Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Pattern-chaser]

Although the idea of a LBQT [etc.] "community" may have benefited certain trans activists that want to make common cause with homosexuals and make (what I believe to be) many false equivalences. And in this regard I think they have been quite successful. You only need see the number of occasions in this very thread that people have equated the way homosexuality was viewed in the past with the way trans are viewed now. While there may be some superficial parallels, the very nature of these groups (and society's reaction to them) has been very different.

Has it? Been "different", I mean? Society's reaction to both of the groups you mention has been uniform and consistent: persecution, beatings, and the occasional murder. Where are the differences?

[Fried Egg]

Although the idea of a LBQT [etc.] "community" may have benefited certain trans activists that want to make common cause with homosexuals and make (what I believe to be) many false equivalences. And in this regard I think they have been quite successful. You only need see the number of occasions in this very thread that people have equated the way homosexuality was viewed in the past with the way trans are viewed now. While there may be some superficial parallels, the very nature of these groups (and society's reaction to them) has been very different.

Has it? Been "different", I mean? Society's reaction to both of the groups you mention has been uniform and consistent: persecution, beatings, and the occasional murder. Where are the differences?

You could say the same about black people. Even women. Why not include those in your "community" as well?

[Sy Borg]

Are you denying that lesbians and gays often don't associate with each other, that many gays don't suspect bisexuals of being in denial, or that lesbians often have considerable hostility towards transpeople?

Every human community is diverse. Autists like us, for example, are not all clones. We are as different as all humans are different. This applies to all such communities. There is disagreement within communities of all sorts. But the LGBTQ+ community is also aware of persecution by those outside their community, and so they band together to resist it, even if some of their other opinions don't line up with all others in the community.

Until recently in Australia, there was a legally-allowable defence — I can't remember what it was called, maybe something like "gay rage"? — whereby a 'normal' heterosexual man was so outraged and offended by the presence or existence of a gay man, that he had no choice but to kill him. This level of prejudice, and others like it, across the world, has surely led to the LGBTQ+ community banding together for self-protection?

No, the gay rage was sexual fear. When I was young, gay bashing was common. It wasn't the presence of a gay man, it was if a gay man aggressively came onto a straight man, then the gay rage notion was considered. Gays were allowed to exist but putting one's hand on a man's bum and making suggestive comments was not a great survival strategy back in the day.

Still the LGBT etc grouping is BS. As I said by analogy (which you seem to have missed), there are serious schisms. No group detests trans more than a type of feminist lesbian. Indeed, that type of feminist actually does believe that the transpeople should not exist, much more so than "normies", as you intimated.

As for the connection between asexuals and gay men, who tend to be hyper-sexual - there is no common ground at all. Intersexed? They tend to be horrified at being lumped in with trans, and certainly don't want to be confused for them.

There has been a societal disconnect from reality, where people think ideals are reality. So some idiot gender theorist decides that all non-normal people should be lumped in together, just as race theories lump together "people of colour", as though they are a cohesive group, let alone a homogeneous one. What are they doing? Trying to isolate straight people and whites respectively, as if everyone who was not straight or white had much in common.

Oops, slipped off topic.

[Pattern-chaser]

Although the idea of a LBQT [etc.] "community" may have benefited certain trans activists that want to make common cause with homosexuals and make (what I believe to be) many false equivalences. And in this regard I think they have been quite successful. You only need see the number of occasions in this very thread that people have equated the way homosexuality was viewed in the past with the way trans are viewed now. While there may be some superficial parallels, the very nature of these groups (and society's reaction to them) has been very different.

Has it? Been "different", I mean? Society's reaction to both of the groups you mention has been uniform and consistent: persecution, beatings, and the occasional murder. Where are the differences?

You could say the same about black people. Even women. Why not include those in your "community" as well?

Your question appears to be facetious and deliberately provocative, as its answer is clear and obvious.

[Fried Egg]

Although the idea of a LBQT [etc.] "community" may have benefited certain trans activists that want to make common cause with homosexuals and make (what I believe to be) many false equivalences. And in this regard I think they have been quite successful. You only need see the number of occasions in this very thread that people have equated the way homosexuality was viewed in the past with the way trans are viewed now. While there may be some superficial parallels, the very nature of these groups (and society's reaction to them) has been very different.

Has it? Been "different", I mean? Society's reaction to both of the groups you mention has been uniform and consistent: persecution, beatings, and the occasional murder. Where are the differences?

You could say the same about black people. Even women. Why not include those in your "community" as well?

Your question appears to be facetious and deliberately provocative, as its answer is clear and obvious.

Yes, it is obvious that those groups do not belong in the same "community", just as obvious as it should be that trans and gay people should not be classified in a single "community". That both might have suffered persecution is irrelevant.

[Sy Borg]

Maybe the new acronym needs to be LGBTQIJ+ (for Jew), given that mobs are forming in universities to attack, harass, intimidate and isolate Jews.

Oops, it needs to be LGBTQIJO+ because obese people often get a hard time.

Update: LGBTQIJOW+ - wimps have been picked on for too long.

Another update: LGBTQIJOW+ - wimps have been picked on for too long.

Another update: LGBTQIJOWD+ ... how can we leave out the disabled?

We must to lump everyone together who has ever been given a hard time. I'm sure that will help.

[Lagayascienza]

I can understand the idea of oppressed minorities forming alliances but I don't think LGBTQI+ABCDEFG... is really an alliance. And, even if it were, it would be an unworkable one. Each group has it's own unique issues that need to be argued separately. The old LGBT was been taken up, and added to, by crazy post-modern theorists at universities and made to appear as a larger, ever-expanding, unified entity. It is not.

It is a post-modernist construct that is disconnected from the daily reality of the lives of sexual minorities. Women's studies, gay studies, men's studies ... yes, these might have a place in our universities. But overarching "gender-theory" and "gender studies" is post-modernist nonsense. None of the gay and lesbian people I know, and none of the the trans people that I have worked with professionally, use the term LGBTQI+ to refer to themselves. Like me they can't even say it without falling over the phonemes. I don't see that the acronym serves any useful purpose. We might as well add heterosexuals to the list so that it embraces all of humanity.

[Pattern-chaser]

Still the LGBT etc grouping is BS. As I said by analogy (which you seem to have missed), there are serious schisms. No group detests trans more than a type of feminist lesbian. Indeed, that type of feminist actually does believe that the transpeople should not exist, much more so than "normies", as you intimated.

Like any human community, the non-heterosexual community is diverse, and supports a wide variety of other sentiments too. But what they have in common is being different from The Norm in this one way. As we have already noted, if they weren't a persecuted minority, the community might be less clearly demarcated, or maybe wouldn't exist at all. They set aside their differences, perhaps temporarily, to stand together for self-protection.

And yes, their differences of opinion or approach are there, undeniably. But I still think it's fair to say, for example, that JKR's Sisters of Hatred are not the only feminists, or lesbians, or whatever, are no more representative than any other shade of opinion that exists within the community. I've looked for statistics, but I can only find opinions. I like to think that most opinions veer away from hatred of any kind.

[Pattern-chaser]

Yes, it is obvious that those groups do not belong in the same "community", just as obvious as it should be that trans and gay people should not be classified in a single "community". That both might have suffered persecution is irrelevant.

Argument over who belongs in a community, and who doesn't, simply distracts us, and deflects us from the ongoing discussion. As you must know, as we all know, human social groupings are multiply-nested. One person belongs to tens or hundreds of different groupings, all at the same time. There is, in that sense, no such thing as a community — a distinct community, that is. All who belong to the LGBTQ+ community also belong to other communities, some of them associated with this one, others not so much.

All that matters to this discussion is that the LGBTQ+ community can usefully be considered as such. Usefully and meaningfully. A precise scientific classification is quite unnecessary, and not helpful, or useful either.

[Pattern-chaser]

...

We must to lump everyone together who has ever been given a hard time. I'm sure that will help.

I'm sure it will. But I'm also fairly sure that the needs of all the groups you listed differ, to the extent that meeting the needs of one group does nothing for other included groups. Because when you cast your net too wide, you catch all kinds of different things. Each of them has different needs. Also, as you must know well, being universally all-inclusive means that your arguments are diluted and weakened, not by contradiction, but by being lost in the mass of other arguments, groups, needs, and communities.

The LGBTQ+ community is a useful distinction because it gathers together all those whose sexuality/orientation/gender/etc is not 'normal' heterosexual. This particular community is useful and relevant here, because the topic concerns gender, a concept intimately associated with all humans, but in particular, with those whose differences lead to persecution — even murder — by Normies.

[Lagayascienza]

"Normal"? Who is normal? Homosexuality has been a part of humanity since forever and is seen in many other species. We don't know why it evolved but it might confer some adaptive advantage. However that may be, it is a "normal" variation in our species and accounts for around 4% of us. Calling everyone but homosexuals "normal" is exclusionary, scientifically inaccurate and unjustified. It's like all hair colors except red normal.

[Lagayascienza]

It's like calling all hair colors except red normal.
Apologies for the omission.

[Sy Borg]

Still the LGBT etc grouping is BS. As I said by analogy (which you seem to have missed), there are serious schisms. No group detests trans more than a type of feminist lesbian. Indeed, that type of feminist actually does believe that the transpeople should not exist, much more so than "normies", as you intimated.

Like any human community, the non-heterosexual community is diverse, and supports a wide variety of other sentiments too. But what they have in common is being different from The Norm in this one way. As we have already noted, if they weren't a persecuted minority, the community might be less clearly demarcated, or maybe wouldn't exist at all. They set aside their differences, perhaps temporarily, to stand together for self-protection.

And yes, their differences of opinion or approach are there, undeniably. But I still think it's fair to say, for example, that JKR's Sisters of Hatred are not the only feminists, or lesbians, or whatever, are no more representative than any other shade of opinion that exists within the community. I've looked for statistics, but I can only find opinions. I like to think that most opinions veer away from hatred of any kind.

JKR did not invent transphobia. Germaine Greer might have been the first TERF in the 70s.

No, the grouping is garbage. It was already dubious as LGB. Adding T made the situation much worse. Adding "I" made no sense since most intersexed people are "normies" themselves, just unable to breed. Most are not at all queer, and their state is usually not known to any but close friends and family. No doubt the same is happening with some trans.

It's like "people of colour" - many of whom are busily killing each other, in their non-white solidarity.

To call a spade a spade - LGBT etc means "not straight" and People of Colour means "not white". It's just another form of division. What we have again is leftist tripe. I am so disappointed with my former allies, who seem to have thrown reason out of the window to show that the Right are not to be outdone in sheer lunacy and illogic.

The notion of all queer or coloured people being in it together as the OPPRESSED against the OPPRESSOR is typical Marxist garbage, the kind of rubbish that deliberately divides people to distract them from the fact that their wealth and future prospects are being lost to Ponzi schemes in immigration, housing and monetary policy.

[Pattern-chaser]

To call a spade a spade - LGBT etc means "not straight" and People of Colour means "not white".

🫶

[Lagayascienza]

When I was younger and lived in Sydney, from the1980s through to the early 2010s, the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, which began as a protest march by gays against their oppression, slowly transformed into a great annual event that was eventually embraced by pretty much the whole city. It was great fun and, although I don't live there anymore, there is no sign of it dying as far as I can ascertain. Leading politicians take part in it and it's still televised nation-wide. But it has lost much of its pointedness and pizzazz. This may be partly to do with the fact that the gay liberation struggle has largely been won.

Gays can now legally marry and leave their partners the house and their superannuation, as straight couples can, without their families contesting the will. They live in the suburbs behind picket fences with moms and dads with kids as neighbours. Sure, there is still homophobia on the fringes but gay equality and acceptance is now largely a reality in Australia. Among my dearest friends are two aging gay couples who tell me that they no longer feel the old animosity towards them. And that's great.

However, there is nothing risqué about marching in the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras parade anymore. It’s less confrontational, less exiting, less of an eye-opener, less spectacular and impactful. The Mardi Gras began to lose its focus when it became so inclusive that everyone and his/her dog began to march in the parade. Now it’s a rag-tag line of gays, parents and friends of gays, the cutest gay owned dogs, drag queens, politicians, the police (who used to be the worst oppressors) the fire brigade, businesses and sundry others whose presence seems superfluous to the original purpose of the parade. I think this loss of focus began happening around the same time as the BTQI+ was being added to the LG of the acronym, and at around the same time as the rise of postmodernism and its "Queer studies” and "Gender Theory" in our universities.

I suspect that the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras will end up as just a paler, down-market version of Rio’s Canaval do Brasil. That would be a shame. Maybe they should dump the post-modernist “gender theorists” and their mumbo jumbo, along with the acronym LGBTQIA+, and get back to basics, back to showing they are out and proud instead of sickos who need to hide in the closet. Just to keep the ret of us on our toes.