Have we reach peak LGBT nonsense?

eagle eye · 06-12-2019 05:21PM

I had a long response written out and it got wiped. I left it for a while thought about it and I'm not going to bother.
I live my life free of hang ups about who is what. If I meet you and you are a nice person you will be my friend if you wish to be. It doesn't matter what color, creed or sexual orientation you are. I look at everybody as an equal. I am willing to have a chat about the issues you bring up but I'm not getting into a heated debate about anything.
I'm not a fan of any organisation that tries to bully people. The catholic church and the LGBT would both fall into that category in my opinion. Both of them do a lot of great work but they have members who have become leaders and push things too far I think.
I'll leave you to argue away about who is right and who is wrong. I think history and heritage can be learned from but it should not be used as a tool to beat someone with. We need to be looking forward and not back. I think the younger people today are a lot more open minded about things than my generation ever will be. I think the fact that I traveled quite a bit and lived abroad helped me to grow out of the pre-conceived beliefs that were given to me by my parents, teachers and peers.
Anyways I'll keep my own views to myself as regards this subject from now on because this site is becoming more and more like Twitter etc. and I want nothing to do with that.

smacl · 06-12-2019 06:15PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm not a fan of any organisation that tries to bully people. The catholic church and the LGBT would both fall into that category in my opinion. Both of them do a lot of great work but they have members who have become leaders and push things too far I think.

LGBT is not an organisation so this is yet another false equivalence, the term refers to individuals most of whom are not members of any LGBT organisations. As with your gay gangs beating people up could you provide some references of LGBT organisations bullying people to support your assertion that this happens.

Cabaal · 08-12-2019 05:24AM

smacl wrote: »

LGBT is not an organisation so this is yet another false equivalence.

Don't be stupid!
Of course LGBT is an organisation!
it has a building with a large lobby that we always hear about.

Now who's wrong?
:pac:

AllForIt · 26-12-2019 10:14PM

Cabaal wrote: »

Don't be stupid!
Of course LGBT is an organisation!
it has a building with a large lobby that we always hear about.

Now who's wrong?
:pac:

Actually, you jest, but the Left has claimed LGBT as part of their own.

It boils my gut that the left expect that if one is gay like myself that one is automatically on the left of politics.

So, it is a bit like the 'LGBT' is an organization or a building.

edit: I'd love to elaborate on this more but not now. I'm not saying I'm right wing.

Bannasidhe · 27-12-2019 02:11PM

AllForIt wrote: »

Actually, you jest, but the Left has claimed LGBT as part of their own.

It boils my gut that the left expect that if one is gay like myself that one is automatically on the left of politics.

So, it is a bit like the 'LGBT' is an organization or a building.

edit: I'd love to elaborate on this more but not now. I'm not saying I'm right wing.

And yet we have a government that certainly cannot be described as left where there are 2 openly gay members - one of whom is leader of the country.

Milo Yiannopoulos is also most certainly not left of anything.

While 'Gay Rights' may have initially been a campaign coming from left - as are most campaigns advocating civil rights of minorities - it has, in a western context, been adopted by many political movements on the right.

In Ireland both FG and FF (latter a bit wishy washy granted), and in the UK the CP supported Marriage Equality.
In Belgium New Flemish Alliance and Flemish Interest (has far right tendencies) support LGBT rights.
In Canada the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party participated in Toronto Pride.
In France surveys have shown 15% of LGBT people supported the National Front in 2013 - more than heterosexuals where the figure was 13%.
In The Netherlands the Right-wing Pim Fortuyn List party was lead and founded by the openly gay Pim Fortuyn.

The Conservative Democratic Party of Switzerland supports LGBT rights, as does The Log Cabin Republicans in the U.S.

So no, 'The' LGBT is not either an organisation or a hive mind.

AllForIt · 29-12-2019 07:16AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And yet we have a government that certainly cannot be described as left where there are 2 openly gay members - one of whom is leader of the country.

Milo Yiannopoulos is also most certainly not left of anything.

While 'Gay Rights' may have initially been a campaign coming from left - as are most campaigns advocating civil rights of minorities - it has, in a western context, been adopted by many political movements on the right.

In Ireland both FG and FF (latter a bit wishy washy granted), and in the UK the CP supported Marriage Equality.
In Belgium New Flemish Alliance and Flemish Interest (has far right tendencies) support LGBT rights.
In Canada the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party participated in Toronto Pride.
In France surveys have shown 15% of LGBT people supported the National Front in 2013 - more than heterosexuals where the figure was 13%.
In The Netherlands the Right-wing Pim Fortuyn List party was lead and founded by the openly gay Pim Fortuyn.

The Conservative Democratic Party of Switzerland supports LGBT rights, as does The Log Cabin Republicans in the U.S.

So no, 'The' LGBT is not either an organisation or a hive mind.

I was talking about the social expectation that if one gay then one feels behoved to be on the left of politics.

You talk about Milo, that nutter, but in even mentioning him, you infer that anyone who is gay and even slightly right, is akin to him.

I abstained in the abortion ref. That wasn't a no, but I wouldn't reveal that to my lefty gay friends. I could do without the argument or the bad feelings. Personally it was something I'm not passionate about either way so I left it.

But don't you get what I mean about 'the' LGBT? Really? Of course it's a thing now and I'm not happy about it one little bit.

In fact I'm quite disturbed about it. Some 10 years ago being gay is okay and now it seems to be about something different altogether. I think the Left is responsible for that.

All I see is the Left bitching about anyone who is white and male. And anyone who doesn't fit into that demographic are the best ppl you could ever meet.

It's nuts what's going on frankly. And I think that my life as a gay man will suffer rather than flourish because of it.

Bannasidhe · 29-12-2019 02:41PM

AllForIt wrote: »

I was talking about the social expectation that if one gay then one feels behoved to be on the left of politics.

You talk about Milo, that nutter, but in even mentioning him, you infer that anyone who is gay and even slightly right, is akin to him.

I abstained in the abortion ref. That wasn't a no, but I wouldn't reveal that to my lefty gay friends. I could do without the argument or the bad feelings. Personally it was something I'm not passionate about either way so I left it.

But don't you get what I mean about 'the' LGBT? Really? Of course it's a thing now and I'm not happy about it one little bit.

In fact I'm quite disturbed about it. Some 10 years ago being gay is okay and now it seems to be about something different altogether. I think the Left is responsible for that.

All I see is the Left bitching about anyone who is white and male. And anyone who doesn't fit into that demographic are the best ppl you could ever meet.

It's nuts what's going on frankly. And I think that my life as a gay man will suffer rather than flourish because of it.

What I am reading is that you feel isolated within the group you hang out with as your politics are different to theirs and that, somehow, this is the 'fault' of 'the Left'.

Which is, imo, a rather insulting view of those you call friends as it implies they have been 'taken over' and do not genuinely believe in left wing politics.

Also, your knowledge of the LGBT fight for recognition is astoundingly poor.
The rights that exist are there because of 'leftys', those rights you enjoy today.

But that does not behove you to anything more than a bit of acknowledgement of the debt you owe the 'leftys' - and yes, the non-white gender queers who didn't have the 'luxury' of 'passing' who literally fought on the streets for your freedoms because I'll tell you this - weren't no white men being dragged into paddy wagons in Christopher Street the night it kicked off.

And yes, there were white men marching in the Pride parades, alongside the men of other colours, the dykes, the gender fluid, the transgendered - all getting spat at and abused and you know what - those white men were 'leftys'.
Some of them were straight - they marched because they saw and injustice and wanted to change it. They didn't abstain as they 'didn't feel passionate about it' - which is another way of saying I couldn't be arsed as it doesn't affect me personally.
Just like the dykes who took up the battle against AIDS to care for our gay brothers.

I know because I was there. 10 years ago. 20 years ago. 30 years ago.

And now I have to listen to privileged pups who are befitting from the battles others fought whinging that they don't like the politics that won them their rights. :rolleyes:

My advice to you - if you don't like the lefty gays - go get yourself some righty ones. There are plenty of them out there who will happily whine along with you.

Odhinn · 31-12-2019 10:45PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

...............

My advice to you - if you don't like the lefty gays - go get yourself some righty ones. There are plenty of them out there who will happily whine along with you.

...from the "safety" of the closet.

Annasopra · 01-01-2020 01:33AM

Odhinn wrote: »

...from the "safety" of the closet.

Or not but happy enough to throw all marginalised ones under the bus

robindch · 26-01-2020 02:40PM

The Church of England is having one of its periodic spasms about marriage equality. To celebrate this, Andrew Graystone has produced this small guide to what's in and what's out, so to speak.

https://twitter.com/AndrewGraystone/status/1220806222758236160

gmisk · 28-01-2020 04:37PM

He has been given a contract by Catalan dragons...I always knew someone would be desperate enough to sign him alas

smacl · 28-01-2020 04:48PM

gmisk wrote: »

He has been given a contract by Catalan dragons...I always knew someone would be desperate enough to sign him alas

Seems to have gone down in Super League circles like a lead baloon; https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/catalan-dragons-slammed-for-signing-israel-folau-1.4153995

gmisk · 28-01-2020 04:54PM

smacl wrote: »

Seems to have gone down in Super League circles like a lead baloon; https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/catalan-dragons-slammed-for-signing-israel-folau-1.4153995

Not surprised tbh

Wigan warriors announced a pride day for their match in March against them, pretty boss move! I wonder if other teams will follow suit

Bannasidhe · 28-01-2020 05:12PM

smacl wrote: »

Seems to have gone down in Super League circles like a lead baloon; https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/catalan-dragons-slammed-for-signing-israel-folau-1.4153995

Catalans Dragons have been widely condemned for their signing of controversial Australian outside back Israel Folau.

The 30-year-old dual-code international, who has not played since being sacked by Rugby Australia last May for making homophobic comments on social media, has joined the Super League club on a 12-month contract.

The signing brought an angry response from Halifax forward Keegan Hirst, an openly gay professional rugby league player, while Super League’s executive chairman Robert Elstone says it lets down many people in the sport.

Elstone reveals many informed voices within the game were against the signing and Wigan demonstrated their opposition by announcing their round six match against Catalans would be named Pride Day.

The signing of Folau, who sparked a storm in April by posting a photo to Instagram that claimed “hell awaits” gay people, prompted a strong reaction from Hirst.

“I’m shocked and disappointed at the signing of IzzyFolau,” Hirst said on Twitter. “Our great game is tasked with fighting against homophobia and standing up for the values it puts such high stock in.

“It shows none of the bravery, camaraderie or integrity rfl expects from its players, staff and fans.”

Folau, who played for Melbourne and Brisbane before switching codes, was told he would not be allowed to return to the NRL but the Rugby Football League has confirmed it will not prevent his registration with the Dragons, saying the moral responsibility for deciding whether to sign a player sits with individual clubs.

Elstone said: “Super League deplores the homophobic comments Israel Folau has made in the past, which squarely contradict our sport’s core values.

“I have sought the opinion of informed voices connected to our game and the majority share my disappointment that one of our clubs has chosen to sign him.

“There is a strong feeling that the decision to sign him lets down many people connected to our sport.

“I made Catalans Dragons aware of those views.

“However, Super League does not have the authority to veto the registration of players and is satisfied by the due diligence carried out by The Rugby Football League.”

Dragons chairman Bernard Guasch said: “We want to give Israel a new opportunity to shine on the pitch.

“We do not support or agree with Israel’s previously expressed and controversial views which are based upon his sincerely held religious belief.

“We do not share or condone those views and we are totally committed to our club and our sport being open and welcoming to everyone.

“We do not believe that those views should be publicly expressed, especially by a high-profile sports person.

“We have a signed agreement with the RFL. Any transgression will trigger an immediate termination of Israel’s contract and a substantial fine for the club.”

Folau said: “I acknowledge the views expressed by Super League and the Rugby Football League.

“I’m a proud Christian, my beliefs are personal, my intention is not to hurt anyone and I will not be making further public comment about them.

Bit of an about face by Folau - how come suddenly his beliefs are personal and won't be shared?
Were they not personal when the ARU asked him to keep them to himself but he felt he had the right to continue to express them?

smacl · 28-01-2020 05:24PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Bit of an about face by Folau - how come suddenly his beliefs are personal and won't be shared?
Were they not personal when the ARU asked him to keep them to himself but he felt he had the right to continue to express them?

And yet he's still sharing the same old nonsense on his Instagram page. I wouldn't say it will be too long before he's given the heave ho, wonder what his team mates make of it all?

robinph · 28-01-2020 05:27PM

The club having signed up agreeing to an allegedly hefty fine if Folau makes any further statements is a pretty risky move, assuming the potential fine is actually substantial. Think I'd be getting Folau to pay you that money for the fine up front himself before signing him and then give him the money back x months after he leaves if he still manages to keep his mouth shut for the duration.

Bannasidhe · 28-01-2020 05:36PM

smacl wrote: »

And yet he's still sharing the same old nonsense on his Instagram page. I wouldn't say it will be too long before he's given the heave ho, wonder what his team mates make of it all?

I think one thing Folau has demonstrated is he feels he is the exception to any rules/agreements he decides he doesn't wish to follow - from Biblical restrictions on tattoos and working on the Sabbath to contracts he has signed.

seamus · 28-01-2020 05:37PM

^^
It could indeed be some form of contractual clause where if he makes it to the end of a period without incurring such a fine, he gets a fixed bonus. But if he does incur the fine, he loses the bonus and the club have a break clause. That's what I would do if I was them.

Cabaal · 02-02-2020 10:31AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I think one thing Folau has demonstrated is he feels he is the exception to any rules/agreements he decides he doesn't wish to follow - from Biblical restrictions on tattoos and working on the Sabbath to contracts he has signed.

Likepretty much every Christian then ðŸ˜‰

feargale · 03-02-2020 11:36PM

Cabaal wrote: »

Likepretty much every Christian then ðŸ˜‰

Clearly a man of discriminate judgement :rolleyes:

Lazy thinking is alive and well.

robindch · 05-02-2020 12:25AM

feargale wrote: »

Lazy thinking is alive and well.

Indeed. And the RCC would be long dead and gone without it :rolleyes:

feargale · 05-02-2020 01:15AM

robindch wrote: »

Indeed. And the RCC would be long dead and gone without it :rolleyes:

Seems you are in agreement.

The rest of your reply is redolent of For Whom the Bell Tolls.

ohnonotgmail · 05-02-2020 05:35PM

feargale wrote: »

Seems you are in agreement.

The rest of your reply is redolent of For Whom the Bell Tolls.

you will probably find that most posters here agree with that.

feargale · 05-02-2020 10:27PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you will probably find that most posters here agree with that.

Not sure what that means. Agree with what?
It's difficult not to conclude that some, like the previous poster, assuming they don't live on top of a mountain, have Christian neighbours all of whom are horrible people. Why? Because all Christians seem to get tarred with the same brush.
When I was a youngster the use of the word all in a pejorative comment on a whole community was usually classed as bigotry. But it appears that much of the world is far too sophisticated now to entertain tolerance, or to separate the oppressors from the innocent and the oporessed.
I'm agnostic, and once upon a time I made occasional visits to A&A threads expecting to have something in common with people there. All I found was same old, same old, like a record in a groove.
The last straw was some years ago when Lourdes flooded causing the death of one pious old lady. The gloating in A&A was nauseating. There seems to be no filtering of the most ill-tasting posts here, at least as regards what is said about Christians/Christianity. It will be interesting to see how far this goes before that absent filtering process raises its head in relation to yours truly.
I have made even less frequent visits to Christianity threads, and only to make an odd enquiry about some historical or cultural matter. They come across as more polite, and allowing that you don't share their beliefs, as having a wider repertoire of conversation than damning the other side.
As one boardsie, also an agnostic put it in another thread, Christians are more fun.

ohnonotgmail · 05-02-2020 11:25PM

feargale wrote: »

Not sure what that means. Agree with what?
It's difficult not to conclude that some, like the previous poster, assuming they don't live on top of a mountain, have Christian neighbours all of whom are horrible people. Why? Because all Christians seem to get tarred with the same brush.
When I was a youngster the use of the word all in a pejorative comment on a whole community was usually classed as bigotry. But it appears that much of the world is far too sophisticated now to entertain tolerance, or to separate the oppressors from the innocent and the oporessed.
I'm agnostic, and once upon a time I made occasional visits to A&A threads expecting to have something in common with people there. All I found was same old, same old, like a record in a groove.
The last straw was some years ago when Lourdes flooded causing the death of one pious old lady. The gloating in A&A was nauseating. There seems to be no filtering of the most ill-tasting posts here, at least as regards what is said about Christians/Christianity. It will be interesting to see how far this goes before that absent filtering process raises its head in relation to yours truly.
I have made even less frequent visits to Christianity threads, and only to make an odd enquiry about some historical or cultural matter. They come across as more polite, and allowing that you don't share their beliefs, as having a wider repertoire of conversation than damning the other side.
As one boardsie, also an agnostic put it in another thread, Christians are more fun.

Well it certainly isn't difficult to conclude that if that is already your opinion. but you are reading something that isn't there.

eagle eye · 05-02-2020 11:33PM

I'm with you feargale. I believe in respecting every man and woman regardless of their beliefs, sexuality or skin colour.
I don't believe in a god but don't ever call myself atheist as I don't want to be associated with the haters that call themselves that.
I have great friends, and family, who are deeply religious. They are entitled to be religious just as I'm entitled not to be. We all get along and respect each other.

smacl · 06-02-2020 12:36AM

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm with you feargale. I believe in respecting every man and woman regardless of their beliefs, sexuality or skin colour.
I don't believe in a god but don't ever call myself atheist as I don't want to be associated with the haters that call themselves that.
I have great friends, and family, who are deeply religious. They are entitled to be religious just as I'm entitled not to be. We all get along and respect each other.

What a load of sanctimonious bollox. You start by saying everyone deserves respect and the go on to refer to atheists as haters you don't want to be associated with. Seriously?

eagle eye · 06-02-2020 12:54AM

smacl wrote:

What a load of sanctimonious bollox. You start by saying everyone deserves respect and the go on to refer to atheists as haters you don't want to be associated with. Seriously?

You need to understand and what I said before you respond.
I said I don't want to be associated with the haters.

Bannasidhe · 06-02-2020 01:22AM

eagle eye wrote: »

You need to understand and what I said before you respond.
I said I don't want to be associated with the haters.

I describe my skin colour as magnolia as I don't want to be associated with white supremacists.

eagle eye · 06-02-2020 02:21AM

Bannasidhe wrote:

I describe my skin colour as magnolia as I don't want to be associated with white supremacists.

And you have every right to do that. I certainly don't have a problem with you doing it.

Have we reach peak LGBT nonsense?

Comments