all 16 comments

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 13 insightful - 7 fun13 insightful - 6 fun14 insightful - 7 fun -  (1 child)

They never cared because its always been about hating trans people and controlling cis people.

They seek to control 95% of the population.

Yeah, the CIA did this with the feminist movement, they sadly succeeded in dividing and conquering by splitting half from the political struggle. The same thing here, divide and conquer.

The CIA is behind the LGBA.

they can get away with it easier if they focus on the T and by having a handful of LGB collaborators as figureheads.

The Alliance has LGB collaborators to help persecute the trans.

Stuff such as protecting lesbians and women's rights is just a smoke screen to assist the attack on trans people.

No comment

The LGB Alliance is made up of something like 93% cishet people. It's all homophobes and transphobes. Literally just a fucking government-supported hate group.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[–]ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Wow, if we ever needed any evidence that these mentally ill sociopaths are the enemy and we're in a fight to the death, there it is in black and white.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They also seem to always leave bisexual trans people out of it all too.

Pot: meet kettle. Cuz when do the trans-crowd themselves ever mention bisexuals? Other than when trying to use us as part of their homophobic smear tactics (like, say, here), NEVER.

Yeah, the CIA did this with the feminist movement, they sadly succeeded in dividing and conquering by splitting half from the political struggle. The same thing here, divide and conquer.

Guess you'd know all about that, what with your attempts to turn the B against the LG, huh?

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That top comment's homophobia is the unintentional answer to the OOP's rhetorical question. Amazing.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I can only comment on my memories as a child but I did not know I was gay or same sex attracted until much later. Before puberty I used to imagine myself "growing up" into heterosexual relationships.

The oldest memory I have of SOME same sex attraction is being at summer camp and there was a changing room for swimming in the lake. I was young but an older boy was in there getting changed. I didn't realize what it was but I became really infatuated with his form. As a kid i understood this to mean I wanted my body to look like his.

The post you are linking to is acting like babies are born being sexually attracted to people... Like no you need to develop most likely after puberty starts.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

How do same-sex attracted children work? That seems dodgy.

They sound like a clueless and even kinda conspiratorial straight person to me, who views same-sex attraction as some paraphilia caused by childhood trauma or something- hence the "dodgy" comment. Surprise- embracing the trans identity didn't make them more understanding of "queerness" or whatnot. They just increased their social clout but stayed just as ignorant and closeminded as your average homophobe who at least doesn't pretend to be so open-minded and enlightened.

In reality, same-sex attraction is as you have experienced yourself. Developing at very similar times in life to opposite-sex attraction with parallel movements and emotions, but still subject to irrational fear and stigma from society as if it was simply a product of corrupt socialization.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I, myself didn't really fear homosexuality as a child in such a way to drive me away from it. It was more like I had a default expectation that I would be "normal" and didn't comprehend that i wasn't until much later. The social default was straight male grow up have 2.5 children etc... I grew up in the 80s so internet technically existed but no one had it. The first time I had internet in my house was by having my computer dial into my high school and it was text based. So to be gay I had to migrate through to the other side of even comprehending what sexuality was.

This is why transgenderism is so absolutely different. They only exist by taking on a social stereotype of something they know exist. Gays can live in a 100% hetero society and then still come out with the same conclusion. Like if you put a gay person into a hypothetical society where only straight people existed they would still realize they were gay in some aspect. If you were to take a transgender person and have them grow up in a hypothetical society where only 1 sex exists, there is absolutely no chance they spontaneously start thinking they are an opposite sex.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't recall having any sexual feelings as a child, but I remember being smitten with certain female characters in shows or other media in a way that I just wasn't with boys. I would just watch those shows and play those video games over and over without knowing why, lol. All I knew was that I liked to look at them (certain girls/women). edit: I'm trying to put words to this... but it was a very un-thinking experience. They made me happy. It was simple.

There were certain male characters I idolized but it felt different; I want to be them, and wished I could get the same kind of adoring attention from girls that they seemed to get.

(Those may seem like obvious signs of same-sex attraction in retrospect, lol, but my (then-nonsexual) same-sex attraction was absolutely not obvious to me when I was a child.)

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There was so much garbage salad there I don't know where to begin and had to stop reading before I got to the end, but for those not on Twitter or anywhere else a certain group of TRA talking points get repeated, some context: There were some routinely-spewed defamatory, twisted falsehoods about LGBA floating around in those convos, which they take as gospel, because it feeds their desperate need to invalidate our existence. They intentionally twist things so that they mean basically nothing or the opposite. Surprise! Who knew they would do such things.

As for how same-sex attracted children work, I dunno, let's ask me and the crushes I had on female teachers or classmates starting around age four. Not a super tough concept, there.

Someone for sure would have tried to stuff me into the tomboy-to-trans pipeline now.

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

They get rid of the T, the B is next and soon it will be L vs G and then what do you know the SC’s have won (straight cis)

Won what? Enough of the forced teaming.

No one on that thread has any idea what the LGB Alliance is about.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

With their rhetoric they seem to expect each sexuality to perish on its own. But every one still be around and kicking at some level, even if no one acknowledges their existence. I guess the same can't be said for gender identity(which just goes poof when not constantly validated), which kinda explains the desperation to stick together I'm seeing.

[–]HelloMomo 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Same-sex attracted children aren't exactly a thing. We talk about proto-gay kids, or kids who will grow up to be gay, but we don't talk about kids being clearly, definitively gay yet.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Predisposed to" is a term that could be used to describe a natural inclination towards a particular sexuality.

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

Same-sex attracted children aren't exactly a thing.

Yes, and no. If it's born-this-way, then the outcome was fixed, long ago. The desire may not quite be apparent until later, of course. Counter-example, are opposite-sex attracted children a thing? That's a more neutral way to put it, no? You talk about a clear, dividing line, and for the sake of propriety, we all know what that is. Yet, can children not have a fondness for a particular sex, for a peer? Romantic love, of sorts? In Canada, and the USA, this is a rather absurd idea, but other cultures seem to have taken notice of it.

But, if we consider fixedness at an early age, then it opens us up to rather hitherto, unexamined, and undesirable concepts. The idea that adult sexuality is fixed in childhood removes the concept of volition, and thus we cannot disparage those who have objectionable desires.

[–]automoderatorHuman-Exclusionary Radical Overlord[M] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

RIP Snappy, I AM THE NEW GOD!

Click below to view and/or archive snapshots:

If this comment is being added for sites which cannot be usefully archived - for example, video hosts or an existing archive site - please let the Moderators know by sending ModMail. REPLIES TO THIS COMMENT ARE NOT SEEN BY MODS

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this sub if you have any questions or concerns.

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