What does Queer bring to the table that wasn’t covered by Lesbian, gay or bi? I mean, even Lesbian isn't really needed. Why not just Gay and bisexual? Simplicity people. Come on.
What does Queer bring to the table that wasn’t covered by Lesbian, gay or bi? I mean, even Lesbian isn't really needed. Why not just Gay and bisexual? Simplicity people. Come on.
Also, the 'sexuality and gender are not related' drum has been well beaten, so why is the T in there?
This is a fucking mess. Out of the way Gok Wan, I'll sort this out.
LGBT etc will go to the wolves along with BAME quite soon. I don't know why all deviants have to band together.
Are we really having a go at people being inclusive of people who total less than 1% of the population over pedantry?Originally Posted by Spikey M
The reason why people use LGBTQ is because if you just talked about one of them people would give even less of a shit about their day to day issues than they already do.
It's on the gays really. Somebody should have stepped in and stopped the freaks turning up to pride parades in latex dog outfits, but they didn't, and now women have been abolished.
One of my first tasks at my job was livestreaming a press conference where a paikistani transgender woman frequented at a bar (not brothel) where 'deviants' as you say might hang out. They were rounded up by police, gangraped by police in prison and then had their head shaved.
There are a billion stories better, worse or somewhere inbetween across the planet. That's why they band together.
I'm not really into any of this stuff at all, but from my limited observations, a lot of Ls Gs and Bs seem to harbour quite a lot of mostly unspoken resentment towards Ts, and vice versa - I'm not sure why, really. Perhaps it's because Ls Gs and Bs feel that their still very shaky conversation with the mainstream has been drowned out by the very very loud T-related arguments, while Ts no doubt feel resentful that Ls Gs and Bs (mainly Ls and Gs) have been acknowledged by the mainstream in a way that they haven't been.
It's not a sustainable discourse because the two are very different things indeed. I guess the reason they are lumped together is that most straight people don't understand any of it so it's convenient to drape it all under the rainbow and trot out some platitudes a couple of times a year.
I can see that but in the west as it all inches very slowly (like an arctic glacier) towards the open, I'm pretty sure it will fragment.
I think judging the movement from that sort of birdseye view does make modern discourse seem very dumb but you and I grew up in a world where Eddie Izzard's sexuality was wild. That it's even happening at all in a mainstream contest is a massive progression. Chemical castration to bitching about him/her in 50 years is a great thing.
I forgot to mention that this is completely correct.
It's because one invalidates the other. If I throw some heels on and call myself Louise, but none of my fellow lesbians are interested in my balls, who is and isn't what they claim to be?
I guess, and I'm definitely a little bitter than I'm not even eight or ten years younger than I am.
Who cares what they claim to be or not be? is the better question in that scenario.
Jim, as someone who has to pretend I'm down with the kids. I'm not sure the TikTok generation would be your era.
A conventional lezzer wouldn't have to be into a woman with balls any more or less than they would have to be into a woman who likes Spandau Ballet, or competitive yachting, or Jarlsberg.
In which case their supposed sexual preference is actually just an aesthetic preference, and they're not actually lesbians, they just like long hair and small hands.
I’m in.
I'm a twit
No but those people weren't around in 1995 to have the belief very firmly put in one's head from a young age that being gay was not something that one wanted to be.
Liking girls =/= liking all girls
We've already done the inclusive thing by including 'other' as a gender option and mx as a title. Not that there isn't a long way to go, obviously. It's not pedantic to wonder why a gender is listed alongside sexualities if gender and sexuality are unrelated. Why don't we just chuck Vegans, the depressed and the disabled in there if we jut want to ring fence anyone that falls outside of Bamsters comfort bubble.
Last edited by Spikey M; 02-12-2020 at 07:56 AM.
That probably is it, but it's all the more reason to fight it. All LGBTQ+ does is give Laurence Fox a catch all term for anything he doesn't like. He must think Immigrants are in there somewhere.
This is straight out of a Dave Chappelle bit
At risk of adding too much tinder:
https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2...more-inclusive
I'm not reading any further. That title is a belter.
Well, I for one am shocked that the countryside is racist. It needs cancelling immediately.
You reek of white privelege. Look at her go, taking pictures of herself on a hill with hijab, she's basically MLK reincarnated.
They don't like girls. They merely have a 'type' like everybody else.
I still remember that fucking my head up and Henry being about ready to behead me. (Unless there's been a newer thread, that one was about 13 years ago.)
Amongst people from ethnic majority backgrounds, the main factors restricting use of the chicken shop included the cost of visiting … and problems linked to transport, a lack of knowledge of the urban environment and a lack of 'cultural habit' of visiting … There was a fear of discrimination, as well as different patterns of use and a lack of culturally appropriate provisions.
Sweet sweet vindication after all this time.
20 people winning is so bittersweet.
Dolls come in white and white only...
Kmart Australia has launched, ‘Baby Charlie with Down Syndrome’ dolls on their website.
The company reached out to Down Syndrome Australia to ensure the creation process was done respectfully.
Down Syndrome Australia is excited with the launch and says "We are pleased that Kmart has taken steps to widen the diversity in its toy range with a number of new fashion dolls and baby dolls with disabilities."
The new collection also features a doll in a wheelchair and another who is vision impaired.
FFS who is this for?
https://www.kmart.com.au/product/bab...sorted/3294801
I like the disability mix pack.
Only 6 bucks as well.
Imaging giving one of these dolls to a disabled child? I would feel like a bully.
Last edited by Queenslander; 03-12-2020 at 09:38 AM.
I suppose there must be kids out there that want dolls that resemble their younger siblings. Little girls in particular like emulating their mums, but this is the nichest niche that's ever niched.
Yeah fair enough Im such a cynical bastard.
Don't get me wrong, they'll sell about 12 and cynicism is the right response. It's a PR exercise. "How can we get the disabled coin?".
Im due to go to Kmart on Saturday so Ill prowl the girls doll isle to see if there is much action.
I'm not sure prowl is the best choice of words in that sentence.
No other way to put it.
"The Queensland Prowler was apprehended today. He was observed by Kmart security acting suspiciously down the Girls toy isle and was heard to be shouting "I only want the disabled ones" as he was forced into the back of the Police Car."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/horse-racing/55166943
Has there been a weaker excuse that was so readily accepted by a sports governing body? I say sport, it's only horse racing which doesn't really qualify.
Those dolls are like the "anti-racist baby" books. For the crowd that needs to show their allegiance in all circumstances.
It's a crying shame though cos if anyone cos going to "take horse racing to the next level" in terms of popularity it was sure as shit gonna be him.
I'm a twit
What does it matter if a jockey's taking coke anyway? It's not gonna make his horse run faster, is it?
No they have other drugs for that.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
