Do tell us of your experience. It could explain your hatred of LGBT folks.
I have no hatred for anyone. I stand opposed to the movement. You are the one trying to talk about specific people.

I am not trying to divert you from talking about the "movement".
You are definitely trying, but you also happen to be failing.

The "movement" you allege is based on a few bad apples.
Nope. the movement is based on all the bad apples.

You blame the LGBT folks for them.
There you go, trying, trying, trying to get onto specific people, and I'm not doing it.
 
I have no hatred for anyone. I stand opposed to the movement. You are the one trying to talk about specific people.


You are definitely trying, but you also happen to be failing.


Nope. the movement is based on all the bad apples.


There you go, trying, trying, trying to get onto specific people, and I'm not doing it.
The LGBT is folks, not a movement. You're trying to attach the movement of a few bad apples to them.
 
The problem is that throughout history, some people claim to be eternal victims when they are, in fact, privileged.
You may well be right. For me, the issue is, which groups of people fit the bill? I think you're suggesting that the LGBT community fits that bill.
I'm not using the term "LGBT community." I don't think that even makes sense.

The LGBTQIAXXXXXXXXXXXXX+ movement insists on supremacy

The LGBTQIAXXX... doesn't exist. I think it's high time that you name actual -organizations- that you believe are insisting on "supremacy" instead of mythical societal constructs.
 
The problem is that throughout history, some people claim to be eternal victims when they are, in fact, privileged.
You may well be right. For me, the issue is, which groups of people fit the bill? I think you're suggesting that the LGBT community fits that bill. I would counter that -some- in that community may fit that bill, but that's a far cry from claiming that -all- members of the LGBT community fit said bill.
Stupid [snip]

It's generally a sure bet that when the first word someone says in response to a post is an insult, the rest isn't worth paying much attention to. After reading beyond the first word, I found that the bet was sound in this case.
 
The LGBTQIAXXX... doesn't exist
Wrong. Maybe you need to pay greater attention.

. I think it's high time that you name actual -organizations-
I'm not naming any organizations or people. LGBTQQIAXXXXXXXXXX+ is a movement. MAGA is a movement. MAGA is trying to make America great again, and LGBTQQIAXXXXXXXXXXXX+ is trying to achieve supremacy. I can't make it any simpler than that.
 
Nope. I am outright stating that they consider themselves eternal victims. Why? Because they feel entitled to supremacy [snip]
That's quite a sweeping assertion.
You fell for it [snip]
What do you believe I "fell for"?
The "eternal victimhood" propaganda [snip]

I'm going to stop you right there, because I now see that we have a larger problem than whether or not "eternal victimhood" exists. The larger problem in question in our conversation above is what you refer to as "they" here, and the "LGBTQIAXXX..." elsewhere. Put simply, it doesn't exist. The closest thing to it would be the LGBTQ community, but as I mentioned elsewhere, the only thing that unites all members is the fact that they're -in- said community. You seem to be claiming that they all share this "eternal victimhood" you speak of, but I've yet to see any evidence that this is the case.
 
The LGBTQIAXXX... doesn't exist. I think it's high time that you name actual -organizations- that you believe are insisting on "supremacy" instead of mythical societal constructs.
Wrong.

Alright, show me evidence that the LGBTQIAXXX... exists then. Now, for my part, I will show you some organizations that -do- exist:
 
I'm going to stop you right there, because I now see that we have a larger problem than whether or not "eternal victimhood" exists.
Red herring. I don't see anyone other than LGBTIAXXXXXXX+ arguing for the existence of eternal victimhood.

LGBTQIAXXX... Put simply, it doesn't exist. The closest thing to it would be the LGBTQ community,
I would agree with you if you were the guy who determines membership. Everything in my experience shows that the LGBTQQIAXXXXXXX+ movement aims at being totally inclusive, explaining the frequent changing of the alphabet soup.

Inclusivity is the reason.


but as I mentioned elsewhere, the only thing that unites all members is the fact that they're -in- said community.
The LGBTQQIAXXXXXXX+ movement insists on being totally inclusive. You don't get to reject any community on their behalf.

You seem to be claiming that they all share this "eternal victimhood"
All in the movement do.

you speak of, but I've yet to see any evidence that this is the case.
What evidence do you need to see?
 
Back
Top