Serious LGBT Discussion

[Toucan]

I used to have a neutral/positive view of LGBT people when I was younger, but it's been a few years that I'm getting very negative about them. The time I spend online doesn't help, since many degenerates gather in the same safe places where thinking slightly differently makes you the enemy.

I dont understand this viewpoint. I see it amongst conservatives. A sort of shake of the head and deep sigh where they say "Oh if only you gays could be more civilised I might have supported you but since I see you holding hands in the street or marching in a parade I just cant bring myself to do it anymore"

Why should your support of an issue be based on the lifestyles of a subsection of individuals pertaining to that matter?
I am for universal healthcare for instance, despite the fact that it is very likely that a lot of people who I do not like and disagree with politically would benefit from such a policy, I do not then say that I am against it.

If you support LGBT rights then support it on its own terms and not because you saw some things at the gay pride parade that triggered you.

 

[Григорий Распутин]

This is very true. And this is also the reason why I have always supported and will always support LGBT rights, even if I'm hostile towards the most vocal and active ones who turn the LGBT community into a big bad joke which in turn badly harms LGBT people and their rights.

I suppose I very badly expressed myself there.

My issue does not reside in the mere fact of being homosexual, bisexual or transsexual, my only issue is the people who represent the community. They are so loud and active, first online, then they grow up and take their actions out in the real world and try to impose their delusional views to other people.

While it's getting harder for my narrow-minded brain to do so, I still try not to only see the few rotten fruits. No matter how much those degenerates might irritate me, I still know that there are also many LGBT people who are completely reasonable and worthy of having their rights being supported. Even if they've been silenced and pushed aside, I put effort into not forgetting that they're still there and need support.

I guess my issue is really about the LGBT community, how and by who it's represented and LGBT extreme activists, not LGBT people as a whole. Many of them do not desire to be associated with the community anymore due to its extremism anyway, which shows that there's a real concern.

 

[Wallace]

I dont understand this viewpoint. I see it amongst conservatives. A sort of shake of the head and deep sigh where they say "Oh if only you gays could be more civilised I might have supported you but since I see you holding hands in the street or marching in a parade I just cant bring myself to do it anymore"

Why should your support of an issue be based on the lifestyles of a subsection of individuals pertaining to that matter?
I am for universal healthcare for instance, despite the fact that it is very likely that a lot of people who I do not like and disagree with politically would benefit from such a policy, I do not then say that I am against it.

If you support LGBT rights then support it on its own terms and not because you saw some things at the gay pride parade that triggered you.

Because "LGBT rights" means different things to different people. Does it mean that two gay men have the right to marry each other, or does it mean that troons have a right to groom children? You say "support it on its own terms", but everyone has a different definition of just what those terms are. The shifting and nebulous definition of the term is very good for enabling a motte-and-bailey type of argument.

There are a lot of words in the Internet/SocJus lexicon that have double meanings or are regularly used as weasel words in this way. These words are also often used as cultural shibboleths by certain groups in the culture war. When someone on another group sees them, they interpret them as codespeak for something else. Confirmation bias kicks in, and suddenly it is very easy to read hidden agendas and intentions in other people’s statements. The first party then switches back to the motte definition of their words—the perfectly reasonable and unobjectionable definition—and gets indignant that someone is trying to put words into their mouth. A massive Internet Argument ensues.

 

[Toucan]

Because "LGBT rights" means different things to different people. Does it mean that two gay men have the right to marry each other, or does it mean that troons have a right to groom children?

LGBT rights has a very mainstream definition that most people, if you were to ask them, would tell you involve letting people marry others of the same gender, allowing trans people to recieve gender confirmation surgery and legally change their gender and, depending on the country, removing laws that discriminate on the basis of sexuality or gender identity in terms of employment or access to civil services. This is the mainstream, Only amongst right wing semi-brains does the notion of LGBT rights involve pedophilia. Dont pretend there is contention on this issue.

There are a lot of words in the Internet/SocJus lexicon that have double meanings or are regularly used as weasel words in this way. These words are also often used as cultural shibboleths by certain groups in the culture war. When someone on another group sees them, they interpret them as codespeak for something else. Confirmation bias kicks in, and suddenly it is very easy to read hidden agendas and intentions in other people’s statements. The first party then switches back to the motte definition of their words—the perfectly reasonable and unobjectionable definition—and gets indignant that someone is trying to put words into their mouth. A massive Internet Argument ensues.

I know.

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

Where does that come from? I thought it was a mere matter of being accepted and ”validated” in a community with people like them, or building a (very shallow) personality on their sexual and gender identity when they had nothing else for themselves, but now that they're older than twenty years old and have developed other interests and personality traits, why do they stay neck-deep into that?

LGBT people who are not obsessed over identity politics seem rarer and rarer to come across. I've read that even they get called homophobic/transphobic despite being gay/bi/trans themselves. I guess many of them prefer to be quiet over their part of themselves and would rather be seen as cis and straight people ignorant about LGBT issues. I may be in this situation myself. It seems being uninterested in sex and love is enough to be considered LGBT (the so-called ”aro-ace” identity). I don't agree with that, but I let people tell me I'm LGBT just for that reason now: they get quite offended that you don't consider ”aro-ace” people inherently LGBT, and apparently you're not allowed to decide for yourself if you're part of LGBT or not.

Speaking for myself here, a gay man who has lived with the same man for many years now.

"LGBT" once was a calling card for a group of people who did just want to be left the fuck alone by the religious child fucking loons controlling or influencing many a Western society; and the campaign for the right to be left alone led to the establishment of many support systems, business and political offices. The campaign for gay marriage over the decades as well became a miniature cottage industry in itself.

Ask yourself this. When the market has gone, that is nobody is "buying" equality because they already have enough of it, what happens to the means of production?

They make something else.

Almost all LGBT organizations in any country that accepted marriage equality and the right for troons not to be fired for being troons immediately became obsolete. Gaybars across Europe likewise are going out of business because gays no longer congregate in private places, they attend normie mainstream places more often than not.

People are being sold a product. An ideal of something new, something vogue, cutting edge and something "progressive"; something no young westerner has ever been able to resist the siren call of.

Many organizations like Stonewall have vast resources built up over the years, and would like to hold onto them by remaining relevant. Where LGBT once meant freedom from religious/cultural demands, it is now a political party in itself with its own agenda, economy and means of propagation.

Despite very much enjoying being fucked up the ass, I would never join an LGBT society, I would never attend a pride event and most of the homosexuals I know are likewise quiet about it now. Not because we stopped being gay, but because being gay means something else now the same way it stopped meaning being happy. It now usually means you're a globalist, a communist, a misogynist and increasingly a black supremacist.

When you stop thinking about woke labels like gender in terms of sexuality and set them next to the vocabulary of yore they make much more sense; Comerade, Citizen, Brother. This is the lingo of a group bound together by ideology; it just happens to be where traditional communism or say Islam uses language to define the individual by the collective the language is used to give the individual a sense of specialness despite being identical to the collective.

LGBT is no more or less remarkable than your universities supper society for whatever your center right party; they're just especially vulgar.

 

[Penrowe]

"Oh if only you gays could be more civilised I might have supported you but since I see you holding hands in the street or marching in a parade I just cant bring myself to do it anymore"

This is incredibly dishonest of you and I don't know who you're trying to fool with this bullshit but what makes conservatives shake their head is when for example a choir of faggots sing about how they're coming for the children and among them are multiple child molesters.

It's not a cutesy joke any longer when you promote and defend child rape. You're like the catholic church but without the cool architecture.

 

[Toucan]

This is incredibly dishonest of you and I don't know who you're trying to fool with this bullshit but what makes conservatives shake their head is when for example a choir of faggots sing about how they're coming for the children and among them are multiple child molesters.

It's not a cutesy joke any longer when you promote and defend child rape. You're like the catholic church but without the cool architecture.

This isnt dishonesty. Its the perspective of someone who hasnt spent the past five years exclusively online. Moral panic over pedophilia in the LGBT community is just that.

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

This isnt dishonesty. Its the perspective of someone who hasnt spent the past five years exclusively online. Moral panic over pedophilia in the LGBT community is just that.

There is a problem with pedophillia in the LGBT scene.

I suppose it might be more correct to say there is a problem on two fronts. That casual relationships between or older individuals with newly or barely legal teenagers is encouraged. Sex, irrespective of gender, is serious business regardless of capacity to bear child or not and absolutely not be encouraged as purely recreational as it currently is.

Then there is the pedophilic side in the truest sense of the word with individuals who are legal trying to look even younger (and don't say there isn't, there's multiple big porn studios that this is their bread and butter) as well as pushing for ever increasing talk about fetishes and all these alternative gender theories with ever increasingly young children.

Normies are very aware of this problem too, they're usually too scared to talk about it in case the PC brigade pounces on them. They're also, unsurprisingly, scared to talk about these things with gay men and women because they can't readily tell who just wants to bone a dude, and who is a communist who thinks everything is rape.

 

[Toucan]

regardless of capacity to bear child or not and absolutely not be encouraged as purely recreational as it currently is.

Sure thing, grandma

Then there is the pedophilic side in the truest sense of the word with individuals who are legal trying to look even younger (and don't say there isn't, there's multiple big porn studios that this is their bread and butter) as well as pushing for ever increasing talk about fetishes and all these alternative gender theories with ever increasingly young children.

Moral fucking panic.
Quantify this for me. Because all I am hearing is "They" with a capital T. I have heard this accusation leveled against the LGBT community my whole life by conservatives and the argument never changes and yet nothing ever comes of it. There is no overarhing enclave of pedophiles hiding amongst the LGBT community and there never has been. This is paranoid right wing propaganda that has been recycled for decades now.

Normies are very aware of this problem too, they're usually too scared to talk about it in case the PC brigade pounces on them. They're also, unsurprisingly, scared to talk about these things with gay men and women because they can't readily tell who just wants to bone a dude, and who is a communist who thinks everything is rape.

When was the last time you left the house and interacted with normal people?
Playing the gay card hardly ever works in the real world outside of perhaps some select hyper gentrified areas. I have never known a normie to be afraid of calling out pedophillia either.

 

[Penrowe]

This isnt dishonesty. Its the perspective of someone who hasnt spent the past five years exclusively online. Moral panic over pedophilia in the LGBT community is just that.

"If only those dang dirty conservatards hadn't been paying attention I would've gotten away with it."

There comes a point where you can't handwave everything as moral panic.

 

[Toucan]

There comes a point where you can't handwave everything as moral panic.

Im sure I will never convince you that you have all just lapped up right wing propaganda from decades ago. But hopefully you will come to doubt your conviction.

 

[polonium]

"If only those dang dirty conservatards hadn't been paying attention I would've gotten away with it."

There comes a point where you can't handwave everything as moral panic.

This would carry a lot more weight if not for the fact that both the catholic and protestant churches are filled to the rafters with kiddy-fiddlers, to the point that it's a meme.

 

[Penrowe]

This would carry a lot more weight if not for the fact that both the catholic and protestant churches are filled to the rafters with kiddy-fiddlers, to the point that it's a meme.

Are you fucking blind m8?

 

[Toucan]

Are you fucking blind m8?

Maybe it would be easier if you could quantify for us what proportion of the LGBT community is supposedly composed of pedophiles? As in name names. Give percentages. Something tangible other than indignant disbelief.

 

[polonium]

Are you fucking blind m8?

No more than you are, apparently.

There are homosexual pedophiles, and there are pedophiles in other demographic groups. I don't know why you'd expect me to be accepting of you using the existence of pedo homos to tarnish mine and every other gay male's reputation by proxy when you won't apply the same standard to yourself.

 

[Penrowe]

No more than you are, apparently.

There are homosexual pedophiles, and there are pedophiles in other demographic groups. I don't know why you'd expect me to be accepting of you using the existence of pedo homos to tarnish mine and every other gay male's reputation by proxy when you won't apply the same standard to yourself.

I have no idea what manner of retard faggot you may be or what your delusions of me are but I specifically made fun of the catholic church just a few posts above.

 

[Toucan]

I have no idea what manner of retard faggot you may be or what your delusions of me are but I specifically made fun of the catholic church just a few posts above.

If the gays must take responsibility for the supposed legions of pedos in their ranks then surely the straights, who by being a much larger proportion of society with a corrospondingly larger number of pedos amongst them, must also take responsibility. When will you denounce the Vile heteros and their pedo agenda? What kind of hypocrite are you?

 

[What the shit]

The LGB part is fine with me, anything after that is where I draw the line and call retarded.

 

[polonium]

I have no idea what manner of retard faggot you may be or what your delusions of me are but I specifically made fun of the catholic church just a few posts above.

I might be retarded, but at least I'm not utilising the same faulty reasoning that hysterical feminists use to accuse all men of rape.

Make me a sandwich, bitch.

 

[Puerto Pollo]

The LGB part is fine with me, anything after that is where I draw the line and call retarded.

We went from GLBT, when gay men pretty much 99.9% of the dirty job, to LGBT because lesbians were getting triggered by males being first, and now it's all about T and QIAA2+BBQ so fuck everyone who isn't a gay male (no fems, no fats, no asians, no pajeets). Bisexuals and curious straight males will be idolized yet shot on sight the minute they're spotted talking to women.