and so on and so on.
Click to expand...
Some people don’t want to work to make a life for themselves and some people don’t want to play the matching game. I get that, but to blame the players (bankers, young go-getters, the hip) for their failure is wrong. Victimhood all the way down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top