This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

all 28 comments

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 32 insightful - 2 fun32 insightful - 1 fun33 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

Because the agenda pushers have been trying to manipulate us into forgetting biological sex. In the beginning, things were simple and everyone agreed with your statement on the matter. Then everything changed when the nonbinary nation attacked.

First, they wanted to create a distinction between sex and gender. They claimed to acknowledge biological sex and its unchanging nature while merely expanding gender to mean a different thing that could have more meanings and categories.

Now, however, that they have gotten enough supporters of the several gender nonsense, they are backpedalling and trying to merge sex and gender back into one thing. This would mean that sex would take on the new definition assigned to gender and true biological sex would be erased from public memory.

Their goal is to eliminate fact, so first they prepared their fantasy in front of us and are now showing signs of forcing it on us and applying it outside the bounds they said they would follow. This happens quite a bit in politics and was a strategy used by Adolf Hitler. He would say that he only wanted to take over a small area, and the Allies would let him. Several small areas later, Germany had amassed a large area and was now a force that would not be easily toppled. This is what the TQIA++ has been doing, slowly moving the goalpost forward until now they are deep within our territory, and now will not as easily be defeated as if the gay and lesbian community had simply exiled them in the first place

[–]8bitgay 21 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 0 fun22 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I think that an unfortunate fact is that they use arguments that are reasonable at first. I mean, sex shouldn't dictate how you live your life. Just because you're born male it doesn't mean you should marry a woman or have to follow your society's stereotypes of how men should be like.

This might seem obvious to us, but to a lot of conservative people it isn't. I bet many of us here have heard stuff like "you are a man, so you have to [stereotype]", "you are a man, so you can't [stereotype]".

What they do though is extrapolate this point. It starts from "your sex shouldn't dictate your entire life" and becomes "your sex is completely irrelevant in all situations". So it can be hard to disagree with their points without it seeming like you agree with the conservative people who follow arbitrary sex-related stereotypes.

[–]VioletRemiCat, homosexual one 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I would frame it differently.

It is like in advertisements - with big letters there is big slogan or idea (like BUY STUFF FOR ONLY 1$!), then there is star mark * and after it with small font there is additional info (like "but only 5 items from list").

They are saying "You don't need to be manly stereotype if you was born as a man!" and then with small font "BUT you need to physically change your body or you looks to fit stereotype you want to live as, or create new branch of stereotypes to follow".

So it is not changing the society and not making life of GNC people easier, it is "if you GNC man, then become a woman!". Or something like "To solve homophobia - if you lesbian woman and like women, then become a straight man!". Which makes non-binaries, gender/queer and trans ideologies - inherently GNC-hating and homophobic.

[–]BiHorror 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

conservative people

At this point, with the amount of damage/bullshit both GC and TRA have done, I rather have conservatives telling me I need to be feminine.

[–]VioletRemiCat, homosexual one 9 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

I need to be feminine.

I read that "I need to be feline" :D

[–]reluctant_commenter 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Your cat urges are showing. 😆

[–]BiHorror 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lol, that would be fine too.

[–]les4leshomonormative 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

...catgender?

[–]VioletRemiCat, homosexual one 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Meow!

[–]8bitgay 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I dunno, frankly I find both quite bad. The difference is that I can talk about conservative homophobes on most "LGBT spaces" while talking about homophobia from the other side is a taboo.

If anything, one of the TQ+ issues is that they "forget" how much LGB are targeted by conservative homophobes, so that they can claim TQ+ is more oppressed.

[–]les4leshomonormative 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah, getting nostalgic for "old school" homophobia isn't productive. They're just as bad, they're just less annoying because they aren't infiltrating us

[–]8bitgay 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And because we're adults, I might add. It's easier to ignore conservative homophobia being an adult since I can often avoid being in conservative spaces or dealing with conservative people.

Still, I'm very much aware of this depending on which place of the city I'm walking. Some neighborhoods are far from gay friendly.

These two "sides" of homophobia help each other.

[–]les4leshomonormative 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

These two "sides" of homophobia help each other.

Exactly lol with all these freaks and narcissists being the face of the community now conservatives probably feel pretty vindicated in hating the rest of us

[–]BiHorror 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

First, they wanted to create a distinction between sex and gender

I don't like NB, but they weren't the ones who coined that... It was John Money who did that. Which then it was accepted by feminists and later queer/"gender" theorists (TRAs). Which then coined stuff like GNC which is then where NBs started popping up.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But even being GNC and not letting your gender be a determining factor in your life doesn't magically make everyone have their own gender. What they're doing is taking reasonable things, such as everyone expressing their gender and sexuality in a unique way, and taking it to the literal extreme and saying that everyone has a unique gender and sexuality. Two chocolate cakes can taste different, but they're still both chocolate and there's no need to treat them as entirely different flavors. It may be useful to make distinctions within chocolate, such as german chocolate cake, but that is no less a chocolate cake than any other.

They apply reasonable statements to things that they don't apply to, which makes it difficult to call them out because the statements aren't too far from the truth, it's just being used incorrectly.

[–]BiHorror 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, considering the topic of this overall post, this goes both ways. NBs shouldn't exist, neither should "GNC" shit. I'm not "GNC," I'm just a normal person who doesn't conform to sex stereotypes. I don't need a special label for that, especially one that bastardized the English language as much as TRAs did. Both of these terms removed the original definition of gender and come from queer theory. Shit, even if gender wasn't used for sex, it still was bastardized for some "muh feelings" or "muh rebellion to societial expectations."

[–]VioletRemiCat, homosexual one 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The word for gender or idea of gender and pronounses for non-binaries does not even exist in my language, and adding extra pronouns is just impossible, as it will require to remake whole language, as most words are gendered with one of three (feminine, masculine, non-alive) versions. So adding new one will need remake all those words, lol.

[–]Willpoll 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

As I remember the original meaning for gender referred to gendered language where the same word would be spelt differently depending on if you were speaking to a man or a woman. It wasn't till the 50's that gender as a synonym for sex started taking off. Now we have the current day convoluted meaning

[–]BiHorror 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's both honestly. Gendered language (for language usuage) then became used euphemism for sex. Dropped out of fashion... Then John Money and Queer Theory happened.

[–]BiHorror 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

2 sexes and "2 genders." If you wanna know more, just Google: John Money and Queer theory (this is where that GNC bullshit is coined from).

It's why I gotta laugh when GC whine about TRAs when they act the same way they do.

[–]reluctant_commenter 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's why I gotta laugh when GC whine about TRAs when they act the same way they do.

Do you mean how GC tends to use the term "gender" to mean sex roles / stereotypes, as opposed to using "gender" as a synonym for sex?

[–]BiHorror 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes. Both sides have equally bastardized the definition of gender. Therefore they BOTH deserve to judged/held accountable. Especially when it is both of their ideologies that stem from the very same sexologist. It would be hypocritical to complain about one and not the other.

The term "gender" fell out of fashion in the past... That's needed to be kept because it was perfect, and acting like normal people, use the terms: sex sex roles, sex stereotypes, etc. to explain things instead of pulling this extra victim shit. It does not help that normal people of society are starting to equate LGB to John Money because the faults of GC and TRAs. Homophobes are using it as ammo.

[–]reluctant_commenter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, to be frank, I don't see why it is useful to have "gender" as a shorthand for "sex stereotypes" when you can just say sex stereotypes. I say sex/gender to indicate that I consider them to be the same word. And, that is how much of academic writing uses them, though not all (some goes by the GC definition).

[–]materialrealityplz 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

How do GC act the same as TRAs...?

[–]BiHorror 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm referring to their complaining of how TRAs did the big dvil of changing definitions (ex: sexuality, gender to mean w/o TRAs define it as, woman/man, etc.) when they do it themselves with gender. One complains about the other, and vice versa, when it comes to changing definitions but they're literally the two sides of the same coin when it came to changing the definition of words for THEIR own benefit.

[–]materialrealityplz 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, 'gender' was basically like a euphemism for saying biological sex, then it got split by queer theory people in post-secondary education. By doing that, they could make it so males can actually be women. Somehow. It's fucked up, yup.

The way they use gender is basically like how people of a sex perform their bio/natal sex - like in the way they dress and their role in society, etc, while 'sex' just means what you were born as.

[–]ANIKAHirsch 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Before it was synonymous with sex, "gender" never used to refer to people at all. Originally, the term was only used to distinguish between masculine and feminine word declensions.

[–]divingrightintowork 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

IIRC There are two reproductive sexes.