"Social Justice" Activists: All Binary in the supposed No Binary

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Kryties
It fascinates me why some people are so bothered by other people's gender or sexual preferences.

Why is that?

Because I could care less about those things.

So then you care at least a tiny bit?


I just couldn't resist...

originally posted by: c2oden
a reply to: Metallicus

"Keep that crap to yourself and play ball".
Words to live by.

Those who want special facilities and medical treatements on somebody else's dime, aren't keeping it to themselves.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: c2oden
a reply to: Metallicus

"Keep that crap to yourself and play ball".
Words to live by.

Those who want special facilities and medical treatements on somebody else's dime, aren't keeping it to themselves.

Whatever.
Not what I talking about.
Seriously, why say that when quoting me?

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: enlightenedservant
And on the flip side, those who want attention and special treatment for their "chosen gender" use it as a political tool to silence free speech and control how others are allowed to think.

Some sort of balance needs to be found.

I so agree with you..... each to their own. But There is a however.

Some times I see a person who is dressed as a woman but is built like a 'man'

and has strong features like a man, or a person slight built fine features and

dressed in a masculine fashion. I never know weather to address them as he

or she, and if you make a mistake they do get offended, even if you meant

no offence.


I really dont care about people choosing a gender different to their appearence

but give us a clue...... we are not mind readers.


I sometimes think some people look to being offended.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Oh, a political cartoon on dailykos? Is your response that destroys my assertion?

Ha! Get the # out of here and come back when you can have a discussion like an adult.

a reply to: watchitburn

Or what? You gonna keep acting tough on your keyboard? LOL

People like you think they want special treatment, yet you willingly ignore the way that the law, religious institutions, and social norms discriminate against them. Even the fake "support the troops" people right here gleefully agreed with trump when he wanted to ban LBGT troops from serving in the military (like in this thread). WTF kind of "special treatment" is that?

In my opinion, it's people with your mindset that need to "get out". Then maybe the world would have more tolerance, bipartisanship, cooperation, dialogue, and overall understanding among its people.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

So basically, you want troops on the front lines who have all kinds of complicated medical problems and/or issues that have a high incidence of mental illness in comorbidity just to prove that the military doesn't discriminate?

Don't you think that if people are going off to potentially serve on the front lines of military conflict, something that can destroy one's mental stability in its own right, you ought to be able to set a set of standards that includes full and perfect health and mental stability to begin with?

Do you think the military would have discriminated against me for refusing my service based on my history of chronic migraine (something, btw, that also tends to a high incidence of depression comorbidity) even though I was a full collegiate athlete and in perfectly outstanding shape?

I don't. I understand why getting caught in a combat situation without my medication would be a bad thing. Apparently, you think that would just be hunky dory fine for a transgender who relies on regular doses of hormones.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

So now transgender = all of LBGT?

Only the Sith speak in absolutes.

a reply to: ketsuko

Well they get all the cushy jobs that wont rupture their various plastic surgeries.

Sure, and also that can become its own logical fallacy where someone always supports an individual or group from minority identity, even if saying or doing something questionable.

A good example of this is when someone critiques more fundamentalist interpretations of Islam, especially where enforced in theocratic societies. This includes treatment of gays or women.

In the US many criticize fundamentalist Christians also for having archaic views on gays or women.

It’s not okay to criticize Islam though for that, because Muslims are a minority in the US. This demonstrates fully the fallacy though because often the criticism is of cultures elsewhere where Muslims are the majority and enforcing such concepts.
a reply to: ketsuko

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Or people will treat your posts as the nonsense they are.

No one has the right to serve in the military. It's a privilege for the best and the most capable.

The military discriminates against people every day. Too old, too fat, too short, too tall, too old, heart condition, mental condition, bum knee, flat feet, too dumb? Sorry you're not good enough.

It's called the real world, you should join it sometime.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

The clothing issue does it.

Christian women who want more modest clothing are just prudes, but Muslim women are strong and empowered for wanting modest clothing, and retail chains like Macy's will sell clothing catering to them specifically.

Or women's liberation on the sexual front. Men are not to sexually objectify women, but women are supposed to want casual sex without emotional strings just like men, essentially objectifying themselves.

And honestly, I wouldn't care about any of it if there weren't entire groups busy trying to tell me why one is right and other isn't.

a reply to: ketsuko

All that and, going by that new Ghostbusters, men are to be sexually objectified now. Watch it thru including the credits and ye shall see.

"Social Justice" = PAYBACK Time (dripping in hypocrisy).

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

The clothing issue does it.

Christian women who want more modest clothing are just prudes, but Muslim women are strong and empowered for wanting modest clothing, and retail chains like Macy's will sell clothing catering to them specifically.

Or women's liberation on the sexual front. Men are not to sexually objectify women, but women are supposed to want casual sex without emotional strings just like men, essentially objectifying themselves.

And honestly, I wouldn't care about any of it if there weren't entire groups busy trying to tell me why one is right and other isn't.

On the women's lib front - let me help you. Men are not to sexually objectify girls and women, and vice versa. Women who want to practice sexual freedom should expect to be objectified by some people because many who control the MSM content just can't or won't accept a different paradigm. But that is changing, e.g. Miss America Pageant.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: ketsuko

All that and, going by that new Ghostbusters, men are to be sexually objectified now. Watch it thru including the credits and ye shall see.

"Social Justice" = PAYBACK Time (dripping in hypocrisy).

That is MSM controlling what they want you to see not women's lib. So who runs and owns Hollywood?

a reply to: InTheLight

No, it's just a mess.

A woman cannot choose to objectify herself and them make it OK. It's not empowering to objectify yourself, not if it's not empowering for others to objectify you.

And let's be honest, since the women who used to dress scantily and wave the flag at car events were forced out by women's libbers who apparently felt they were being objectified, were choosing to do it by their choice, sometimes ... a women can't even make her own choice because other women who place themselves in positions of power over those women make the choice for them.

How is that any different than what men supposedly are guilty of?

If I had a job I liked and another woman or group of women came in a told me I could no longer do it because it was demeaning to me as a women, how are they making any less use of their own power to oppress me as a woman? Does it really matter then that they are women too? I say they're still oppressing my personal choices and freedom.

Many women who choose to be wives and mothers first have felt this type of oppression from our so-called sisters for a while now.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: InTheLight

No, it's just a mess.

A woman cannot choose to objectify herself and them make it OK. It's not empowering to objectify yourself, not if it's not empowering for others to objectify you.

And let's be honest, since the women who used to dress scantily and wave the flag at car events were forced out by women's libbers who apparently felt they were being objectified, were choosing to do it by their choice, sometimes ... a women can't even make her own choice because other women who place themselves in positions of power over those women make the choice for them.

How is that any different than what men supposedly are guilty of?

If I had a job I liked and another woman or group of women came in a told me I could no longer do it because it was demeaning to me as a women, how are they making any less use of their own power to oppress me as a woman? Does it really matter then that they are women too? I say they're still oppressing my personal choices and freedom.

Many women who choose to be wives and mothers first have felt this type of oppression from our so-called sisters for a while now.

The women in my life's sphere who are wives and mothers have never had 'feminist' telling them anything. Rather, we pat each other on the back for all we do being wives, mothers and others who are also working a full time job. The women in my sphere are supportive.

If I want to dress up sexy because that is how I feel that day, then it's nobody's business but it does not mean I am looking to be objectified by men or asking for it. It has nothing to do with anybody else.

These alleged examples of feminists oppressing other women you come up with are foreign in my and my gal friend's lives and we have friends that are stay at home moms and dressed up sexy most of our lives with no oppression at all. But we know that choosing that lifestyle may be out of necessity because it's not worth working and paying childcare, or the woman can't work for various reasons. There's more than meet the eye and we women know it. I call BS.

Women who choose to dress sexy and/or have casual sex have assumptions hurled at them and, yes, women and men alike can be closed minded, but not how you are painting it.

thoughtcatalog.com...

As for the transgendered folks, if any of you want to bother, just do some research, it's complicated.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Kryties

Makes me think of some random hoarding show I saw on tv at a clients the other day. There was an old man and two younger sisters. He didn't want them to help, see he was the hoarder. But he was a hoarder due to disability not desire, but refused help from his sisters cause he had things like pornography and dildos in his house and knew they would go crazy if they saw it.

So the crew comes and brings the family and refuses his requests to keep the family out of it and pushes it. Finally he relents. So the family come in, trying to help with with his real hoarding problem that puts him at risk and makes it so he can't have aides without being reported and taken away from his home, and sure enough they find all the porn and dildos and such thee guy has. So of course they have a huge hissy fit about how messed up and perverse this is, blaming him for them seeing it, and just in general going nuts over it. Tell him off and refuse to help, til eventually he has to apologize and they end up helping.

I watched it thinking, this dude has serious problems with the hoarding and disability and health risks, these are real problems. Why is this guys private life a concern here? Why are people like his sisters so damn screwed up that they actually think what the dude does privately is their concern or something they should even have a problem with? Are we as a society so messed up and concerned over peoples sexuality and sex life that we put concerns over it over actual real problems?

I simply do not get it.

a reply to: Puppylove

Again, Hollywood, those reality shows are not really reality shows to a large extent. They have to add drama to keep a certain type of audience engaged.