DiscussionAm I the only one that can't support any straight guy who's against transgenders? What's your personal opinion?

submitted by CancelPowerSuper Bi Male from self.LGBDropTheT

I don't know if I'm the only one but I just discovered that I can't really "trust" or support any of these forums, spaces that are full of straight guys who are against transgenderism. They are just most likely to be homophobic because, in their minds, LGBT = LGB and they are all the same "degenerate shit"

I have no problem with spaces full of straight women because a straight woman who speaks against transgenders is most likely gonna support gay rights too but I just really don't feel "safe" supporting ANY straight guy speaking up against transgenders. This is partly why I'm here, it's because most of us are LGB so when I see somebody criticize transgenderism at least I would be 100% sure and confident that person isn't secretly a homophobic piece of shit who's using transgenders as some kind of a dog whistle or scapegoat behind his real intentions. You get what I mean?

I don't know if I'm the only one who feels this way. Of course, this isn't some kind of an attack on straight guys, I just think that, unlike women, they don't see "nuance" in the situation. They don't see LGB and transgenders, they just see us all as LGBT and attack transgenders only because they are the easiest and most troublesome part of the movement as a way to take away all our rights.

all 20 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]reluctant_commenter 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I have no problem with spaces full of straight women because a straight woman who speaks against transgenders is most likely gonna support gay rights too

Uhhhh. You are very mistaken if you think that's always the case. Some straight women do support gay rights, yes, but some of them are homophobic just like the straight guys. If you're surprised by this, consider: Straight people are generally much more uncomfortable with LGB people of their own sex. That is, straight men are usually more uncomfortable with gay/bi men and straight women are usually more uncomfortable with lesbian/bi women. This has certainly been my experience as a lesbian woman! Most straight men don't give a flying fuck that I'm into women, but I've heard many straight women IRL say they were grossed out by female homosexuality.

I am happy that some straight men are willing to acknowledge how homophobic and sexist trans ideology is. For example, the SuperStraight movement was composed mostly of straight men, and they were generally very supportive of LGB people.

edit: Also, glad to see you're still around, I saw you said you were going to leave.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a good point. Most straight people are unfamiliar with us, and people don't trust things we're not familiar with. It's a survival mechanism. A homophobic straight man might see a gay man as a threat because he's afraid that the gay or bi man might try to come onto him or even rape him. A lesbian is never gonna rape a man.

[–]MyLongestJourney 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Some of them are homophobic,some others are not. Things is, by supporting TRA politics, you also give plenty of ammunition to actual homophobes. Drop the T and they are hapless.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

One of my goals in the foreseeable future to help end the conflation between gender identity stuff and matters of sexual orientation. I think this will neutralize a lot of the obstacles I'm seeing with LGB support nowadays, and heavily reduce paraphilic and sexual oppurtunism in the extended acronym of LGBTQAI2S+ as a whole.

I realize it's not complete solution, though. As many don't conflate the two, but still don't support LGB. The common denominator among them is unsurprisingly another kind of ideology. Good ol' Bible texts.

Which is a shame, because the particular example I'm drawing from is very intelligent, creative, and understanding in many other ways and even supported LGB apart from the T a while back, and yet over time their forays into religious dogma turned then away.

Admittedly, this person and many others seem to hugely benefit from the order and guidance that religions provide, but in order to get that benefit some feel that they need to take in the bad with the good as a whole, otherwise they are not being faithful to their religion.

There's something to be said for keeping religions "pure" or "original" and whatnot. I'd say keep them pure and just drop the whole thing instead. But since many people seem to need some religion in their lives to be happy and fulfilled, I'm okay with plain religious reform. Of course, an secular atheist would have next to no influence or say in this stuff anyway, so all this is moot.

Anyway, sorry for going off on a tangent.

Tldr; Agreed. Drop the T. And drop regressive religious dogma too.

[–]MyLongestJourney 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Regarding religion : I,as a 100% secular,agnostic scientist,has concluded that there is no way you will eliminate it. You know why? Because it offers comfort to the people,and that kind of false promises of hope that science would never do. And people need this, they need that hope and comfort that we the scientists can never offer them,because it is in direct opposition of our core principles.

But most people, can be reasoned with,most people can accept practices which do not harm themselves,their children and society in general.This is how, the original homosexual rights movement scored it's manor victories. "We know we are different than you,but we promise,if you give us the chance,we can be decent individuals and productive members of society".

So,do not call for religious reform. Call for reigning in the narcissistic monsters of queer critical theory.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My contention with religions are mainly scriptural. Because dogma is an obstacle to reason. It's mostly a pick and choose habit with scripture, but it would be difficult to consciously ignore what another member of one's religion correctly points out is stated in the respective holy text.

That's what I mean by religious reform. How literally should scripture be taken now? Which parts should be embraced and rejected? Because much of it is plain incompatible with social progress. People can compartmentalize contradicting beliefs up to a point, but eventually the cognitive dissonance between reason and dogma becomes too much; Something has to give. And frequently reason loses the Tug of War(especially during periods of emotional tumult when a source of said comfort is most needed). Preemptive religious reform can prevent this situation from occurring.

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

Regarding religion : I,as a 100% secular,agnostic scientist,has concluded that there is no way you will eliminate it. You know why? Because it offers comfort to the people,and that kind of false promises of hope that science would never do.

If you haven't heard of it already, there actually is some evidence that belief in a God/otherworldly power has a (partial) genetic basis. It's called the God gene.

Really takes all kinds of people to make the world go round!

[–]MyLongestJourney 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If you haven't heard of it already, there actually is some evidence that belief in a God/otherworldly power has a (partial) genetic basis. It's called the God gene.

Oh,I have heard about it,ages ago. But I did not bother to read any cited studies. So,I do not know if its verified or not.But really,who needs studies to accept that people need that special kind of comfort ?

Really takes all kinds of people to make the world go round!

Agreed. The trouble starts when religion (or any kind of ideology) tries to overtake science.

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

But really,who needs studies to accept that people need that special kind of comfort ?

Well, without any evidence, we all could just be making shit up, haha.

Agreed. The trouble starts when religion (or any kind of ideology) tries to overtake science.

Yup. And sadly, I think even science has been infiltrated massively by ideology. Watching the silencing of academics who are trying to study detransitioners is a prime example.

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

I think straight conservatives are more open than you think, but there is low tolerance for sexual promiscuity and of being a target of sexual objectification (yes I realize the potential for hypocrisy in that regard). I belong to a small forum of mostly straight male conservatives who are well aware of my sexual orientation. I am somewhat accepted although with some tokenism at times.

[–]ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I’m of the view that if you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas. Matt Walsh for example may share some of our views on transgenderism but he is not our ally and would happily recriminalise same sex relationships and turn the US into Gilead.

[–]xanditAGAB (Assigned Gay at Birth) 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

he's not our ally but he's fighting the same beast that we are, radfems are, parents are, normies are, etc... the beast being the gender woo. I think kellie jay keen has it right, but I understand that these groups aren't necessarily looking out for lgb so you have to be on your guard so too speak.

edit: just to clarify I'm not talking about sharing an organization or resources. I mean things like posie going on tucker, or even the woman who went to heritage foundation...

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's not an either or. Take people on a case by case basis, as you yourself would like to be taken by others. Grouping people can be useful, but it's merely a preliminary tool and is not a substitute for an individualized character assessment, that one can only really get from getting to know someone. Ironically, this take kinda lacks the aforementioned "nuance" in the situation by presuming all straight guys to be untrustworthy and all straight women to be trustworthy.

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

Completely agree, well said.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I know two straight men who support gay people and oppose transgenderism. My best friend and my dad. Some straight men don't see the nuances, but some of them do. Take it on a case by case basis.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

For the most part straight guys who are against gender ideology are conservatives, so they're usually also pretty homophobic and sexist. Which I don't think is particularly helpful since it just adds to political polarization.

I think it's largely because straight men aren't directly affected by it. There's no real effort to harass straight men into sleeping with trans women and there's no erosion of rights for straight men like what is happening to women. So the straight men who get involved tend to be those that are simply bigoted and that bigotry extends to LGB most of the time since they still think that most trans women are gay men. And I think that's what they're really objecting to, that they see trans people as gay rather than objecting to trans as it's own thing.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most of the homophobia I've experienced has come from straight women. So...

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

As a very general rule of thumb, I would agree with you, but it's certainly not a hard-and-fast rule, and there are plenty of counter-examples.

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

I wouldn't say I'm distrustful of them, but I know they won't be...sigh..."allies" to LGB people for the exact reason you mention. They have been trained to equate same sex attraction and trans as the 'same'. After all, it's LGBT isn't it?
The best we can do is just educate people on this shit. I made a Twat account when Elon started looming overhead just to push the buttons, and so far I've been temporarily suspended three times...all of them for raising awareness of LGB communities being separate of the TQ+ ones. I push back on the 'trans women of color started pride' bullshit, I point out that the ones creeping on kids are straight men masquerading as women and molesting little girls, and I point them to groups and links like LGBAlliance and the 'cotton ceiling' expose. I've gotten a few hits back, of people telling me they weren't aware we had a 'civil war' in the alphabet soup, but most people just shrug it aside...especially the zealot Christians with their "Homosexuality is a sin" spiel.

That's my biggest regret, that this insanity growing on the left has pushed me so far to the 'right' that I now find myself in conversations and threads with these types of people because our beliefs are more closely aligned than with neo-liberal ideology.

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

Yeah I also tend to be cautious.