Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Discuss.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX
I didn't make the equivalence, some nut did deciding small children should be exposed to gays and cross-dressers.

Gays - Genetic defect
Cross-dressers/BDSM - Mental illness/lifestyle choice - whichever you like.
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
SuperJail Warden
Member
+196|2072
I never said it was a sign of decline either.
uziq
Member
+169|1804
right. complaining about parents teaching their kids to become 'more accepting' of other lifestyles is not the same thing as complaining about the state of society/the way it's heading. why the hell else do you care how a parent chooses to raise their kid? it's none of your business. seeing as cross-dressing is definitely NOT a mental illness or genetic defect i think you have no credible interest in how parents choose to raise their children.

Last edited by uziq (2019-05-16 08:45:35)

Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+1,966|3710|London, England

uziq wrote:

right. complaining about parents teaching their kids to become 'more accepting' of other lifestyles is not the same thing as complaining about the state of society/the way it's heading. why the hell else do you care how a parent chooses to raise their kid? it's none of your business. seeing as cross-dressing is definitely NOT a mental illness or genetic defect i think you have no credible interest in how parents choose to raise their children.
Considering he has no desire to ever have kids and believes in malthusian population bombs, I think he should mind his business and enjoy the retirement benefits that will be paid to him by other peoples kids and grandkids.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,748|5124|USA

Lumping the "queerfolk" in with tilted fetishists, the dangerously psychotic, or general repulsiveness and villainy within the same breath is really par for the course. Bringing up children to influence the argument is also part of the classic playbook. Let's not forget that macbeth absolutely loathes the kids he works with, so those posts came off as a bit insincere. It's cool that we got to see some of our reactionaries get to be themselves in the last couple pages, though.

I think teaching kids that the gays and trans are around and that they shouldn't care that much or get freaked out is way better than rewarding or ignoring intolerance and hate, which is really the harmful development here. And perhaps if children were taught that it's fine if a dude puts on a skirt or a chick dates another chick, later some wouldn't have to live in fear and develop so many satellite complexes that can come with staying in the closet. But no! Think of the…children.
SuperJail Warden
Member
+196|2072

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I think teaching kids that the gays and trans are around and that they shouldn't care that much or get freaked out is way better than rewarding or ignoring intolerance and hate, which is really the harmful development here. And perhaps if children were taught that it's fine if a dude puts on a skirt or a chick dates another chick, later some wouldn't have to live in fear and develop so many satellite complexes that can come with staying in the closet. But no! Think of the…children.
NJ passed a law saying we need to integrate the accomplishments of LGBT people in our history lessons. They are going beyond just acceptance but making us now inflate the accomplishments of trannies and put them in the same league with great men like General Eisenhower and Theodore Roosevelt just like the blacks do with black history month.
SuperJail Warden
Member
+196|2072
On a serious note for a second, I was teaching about modern civil rights cases going on right now to my seniors. I used the transgender case going through the SCOTUS. I used newspaper articles from the NYT and WSJ and had them compare the coverage of the same case (liberal NYT vs conservative WSJ). Then had a pro-LGBT op-ed on the case from the NYT and anti-LGBT essay on the case from National Review and had them contrast them. A kid pointed out that their generation rarely hear anything negative about transgender people and this seemed like a non-issue to them. I explained how difficult it was to actually find an anti-LGBT take on the case for the contrast. I found one from some insignificant weirdo who pushed the "religious freedom" line. I further explained how different this is from back in 2004 when GWB won a second term fear-mongering about gay marriage.

And before anyone asked, I didn't go on about mental illness or anything with the kids. I played it PC. If you asked the kids to guess my views, they would probably say I was cool with the stuff because Mr. Macbeth is cool.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

right. complaining about parents teaching their kids to become 'more accepting' of other lifestyles is not the same thing as complaining about the state of society/the way it's heading. why the hell else do you care how a parent chooses to raise their kid? it's none of your business. seeing as cross-dressing is definitely NOT a mental illness or genetic defect i think you have no credible interest in how parents choose to raise their children.
How parents choose to raise their kids is an issue, how many times have you ridiculed War Man's parents?

Personally I think its disturbing that the LGBT crowd are not satisfied with pushing their agenda on secondary school children, they're now targeting primary and pre-school.
Would it be OK if marxists and the gun-rights crowd were doing the same thing?
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,748|5124|USA

What do you mean, "if?" The gun rights crowd have been targeting young children for a long time. I still have a comic book pamphlet from the 90s somewhere where a kindly old grandfather converted his grandkids and then their feckless parents with NRA talking points. You can find low caliber firearms at gun stores in bright, kid-friendly colors. I don't understand why you'd even bring this up in argument. Little Timmy finding his dad's .38 and waving it at neighbor kids is hardly the same threat level as his parents allowing his homosexual aunt or drag queen uncle over for Thanksgiving now, is it.

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/4/29/1398789363878/Abby-aged-8-from-Louisian-008.jpg?width=1020&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=3f6d59a1a677efa30c89e164ae93c411
Armed to the milk teeth: America's gun-toting kids
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

converted his grandkids and then their feckless parents with NRA talking points.
So it is wrong, thanks for supporting my argument.
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,748|5124|USA

How is that at all supporting your argument. You brought up the possibility of gun rights advocates sinking their fingers into little kids as an analogy to justify your fear of the gay. I pointed out that gun advocacies were already targeting children, and then summarily dismissed your comparison.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX
So you think exposing kids to firearms is bad, but exposing kids to gays, transvestites and transgenders is bad.
I think both are bad, they're going to give kids weird ideas and mess up their development.
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,748|5124|USA

You're being intentionally obtuse. The issues aren't even remotely similar and nothing of what I wrote translates to a backing of your argument. You're even generalizing the gun part of it.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX
How am I being obtuse?
Children should not be targets for any proselytising group - religion, politics, aberrent lifestyles etc.
We shouldn't be selective and discriminatory about it either.
The bulk of the problems in the world derive from allowing the brainwashing of kids into religion, we shouldn't allow this or anything else.
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,748|5124|USA

I like your use of the word "aberrant" in obvious relation to the feared gay, and then how you go on to criticize religion in one of the most ironic lacks of hindsight (hint: historically aberrant opinion to criticize "proper" religious upbringing) I've ever seen out of you. Getting kids used to people isn't the same thing as trying to convert them over to an LGBT lifestyle, any more than them taking MLK off is trying to turn them black. You're just venting your prejudices under the guise of concern.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX
"a group, individual, or structure that is not normal or typical"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aberrant
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
uziq
Member
+169|1804
norms are not concrete. they change over time. your categorisation of them as ‘aberrant’ (when what you probably privately mean is ‘abhorrent’) is an example of your outdated norm clashing with the new norm. you are not appealing to some categorically provable, objective ‘normal’ reality, here: we are discussing human behaviour and society. homosexuality is as old as our species so who are you to call it ‘abnormal’? the difference is that society now is making attempts to become tolerant and understanding of these age-old groups instead of suspicious, fearful and bigoted.
SuperJail Warden
Member
+196|2072
Flamboyant gay men are bad at customer service jobs because they have bitchy attitudes.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

norms are not concrete. they change over time. your categorisation of them as ‘aberrant’ (when what you probably privately mean is ‘abhorrent’) is an example of your outdated norm clashing with the new norm. you are not appealing to some categorically provable, objective ‘normal’ reality, here: we are discussing human behaviour and society. homosexuality is as old as our species so who are you to call it ‘abnormal’? the difference is that society now is making attempts to become tolerant and understanding of these age-old groups instead of suspicious, fearful and bigoted.
Maybe, should still not be rammed down the throats of small children when they aren't developed enough to take a rational view.
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,618|4458|eXtreme to the maX

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Flamboyant gay men are bad at customer service jobs because they have bitchy attitudes.
How can you tell if someone is gay?
Don't worry, they'll tell you.
Your virus system is infected with windows. Please to be giving me your credit card details urgently
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+712|5037|United States of America
That's... not a thing gay people do. Either they're flamboyant and clearly gay, or it's not that big a part of their personality that it doesn't matter.
SuperJail Warden
Member
+196|2072
They added a gay wedding to the Arthur children T.V. show.
uziq
Member
+169|1804

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

norms are not concrete. they change over time. your categorisation of them as ‘aberrant’ (when what you probably privately mean is ‘abhorrent’) is an example of your outdated norm clashing with the new norm. you are not appealing to some categorically provable, objective ‘normal’ reality, here: we are discussing human behaviour and society. homosexuality is as old as our species so who are you to call it ‘abnormal’? the difference is that society now is making attempts to become tolerant and understanding of these age-old groups instead of suspicious, fearful and bigoted.
Maybe, should still not be rammed down the throats of small children when they aren't developed enough to take a rational view.
society has been using toy guns and barbies, thinly veiled cartoons and pink/blue clothing to 'ram' identity down children's throats for decades before they are of 'rational' age.. judging by the number of raging incels on the planet at the moment, and what with the nasty discourse about 'men going their own way' and feminist critics, i think we need a few more drag queens. america has a much bigger problem with hyper-masculinity than it does with homosexuality.

why are you so critical about alternative lifestyles and minority cultures but don't question mainstream norms at all? almost all academic discourse about 'norms' (i.e. germany's 19th century obsession) normally involves a critique of norms, or a structural study of their formation. you just seem to think that norms come from God, or are a priori in human nature or something, that favourite ideological camoflague of yours, 'rational' (hint: the range of societies on earth now and throughout long history contradicts your view).

spare me the malthusian bullshit about the future of western society, too. it's always you shut-ins who don't have kids and won't ever have kids who have such a 'concern' about the sexual habits and productivity of the rest of society.

Last edited by uziq (2019-05-21 04:29:57)

coke
Aye up duck!
+436|5061|England. Stoke

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

norms are not concrete. they change over time. your categorisation of them as ‘aberrant’ (when what you probably privately mean is ‘abhorrent’) is an example of your outdated norm clashing with the new norm. you are not appealing to some categorically provable, objective ‘normal’ reality, here: we are discussing human behaviour and society. homosexuality is as old as our species so who are you to call it ‘abnormal’? the difference is that society now is making attempts to become tolerant and understanding of these age-old groups instead of suspicious, fearful and bigoted.
Maybe, should still not be rammed down the throats of small children when they aren't developed enough to take a rational view.
You should be "developed" enough by now, but aren't so still can't take a rational view.
SuperJail Warden
Member
+196|2072

Dilbert_X wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Flamboyant gay men are bad at customer service jobs because they have bitchy attitudes.
How can you tell if someone is gay?
Don't worry, they'll tell you.
I don't know why they need their own accent and walk like they do. This is all Hollywood's fault for getting flowerly gay people on T.V.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2019 Jeff Minard