Virtue SignalingHow do we secede from this "nation"?

submitted by ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah from (lgbtqnation.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]reluctant_commenter 19 insightful - 1 fun19 insightful - 0 fun20 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Will repeat it until I'm blue in the face... I'm not a part of any LGBTQ community or communities. LGBTQ organizations don't represent me, and broadly speaking, they are doing a worse-than-terrible job of addressing discrimination faced by LGB people. People I talk to IRL would get pissed off if I told them this, but the TQ+ movement is becoming so extreme that I'm starting to feel like I have to be more vocal about holding this opinion, or else I'd be going against my own values and beliefs.

Also-- I was gonna make a post about this court case, I saw someone tried to a few days ago but it got removed. I actually think this is a really relevant court case for LGB rights in the US! Aside from the fact that "LGBTQ Nation" wrote this article.

Note that the angle the plaintiffs are taking is based on religious belief:

Several of the plaintiffs said that being in custody with trans women violates their religious beliefs.

In the US, at least, I think that we might have to take this approach, too, when defending LGB rights and issues. Ultimately, gender identity theory functions like a religion, and it's a religion that hates and tries to deny the existence of same-sex attraction. And LGB people are all same-sex-attracted. I think these sorts of cases may end up playing out in a surprisingly similar pattern to the debates with Christians over the "morality" of being gay.

[–][deleted] 19 insightful - 1 fun19 insightful - 0 fun20 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Note that the angle the plaintiffs are taking is based on religious belief:

Several of the plaintiffs said that being in custody with trans women violates their religious beliefs.

In California, that's probably about the only angle anyone can take now. Gender Identity is a legally protected class in the state, but it can't supersede federal law.

Something I note in the article is this:

Woman II Woman’s founder Amie Ichikawa has said that she supports the safety of trans women in prison. However, she also claims that SB 132 allows “sexual predators to slip in under the umbrella of transgender identity.” Her claims echo right-wing depictions of trans women as sexual predators.

She literally said "sexual predators will lie and pretend to be trans". And this garbage rag journalist claims "she's saying trans people are predators".

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's the same rhetoric they always use. Can't say lesbians have been pressured into relationships with trans women because people will begin to wonder if transgender women pose a threat to lesbians. Which is bad for the movement and the movement is an absolute good. Can't talk about detransitioners because people will be concerned that there's actually a problem with the process of transitioning and the clinics in America. Which is bad for the movement and the movement is an absolute good. Any critical discussion can be met with "That's what those crazy right wingers are saying too. And you don't want to be like those dusty, evil old men, do you? They opposed gay marriage after all." If this doesn't shut you up, congratulations, you've crossed the line and you're now a bigot. At which point, any meaningful discussion you try to have will get labelled as anti-trans in advance. These are not the tactics of any human rights group.

[–]Femaleisnthateful 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What does the stupid author of this article think many of these 'transwomen' are imprisoned for?

[–]fuck_reddit 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I very strongly agree. My bf and I have had sad conversations about how we need to polish up our old pro-marriage arguments…