Corporate Mór

3y

Why're you yelling you ugly b****

RASIE

3y

OP said "I remember when same s***marriage was passed. Now it just feels dangerous." Thats why i stuck with gay people. Im also gay and i dont speak on behalf on trans people

I didnt prove anything or say that lack of collective action means lack oppression. I said that if people actually felt like they were in legitimate danger (in contrast to exaggerating feelings online because thats what screen life breeds) then they would probably be doing a whole lot more than complaining online about it endlessly or staging pointless protests that get 20 minutes of media coverage and are instantly forgotten because everyone went home to complain more online

The rest of your post is concern posting that causes brainrot

Lystra

3y

its pretty obvious

convincing people especially men that its cool to be gay or change s***is never going to be easy

it goes against very old social and biological rules

eye contact

3y

very old social rules

The Greco Roman social model that the west prides itself on was saturated with homoerotic rhetoric

Men literally had s***with each other as a social norm because they devalued women that much

eye contact

3y

very old social rules

The Greco Roman social model that the west prides itself on was saturated with homoerotic rhetoric

Men literally had s***with each other as a social norm because they devalued women that much

Lystra

3y

this was pre christianity tho, most of modern western society is based on christianity and science, two things they didnt have

Lystra

3y

this was pre christianity tho, most of modern western society is based on christianity and science, two things they didnt have

slimreapercantrap

3y

word

are there like specific laws in mind or like bills to back type s***?

eye contact

3y

science

Science doesn’t refute the validity to Transexuality and homosexuality

Lystra

3y

my point wasnt that science refutes those things my point is that the philosophy and basis of our society and how we perceive reality is radically different from greco roman s***

eye contact

3y

You said it goes against very old biological rules

Which it doesn’t

Lystra

3y

well you cant be transexual without modern technology and homosexuality is extremely counterintuitive to the basic need of life which is reproduction

youre just trying to get me banned i see u

eye contact

3y

You said it goes against very old biological rules

Which it doesn’t

slimreapercantrap

3y

oh sorry ppl say d***head casually in philly

like how australians say c*** lol

eye contact

3y

So suddenly it’s reasonable for people who regularly violate every norm of biology to cite it as a reason that they need to oppose a social condition makes no sense

Lystra

3y

what u could say to support your argument is that biology has shown that s***determination is not binary, which is true. and i personally have no vendetta against either group im explaining why people are against it

Lystra

3y

im sorry im off a bean and i dont understand what youre trying to say

Glentothe

3y

Because the trans community has hijacked the movement and are- probably inadvertently, alienating people to the push for equality because of how over the top and in your face they are about their gender identity when us non-bigoted people couldn’t care less about their gender. This is just an observation as the community doesn’t reflect me, I’m all for people living how they want to live. A couple of my gay friends have said that they have observed trans groups trying to exclude LGB people from marches and parades as well which goes entirely against the movement which is about inclusion and equality. I think a lot of the trans lobby manifests itself as anger which is often misdirected.

krishna bound

3y

actual long post now

firstly, i don't think it's really fair to equate LGBT movements intrinsically to leftism. it's true of course that the two intersected many times historically (just as racial civil rights movements did on both ends too) , but there is no intrinsic connection between LGBT and any specific political movements (in the US or abroad), just allyship at times in terms of similar goals. For the purpose of this conversation though it makes more sense to limit the discussion to America as the modern understanding of LGBT movements is basically an Americanism more than anything else. In that sense, we ave to acknowledge there is just as much a history of right wing LGBT movements in the US as there is leftist ones. Much of the reason we now group LGBT groups with leftism is due to a false equivalence made in the post-WW2 era by the US government, where President Eisenhower & Senator McCarthy included gays in their umbrella of McCarthyism investigations. This of course had the result of pushing LGBT people into outer/alien spaces which of course were occupied by those also excluded - at the time i.e. Marxists, etc. ; however this was not still a direct connection as much as it was a means of communication. What is often not talked about at this time are movements such as the Gay Voter's League, which often campaigned for Republican Candidates (including Nixon!), the rise of Log Cabin Republicans (which successfully lobbied against many anti-gay measures in the US), and prior to that, of course, the movements of gay people who supported Fascism - that quote from Maxim Gorky exists for a reason, it was not just fabricated due to hating Nazis. Just as the succession of Dadism led to Fascism, the "rebuild all culture with new values" ideas was appealing to many disenfranchised LGBT at the time, especially abroad since it was not true that Marxism and LGBT rights were seen (internally or externally) as one and the same. While of course this was seen more in Europe, it did also exist in the US.

Of course, all the above is basically just historical window dressing. Of course LGBT people were historically targeted politically within the US and elsewhere in the same manner as political Leftists. The point is though that the threat there was visceral; fighting for what was not just a political ends but a deep cultural victory. For as much as LGBT people may come from different labels or walks of life, there is a reason the letters are (were) grouped together over time and it's because the original cultural battle was about, at its heart, the ability to hold differential cultural values and still co-exist alongside others; this is how it materializes in strains of all subcultural movements from Punk to Jon Waters' shock Cinema. This was a shared value between groups - whether they be transgender, gay, etc. Now, here is the issue; years pass, and this victory was essentially won. Or, well, it was was won insofar as the system accepted the asks of the people fighting it. Because, at the end of the day, what was the battle being fought in epistemological terms? We can talk about "acceptance" and "safety" because these are abstracts without clear political goals - they exist solely within the minds of the individual to be debated upon in a collective; they're the mirror side of conservative "preserve our culture" style goals. So politically, groups must find real battles to fight. These took the form of simply mirroring that of their external contemporaries; say, fighting for civil unions, fighting for gay marriage. So what happened, that with all those battles won, the tide broke? Did conservatives simply push back too hard? Did the government infiltrate the movement? There's a quote, the famous wave speech, from Fear & Loathing In Las Vegas about the 60s counterculture I feel is apt:

And that, I think, was the handle—that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn't need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting—on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave.…
So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark—that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.

The truth is that there is no simple answer such as movements being "hijacked". The fact is that time keeps moving and as such political goals lose material ends and became more abstract while also being further intertwined with the system it tried to fight. For all the talk of opposition and danger, the fact is - in some format - institutionally the fight was absorbed separate from the identities of those originally fighting it. No longer was it about fighting for the truth or righteousness of the identities, it was about winning economic & sociopolitical battles within the capitalist system. As thompson notes, the cultural battles we fight are no longer a simple youth vs old guard fight of good & evil anymore. The classical nature of these fights are reduced back to abstracts connected by a thread at best to their material political goals. There is no longer a real tether that holds groups within the connected sphere together anymore either; that momentum has been shifted as systematically collective material goals have been replaced with individual ones.

Someone else in the thread mentioned about how certain times felt "violent" during political turmoil, and I think that's a good term to use - not because this was a physical war in the sense of Stonewall all the way through, but rather because the victories fought by those battling them felt violent. The rulings for gay marriage and anti-discrimination suits, and laws that followed as such on a state and local level, and the very acceptance into the systematic social fabric were violent victories; not in the physical sense, but in their integral intensity. Now, however, you may see a pushback, but is that pushback really against these same victories in a meaningful material manner? Almost 75% of americans support gay marriage. Talk or discussion of anti-gay sentiment is just as individualist as talk of radical acceptance or liberation - it may as well be an argument over someone's favorite color that can turn violent in the same way as a bad discussion in a bar. The fight has shifted milestones and the talking points have changed because it is no longer being fought outside the system. Kurt Vonnegut said it best on Vietnam:

Every respectable artist in this country was against the war. It was like a laser beam. We were all aimed in the same direction. The power of this weapon turns out to be that of a custard pie dropped from a stepladder six feet high.