The only "trans" people I have ever known who didn't yap about themselves all day long were the ones who actually were transgender, not the cultists. EVERYTHING to do with the "trans" cult seems to be about attention.
And, for the record, I spent my entire time in gay politics saying that we should stop "shoving it …
The only "trans" people I have ever known who didn't yap about themselves all day long were the ones who actually were transgender, not the cultists. EVERYTHING to do with the "trans" cult seems to be about attention.
And, for the record, I spent my entire time in gay politics saying that we should stop "shoving it in [others'] faces." Because our goal all along should have been that being gay is unremarkable, undefining, and private. Instead, we had (and still have) those grotesque parades where people act out S&M fantasies on parade floats. And there are still a lot of gays for whom the purpose of life is to make sure strangers know what they think about when they masturbate.
For my counseling assimilation, I was called self-hating, suffering from "internalized homophobia." Even while I was as out as could be at work (except I didn't wear a cock ring or grow any "facial hair statements").
But back to that summoning thing. If you were to go to a KKK meeting and you got beaten up, could you honestly claim that it wasn't expected?
OK, I am prejudiced, mine is the attitude of one who spent a long time trying to get attention and suddenly outgrew it, and we tend to dislike most in others that which we dislike most in ourselves.
But whether or not there is anything good about gender nonconformity, there are going to be people who don't like it, nd at the extremes of that dislike there is going to be violence. I'm not that extreme but I can easily see making a very loud scene.
"But back to that summoning thing. If you were to go to a KKK meeting and you got beaten up, could you honestly claim that it wasn't expected?"
No, again, I agree. I'd know full well I was putting myself in danger if I went to a KKK rally. And asserting my right to be there wouldn't make the beating any less likely. But if a significant portion of society was a KKK rally, and my only option to live my life without risk of getting beaten was to hide my skin, should I do it? Would this be acceptable? Would you blame me for refusing or society for being that way?
I understand where you're coming from with assimilation. As we've discussed before, back in the day, many gay people defined themselves by their "otherness," by their status as outsiders. They were shocking and crass simply for the thrill of being so. I think the same is true of the Q+ community today. We are united in our disdain for these people.
But true assimilation also requires adaptation from society. If I'm allowed to kiss my girlfriend or wife in the street without fear of violence, you should be able to kiss your boyfriend or husband. That's not rubbing anything in anybody's face, that's a normal expression of affection that we should *all* be able to take for granted. And it's a long way from the public fetish parties that have sadly come to embody "Pride."
The point I was trying to make is that many of the "don't rub it in my face" people are talking about these ordinary gestures. They're basically saying, "I'll tolerate your existence as long as you completely hide who you are."
I like how we converge on agreement. The more we converse, the more we agree. The same public displays of affection that heterosexual people use should be unremarkable (they would not be in Alabama), but when it comes to going out in public in bondage gear, I shift more toward "what happens, happens."
As I have probably mentioned before, after my solitary march I took part in, 1976, I had signed up for reminders, and every year I got one encouraging me to show up as lewdly-dressed and offensive as I could manage, because ("titter titter") the cops can'tt arrest us all. And that was 45 years ago.
Of only it was a "few."
The only "trans" people I have ever known who didn't yap about themselves all day long were the ones who actually were transgender, not the cultists. EVERYTHING to do with the "trans" cult seems to be about attention.
And, for the record, I spent my entire time in gay politics saying that we should stop "shoving it in [others'] faces." Because our goal all along should have been that being gay is unremarkable, undefining, and private. Instead, we had (and still have) those grotesque parades where people act out S&M fantasies on parade floats. And there are still a lot of gays for whom the purpose of life is to make sure strangers know what they think about when they masturbate.
For my counseling assimilation, I was called self-hating, suffering from "internalized homophobia." Even while I was as out as could be at work (except I didn't wear a cock ring or grow any "facial hair statements").
But back to that summoning thing. If you were to go to a KKK meeting and you got beaten up, could you honestly claim that it wasn't expected?
OK, I am prejudiced, mine is the attitude of one who spent a long time trying to get attention and suddenly outgrew it, and we tend to dislike most in others that which we dislike most in ourselves.
But whether or not there is anything good about gender nonconformity, there are going to be people who don't like it, nd at the extremes of that dislike there is going to be violence. I'm not that extreme but I can easily see making a very loud scene.
"But back to that summoning thing. If you were to go to a KKK meeting and you got beaten up, could you honestly claim that it wasn't expected?"
No, again, I agree. I'd know full well I was putting myself in danger if I went to a KKK rally. And asserting my right to be there wouldn't make the beating any less likely. But if a significant portion of society was a KKK rally, and my only option to live my life without risk of getting beaten was to hide my skin, should I do it? Would this be acceptable? Would you blame me for refusing or society for being that way?
I understand where you're coming from with assimilation. As we've discussed before, back in the day, many gay people defined themselves by their "otherness," by their status as outsiders. They were shocking and crass simply for the thrill of being so. I think the same is true of the Q+ community today. We are united in our disdain for these people.
But true assimilation also requires adaptation from society. If I'm allowed to kiss my girlfriend or wife in the street without fear of violence, you should be able to kiss your boyfriend or husband. That's not rubbing anything in anybody's face, that's a normal expression of affection that we should *all* be able to take for granted. And it's a long way from the public fetish parties that have sadly come to embody "Pride."
The point I was trying to make is that many of the "don't rub it in my face" people are talking about these ordinary gestures. They're basically saying, "I'll tolerate your existence as long as you completely hide who you are."
I like how we converge on agreement. The more we converse, the more we agree. The same public displays of affection that heterosexual people use should be unremarkable (they would not be in Alabama), but when it comes to going out in public in bondage gear, I shift more toward "what happens, happens."
As I have probably mentioned before, after my solitary march I took part in, 1976, I had signed up for reminders, and every year I got one encouraging me to show up as lewdly-dressed and offensive as I could manage, because ("titter titter") the cops can'tt arrest us all. And that was 45 years ago.