There's a man in mah bathroom!!! - Trans bathroom thread

[PastryOfApathy]

2 hours ago, 6tails said:

The USDoJ just sued North Carolina right back for its HB2 bill.

the gay agenda discriminating against innocent christians and children once again smh

[willow]

22 hours ago, Gamedog said:

"women will be raped by MEN!!!!!"

 

boys have always been using the men's bathroom and nobody cared for their safety amongst ebil rapist men (:

because women are "vulnerable" and need to be "protected". boys can "defend themselves"

19 hours ago, Saxon said:

 

I think this whole argument is pretty silly anyway though; I don't care if somebody feels hurt because they weren't allowed to poop in a way that reaffirmed their identity.

it'a not really about hurt feelings though

[MalletFace]

16 hours ago, 6tails said:

The USDoJ just sued North Carolina right back for its HB2 bill.

• Charlotte passes non-discrimination ordinance.
• NC steps in and nullifies that ordinance with a bill.
• USDoJ steps in and attemps to nullify that bill.
• NC complains that the federal government is abusing its power.

States' rights really has just been about state governments being able to do whatever they want to do. If this doesn't prove that then I don't know what does.

I - personally - do not wish to go back to the early days of the nation when most states were virtually theocracies.

[Clove Darkwave]

7 minutes ago, MalletFace said:

• Charlotte passes non-discrimination ordinance.
• NC steps in and nullifies that ordinance with a bill.
• USDoJ steps in and attemps to nullify that bill.
• NC complains that the federal government is abusing its power.

States' rights really has just been about state governments being able to do whatever they want to do. If this doesn't prove that then I don't know what does.

I - personally - do not wish to go back to the early days of the nation when most states were virtually theocracies.

"Help! Help! My ability to oppress is being oppressed!"

[Feelwell]

12 minutes ago, MalletFace said:

• Charlotte passes non-discrimination ordinance.
• NC steps in and nullifies that ordinance with a bill.
• USDoJ steps in and attemps to nullify that bill.
• NC complains that the federal government is abusing its power.

First of all, North Carolina= NC right?

Second of all, how on the earth did NC get enough support to nullify something stopping discrimation? What issues and reasons were they citing to not make it look like they're a bunch of homophobes?

[Vae]

13 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

First of all, North Carolina= NC right?

Second of all, how on the earth did NC get enough support to nullify something stopping discrimation? What issues and reasons were they citing to not make it look like they're a bunch of homophobes?

According to the news reports I've seen on Twitter, the same old "It's not what matches your birth certificate, therefore it doesn't count, because trans people aren't real! Also, perverts will sneak in bathrooms and rape women!" bullshit.

[MalletFace]

13 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

First of all, North Carolina= NC right?

Second of all, how on the earth did NC get enough support to nullify something stopping discrimation? What issues and reasons were they citing to not make it look like they're a bunch of homophobes?

Yup.

Directly from HB2: "The General Assembly finds that laws and obligations consistent statewide for all businesses, organizations, and employers doing business in the State benefit the businesses, organizations, and employers seeking to do business in the State and attracts new businesses, organizations, and employers to the State."

To attempt to make them sound like the good guys, they passed it off as a non-discrimination ordinance that was supposed to improve the state's economy and guarantee the rights of those in the state. HB2 outlaws all other non-discrimination ordinances and laws within the state, and then limits discrimination protections to those based on "race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex or handicap." They claimed they were protecting women's rights by including the bathroom bits.

Everybody knew what they were doing, though; that's why some democrats walked out as it was being passed.

In another neat little surprise, the wording of HB2 and other bills makes religious discrimination claims by those that are NOT Christian fairly difficult. It even complicates normal discrimination claims.

[Kosha]

39 minutes ago, MalletFace said:

States' rights really has just been about state governments being able to do whatever they want to do. If this doesn't prove that then I don't know what does.

I'm not opposed to the idea of States' rights, but there needs to be a limit to what the state can and can't do. If people's rights are being oppressed, the federal government should step in. IMO social issues should always be handled by the federal government since American history has shown us that when it's handled by the states, bad things happen.

[AshleyAshes]

53 minutes ago, Kosha said:

I'm not opposed to the idea of States' rights, but there needs to be a limit to what the state can and can't do. If people's rights are being oppressed, the federal government should step in. IMO social issues should always be handled by the federal government since American history has shown us that when it's handled by the states, bad things happen.

 A state should have the right to deploy its national guard to stop black kids from going to high school with white kids as much as it wants!!! 

[Troj]

I find it revealing and instructive how "States' Rights" enthusiasts often react when states exercise their rights in ways they don't like.

Too often, "Let the states decide!" means "I'm too much of a coward to really admit I hope gay marriage, racial integration, and transgender rights never become a reality."

[Xaende]

1 hour ago, Troj said:

I find it revealing and instructive how "States' Rights" enthusiasts often react when states exercise their rights in ways they don't like.

Too often, "Let the states decide!" means "I'm too much of a coward to really admit I hope gay marriage, racial integration, and transgender rights never become a reality."

Agreed, but it can work both ways. Contrast NC with Vermont, for instance. The federal government also has a long history of racism, sexism etc. so their hands aren't entirely clean. Thankfully, this is just one state.

[willow]

Honestly, it kind of sucks that states can decide things like though  

 

[Clove Darkwave]

4 minutes ago, willow said:

Honestly, it kind of sucks that states can decide things like though  

 

Remember, this could always have been the other way around. It's best to have a balance between state and federal gov't I think.

[Gamedog]

3 hours ago, willow said:

because women are "vulnerable" and need to be "protected". boys can "defend themselves"

it'a not really about hurt feelings though

I've heard "boys can defend themselves" in regards to ADULT MEN, but never young boys 

[Zeke]

5 hours ago, Gamedog said:

I've heard "boys can defend themselves" in regards to ADULT MEN, but never young boys 

But small boys (children) can't really defend themselves and are the most likely to be sexually assaulted. But no, it's about women being raped by invisible transgender women. :V

 

8 hours ago, MalletFace said:

• I - personally - do not wish to go back to the early days of the nation when most states were virtually theocracies.

The only state so far to ever make it is Utah with it's Mormonism infecting the government and turning it into a nanny state.

[Crazy Lee]

On 5/6/2016 at 0:41 AM, WolfNightV4X1 said:

I thought this was common knowledge

Before this Target issue, before even the laws in NC and other places, there's been a lot of uproar about trans teens and which bathroom they should be in. A lot of trans teens have been wanting to go into the bathroom or locker rooms of their inner gender at their high schools, and this has been causing an uproar for months. Some places have been more accommodating than others, and lawsuits have been filed. I think there was a suit over in Chicago about it.

In the case of a Highschooler, who knows how far they've gone to switch to the other gender. They still might look like their birth gender. That's probably WHY a lot of this "male in a woman's bathroom/locker room" has come up. People see teen men as sexual perverts and predators, and think of such a teen boy in their daughter's locker room (even if she is trans, and even if she changes in a locker toilet stall), and the parents foam at the mouth. Those trans teens might just have to stick to their birth bathroom for now.

 

On 5/6/2016 at 0:35 PM, Vae said:

Just get rid of gendered bathrooms altogether, and avoid this mess.

Want a toilet? Pick a stall.
Want a urinal? Pick a stall.

Regardless of what you are on the gender scale, congratulations, you now have a place to shit.

Now wash your hands and go.

Yea, but odds are it will be stalls only, and have you seen how men often don't raise the toilet seat and piss all over it?

 

And a thought here for those in this thread who aren't getting it: Conservatives do not believe that trans exists. What I mean is they do not think that trans people are born trans. They assume it's someone who thinks "Oh, today I'm going to be a woman for the fuck of it." Or "I'm going to be a woman to be a rapist", since they associate lgbt with sexual deviancy and perversion and you're all rapists and sodomites. So, if you can chose to be trans (in their mind), you can choose to be not trans. In fact, one comment I heard from some right wingers was "They say that being gay is not a choice, but you can choose your gender. Make up your mind." I think they confuse gender fluid with trans, which are two different things.

[AshleyAshes]

32 minutes ago, Crazy Lee said:

Those trans teens might just have to stick to their birth bathroom for now.

Forcing transgender students to use a washroom other than that of their gender identity is a violation of Title IX within the United States.  Any school receiving federal funding (Translation: Basically any public education institution) has to abide by Title IX.  Now, this hasn't been reaffirmed by supreme court, no case relevant to this has gone that high, but thus far no educational instruction has successfully defended itself in this case either.  It's also decided to be a violation of Title IX by the US DoJ.  Now, I'm sure your free to read Title IX and give your own armchair interpretation as counter argument, but your argument isn't with me, it's with various US courts.  I'm just telling you what is established legal precedent.

 

Fun side note: This is also defacto protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms within Canada as well.  The Government of Canada would not be able to bar transgender individuals from their identified washroom without trying to modify The Charter first.

[Gamedog]

38 minutes ago, Crazy Lee said:

And a thought here for those in this thread who aren't getting it: Conservatives do not believe that trans exists.

It's so hostile and cold in here, I was waiting for you to show up with the blankets

 

Thank you

[Kosha]

1 hour ago, Zeke said:

The only state so far to ever make it is Utah with it's Mormonism infecting the government and turning it into a nanny state.

Does anyone remember Deseret?

[Crazy Lee]

11 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Forcing transgender students to use a washroom other than that of their gender identity is a violation of Title IX within the United States.  Any school receiving federal funding (Translation: Basically any public education institution) has to abide by Title IX.  Now, this hasn't been reaffirmed by supreme court, no case relevant to this has gone that high, but thus far no educational instruction has successfully defended itself in this case either.  It's also decided to be a violation of Title IX by the US DoJ.  Now, I'm sure your free to read Title IX and give your own armchair interpretation as counter argument, but your argument isn't with me, it's with various US courts.  I'm just telling you what is established legal precedent.

 

Fun side note: This is also defacto protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms within Canada as well.  The Government of Canada would not be able to bar transgender individuals from their identified washroom without trying to modify The Charter first.

That's why there's lawsuits and complaints against these schools, because of Title IX. But most parents don't know what Title IX is, or even care. All they think of is a typical horny teenage boy being in a high school locker with their precious sweet 16 daughter, and the overprotective suburban helecopter parent mode kicks in and they get stupid. Doesn't matter that the teen boy is trans, doesn't matter if she would hide in the stall to change. If she still looks like a boy it's even worse. I don't even care, I would like trans teens to be able to use the proper bathroom, but they may have to stick with their birth bathroom until the rest of society grows up.

 

4 minutes ago, Gamedog said:

It's so hostile and cold in here, I was waiting for you to show up with the blankets

 

Thank you

So sorry you got so easily butthurt. Would you like a safe space like Tumblr?

I read conservative essays in the news, listen to conservative pundits. They don't believe trans is something that you're born with and can't change. To them it's the same as cross dressing and drag queens. Or you're a homo faggot who's effiminate. Or they compare trans to genderqueer. They assume you can just stop being trans. I'm just going by what comes out of the mouth of people who speak for the GOP and the conservative side in general.
 

[AshleyAshes]

1 minute ago, Crazy Lee said:

That's why there's lawsuits and complaints against these schools, because of Title IX. But most parents don't know what Title IX is, or even care. All they think of is a typical horny teenage boy being in a high school locker with their precious sweet 16 daughter, and the overprotective suburban helecopter parent mode kicks in and they get stupid. Doesn't matter that the teen boy is trans, doesn't matter if she would hide in the stall to change.

Just because a group of ignorant dip-fucks do not understand that an individual possesses certain legally defined rights that schools have a legal obligation to protect, does not mean that person stops possessing those rights in an effort to satisfy ignorant dip-fucks.   'But some shit heads might whine a whole lot about it' is not a valid legal argument.

[Zeke]

9 minutes ago, Kosha said:

Does anyone remember Deseret?

I had to look it up just to find out. 
But it makes sense.

6 minutes ago, Crazy Lee said:

 

I read conservative essays in the news, listen to conservative pundits. They don't believe trans is something that you're born with and can't change. To them it's the same as cross dressing and drag queens. Or you're a homo faggot who's effiminate. Or they compare trans to genderqueer. They assume you can just stop being trans. I'm just going by what comes out of the mouth of people who speak for the GOP and the conservative side in general.
 

They also believe that being gay is a choice, poor people should buy more money, and Black people were better off as slaves since they worked for a living. :V

But yeah, ask any GOP person that isn't a "Liberal-Republican" or Log Cabin Repub, and you get the same rhetoric about transgenders...with a good percentage of it being "muh keeds".

[Fantasma]

Popping in with a quick view on what should be state versus federal mandated:

Any laws protecting people (and animals for fucks sake, looking at you deep south) from discrimination and being opressed should be made mandatory for all states as a bare minimum. Some are going to be better than others, such as oregon funding transitions, but no matter of civil liberty and safety should be something optional that a state can opt out of.

Think about it like if handicap or racial discrimination protection ordinances were left entirely up to the state. Absolute stupidity.

I'm not saying extra funding and programs should be required from the states as it is sadly their goverment's choice on where to spend it, but they should have the same bare minimum protection laws on the book.

[Butters]

I think its great that a lot of businesses/celebs are standing up for the rights of lgbt ppl these days. North Carolina is really bleeding jobs and people are pissed. 

But the south is really into that discrimination shit. They adore it. They've had it around since their birth and just switch the victim up from time to time. (Usually they prey on white men's sexual fears, like claiming that all black men want to rape white women or that gays are all pedophiles. I guess now transgenders are rapists too. Its always rapist minorities with these nazis that run the south. )

I notice that really only Gamedog mentioned the fact that this law implies heavily that men naturally want to rape women/girls. Otherwise, why would a "man" being in a women's bathroom be bad? And yet, no one talks about that on media.  Guess the sjws were right allllllllll along. Haha. 

A lot of north carolinians have pointed out that this wasn't an issue until recently too. All of a sudden we are supposed to fear transgenders who have been using those bathrooms all along. God, people are dumb. 

Fortunately, South Carolina's governor is corporation fan. So she will veto any similar bill to HB2 because she doesn't want her impoverished state to lose more jobs. We can be more liberal than NC occasionally.  

[Gamedog]

1 hour ago, Butters said:

I notice that really only Gamedog mentioned the fact that this law implies heavily that men naturally want to rape women/girls. Otherwise, why would a "man" being in a women's bathroom be bad? And yet, no one talks about that on media.  Guess the sjws were right allllllllll along. Haha.

That's not really what I was saying at all. (although I do agree that it demonizes men and makes us out to look like sexual predators)
I'm saying that if these lawmakers believe that trans women are men who are going into the women's washroom to creep on women, where were they when these same super creepy men were using the washrooms unattended with their male children?

My point was that people only give a shit when it's a woman at risk.

[Troj]

10 hours ago, Crazy Lee said:

And a thought here for those in this thread who aren't getting it: Conservatives do not believe that trans exists. What I mean is they do not think that trans people are born trans. They assume it's someone who thinks "Oh, today I'm going to be a woman for the fuck of it." Or "I'm going to be a woman to be a rapist", since they associate lgbt with sexual deviancy and perversion and you're all rapists and sodomites. So, if you can chose to be trans (in their mind), you can choose to be not trans. In fact, one comment I heard from some right wingers was "They say that being gay is not a choice, but you can choose your gender. Make up your mind." I think they confuse gender fluid with trans, which are two different things.

Exactly right.

Conservatives also take gender roles for granted, and don't understand the science behind, well, anything. So, they don't see any difference between someone "feeling" female or male, and someone "feeling" like a potato, a dragon, or Napoleon.

In general, I'd also say they're privileged, in the sense that they've never had the experience of being a true cultural outsider--or if they have, they've opted to suppress their nonconformist tendencies or thoughts, in favor of going along to get along. Ergo, their reflexive response to outsiders is to say, "Why can't you just pipe down and play nice?" Trans people are seen as little more than crazy trolls who are needlessly rocking the boat when everything was just fine before, thank you (read: just fine for cis-gendered people).

 

 

[Feelwell]

4 minutes ago, Troj said:

Conservatives also take gender roles for granted, and don't understand the science behind, well, anything. So, they don't see any difference between someone "feeling" female or male, and someone "feeling" like a potato, a dragon, or Napoleon.

 

Interesting examples.....

 

5 minutes ago, Troj said:

In general, I'd also say they're privileged, in the sense that they've never had the experience of being a true cultural outsider--or if they have, they've opted to suppress their nonconformist tendencies or thoughts, in favor of going along to get along. Ergo, their reflexive response to outsiders is to say, "Why can't you just pipe down and play nice?" Trans people are seen as little more than crazy trolls who are needlessly rocking the boat when everything was just fine before, thank you (read: just fine for cis-gendered people).

 

 

Eventually they're going to have to realize and admit there are people who are different and that their views are outdated. Soon it'll be them forced to conform, and I bet they'll fight tooth and claw to stop it then.

[Troj]

9 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

Interesting examples.....

They're examples I've heard actual transphobes use, in fact--oh, and Rachel Dolzeal, of course.

9 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

Interesting examples.....

 

Eventually they're going to have to realize and admit there are people who are different and that their views are outdated. Soon it'll be them forced to conform, and I bet they'll fight tooth and claw to stop it then.

Well, and we're seeing that tantrum right now, in the form of the rise of The Donald and the aforementioned bathroom laws.

Hell, the Civil Rights Act passed 52 years ago, and people still don't want to part with their sweet, sweet racism--as evidenced by All Lives Matter concern-trolling, and people flipping their everloving shit about Malia Obama taking a year off before going to Harvard.

[Feelwell]

7 minutes ago, Troj said:

They're examples I've heard actual transphobes use, in fact--oh, and Rachel Dolzeal, of course.

Well, and we're seeing that tantrum right now, in the form of the rise of The Donald and the aforementioned bathroom laws.

Hell, the Civil Rights Act passed 52 years ago, and people still don't want to part with their sweet, sweet racism--as evidenced by All Lives Matter concern-trolling, and people flipping their everloving shit about Malia Obama taking a year off before going to Harvard.

I propose we get rid of all non furries. I barely ever hear of furries being trans/homo-phobic. 

Just make some sort of non-furry seeking weapon.

[AshleyAshes]

2 minutes ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

I propose we get rid of all non furries. I barely ever hear of furries being trans/homo-phobic. 

Oh no, there are plenty of trans phobic furries.  Thought there is only a minority of homophobic furies, since the fandom is pretty gay, they find themselves way outnumbered if they attempt a homophobic argument.

[Feelwell]

11 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Oh no, there are plenty of trans phobic furries.  Thought there is only a minority of homophobic furies, since the fandom is pretty gay, they find themselves way outnumbered if they attempt a homophobic argument.

I sure find it difficult to find them.

At the very least many of the fandom are more open-minded than non-furries.

[Saxon]

Many of the supporters of Donald Trump are young men who haven't been to university and hence have diminished job prospects compared to the privileged college students who spend so much time lecturing them that actually they hold all the privilege.

All that privilege of being brought up in an environment in which you are forced to conform. The brother of one man I know was left handed, and was punished until he wrote with his right, because his parents wanted him to fit in. All that privilege of being circumcised in order to 'fit in'. All that privilege of being beaten as a child.

So I don't think this narrative that archetypal American conservatives don't want to lose their privilege sits right; we should not regard the archetypal traditional upbringing as a privilege and many archetypal conservatives are poor; they're not all part of some aetherial oppressor class.

 

 

[Butters]

3 hours ago, Saxon said:

Many of the supporters of Donald Trump are young men who haven't been to university and hence have diminished job prospects compared to the privileged college students who spend so much time lecturing them that actually they hold all the privilege.

 

 

 

Um, no. 

Trump's fanbase is predominantly uneducated old white men. He might have a few here and there but he is running on an anti-establishment/white grievance platform. 

(In fact, the candidate with the biggest youth vote is Sanders.) 

[Lucyfish]

Now that Dimmald Dormp has the GOP election sealed in, Bernie Sanders has the Republican vote now too, huehue.

[Saxon]

55 minutes ago, Butters said:

Um, no. 

Trump's fanbase is predominantly uneducated old white men. He might have a few here and there but he is running on an anti-establishment/white grievance platform. 

(In fact, the candidate with the biggest youth vote is Sanders.) 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/15/who-really-supports-donald-trump-ted-cruz-ben-carson-marco-rubio-and-jeb-bush-in-5-charts/

So there isn't any evidence to show his support base is 'all old'.

There is good evidence to show that they tend to be poor white men without college degrees.

Compared to the general population, Donald Trump appealed particularly strongly to people on lower incomes with lower levels of higher education. The gap between Trump supporters without degrees and those who have them was the biggest among any republican candidate....because you know, people who can't afford to go to University are obviously the big meanies with all the privilege.

 

[Clove Darkwave]

5 hours ago, Feelwell the Rabbit said:

Eventually they're going to have to realize and admit there are people who are different and that their views are outdated. Soon it'll be them forced to conform, and I bet they'll fight tooth and claw to stop it then.

This is the case every several generations.

 

Note: Don't make this about elections guys.

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

1 hour ago, Lucyfish said:

Now that Dimmald Dormp has the GOP election sealed in, Bernie Sanders has the Republican vote now too, huehue.

Bernie Sanders has literally 0 chance of winning. And if you honestly think he has the republican vote you're probably putting your fingers in your ear and going "LA LA LA" because you don't want to admit that your precious Bernie has basically lost. You know who the Republicans are voting for? Hillary.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/04/25/bombshell-poll-20-republicans-vote-hillary-clinton-trump-wins.html

 

[Lucyfish]

Just now, Sidewalk Surfboard said:

Bernie Sanders has literally 0 chance of winning. And if you honestly think he has the republican vote you're probably putting your fingers in your ear and going "LA LA LA" because you don't want to admit that your precious Bernie has basically lost. You know who the Republicans are voting for? Hillary.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/04/25/bombshell-poll-20-republicans-vote-hillary-clinton-trump-wins.html

 

I'll save saying Bernie has no chance of winning until after we get the California results.

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

Just now, Lucyfish said:

I'll save saying Bernie has no chance of winning until after we get the California results.

Even if he wins California he'll still be way too far behind. Get over yourself.

[Lucyfish]

Just now, Sidewalk Surfboard said:

Even if he wins California he'll still be way too far behind. Get over yourself.

Not true at all, actually. It depends on how much of a landslide he wins California by.

[Lucyfish]

Just now, 6tails said:

Since our Gov Jerry is Democrat, I'll put slightly better odds at a Bernie victory in CA, but I doubt that a landslide will happen by any means.

Yeah, I expect Bernie will win, but there's no reason to not hold out hope that it'll be the big one he needs.

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

1 minute ago, Lucyfish said:

Not true at all, actually. It depends on how much of a landslide he wins California by.

That's implying he's going to win at all. California has more minority groups such as Latino and African American, and it's been proven by polls that Clinton has more of their support. Sure, Bernie might win Cali, but like I said, he doesn't have enough delegates anyways, and Hillary will still be in the lead.

http://capitolweekly.net/hillary-bernie-independents-poll-california/

[Lucyfish]

Just now, Sidewalk Surfboard said:

That's implying he's going to win at all. California has more minority groups such as Latino and African American, and it's been proven by polls that Clinton has more of their support. Sure, Bernie might win Cali, but like I said, he doesn't have enough delegates anyways, and Hillary will still be in the lead.

http://capitolweekly.net/hillary-bernie-independents-poll-california/

I'm almost 100% certain he will win California, since he's always been the highest polling candidate there and California is one of the main states that pushed him for the candidacy in the first place.

Seriously, when I lived there nobody would shut up about him. He has that state in the bag.

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

Just now, Lucyfish said:

I'm almost 100% certain he will win California, since he's always been the highest polling candidate there and California is one of the main states that pushed him for the candidacy in the first place.

Seriously, when I lived there nobody would shut up about him. He has that state in the bag.

His support has gone down recently, so you really can't be too sure. We'll have to wait and see, won't we?

[Lucyfish]

Just now, Sidewalk Surfboard said:

His support has gone down recently, so you really can't be too sure. We'll have to wait and see, won't we?

Indeed, but I'll remain hopeful. California is 9 times out of 10 the deciding factor in any Democratic race, so it's usually up for grabs until they cast their vote.

[Saxon]

11 minutes ago, Clove Darkwave said:

This is the case every several generations.

 

Note: Don't make this about elections guys.

I don't mean to turn this discussion to elections; I am pointing out the flaws of regarding conservative people as archetypal privileged oppressors.

I don't think that people are going to find much common ground with conservative thinkers, and hence be able to break bread with them and resolve matters, if they continue to regard them as maniacally evil characters seeking to defend their privilege, when plenty are actually disadvantaged by modern society.

I think that a convincing argument could be presented to them that employers should not be entitled to sack employees because of their sexual orientation, and businesses should not be able to refuse clients they suspect of being gay, anymore than we would accept somebody doing that on the grounds of race, religion or sex.

Patronising them scuppers that opportunity.

 

[Lucyfish]

Conservatives typically tend to believe religion is grounds to do whatever they want, unfortunately. People don't matter, only Jesus's magic book does.

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

Just now, Lucyfish said:

Conservatives typically tend to believe religion is grounds to do whatever they want, unfortunately. People don't matter, only Jesus's magic book does.

You have never talked to a single Christian in your entire life have you Lucy

[Lucyfish]

1 minute ago, Sidewalk Surfboard said:

You have never talked to a single Christian in your entire life have you Lucy

I was a devout Baptist conservative until I was 15, lol.

The "People don't matter, only God's word matters" mindset was taught to me from a very early age, and everyone in our church adhered to that dogma very willingly and devoutly.

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

1 minute ago, Lucyfish said:

I was a devout Baptist conservative until I was 15, lol.

The "People don't matter, only God's word matters" mindset was taught to me from a very early age, and everyone in our church adhered to that dogma very willingly and devoutly.

Just because you were raised with an unfortunately bad section of Christianity does not mean that every single Christian is like that. You should try talking to different types of Christians before spouting your hatred people who worship le sky fairy