Be precise in your terms
Forced teaming creates yet another mess.
Humanists UK can’t explain.
There is no such thing as “LGBT”.
L stands for lesbians. These are women who are sexually attracted to other women. That is not a mental illness and only certain religious extremists make that absurd and offensive argument.
G stands for gay men. These are men who are sexually attracted to other men. That is not a mental illness and only certain religious extremists make that absurd and offensive argument.
B stands for bisexuals. These are people who are attracted to both men and women. That is not a mental illness and only certain religious extremists make that absurd and offensive argument.
T stands for trans. According to Stonewall’s glossary, this is a very large collection of different kinds of people including transgender, transsexual, genderqueer (GQ), genderfluid, non-binary, gender-variant, genderless, agender, nongender, third gender, bigender, trans man, trans woman, trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois. Until last summer it also included cross-dressers. The definition is a bit fluid…
Some of these people believe they are the opposite sex. That is a denial of reality. Some of them (neutrois) want to have their genitals removed entirely to have a smooth exterior. It is perfectly valid to suggest that some of these people suffer from mental illness. In fact, denying it is quite cruel, since it may deter them from seeking help.
Your thoughtless statements are adding to the existing stigma attached to mental illness. They are ignorant and profoundly unhelpful.
And not all that humanistish.
LGBT might be the set of people who are L or G or B or T. At least one, not all.
NPR just had a story about Anita
Hill’sBryant’s recent death. Every time a reference to her opposition to gay rights came up, the announcer said “LGBT community.” Every time.After the pie-in-the-face incident many years ago, I realized I could never hate her. “At least it’s a fruit pie,” she said.
Colin – well I know that but L and G and B are not the same as T, so it’s bad and wrong to lump them together. It makes as much sense as talking about women and men and carrots as if they’re a set.
Mike – jeezus you scared me for a second. Bryant.
LOL sorry!
The “enlightened”, “progressive”, morally superior view is that same sex-attraction (as opposed to same “gender” attraction), especially when a lesbian woman is not interested in “lady-cock”, is hateful, bigoted, and comparable to Apartheid.
I agree that there’s no such animal as an LGBTQI+ person. It doesn’t even make sense to call anyone a member of the alphabet community, because it doesn’t exist either. The rights which people who are L, G, and B have asked for are/were all rights which heterosexual people have, and are/were denied them.
People with differences of sexual development are only asking not to be included in the soup.
People who include themselves in the soup under the TQ+ designation, and who generally refuse to give a precise definition of whatever it is they are claiming to be (the + is widely assumed to apply to would-be or actual child rapists), already have the same rights as everyone else. They’re demanding special privileges, so that social conventions and laws against bad behaviour don’t apply to them.
And how do we get from this condemnation of chemical castration of a gay man all the way over to approval of chemical castration for gay boys?
The “conversion therapy ban” these so-called Humanists support would call for jail for anybody trying to talk a boy out of chemically castrating himself. It makes juvenile trans identification a one-way street.
They are simultaneously bemoaning the fate of Turing in the bad old days and calling to extend it to ten times as many lads today.
But paradoxes are so profound and the people who believe in them are the smarterest people of all, dontchaknow!
Francis Boyle, I believe in jumbo shrimp. Is that enough to put me in the group? Or do oxymorons not count?