Thoughts on Pride month.

[FailWood]

I have very conflicting thoughts on this subject, as someone who hates sensationalism, but doesn't wish for anyone to feel like an outcast or face abuse.

Pride month seeks to stop alienating those who are LGBTQ and the abuse they face, however in a double standard fashion it also alienates those who are sexually straight and have no conflicts about who or what they are, and Pride month supporters are hostile towards them if they have even the slightest misgivings.  Between the double standard nature of this and my hatred of sensationalism, it's easy to see why I don't like execution of Pride month.

 

Just to give my own thoughts of what I think about LGBTQ:

While I support those who are lesbian, gay, or bisexual, I'm not the most keen of the idea of there being trans people, even though I am against the abuse they face.  The ambiguity can lead to dishonesty due to them sometimes not fully committing to one side or wanting their preference before the change is completed, and I dislike how there's nothing in the law saying they HAVE to be honest.  On the other hand, there is a law saying you have to refer to them as their preferred pronoun in workplace environments, and breaking it CAN lead to jail time, which I think is absurd.

Does anyone else feel a similar conflict towards this subject as I do?  Where you're fine with what it's aiming to do, but hates how it was handled?

[Armchair General]

While I agree with you, I don't really face the exact problems that you've described in regards with being jailed for misgendering people. Not saying that it'll be great idea to do so, especially at the workplace; but the "you're with us or against us mentality" needs to die out.

Edited June 10, 2022 by Armchair General

[Florete]

3 hours ago, FailWood said:

however in a double standard fashion it also alienates those who are sexually straight and have no conflicts about who or what they are

No it does not and if you feel that way about it the problem lies with you. What's with this idea that bringing awareness to one thing requires the exclusion of everything else?

Think about it like this: "Straight Pride," if we must put a name to it, is everywhere, all around you, every day. You see a picture of happy straight couple kissing on Facebook? That's Straight Pride. You see a straight couple in a commercial just being themselves? That's Straight Pride. You see a flirty male character hitting on women? That's Straight Pride. You play Pokemon and the Attract condition only works on the opposite gender? That's Straight Pride. 

You cannot realistically be alienated for being straight because being straight is the status quo. If you're thinking you feel alienated for being straight, it is because you're so used to heterosexuality and heteronormativity being the status quo that even a slight deviation makes you feel uncomfortable, even though all it is is a group of people wanting to be seen and accepted for who they are. It's like the old saying: "When one is used to preferential treatment, equality begins to feel like discrimination."

That's not to say there aren't bad actors out there, there always are, but I don't believe you're saying all this as a result of a few bad actors.

It is not unthinkable to have certain misgivings about Pride Month specifically, but your post comes off as very dishonest and disrespectful.

[FailWood]

1 hour ago, Florete said:

What's with this idea that bringing awareness to one thing requires the exclusion of everything else?

That's how it happens though.  To provide opportunities to a certain group of people who are commonly oppressed for whatever reason, you have to deny others not of that group a chance to grant them that opportunity.  Same applies even when none of that stuff is part of the equation.  Giving one person a job means you have to deny another candidate if there's no more open spots available.

1 hour ago, Florete said:

It is not unthinkable to have certain misgivings about Pride Month specifically, but your post comes off as very dishonest and disrespectful.

You sound like you understand what it is I'm saying, yet you say that I'm coming off as dishonest, which makes no sense.

I find that extremely odd, given that your point was focused heavily on "Straight Pride" even though I said that Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual were the parts of LGBTQ that I do support, but then you say nothing about Trans or Queer, the parts of LGBTQ that I don't fully support.  It's like you're trying to spin my words.

[Florete]

3 minutes ago, FailWood said:

That's how it happens though.  To provide opportunities to a certain group of people who are commonly oppressed for whatever reason, you have to deny others not of that group a chance to grant them that opportunity.  Same applies even when none of that stuff is part of the equation.  Giving one person a job means you have to deny another candidate if there's no more open spots available.

No opportunities are being lost for anyone. New opportunities are being created for specific people. Complaining about that is straight up selfish.

It's like when a game-development class for women opened up and people asked where the class for men was: it's every other class. 

7 minutes ago, FailWood said:

You sound like you understand what it is I'm saying, yet you say that I'm coming off as dishonest, which makes no sense.

I find that extremely odd, given that your point was focused heavily on "Straight Pride" even though I said that Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual were the parts of LGBTQ that I do support, but then you say nothing about Trans or Queer, the parts of LGBTQ that I don't fully support.  It's like you're trying to spin my words.

Your misgivings on Pride month force me to question your actual feelings on the matter. You say you support lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, yet you also apparently feel alienated when they want to make themselves seen (which is bs and is why I posted what I did). This does not tell me you support them, it tells me you're fine with them existing as long as they do so in their own little bubble where you don't have to notice them.

By "dishonest" I just mean that you say one thing while believing another, even if you don't realize it yourself. It's not tough to understand that.

As far as your opinion on TQ+, well, you don't like them, and there's just not much to say about that. I can say you have some pretty awful opinions in that regard, but there's just not much else to unpack (or at least I'm not the person to do so). I've definitely never heard of anyone getting jail time for misgendering or dead-naming anyone, though, and I honestly doubt that such a law actually exists, but I haven't exactly bothered to look it up.

[FailWood]

21 minutes ago, Florete said:

New opportunities are being created for specific people.

For specific people, which excludes others who aren't of those people.  My point on that still stands.

21 minutes ago, Florete said:

It's like when a game-development class for women opened up and people asked where the class for men was: it's every other class. 

That's nonsense and you know it.  Since when are there general environments like that these days which actively exclude women?

21 minutes ago, Florete said:

yet you also apparently feel alienated

I never said that I did personally.  Do not put words in my mouth.

21 minutes ago, Florete said:

By "dishonest" I just mean that you say one thing while believing another, even if you don't realize it yourself. It's not tough to understand that.

You're pretty much saying that I can't support LGB just because I'm not any of those things.  That's absurd.

22 minutes ago, Florete said:

I've definitely never heard of anyone getting jail time for misgendering or dead-naming anyone, though, and I honestly doubt that such a law actually exists, but I haven't exactly bothered to look it up.

https://www.californiafamily.org/2018/02/good-news-law-penalizing-misgendering-with-hefty-fine-and-or-jail-time-being-legally-challenged/

This article says that people can get up to a year of jail time for misgendering another person.

[Eltosian Kadath]

5 hours ago, FailWood said:

however in a double standard fashion it also alienates those who are sexually straight and have no conflicts about who or what they are,

I don't see how it is a double standard, as it gets similar treatment to other forms of celebration. To use a bit of a metaphor (not a perfect on mind you), its like being an atheist during the Christmas season. You can join in on the corporatization, and celebration, but some of it isn't really going to for you (like Christmas mass for instance), and that is OK.

Yeah, I know the metaphor isn't perfect, religion is more of a choice than sexuality or gender identity is.

 

5 hours ago, FailWood said:

Pride month supporters are hostile towards them if they have even the slightest misgivings.

For the same reasons trying to "end" Christmas would earn you hostility from some Christians...

 

5 hours ago, FailWood said:

I don't like execution of Pride month.

I am a little curious what your ideal execution of Pride month would be.

 

3 hours ago, FailWood said:

I'm not the most keen of the idea of there being trans people,

That is a really dark way of viewing the world... Time to ask a question I will likely regret learning the answer to, but why are you not keen on the idea of a demographic of people existing?

 

3 hours ago, FailWood said:

The ambiguity can lead to dishonesty due to them sometimes not fully committing to one side

There are non-binary identities, where there isn't one "side" that they are a part of. The dishonesty (or if interpreted charitably ignorance) more comes from people trying to force a spectrum into a binary. To continue the Christian metaphor from before, Lutherans that insist on not being equated with Roman Catholics isn't dishonest, its treating two branches of Christianity as identical which is. Sure that simplification of Christianity can be useful, but there are times where that loss of precision isn't appropriate. The world is almost always analogue, even when digital simplifications are useful, it doesn't change the nature our analogue reality.

 

3 hours ago, FailWood said:

wanting their preference before the change is completed, and I dislike how there's nothing in the law saying they HAVE to be honest

Why would they be dishonest about their preferred pronouns? What would even be the gain to them, or harm to you if they are being dishonest? Why are you assuming dishonesty?

Alternatively is this that incredibly dishonest, and sensationalist thing people do where they pretend sex and gender are identical?

 

3 hours ago, FailWood said:

On the other hand, there is a law saying you have to refer to them as their preferred pronoun in workplace environments, and breaking it CAN lead to jail time, which I think is absurd.

For someone that claims to hate sensationalism, this is a very sensationalist claim to make. This law isn't about when somebody accidentally said a pronoun wrong once, and more of somebody intentionally refusing to say the right pronoun repeated as a form of harassment, even after being reminded repeatedly, and warned about the consequences of such repeated harassment. I hope you can understand why intentionally being misgendered repeatedly can be a form of harassment, as it would also be so when done to cis people, although it is often accurately seen as petty and childish when done to cis people (and as such does not occur frequently enough to warrant a law). If you need help imagining I can give you an example scenario: imagine a boss (or if you are still a minor one of your teachers) who insists on referring to you as a she, or a little girl, and even tries to get employees/students to join in on calling you a little girl, even trying to force you to act like a girl for them, or forcing you into women's bathrooms/locker-rooms against your will. If you can not even imagine a level of harassment that might require jail time as a deterrent, than I envy how kind life has been to you.

 

30 minutes ago, FailWood said:

That's how it happens though.  To provide opportunities to a certain group of people who are commonly oppressed for whatever reason, you have to deny others not of that group a chance to grant them that opportunity.  Same applies even when none of that stuff is part of the equation.  Giving one person a job means you have to deny another candidate if there's no more open spots available.

What opportunity do you feel like you lost because Pride exists?

 

24 minutes ago, FailWood said:

For specific people, which excludes others who aren't of those people.  My point on that still stands.

Nothing is stopping you from trying to create the same opportunity for yourself, the same way they did.  I don't see how the point stands much at all...

 

13 minutes ago, FailWood said:

Since when are there general environments like that these days which actively exclude women?

Haven't been paying much attention to gaming news have you, as numerous videogame companies have had some fairly heinous amounts of discrimination against women come to light...

 

12 minutes ago, FailWood said:

 

53 minutes ago, Florete said:

yet you also apparently feel alienated

I never said that I did personally.  Do not put words in my mouth.

 

6 hours ago, FailWood said:

it also alienates those who are sexually straight and have no conflicts about who or what they are

Are these not your words, or was this some dishonest and sensational hypothetical about other people?

[FailWood]

1 hour ago, Florete said:

This does not tell me you support them, it tells me you're fine with them existing as long as they do so in their own little bubble where you don't have to notice them.

For Trans and Queer, that's exactly how I feel.  I don't feel like I'll ever be comfortable around them, but the atrocities they faced should never have happened.

As for LGBs, I do support them.  A long time ago, I was weary of the idea of two people of the same gender being lovers.  However, after I attended a Lesbian wedding back when I was a kid, and saw how it was no different then any other wedding I've heard about before that one, that's when I started supporting it.

[FailWood]

5 minutes ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

I am a little curious what your ideal execution of Pride month would

Honestly, I'd much rather it not be a thing at all.  But to give your question a proper answer; something that's a lot less "in your face", where there's not news of a rally every other day.

9 minutes ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

why are you not keen on the idea of a demographic of people existing?

Because I view Trans as a big monkey wrench to how the world works, and it conflicts with a personal preference of wanting things to be simple, or relatively easy to understand.

15 minutes ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

What opportunity do you feel like you lost because Pride exists?

None, fortunately.  The only job opportunity I ever lost had nothing to do with who or what I am.

18 minutes ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

Nothing is stopping you from trying to create the same opportunity for yourself, the same way they did.  I don't see how the point stands much at all...

If I ever did create something, then I'd make the opportunity available to everyone (age permitting of course).

23 minutes ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

Are these not your words, or was this some dishonest and sensational hypothetical about other people?

It's a feeling that exists, yet for the sake of privacy, I can't say who feels this way.

 

28 minutes ago, Eltosian Kadath said:

Haven't been paying much attention to gaming news have you, as numerous videogame companies have had some fairly heinous amounts of discrimination against women come to light...

Were there not any women in those environments at all?  I've heard of women be harassed in those work environments, but I haven't heard of any instances of them being completely excluded.

[Benice]

6 hours ago, FailWood said:

Pride month seeks to stop alienating those who are LGBTQ and the abuse they face, however in a double standard fashion it also alienates those who are sexually straight and have no conflicts about who or what they are

I don't think that this is true; it's more that the rest of the year is "Straight month", so to speak. In the month of the year where LGBTQ+ people become a more visible minority, it can feel odd to people who are not part of that minority and haven't had as much exposure to it. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the concept of the mind's schemas, but as a brief summary, they're essentially the brain's framework for sorting information. For example, a young child may see a four-legged cat, and be told by a parent that it is a cat. Thus, the brain creates the new schema for "Cats" based on the information it has- A cat is an animal that walks on four legs. Schemas change primarily in two ways: Assimilation and Accommodation. Assimilation is when we modify or change new information to fit into our schema- For example, the child I mentioned earlier may see a horse and call it a cat, assimilating the new information into the "Cat" schema. Accommodation is when a schema is altered to better fit the information, such as the child learning that not all four-legged animals are cats and accommodates the schema to include horses as something other than cats.

tl;dr Schemas are how the brain sorts information; new information can either be added in to an existing schema (Assimilation) or the schema will be modified to accommodate for the new information (Accommodation).

The reason that I'm mentioning this is that as we grow up, schemas will naturally form based on our experiences. However, as we age, the ability to accommodate new information goes down, and our schemas become more set in stone. If one is raised in an environment where everyone is straight, which is what is most often portrayed in media for most of the year, then your schema for relationships is more likely to have the idea that a romantic relationship is straight- This could potentially be the case for you. Even if your personal belief doesn't line up with this, it does follow that new information that does not fit into your existing schema can cause discomfort. The information that we are given during Pride Month (At least here in Canada) is contrary to the information we get for the rest of the year; I can see how you'd feel that it's an anti-Straight or Cis month, (Though not an anti-LGBTQ+ household, I was raised in a very straight environment, so the increased exposure to diversity can be a little uncomfortable for me at first as well) but in reality... I really don't think that this is the case, and I'd chalk it mostly up to how the brain works with new information. The fact that the whole of society isn't affirming your sexuality could certainly be mistakenly perceived as anti-straight.

Now, blaming the brain and moving on isn't a good idea, but just being aware of that predisposition it may have can be very helpful.

(Also note that I haven't studied minority influence yet, though, so I've still got an incomplete picture.)

6 hours ago, FailWood said:

and Pride month supporters are hostile towards them if they have even the slightest misgivings

Eehh, that's a pretty broad generalization. LGBTQ+ people and their allies aren't a singular entity. Some people may be hostile, while others won't be- Can't paint 'em all with one brush, that's for sure. You are probably correct that people are more likely to be militant about this time of year thanks to the increased awareness, though, but that's just human nature. Plus...

6 hours ago, FailWood said:

Between the double standard nature of this and my hatred of sensationalism, it's easy to see why I don't like execution of Pride month.

One thing to keep in mind that LGBTQ+ people have been an oppressed minority for a long time, and are only now starting to get *some* mainstream acceptance in North American media. While it's definitely a loaded comparison, I would still say that it's a bit like the fight for the civil rights of people of colour throughout the 1900's in America- I'll focus on voting rights for the purpose of the comparison. The way the oppressed minority (In this case, primarily African-Americans) got their freedom wasn't necessarily pretty; both sides of the conflict instigated violence, and it is worth noting that civil disobedience did play a large role in how they eventually did get the right to vote. Activism, for better or for worse, isn't often perfectly clean for either side. Back to the present day, while it's not quite the same thing, there are some things that are paralleled. With all the history of repression and the continued efforts against them by many people in America and around the world... Well, it certainly makes sense to me that people are loud about it, perhaps even louder than some people are comfortable with- That's fundamentally how social change works. Things don't change by staying in comfort zones.

7 hours ago, FailWood said:

I'm not the most keen of the idea of there being trans people, even though I am against the abuse they face. 

I mentioned this back on the other thread, but I also have a hard time understanding gender- It's a complicated concept and, though I am ashamed of it, I do still feel discomfort over it, though this is mostly my lack of understanding (Well, it's also possible that gender isn't complicated and I am just not very smart). Regardless, given that I am a cis man, it ain't my job to understand gender, because I probably never will, similar to how people who don't have Bipolar are unlikely to properly understand manias, or people without psychosis likely won't understand breaks from reality. As someone who doesn't deal with gender as a personal conflict, I feel like my role in the subject is just to respect pronouns as best I can, since that is all I can do for now. I do still strive to better understand gender, but as a small-brain degenerate, I'll start small and hopefully work my way up from there.

7 hours ago, FailWood said:

Does anyone else feel a similar conflict towards this subject as I do? 

While I don't feel the same way you do, I do think I understand how you feel. It can be really hard to try to be loving or kind when we're dealing with new things, especially if we don't get them. Plus, since it is a minority that's still being mistreated by lots of people in America, it is easy to prompt hostility and arguments, as we can see in discussions like this one. It is a really sensitive topic, and approaching it is indeed difficult; however, I would still encourage you to seek out respectful discussion with LGTBQ+ people; you mentioned that you still don't feel comfortable with non-binary people, but... Well, ignoring them won't change that. Social change is, by nature, uncomfortable, and it's by moving past what makes you uncomfortable that you can decide whether or not the change is something you want to support.

[ping]

8 hours ago, FailWood said:

While I support those who are lesbian, gay, or bisexual, I'm not the most keen of the idea of there being trans people, even though I am against the abuse they face.

@Florete's post sums up my opinions on the matter quite nicely, but I want to ask you to reflect on this stance. Trans people exist. That's a fact. You're literally telling real, actual people that you wish they didn't exist. That's pretty fucked up. "I don't condone any abuse or violence against him, buuuuuut it would be really nice if FailWood didn't exist." - that's really uncomfortably close to "I hope you die".

[FailWood]

13 minutes ago, Benice said:

I don't think that this is true; it's more that the rest of the year is "Straight month", so to speak.

 

14 minutes ago, Benice said:

Schemas

The whole "rest of the year is _____ month" case never sat well me whenever someone brings it up.  My household never put stock into what people were or made a big deal about details like that.  We knew that not everyone was exactly the same, but we still treated others as people.  It was a very simple outlook on things.

7 minutes ago, ping said:

Florete's post sums up my opinions on the matter quite nicely, but I want to ask you to reflect on this stance. Trans people exist. That's a fact. You're literally telling real, actual people that you wish they didn't exist. That's pretty fucked up.

You're way off the mark of what I'm trying to say.  I'm saying that I wish they would just pick a side they prefer and be done with it.  It's the confusion behind it all that I wish didn't exist, not the people themselves.

[Florete]

2 hours ago, FailWood said:

For specific people, which excludes others who aren't of those people.  My point on that still stands.

You have a million dollars (or your regional equivalent) and you're complaining that it's not a million and one.

Like, I see the (very twisted) logic here, and I want to keep this as civil as I can, but I can't see this as anything but extremely petty. Thing exists, and because it's not for you, it's a problem? Even though you have so many other Things? Hell, cis/straight people aren't even actually excluded from Pride Month, you can join in if you want (I have cis/straight family members who have done just that). In fact, I'd go so far as to say that those who are confident in their sexuality, including cis/straight people, should feel the least alienated by Pride Month.

2 hours ago, FailWood said:

That's nonsense and you know it.  Since when are there general environments like that these days which actively exclude women?

You misunderstand. It's not that the other classes actively exclude women, it's that a women-only class exists because the other ones are so heavily focused on men and the male demographic already to the point that a male-only class would be redundant...Just like why Pride Month exists.

2 hours ago, FailWood said:

I never said that I did personally.  Do not put words in my mouth.

1 hour ago, FailWood said:

It's a feeling that exists, yet for the sake of privacy, I can't say who feels this way.

Okay, so say what applies to you, in your own words. Do you or do you not feel alienated by Pride Month? If not, why are you sympathizing with those who are? I don't care what your homophobic aunt says on Facebook, so if you don't want to take on the responsibility of this position, you ought to let it go.

2 hours ago, FailWood said:

You're pretty much saying that I can't support LGB just because I'm not any of those things.  That's absurd.

? That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying you're saying one thing while your words otherwise suggest something else. Cis/straight allies absolutely exist.

2 hours ago, FailWood said:

https://www.californiafamily.org/2018/02/good-news-law-penalizing-misgendering-with-hefty-fine-and-or-jail-time-being-legally-challenged/

This article says that people can get up to a year of jail time for misgendering another person.

Not only is this "source" so obviously incredibly biased - and thus I do not trust them - this law appears to specifically be about doctors and/or nurses misgendering patients, which can have very real medical consequences. This isn't saying Joe Blow can be arrested for dead-naming a trans girl on the street.

24 minutes ago, FailWood said:

You're way off the mark of what I'm trying to say.  I'm saying that I wish they would just pick a side they prefer and be done with it.  It's the confusion behind it all that I wish didn't exist, not the people themselves.

Trans people have picked a side. You literally said, "I'm not the most keen of the idea of there being trans people." If ping is way off the mark, you need to explain yourself better.

Edited June 10, 2022 by Florete

[LoneStar]

4 hours ago, Florete said:

Okay, so say what applies to you, in your own words. Do you or do you not feel alienated by Pride Month? If not, why are you sympathizing with those who are? I don't care what your homophobic aunt says on Facebook, so if you don't want to take on the responsibility of this position, you ought to let it go.

The whole alienation thing is interesting. I've started to become more aware of narcissism. I guess there are people who want things to center around them so when they're not giving attention they feel threatened. But like what has been said it's effectively "Straight Month Pride" every other month. I guess people are upset that there's a dedicated "Pride Month" and for the sake of "equality" there shouldn't be one. I'm more of the that line of thinking, but I understand that it's necessary for oppressed groups to be able to express themselves and for others to be able to see them as just people celebrating and being happy like any other. There's some weirdness that may or may not happen in the Pride Parades that people disagree with, but even then that doesn't have to define the whole LGBT+.

5 hours ago, FailWood said:

You're way off the mark of what I'm trying to say.  I'm saying that I wish they would just pick a side they prefer and be done with it.  It's the confusion behind it all that I wish didn't exist, not the people themselves.

Well even the trans people themselves have to deal with the confusion. The simple concept is that gender and sex are separate things. Even though males generally identify as men and females generally identify as women. I can see the complexity, and it would be easier if things were simple, but just take things for what they are. If you see a male, more than likely he identifies as a man, but that isn't necessarily the case. Just accept that people come with a small asterisk that you should pay attention to, but it won't always be there. Maybe that line of thinking is more comfortable?

5 hours ago, Florete said:

Trans people have picked a side.

I guess genderfluid exists and that's were the discomfort on picking a side comes from.

5 hours ago, ping said:

Trans people exist. That's a fact. You're literally telling real, actual people that you wish they didn't exist. That's pretty fucked up. "I don't condone any abuse or violence against him, buuuuuut it would be really nice if FailWood didn't exist." - that's really uncomfortably close to "I hope you die".

I'm guessing it's seen as a sickness. Like instead of using "FailWood" "people with cancer" could be more accurate to what's being conceptualized from FailWood's stance. Well the problem, and "confusion" as FailWood calls it is the gender dysphoria. The solution for people going through that is transitioning and being trans. Trans people exist because of the "confusion" that they're going dealing with, I don't think it gets more complex than that.

[Armchair General]

12 hours ago, FailWood said:

https://www.californiafamily.org/2018/02/good-news-law-penalizing-misgendering-with-hefty-fine-and-or-jail-time-being-legally-challenged/

This article says that people can get up to a year of jail time for misgendering another person

Here's an better example.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2021/03/18/canadian-man-jailed-after-misgendering-his-daughter/

Just bear in mind, that there's plenty of other stories where an activist in the Commonwealth repeatedly misgenders someone on Twitter, they get arrested and possibly fined. Personally, I believe that what happens on the internet should stay on the internet unless it involves threatening people with physical harm; but I find the notion of fining people for what they say or believe in is kind of ridiculous, especially when you can just block them.

As for the rest of thread, what's with not getting involved, @FailWood

After all, it's just another month in the year where people can celebrate who they are. I usually just skip reading articles about it and I'll be fine.

 

[ping]

Breitbart? What's the next "unbiased" "journalistic" source, Russia Today?

11 hours ago, FailWood said:

You're way off the mark of what I'm trying to say.  I'm saying that I wish they would just pick a side they prefer and be done with it.  It's the confusion behind it all that I wish didn't exist, not the people themselves.

I mean... that's not as bad, I guess? It's still a very odd take, to say the least. You talk like gender identity is just like picking what shoes to wear for the day. It's not my place to speculate "how it feels" to have a gender identity that's different from one's biological sex, but I assume it's more complicated for the people in question than just "picking a side". Not to mention that, guess what, non-binary people also exist and deserve recognition.

[Benice]

11 hours ago, FailWood said:

The whole "rest of the year is _____ month" case never sat well me whenever someone brings it up.

It's true, though; the status quo for the rest of the year is straight and cis: In advertising, in pictures and cards, in shows, in movies, on billboards, even. Pride Month is a celebration of a vulnerable minority and the one time of year where they really have a voice in larger society. If portrayals of LGBTQ+ people were more common and accepted by society, then you wouldn't notice or be bothered by Pride month since it would fit more closely to your definition of normal- Even if you have no intention of being discriminatory towards LGB people specifically, society has conditioned people to think that it ain't normal; Pride month exists, in part, to help change this perception.

12 hours ago, FailWood said:

But to give your question a proper answer; something that's a lot less "in your face", where there's not news of a rally every other day.

Well, why do you think that they have rallies? What do you think the purpose is? Furthermore, what's the point of a pride month where people are... Expected to not be proud? How is a silent pride month supposed to generate discussion or promote change?

Finally... What do you think a "Straight pride" month look like? 'Cause to me, a "straight pride" month would look pretty much exactly like the rest of the year, because it's not challening the status quo at all. If you had a different take, though, hearing it would be interesting.

Ultimately, you say that you wish no harm upon LGBTQ+ people, but if you're asking them to remain hidden, you aren't staying neutral; you are actively siding against them.

11 hours ago, Florete said:

I can't see this as anything but extremely petty. Thing exists, and because it's not for you, it's a problem? Even though you have so many other Things?

[...]

You misunderstand. It's not that the other classes actively exclude women, it's that a women-only class exists because the other ones are so heavily focused on men and the male demographic already to the point that a male-only class would be redundant...Just like why Pride Month exists.

^Also, pretty much this.

[eclipse]

I've heard that this topic is a clusterfuck, so I'm gonna lock it while I figure out what happened here.

EDIT 1: And my temper just hit the roof.  For the sake of literally everyone in this topic, I'm going to take a little break.

EDIT 2: That was longer than a little break, but that's okay.  Transphobia is not welcome on SF (and neither are the other -phobias, for anyone else that wants to be clever about being an ass to LBGTQ+ people), and OP has been banned because of that.  And Breitbart is not a reliable source.

Edited June 11, 2022 by eclipse