Super Straight - a new sexuality???

Let's be honest. Thinking Paris Lees is hot doesn't make you any less straight does it?

If being "super straight" isn't compatible with that opinion then count me out of that group!
 
SexyGreyFox said:
What are the figures in Pink in the diagram at the top?
Click to expand...

Transgender people.

The theory being that as a straight person you have to be attracted to the opposite sex or the same sex as you if they consider themselves transgender (regardless of their genitalia). If you don't you're in the wrong.

It's a stupid theory really.
 
Feek said:
Wait, so if I point out someone and say “that’s not a real woman” then that makes me transphobic?

What a joke. An absolute joke. Someone stop the planet because I want to get off.
Click to expand...

Absolutely it would - it could easily see you getting banned from various social media companies, in the UK it can lead to the police paying you a visit for a non-crime hate incident and it could lead to you losing your job.

See for example this guy who was critical of how "gender" is used currently:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-tweet-police-acted-unlawfully
Police officers unlawfully interfered with a man’s right to freedom of expression by turning up at his place of work to speak to him about allegedly “transphobic” tweets, the high court has ruled.

Harry Miller, a former police officer who founded the campaign group Fair Cop, said the actions of Humberside police had a “substantial chilling effect” on his right to free speech.

Miller, 54, from Lincolnshire, said an officer told him he had not committed a crime, but that his tweeting was being recorded as a “hate incident”.
[...]
Miller posted a number of tweets between November 2018 and January 2019 which he said formed part of the debate about proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

The tweets included: “I was assigned Mammal at Birth, but my orientation is Fish. Don’t mis species me.” Miller also tweeted: “Transwomen are women. Anyone know where this new biological classification was first proposed and adopted?”.
Click to expand...


Minusorange said:
This is flawed, you either believe the fantasy that a man pretending to be a women is actually a woman or vice versa or you don't, if you are attracted to women but not to men pretending to be women then you do not accept their fantasy
Click to expand...

It isn't flawed, it's consistent with current queer theory etc.. if you accept gender and sex are separate things then clearly for some people sex is important to their sexuality not just gender identity or attempts to mimic the opposite sex. So this position accepts that "trans women are women" and goes along with the Trans rights argument that sucking girly **** is still straight if you're a guy etc.. and makes an argument that there are clearly straight (or lesbian) people not into that ergo a different sexuality definition can be created for them.


squawkBOX said:
This is a horrible anti-trans piece of work.

There is a deeply unpleasant number of groups on social media that frame themselves as being pro LGB. However, the obsession that they have with trans issues is worrying. A lot of them seem to be perpetuated by those that are comfortable in life and who seem obsessed with the issue and frame it as 'won't someone think of X' (where X is anything other than treating trans people with respect). A lot of arguments are simply re-hashed from the criticisms that gay men and woman faced in the past.

I'd rather we live in a society where we treat everyone with respect. Live the life the way you want, but intentionally going out there to make someone's life more more difficult is horrible and not the behaviour we should accept in a civilised society.
Click to expand...

How is it ant-trans or making things more difficult? Surely it makes things easier to have these things clearly defined - there is no confusion needed if a lesbian is a "super lesbian" then a trans person knows they're not interested in "girly ****" they want lady bits only...

The whole thing is entirely consistent with current queer theory/gender ideology. No one has any right to tell people they should be attracted to or sleep with people from some group they're not interested in - that's not too different to say gay conversion therapy.

The reason LGB groups exist is because people (primarily Lesbians) have been on the receiving end of pressure/gaslighting from trans-women for years - this notion of a "cotton ceiling" etc.. and that they're somehow not progressive or woke/LGBT enough if they won't also date a trans-woman or that it is transphobic to not want to when in reality that argument is like saying a gay person is misogynistic for not wanting to date women.
 
.Lethal said:
Starting to think we're at the point where some people get bored to the point they start making **** up.



LMAO Here we go.
Click to expand...
https://abcnews.go.com/US/transgend...d-competitors-critics-close/story?id=55856294

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/50097423

McKinnon won her qualifying race in 11.649 seconds - a record in the female 35-39 sprint category - with American Dawn Orwick second in 12.063.

Or the powerlifters who are smashing all the previous womens world records.

"Making **** up" :o
 
My signature pretty much sums up this whole situation, this sort of orthodoxy is simply designed to weed out and punish those who oppose the authoritarians who now dominate most cultural institutions and the media. I do not really think they care one bit about the LGBT community or in the case of BLM the black community, they are simply vehicles to assert control, push agendas and punish those who oppose them whilst looking like the good guys.

I don't think it's coincidence that those who heavily promote this sort of lifestyle at the expense of birth-rates tend to be proponents of global depopulation and in the case of BLM destruction of the core/traditional family to be replaced with the state.

Russia have the most sensible approach to LGBT, acceptance/protection of those who are LGBT but draw the line at allowing multi-billion pound institutions to actively promote and push it on 5 years olds.
 
Last edited:
Minstadave said:
Transgender people.

The theory being that as a straight person you have to be attracted to the opposite sex or the same sex as you if they consider themselves transgender (regardless of their genitalia). If you don't you're in the wrong.

It's a stupid theory really.
Click to expand...

Got to admit I was attracted to my drummer when he first turned up as a she.
 
builder22 said:
was that in a hair metal band by any chance? :D
Click to expand...

Club band.
One month he looked like the picture on the left and the next month he looked like the right.
The first night we were playing one of the roughest pubs in Stoke and nobody took any notice.
Some real rough arses were outside talking to her and they obviously knew but acted like humans.

aw.jpg
 
SexyGreyFox said:
Club band.
One month he looked like the picture on the left and the next month he looked like the right.
The first night we were playing one of the roughest pubs in Stoke and nobody took any notice.
Some real rough arses were outside talking to her and they obviously knew but acted like humans.

aw.jpg
Click to expand...

quite the transformation there...tonight Mathew I'm going to be...

one of my fav performances btw...

 
Last edited:
dowie said:
It isn't flawed, it's consistent with current queer theory etc.. if you accept gender and sex are separate things then clearly for some people sex is important to their sexuality not just gender identity or attempts to mimic the opposite sex. So this position accepts that "trans women are women" and goes along with the Trans rights argument that sucking girly **** is still straight if you're a guy etc.. and makes an argument that there are clearly straight (or lesbian) people not into that ergo a different sexuality definition can be created for them.
Click to expand...

You're either male or female, there is no "but", you either believe the fantasy or you don't, so a man who pretends to be a woman is either a woman or a man, it's flawed on the premise that you can believe someone with a penis can be a woman but isn't a woman when it comes to having sex, it's a complete contradiction
 
I was filling out the census form today and this question came up;

Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?
Click to expand...

That is a confusing question.

It's no wonder young people are confused these days. I think a lot of it is to do with the inconsistent terminology.
 
Minusorange said:
You're either male or female, there is no "but", you either believe the fantasy or you don't, so a man who pretends to be a woman is either a woman or a man, it's flawed on the premise that you can believe someone with a penis can be a woman but isn't a woman when it comes to having sex, it's a complete contradiction
Click to expand...

That isn't a flaw inherent to this "super" concept though, it isn't necessarily a flaw in itself either - the ideology of separating gender and sex can be logically consistent, you've not highlighted a "flaw" per se but rather you've articulated some disagreement - you disagree with the idea of separating the concept of gender identity and sex, that's fine too.

The point is that this new argument is consistent with the ideology TRAs subscribe to - if you're going to call it flawed then you need to show where it is flawed, disagreeing with this gender ideology isn't demonstrating that this new "sexuality" is flawed.

StriderX said:
My opinion remains that trying to enforce binary positions onto a spectrum will never work.
Click to expand...

So do you identify as bi/pan and/or take the poison that everyone is bi or pan but to different %s or different placers on some spectrum?
 
Minusorange said:
You're either male or female
Click to expand...
I bet it gets interesting when a brothel is recruiting a "female" or "male" I wonder how they have to word the advert

I don't believe in a gender spectrum, maybe a masculinity/feminine one

I'm not convinced women really think differently to men either or I've only ever dated people who were tomboys.

the bits someone is born with pretty much defines my will to have a relationship with them.

I've got no problem with LGBT+ whatever as long as they can accept my beliefs the same as I will accommodate theirs.

yes you can be very close to being a woman but to anyone who actually wants a relationship with the opposite sex your not actually female
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom