7 ms·

You've just described an anti-LGBT organization while claiming it is not

pessimizer 4y ago
You've implied that a bunch of gay people are anti-gay because of the gay organization they belong to that advocates for gays.
- nisegami 4y ago
  I claim that they're anti-LGBT, not anti-gay
  - bobsmooth 4y ago
    They are pro-LGB. If you think that means they're anti-LGBT that's on you.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  They're not "anti-gay", they're anti-the-wrong-sort-of-gay. You're only gay if you're the kind of gay they approve of.
  - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
    - Gordonjcp 4y ago
      Yeah, you don't need to explain it to me, and especially not incorrectly.
      - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        If I was wrong you'd have corrected me. People have a legal and moral right to self-associate with those they choose and to exclude those sabotaging their political movements.
        Gordonjcp 4y ago
        You appear to be an apologist for an insanely homophobic organisation, so I don't know how much help you'd get from anyone correcting you.
        LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        Presumably the world would get the benefit. If anything I say is incorrect please point it out. You appear to be saying a HOMOsexual focused organization is being HOMOphobic by wanting to focus only on HOMOsexuals. But no, I'm not apologizing. I can't see anything wrong with any subgroup wanting to focus their attention more-directly on themselves. Do Indigenous people not have the right to their own organizations since the popularization of the BIPoC acronym?
Levitz 4y ago
You can't reasonably equate anti-LGBT with consdering that the T doesn't belong with the LGB.
- nisegami 4y ago
  I do genuinely believe that "consdering that the T doesn't belong with the LGB" makes you "anti-LGBT".
  - jaywalk 4y ago
    But they're not against LGB, just T. So they're anti-T. When every letter in the acronym is literally representing a different group, lumping them together the way you are is dishonest.
    - mock-possum 4y ago
      that's exactly the kind of divide-and-conquer approach that queer solidarity is a bulwark against though - whether you're gay, straight, bisexual, or trans, we all face a very particular kind of oppression having to do with sex and gender, and our best bet for countering that oppression is to have eachother's backs: if you're coming after trans people you're going to have to get through the rest of us first. That's not dishonest, that's a strategic show of strength.
      - jaywalk 4y ago
        I'm not saying there's anything dishonest about LGBT people all banding together to show strength. I'm saying that it's dishonest to say that an LGB person who doesn't want to be lumped in with the T people is "anti-LGBT." I'm not LGBT, but I do personally know LGB people who don't like the Ts being lumped in with them. They aren't anti-trans by any means, but they see it as a different thing that tends to distract from the LGB and causes more strife. I also know LGB people who share your philosophy and are perfectly happy to have the Ts onboard. I'm just explaining my POV as an outsider.
      - deleted 4y ago

You've implied that a bunch of gay people are anti-gay because of the gay organization they belong to that advocates for gays.

nisegami 4y ago
I claim that they're anti-LGBT, not anti-gay
- bobsmooth 4y ago
  They are pro-LGB. If you think that means they're anti-LGBT that's on you.
Gordonjcp 4y ago
They're not "anti-gay", they're anti-the-wrong-sort-of-gay. You're only gay if you're the kind of gay they approve of.
- LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
  - Gordonjcp 4y ago
    Yeah, you don't need to explain it to me, and especially not incorrectly.
    - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
      If I was wrong you'd have corrected me. People have a legal and moral right to self-associate with those they choose and to exclude those sabotaging their political movements.
      - Gordonjcp 4y ago
        You appear to be an apologist for an insanely homophobic organisation, so I don't know how much help you'd get from anyone correcting you.
        LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        Presumably the world would get the benefit. If anything I say is incorrect please point it out. You appear to be saying a HOMOsexual focused organization is being HOMOphobic by wanting to focus only on HOMOsexuals. But no, I'm not apologizing. I can't see anything wrong with any subgroup wanting to focus their attention more-directly on themselves. Do Indigenous people not have the right to their own organizations since the popularization of the BIPoC acronym?

Levitz 4y ago

You can't reasonably equate anti-LGBT with consdering that the T doesn't belong with the LGB.

nisegami 4y ago
I do genuinely believe that "consdering that the T doesn't belong with the LGB" makes you "anti-LGBT".
- jaywalk 4y ago
  But they're not against LGB, just T. So they're anti-T. When every letter in the acronym is literally representing a different group, lumping them together the way you are is dishonest.
  - mock-possum 4y ago
    that's exactly the kind of divide-and-conquer approach that queer solidarity is a bulwark against though - whether you're gay, straight, bisexual, or trans, we all face a very particular kind of oppression having to do with sex and gender, and our best bet for countering that oppression is to have eachother's backs: if you're coming after trans people you're going to have to get through the rest of us first. That's not dishonest, that's a strategic show of strength.
    - jaywalk 4y ago
      I'm not saying there's anything dishonest about LGBT people all banding together to show strength. I'm saying that it's dishonest to say that an LGB person who doesn't want to be lumped in with the T people is "anti-LGBT." I'm not LGBT, but I do personally know LGB people who don't like the Ts being lumped in with them. They aren't anti-trans by any means, but they see it as a different thing that tends to distract from the LGB and causes more strife. I also know LGB people who share your philosophy and are perfectly happy to have the Ts onboard. I'm just explaining my POV as an outsider.
    - deleted 4y ago