Off-Topic

I assumed as such but I didn't want to say in case it actually was the right spelling!

I'm not particularly bothered by that kind of idiocy, I find it hard to see how someone like that is going to infringe on my life, this guy, on the other hand, got to me when I found this on my feed;

When did it become a matter of privilege to be sexually secure or not dress up as a chick and want to **** dudes up the ass? When did expecting men to use the men's room become bigotry? Seriously, when did this happen? No one is ****ing stopping homosexuals from being gay or transsexual or whatever the ****. Meanwhile they are trying to change the meaning of words and demanding everyone follow suit with this "Trans*" and "cis" **** and turning gender into 50 different categories. It's annoying. It is also divisive.How the **** can gay people be so divisive?

That's an ignorant, relatively articulate, vocal young person who should know better. That's a bloody dangerous combination in my opinion.

I always get confused when I meet people my age and younger who are bigoted, or racist, or whatever it is. Like, I can understand it in older generations, but when I hear people in their 30's or younger spout crap like all that, I just have to stare at them with confusion on my face. I don't understand it.

I got a little bored earlier and decided to see if I could start a pleasebt discussion with the editor of Alive. I had never actually seen it before moving to Drimnagh and I have to say its probably the most offensive piece of right wing drivel ever published on this island, wonder if I will get a reply

Sir,

I would like to thank you for your most excellent satirical comic that you deliver free of charge. There has been a real gap in the market for close to the bone satire since viz ceased publication. In particular the editors jottings column is really well done, I'm sure people of deficient intelligence could actually read your musings on homophobic bullying and think that you were serious. After all who has done more to promote homophobic bullying than the catholic church! Once again well done on producing a paper of such pure comical genius.

Regards
Stephen

Babybuff wrote: »

Would there be room for a Q in the name of the forum or is that a silly question?

Q as in queer or questioning - I dunno - it's quite long already compared to most other forum titles

wonderfulname wrote: »

Queer I would assume.

LGBTQ is an option, as opposed to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender & Queer, that is a bit, very, long.

yeah but a lot of people don't know what lgbt means let alone lgbtq.

wonderfulname wrote: »

Fair enough, if you have reason to believe as such.

I'm not dead set against lgbtq or lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer - I'm just not sure what the best option is in terms of praxticality - I do think there might be objections from some to queer or q though.

Sigh just sigh - bitterness and pride

I wouldn't be too bothered, I see LGBT as meaning LGBT issues/topics here, not a description of those who frequent. At the same time there does seem to be a lot of specifically queer conversation recently and if that continues then of course it makes sense to consider whether the forum name should reflect that. It's not nonsense, this place would be dead if it were, there is conversation to be had specific to minority sexuality and gender, how would you refer to a place set aside for that purpose? LGBT, GLBT, LGBTQ, Rainbow, Gay-friendly, Everyone-friendly? Or are you genuinely claiming it makes more sense not to define it at all?

Queer is a catch all term for anyone who doesn't fully fit LGBT, or even those who do as well, people like their labels, if I'm forced to use one that's the one I use because it's the only one that fits, I'd much prefer to just get on with it as well but that isn't really an option is it? Genderqueer is a real term btw, another catch all for anyone outside the gender binary.

Part of respecting someone's right to be themselves is respecting their right to refer to themselves as they wish, you've been afforded that, maybe you should consider how you'd feel if you weren't.

Mango: I would completely understand that, having the word queer up on the main menu might be a bit... yeah, it can cause offence for a lot of people and it can still retain it's negative connotations, I wouldn't be hesitant on Q though, that probably doesn't reflect the best on me but anyway.

In case you didn't notice you made yourself quite clear on how you wish to go about life and nobody here trivialised that as you did "queer", what exactly do you call 'that'?

Also- I had a rubbish day. I fell out of a car (yes, really), busted up my knee and lost my wallet. So to cheer me up I watched this multiple times. It always works.



Cracks me up, man.

Babybuff wrote: »

this is just condescending bs and to refer you to elsewhere, you can only speak for yourself so why continue representing a substantial proportion of us.

I genuinely don't know where you're getting this. tell me where I accidentally or otherwise indicated that I was "representing a substantial proportion of us" and not my own views?

Babybuff wrote: »

do you.do you really. we should all go do that so. That's nice.

this is insane.

Speaking as a representative for what a group either 'thinks' or 'will do' would be "we think...", "we are..." or "I think we will/are..."

An individual making a suggestion to a group (and NOT representing the group) is "I think/believe we should/ought to"
i.e. it is "I" that is doing the thinking and the "should" is a the suggestion from the "I" to the group.

This way group is free to then say "we as a group, disagree with you" where as if the "I" had said "we think/are/ wil do or I think we will" the group would need to say "that is/isn't true" thus I would then and only then, be representing/misrepresenting a group.