Jump to content

LGBT+ Discussion

Turkish

By Turkish,
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, cloggy saint said:

So you're now a champion of LGBT rights? This is a turnaround.

I think it's more the case that this was a nice bit of virtue signalling from Virgin. They do it to much fanfare in countries where they can get away with it but when it comes actually standing up and having principles and possibly paying a real economic or other sort of cost they fold like a house of cards. Kind of suggests it wasn't about promoting minority rights at all. Sort of like when Disney release their films with black actors obscured on the film posters or cut out scenes of blokes kissing in the middle east.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I think it's more the case that this was a nice bit of virtue signalling from Virgin. They do it to much fanfare in countries where they can get away with it but when it comes actually standing up and having principles and possibly paying a real economic or other sort of cost they fold like a house of cards. Kind of suggests it wasn't about promoting minority rights at all. Sort of like when Disney release their films with black actors obscured on the film posters or cut out scenes of blokes kissing in the middle east.  

To be fair, they did send the England team to Qatar in a plane named 'Rain Bow'.

That should sort out the issues in a strict Sharia country :mcinnes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
47 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I think it's more the case that this was a nice bit of virtue signalling from Virgin. They do it to much fanfare in countries where they can get away with it but when it comes actually standing up and having principles and possibly paying a real economic or other sort of cost they fold like a house of cards. Kind of suggests it wasn't about promoting minority rights at all. Sort of like when Disney release their films with black actors obscured on the film posters or cut out scenes of blokes kissing in the middle east.  

Exactly. Like a lot of big companies they’ll do it when it suits them or to jump on the bandwagon and be seen to so the right thing then stop when it doesn’t. Why should we make a stand for LGBTs if it impacts profits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Turkish said:

The 1980s is asking for it's attitudes back

Nothing wrong with the 1980's; got married, graduated from university, got my first full time job, bought the house we still live in, 2 of our 3 children were born. At least men were men, ( and women were grateful ).

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, farawaysaint said:

You could be a ftm transgender who likes women and still be a heterosexual male you bigot.

You could not be biologically male as your genetics would still define you as female, and you could not father children.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

You could not be biologically male as your genetics would still define you as female, and you could not father children.

 

Incorrect

Labour conference: Not right to say only women have a cervix, says Starmer - BBC News

Why a Woman Can Have a Penis: Gender Identity Myths Explained (newsweek.com)

 

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Turkish said:

 

Incorrect

Labour conference: Not right to say only women have a cervix, says Starmer - BBC News

Why a Woman Can Have a Penis: Gender Identity Myths Explained (newsweek.com)

 

Just pure wokish bullshit. There are 8 Billion people on Earth and probably 7,999,999,800 are genetically male or female. Nothing to do with how you choose to dress, or how you surgically or pharmacologically alter your physical appearance. Your genetic makeup is determined at the moment of fertilization, and is fixed for life.

I don't mind if somebody chooses to identify as something different to what biology defines, but I side with J K Rowling ; just because Eddie Izzard decides that today he will be in "girl mode" does not make Eddie a woman.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted (edited)

It's much more complicated than what is portrayed here or in the Daily Mail. There are two separate issues which sometimes overlap. Its not necessarily about wokeism. Dont let that stop the outrage though. 

Quite a high proportion of the population, around 1.5% have some degree of intersex - ie they are genetically male or female but have genitals, chromosones or endocrinology issues which are some way between the two. Sometimes children are assigned a different sex at birth to what is later discovered to be their genetic makeup.

If you are, for example a genetic male but have a vagina, oestrogen and testerone levels more commonly found in women or abnormalities in your Y chromosone its not surprising that many later identify as transgender 

 

main-qimg-b3675fdbca6bda976b103e5592a3e076-lq

      

Edited by buctootim
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Just pure wokish bullshit. There are 8 Billion people on Earth and probably 7,999,999,800 are genetically male or female. Nothing to do with how you choose to dress, or how you surgically or pharmacologically alter your physical appearance. Your genetic makeup is determined at the moment of fertilization, and is fixed for life.

I don't mind if somebody chooses to identify as something different to what biology defines, but I side with J K Rowling ; just because Eddie Izzard decides that today he will be in "girl mode" does not make Eddie a woman.

Eddie Izzard is a beautiful woman when he wants to be. You might just have to ask him which one on any particular day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, buctootim said:

It's much more complicated than what is portrayed here or in the Daily Mail. There are two separate issues which sometimes overlap. Its not necessarily about wokeism. Dont let that stop the outrage though. 

Quite a high proportion of the population, around 1.5% have some degree of intersex - ie they are genetically male or female but have genitals, chromosones or endocrinology issues which are some way between the two. Sometimes children are assigned a different sex at birth to what is later discovered to be their genetic makeup.

If you are, for example a genetic male but have a vagina, oestrogen and testerone levels more commonly found in women or abnormalities in your Y chromosone its not surprising that many later identify as transgender 

 

main-qimg-b3675fdbca6bda976b103e5592a3e076-lq

      

Few rational people would argue with any of that, the problem is that it has no bearing at all on men who want to be women as a lifestyle choice because they enjoy dressing up in stereotypically female clothes. It regularly gets brought up in an attempt to provide a medical basis for being transgender but really it’s a non-sequitur. Whatever the variations in hormones, genital shapes and genetics, we still have a clear definition of male and female which applies to all but a very, very small percentage of the population; people who ovulate are female, people who have testicles and produce sperm are male.

If this was the true basis of what some people actually want to be true, you’d expect it to be fairly consistent; across gender, time, personalities and location. Instead what’s happening is there are 2.5 times as many men who claim to be women, compared to the other way around, the number of people making this claim is growing exponentially, it’s much higher in for example, California than Kansas and it’s frequently associated with people who have serious mental health issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

Few rational people would argue with any of that, the problem is that it has no bearing at all on men who want to be women as a lifestyle choice because they enjoy dressing up in stereotypically female clothes. It regularly gets brought up in an attempt to provide a medical basis for being transgender but really it’s a non-sequitur. Whatever the variations in hormones, genital shapes and genetics, we still have a clear definition of male and female which applies to all but a very, very small percentage of the population; people who ovulate are female, people who have testicles and produce sperm are male.

If this was the true basis of what some people actually want to be true, you’d expect it to be fairly consistent; across gender, time, personalities and location. Instead what’s happening is there are 2.5 times as many men who claim to be women, compared to the other way around, the number of people making this claim is growing exponentially, it’s much higher in for example, California than Kansas and it’s frequently associated with people who have serious mental health issues.

Ja I don't disagree. I am so bored of hearing every minor detail of somebody's makeup and how they are discriminated in some way. The tokenism in films and tv and the incessant megaphoning of special interests is incredibly tedious. Whether of not somebody wants to wear a dress is fine by me, I dont care. Im still going to snigger inwardly at the six foot tall 16 stone ones with receding hair though. .     

Edited by buctootim
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Anyone else buzzing for the new 3 lions song?

Throughly depressing, a real lack of diversity, no mention of the struggles of LGBTs having to travel, no female representation singing, offensive to those who don’t celebrate Christmas. To say it’s tone deaf would be an understatement. Also why didn’t they do a version for the womens euros? Sexism alive and well in Baddiel and skinner it would seem

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cloggy saint

cloggy saint

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Throughly depressing, a real lack of diversity, no mention of the struggles of LGBTs having to travel, no female representation singing, offensive to those who don’t celebrate Christmas. To say it’s tone deaf would be an understatement. Also why didn’t they do a version for the womens euros? Sexism alive and well in Baddiel and skinner it would seem

You are so predictable.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-63710435

Quote

An ex-Wales footballer has described being asked to remove her "rainbow wall" bucket hat as she entered a World Cup stadium in Qatar.

I don't get the suprise and indignation that these reports contain.  We agreed to play a World Cup in a country whose laws say homosexuality is a crime.  We didn't have to agree to play, but by doing so, we've accepted the laws of that country.  Now we seem eternally surprised that the country are enforcing their laws.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-63710435

I don't get the suprise and indignation that these reports contain.  We agreed to play a World Cup in a country whose laws say homosexuality is a crime.  We didn't have to agree to play, but by doing so, we've accepted the laws of that country.  Now we seem eternally surprised that the country are enforcing their laws.  

But only the women wearing these hats were asked to remove them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rallyboy

rallyboy

Posted
Posted

Did FIFA lost control of their own tournament when they sold it to Qatar?

The hosts appear to have gone rogue and are now doing whatever they want - from beer sales to keeping fans outside or banning entry for a hat.

And it's not about the laws of the country, these things were all discussed, negotiated and agreed in advance, but Qatar are now ripping up those agreements and making up new rules every day.

As an advert for what a wonderful place it is and how everyone's welcome, it's been a total clusterfuck.

So the sooner their awful team is battered for a third time and relegated back into the shadows of world football, the better.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

Did FIFA lost control of their own tournament when they sold it to Qatar?

The hosts appear to have gone rogue and are now doing whatever they want - from beer sales to keeping fans outside or banning entry for a hat.

And it's not about the laws of the country, these things were all discussed, negotiated and agreed in advance, but Qatar are now ripping up those agreements and making up new rules every day.

As an advert for what a wonderful place it is and how everyone's welcome, it's been a total clusterfuck.

So the sooner their awful team is battered for a third time and relegated back into the shadows of world football, the better.

 

Unlike those other countries that follow strict Sharia laws that are way more welcoming and tolerant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadoldgit

sadoldgit

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, rallyboy said:

Did FIFA lost control of their own tournament when they sold it to Qatar?

The hosts appear to have gone rogue and are now doing whatever they want - from beer sales to keeping fans outside or banning entry for a hat.

And it's not about the laws of the country, these things were all discussed, negotiated and agreed in advance, but Qatar are now ripping up those agreements and making up new rules every day.

As an advert for what a wonderful place it is and how everyone's welcome, it's been a total clusterfuck.

So the sooner their awful team is battered for a third time and relegated back into the shadows of world football, the better.

 

FIFA didn’t have much of a reputation to trash in the first place, but you would assume that the purpose of hosting the WC for the Qatari’s was a giant PR exercise in convincing us they are good guys really. Within hours of the first ball being kicked FIFA’s reputation has sunk even lower and the Qatar’s have managed to confirm what most people thought about them in the first place. They have had 12 years to iron out any potential problems and yet here we have the hosts sticking two fingers up to all of the agreements that have been signed up to and we watch while FIFA collapse like a pack of cards. There has been a strange atmosphere around these games from the start which doesn’t look like it is going to evaporate now the football is under way. What was a dumb decision to start with now finds it’s chickens coming home to roost. Can’t see many upsides to this other than hopefully David Beckham’s grubby quest for a knighthood is finally buried for good beneath the Qatari sand along with his reputation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

FIFA didn’t have much of a reputation to trash in the first place, but you would assume that the purpose of hosting the WC for the Qatari’s was a giant PR exercise in convincing us they are good guys really. Within hours of the first ball being kicked FIFA’s reputation has sunk even lower and the Qatar’s have managed to confirm what most people thought about them in the first place. They have had 12 years to iron out any potential problems and yet here we have the hosts sticking two fingers up to all of the agreements that have been signed up to and we watch while FIFA collapse like a pack of cards. There has been a strange atmosphere around these games from the start which doesn’t look like it is going to evaporate now the football is under way. What was a dumb decision to start with now finds it’s chickens coming home to roost. Can’t see many upsides to this other than hopefully David Beckham’s grubby quest for a knighthood is finally buried for good beneath the Qatari sand along with his reputation.

we should be delighted that the 'Game' is being hosted in a Muslim country.  We should respect their way of life, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

in so much they hate the LBGTQ+ community to?  probably

Homosexuality was legalised in Turkiye in 1923, and in Jordan in 1951. It may not be socially acceptable, but in this regard they were ahead of the UK.

I doubt very much that in any of the countries listed there would be a ban on rainbows in similar fashion to Qatar.

 

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Homosexuality was legalised in Turkiye in 1923, and in Jordan in 1951. It may not be socially acceptable, but in this regard they were ahead of the UK.

I doubt very much that in any of the countries listed there would be a ban on rainbows in similar fashion to Qatar.

 

Ok, so what?  Who are we to tell another country what to do?

We are bad enough at talking about these behaviours on certain towns and cities in this country, let alone demand change in another

Edited by AlexLaw76
Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Ok, so what?  Who are we to tell another country what to do?

We are bad enough at talking about these behaviours on certain towns and cities in this country, let alone demand change in another

Your comment was about the consequence of playing in a Muslim country, not specifically about Qatar. Your generalisations show a lack of understanding about other faiths and countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Super Saint

Weston Super Saint

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

FIFA didn’t have much of a reputation to trash in the first place, but you would assume that the purpose of hosting the WC for the Qatari’s was a giant PR exercise in convincing us they are good guys really. Within hours of the first ball being kicked FIFA’s reputation has sunk even lower and the Qatar’s have managed to confirm what most people thought about them in the first place. They have had 12 years to iron out any potential problems and yet here we have the hosts sticking two fingers up to all of the agreements that have been signed up to and we watch while FIFA collapse like a pack of cards. There has been a strange atmosphere around these games from the start which doesn’t look like it is going to evaporate now the football is under way. What was a dumb decision to start with now finds it’s chickens coming home to roost. Can’t see many upsides to this other than hopefully David Beckham’s grubby quest for a knighthood is finally buried for good beneath the Qatari sand along with his reputation.

Which agreements were "signed up to"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Your comment was about the consequence of playing in a Muslim country, not specifically about Qatar. Your generalisations show a lack of understanding about other faiths and countries.

My point was the general, who are we to demand change in another country? 

We cant even change the mindset of sections of that religion over here, let alone an entire state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

My point was the general, who are we to demand change in another country? 

We cant even change the mindset of sections of that religion over here, let alone an entire state.

Remember as Soggy put it the other day “isn’t it our job to educate these savages?” 
 

Surely this isn’t just restricted to those in Qatar?

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to LGBT+ Discussion

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...