We are also discovering exoplanets all the time that may support life. The fact that they have a right to exist or not should be recognised in this game. Please add the Drake equation to this, N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL
Struggling with D, E, H, I, J, K and Y, but I'm sure the good people of CL can come up with summing?
A = Any thing goes B = Bi C = Cottaging D = ? E = Everything (Incl. inanimate objects) F = Fingers (Woman off wrist) G= Gay H= ? I= ? J= ? K= ? L= Lesbien M= Men only N= Nothing O= Open minded P= Pansexual Q= Queer R= Rectum S= Single (Man/Woman off the wrist) T= Trans U= Undecided V= Veggie W= Women only X= XX Y= ? Z= Zooaphile
... In the States, we're currently having a national discussion about bathrooms, which is a distraction from the larger conversation that individual states are revoking the rights of the LGTBQ+ community as protected from being discriminated against (i.e. North Carolina's new bill makes it legal for anyone to discriminate against people based on their sexual or gender orientation).
...
I didn't know it was currently illegal in the US to discriminate based on sexual orientation etc. but for that to be the case and now have states wanting to turn the clock back is very worrying. What's next, saying it's OK to discriminate on grounds of sex or colour?
Heading off on a tangent, I know, but, didn't the Oklahoma State legislature just make abortion illegal this week?
Not fully made law, but the Governor shares a similar view.
As ever with these things, there always seem to be groups out there keen to take offense for others (who haven't taken offense) or create groupings when all we need is recognition of an individual's choices.
... In the States, we're currently having a national discussion about bathrooms, which is a distraction from the larger conversation that individual states are revoking the rights of the LGTBQ+ community as protected from being discriminated against (i.e. North Carolina's new bill makes it legal for anyone to discriminate against people based on their sexual or gender orientation).
...
I didn't know it was currently illegal in the US to discriminate based on sexual orientation etc. but for that to be the case and now have states wanting to turn the clock back is very worrying. What's next, saying it's OK to discriminate on grounds of sex or colour?
Heading off on a tangent, I know, but, didn't the Oklahoma State legislature just make abortion illegal this week?
Not fully made law, but the Governor shares a similar view.
No, the Governor vetoed it. She might agree with them, but even she could see an expensive court case that they would eventually lose.
Applaud the club but not something I would choose to attend, however think the club have only done it to help win positive praise unlike when the Red White and Black initiative was launched.
Struggling with D, E, H, I, J, K and Y, but I'm sure the good people of CL can come up with summing?
A = Any thing goes B = Bi C = Cottaging D = ? E = Everything (Incl. inanimate objects) F = Fingers (Woman off wrist) G= Gay H= ? I= ? J= ? K= ? L= Lesbien M= Men only N= Nothing O= Open minded P= Pansexual Q= Queer R= Rectum S= Single (Man/Woman off the wrist) T= Trans U= Undecided V= Veggie W= Women only X= XX Y= ? Z= Zooaphile
Surely B should be for bestiality (unfair to exclude those who love their animals) and P should be for polygamy which is practised by so many Moslem males. At the end of the day, all these labels are irrelevant, because if the Marxists get their way, gender fluidity will mean that we can be male in the morning, female in the afternoon and something else in the evening, and have a wonderfully varied sex life along the way.
Struggling with D, E, H, I, J, K and Y, but I'm sure the good people of CL can come up with summing?
A = Any thing goes B = Bi C = Cottaging D = ? E = Everything (Incl. inanimate objects) F = Fingers (Woman off wrist) G= Gay H= ? I= ? J= ? K= ? L= Lesbien M= Men only N= Nothing O= Open minded P= Pansexual Q= Queer R= Rectum S= Single (Man/Woman off the wrist) T= Trans U= Undecided V= Veggie W= Women only X= XX Y= ? Z= Zooaphile
Surely B should be for bestiality (unfair to exclude those who love their animals) and P should be for polygamy which is practised by so many Moslem males. At the end of the day, all these labels are irrelevant, because if the Marxists get their way, gender fluidity will mean that we can be male in the morning, female in the afternoon and something else in the evening, and have a wonderfully varied sex life along the way.
There is a brilliant book by Ursula Le Guin, the 'Left Hand of Darkness' I believe it is called. Where she imagines just that. A 'human' society where people got their 'monthlies' and became either male or female ( genitalia wise) for a week, and then shagged incessantly. Then after a week their libido would revert to neutral for three weeks. As a result a 'person' could both father a child, and mother a child in their lifetime.
Struggling with D, E, H, I, J, K and Y, but I'm sure the good people of CL can come up with summing?
A = Any thing goes B = Bi C = Cottaging D = ? E = Everything (Incl. inanimate objects) F = Fingers (Woman off wrist) G= Gay H= ? I= ? J= ? K= ? L= Lesbien M= Men only N= Nothing O= Open minded P= Pansexual Q= Queer R= Rectum S= Single (Man/Woman off the wrist) T= Trans U= Undecided V= Veggie W= Women only X= XX Y= ? Z= Zooaphile
Surely B should be for bestiality (unfair to exclude those who love their animals) and P should be for polygamy which is practised by so many Moslem males. At the end of the day, all these labels are irrelevant, because if the Marxists get their way, gender fluidity will mean that we can be male in the morning, female in the afternoon and something else in the evening, and have a wonderfully varied sex life along the way.
1) As a Marxist that isn't on my agenda. I remember in Kapital where Marx...no never brought that up. 2) these labels are important because they acknowledge people, which has a huge power unto itself. 3) I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but LBTBQ folks are often compared to people who conduct bestiality and pedophilia, and it's a terrible slur. It's like comparing black people to monkeys. Genuinely hope you didn't know this, but it's an incredibly bigoted thing to say. 4) I'd say that we're at best drawing with homophobia. To be honest, I'd have taken a draw if you'd offered it in advance.
Struggling with D, E, H, I, J, K and Y, but I'm sure the good people of CL can come up with summing?
A = Any thing goes B = Bi C = Cottaging D = ? E = Everything (Incl. inanimate objects) F = Fingers (Woman off wrist) G= Gay H= ? I= ? J= ? K= ? L= Lesbien M= Men only N= Nothing O= Open minded P= Pansexual Q= Queer R= Rectum S= Single (Man/Woman off the wrist) T= Trans U= Undecided V= Veggie W= Women only X= XX Y= ? Z= Zooaphile
Surely B should be for bestiality (unfair to exclude those who love their animals) and P should be for polygamy which is practised by so many Moslem males. At the end of the day, all these labels are irrelevant, because if the Marxists get their way, gender fluidity will mean that we can be male in the morning, female in the afternoon and something else in the evening, and have a wonderfully varied sex life along the way.
1) As a Marxist that isn't on my agenda. I remember in Kapital where Marx...no never brought that up. 2) these labels are important because they acknowledge people, which has a huge power unto itself. 3) I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but LBTBQ folks are often compared to people who conduct bestiality and pedophilia, and it's a terrible slur. It's like comparing black people to monkeys. Genuinely hope you didn't know this, but it's an incredibly bigoted thing to say. 4) I'd say that we're at best drawing with homophobia. To be honest, I'd have taken a draw if you'd offered it in advance.
Good points SDAddick, especially (3) - which I agree with completely. On the other hand, and completely sincerely without wishing to appear provocative or in disagreement, do you feel that the excessive labeling of groups (I'm thinking of the evolution from LGBT to LGBTAIQ+) is doing anyone any good?
Personally I find it quite frustrating as an onlooker, because although I don't think there should ever be a requirement for an umbrella term for what essentially boils down to "Don't be a dick (and/or vagina ) and treat everyone else with the respect you'd like to enjoy yourself.", I do appreciate that there may be a need for that term in the current climate. However, when the usage and meaning of that term begins to be the focus of the debate, then I can't help but fear it's actively facilitating the avoidance of the real issues.
Struggling with D, E, H, I, J, K and Y, but I'm sure the good people of CL can come up with summing?
A = Any thing goes B = Bi C = Cottaging D = ? E = Everything (Incl. inanimate objects) F = Fingers (Woman off wrist) G= Gay H= ? I= ? J= ? K= ? L= Lesbien M= Men only N= Nothing O= Open minded P= Pansexual Q= Queer R= Rectum S= Single (Man/Woman off the wrist) T= Trans U= Undecided V= Veggie W= Women only X= XX Y= ? Z= Zooaphile
Surely B should be for bestiality (unfair to exclude those who love their animals) and P should be for polygamy which is practised by so many Moslem males. At the end of the day, all these labels are irrelevant, because if the Marxists get their way, gender fluidity will mean that we can be male in the morning, female in the afternoon and something else in the evening, and have a wonderfully varied sex life along the way.
1) As a Marxist that isn't on my agenda. I remember in Kapital where Marx...no never brought that up. 2) these labels are important because they acknowledge people, which has a huge power unto itself. 3) I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but LBTBQ folks are often compared to people who conduct bestiality and pedophilia, and it's a terrible slur. It's like comparing black people to monkeys. Genuinely hope you didn't know this, but it's an incredibly bigoted thing to say. 4) I'd say that we're at best drawing with homophobia. To be honest, I'd have taken a draw if you'd offered it in advance.
It's very much on the agenda of this particular Marxist, Roz Ward and she stated as much at a Marxist conference. Her "anti bullying" program which the Leftist Premier of Victoria wants to introduce to all schools in Victoria, will teach primary school kids as young as 7 all about gay sex, and has kids as young as 11 role playing as being Lesbian, bi, having had multiple sex partners by the age of 15, in fact everything other than being heterosexual. No need to give me the benefit of the doubt as I didn't make any link between paedophilia and bestiality and LGBTI people. The point I'm trying to make is that if you want to be truely inclusive and cover every base with all these different labels, then you need to recognise people who like to have sex with animals as well, as unpalatable as that may seem, just as some people may find gay sex unpalatable. Where do you draw the line when it comes to people's sexual preferences, or is there no line? That's a rhetorical question!
Comments
A = Any thing goes
B = Bi
C = Cottaging
D = ?
E = Everything (Incl. inanimate objects)
F = Fingers (Woman off wrist)
G= Gay
H= ?
I= ?
J= ?
K= ?
L= Lesbien
M= Men only
N= Nothing
O= Open minded
P= Pansexual
Q= Queer
R= Rectum
S= Single (Man/Woman off the wrist)
T= Trans
U= Undecided
V= Veggie
W= Women only
X= XX
Y= ?
Z= Zooaphile
Not fully made law, but the Governor shares a similar view.
and P should be for polygamy which is practised by so many Moslem males.
At the end of the day, all these labels are irrelevant, because if the Marxists get their way, gender fluidity will mean that we can be male in the morning, female in the afternoon and something else in the evening, and have a wonderfully varied sex life along the way.
As a result a 'person' could both father a child, and mother a child in their lifetime.
2) these labels are important because they acknowledge people, which has a huge power unto itself.
3) I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but LBTBQ folks are often compared to people who conduct bestiality and pedophilia, and it's a terrible slur. It's like comparing black people to monkeys. Genuinely hope you didn't know this, but it's an incredibly bigoted thing to say.
4) I'd say that we're at best drawing with homophobia. To be honest, I'd have taken a draw if you'd offered it in advance.
You have arguments about removing the "T" as gender isn't a sexuality and then student groups tearing themselves apart because gay men are now seen as equally privileged when compared to straight men. It all seems a tad conflated - and bordering on militant - to me, and removes the focus from the real issues at hand - equality for all, regardless of gender or orientation.
Personally I find it quite frustrating as an onlooker, because although I don't think there should ever be a requirement for an umbrella term for what essentially boils down to "Don't be a dick (and/or vagina
No need to give me the benefit of the doubt as I didn't make any link between paedophilia and bestiality and LGBTI people. The point I'm trying to make is that if you want to be truely inclusive and cover every base with all these different labels, then you need to recognise people who like to have sex with animals as well, as unpalatable as that may seem, just as some people may find gay sex unpalatable. Where do you draw the line when it comes to people's sexual preferences, or is there no line? That's a rhetorical question!
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=18033
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/marxist-roz-ward-now-victorian-school-lgbti-adviser/news-story/bcfc421e3d5c148775d282c2093deeaa
Anything between consenting adults is OK, anything else is not.