Conservative DCUM'ers: how far back do you want LGBTQ rights rolled back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Think this is a poor reading of things. Almost no one is against "the gays." Almost everyone accepts gay marriage, gay relationships, two mommies or two daddies, gay children, rainbow flags, tolerance, non-discrimition etc etc etc. That issue is settled

What people are bothered by is the "trans issue." Human beings have been around for 300,000 years. Gender fluidity is a very novel concept and the vast majority of people don't buy it. While gender dysmorphia has always existed, people are really uncomfortable being told their tomboy girl or their effeminate boy is not a real boy or girl. And they need to transition and take on a lifetime of medical intervention. Most parents don't think this is a healthy way of dealing with the turbulence of adolescence. They think that what it means to be a boy or girl should be very expansive. If you're not a Barbie or a Jock or you're attracted to people of the same gender, it shouldn't be an issue.

But there seems to be a lot of pressure in certain zip codes that if you don't conform to gender stereotypes there's something wrong with you. And now there's an entire industry that will swoop in and take advantage of it - for financial, ideological, or political reasons

That's what bothers people. It's not LGBQ. It's the T.

That's the same thing in different wrapping paper. I was there when the issue wasn't grown adults living in monogamous gay relationships, it was the CHILDREN. We can't expose the CHILDREN to gay marriage, because it will confuse them/influence them/damage them.

Now it's transgenderism. Which is a thing that exists and has existed through known history. Just like gay people. And somehow you didn't end up gay or trans. Trust your kids to find their way, too. Even if they (gasp!) see a person in a dress using the women's restroom who they think might have a Y chromosome.

Gen Z had the higher exposure to LGBT in public than earlier generation. Somehow they ended up more gay and trans.

Or previous generations suppressed themselves more.

Which leads to suicide, right? That's why we should support all this, because we can save lives through suicide. I'm sure if you look it up, you'll see graphs showing suicide and mental illness making sharp declines as we have embraced this new reality. Right? Can someone show me those graphs of all the suppressed people from 10, 20, 30 years ago killing themselves because they were men living inside women's bodies or vice versa? And how now this new treatment embrace of trans youth is causing the lowest levels of suicide in decades. Someone get those youth suicide graphs and we can settle this once and for all.

The truth is suicide rates have been on the rise the past couple decades. A recent survey showed a dramatic increase in suicidal ideation among teenagers especially girls. Approximately 20% of the the younger generation now identifies as LGBQT and according to statistics they seem far less happier and have more suicidal ideation. If historically these large numbers of gay and transgender individuals have always existed we should be able to see evidence of a lot of unexplained suicides throughout history but we don't. The suicide rate should also be on the decline with more acceptance but the opposite is happening.

[Anonymous]

A local public elementary school teacher (MD) was reading a book to her 6 year old students that featured a cartoon of people in fetish gear making out. Call me a reactionary Republican (I’m not), but I think it is inappropriate for children of any age, much less 6 years olds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How far back?

1.Mind your own business but don't flaunt sexual activity in front of children. That goes for heterosexual and homosexual activity.
2. No transition for children. Some kids think they are superheroes. We don't let them jump off tall buildings to see if they can fly.
3. Don't call people bigots because they think kids should not have surgery a la Dr. Mengele.

When you say sh-- like this, comparing transition to a Nazi torture doctor, you are in fact a bigot.

This is probably not the place for explicit descriptions of the results and complications of bottom surgery, but I think it is extremely unfair to call someone a bigot for recoiling at the idea of it and at it being done to young people who often have a range of other psychological issues

Kids aren’t getting bottom surgery. People are losing their minds over social transitions and puberty blockers because they’re terrified they won’t be able to look at a person, and figure out what kind of genitalia they have. That’s creepy as hell. No one has the right to know what’s in someone else’s pants.

It’s way more complicated than that. You think hormones therapies and gender changing drugs are risk free? No, when you mess with the endocrine system with growth hormones and other hormone regulating drugs, you heighten the risks for a slew of major health problems like cardiovascular disease to cancer to strokes.

Yet democrats want MINORs to make informed health decisions for elective procedures that could significantly harm their health in the future when democrats keep telling us those same minors have immature brains and not fully developed decision making skills when it comes to crime. It’s so, sooooooo hypocritical.

I did not say they’re risk free. You know what I’m not?! An endocrinologist. I’d guess you aren’t either. I can’t think of a single lawmaker who is an endocrinologist. So, if there’s a teen who’s insisted since they were 3 years old that they were another gender, and become extremely distressed by body changes that come with puberty, I think the kid and parents should talk to the f-n doctors, and make a decision together.

Why are ya’ll happily inviting the government in on your medical options? It’s nuts!! They’re not qualified. They’re also making every single thing about protecting kids from trans activities. Financial planning by legislators? Gotta watch out for money going to trans friendly organizations! Books in schools? What teachers are saying? Gotta watch out for that trans indoctrination! Swimsuits at Target? Gotta watch out because Target is trying to make your kids trans!

I can see trans people are the popular boogeyman. It’s for money. It’s for votes. It has never, ever been about kids. If it was, I would have expected these same states to deal with the number of kids dying from gunshot wounds in their state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leave the children alone!

You leave other people's children alone. If someone wants to take their kids to a reading at a library or bookstore, that's up to them to decide how to parent their children. It's so strange that you think you should be involved.

Then we're in a agreement. Keep it out of schools where there are captive audiences. Keep it out of Starbucks and other businesses. As a general rule of thumb, if you wouldnt want to see a cross or MAGA flag there (schools, malls, public buildings) then don't put a pride flag there. If you want to convince your 5 year old daughter that she'd be better off if she had a penis, that's on you.

When it's time to have these discussions with my children it will be on MY terms at a time and place of MY choosing. I don't need some blue haired woman or trans person having these conversations with my children out of my sight. This is an optics war that the left cannot win.

Keep it...out of Starbucks? What? No. lol.

Have you been following the news? It has been removed from Starbucks (and many other places).

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/15/business/starbucks-pride-decorations.html

I don't have subscription but right there in the title...

The company insists that’s not true and said the examples are an “outlier.”

Of course they're going to say it's not true. Corporate has said it's a top down mandate that all stores look the same. Not trying to be a jerk here but it's been all over the news. Next time you're at a strip mall take a peek inside the local Starbucks and see how many rainbows there are there. My guess is that it will be the same as the number of MAGA banners. Which is how it should be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

I’m a socially conservative immigrant who votes democrat. The following are too much for me:

- talking about gender identity and sexuality in elementary school. Have no problem with talking about how some kids have two mommies or two daddies. But when students are taught about sex in 4th grade I’d rather it be introduced as a means of reproduction. I feel sex as pleasure should not be discussed until middle school.
- parents not knowing if their kids are identifying as another gender. This is a medical issue. Parents have the right to know whether their child has socially transitioned.
-pretending that biological sex is a social construct. Women are adult human females. Females are the sex with the large gametes - the ones, where if everything is functioning properly, have the capacity to get pregnant. Males do not. It’s as simple as that.

Everything else I’m ok with, including gay marriage.

Honest question - for number 1 why don’t you just sign the permission form for your child not to participate in sex Ed?

You have your head in the sand. Do you not let your kids interact with other kids? Should those parents be barred from talking with their kids about sex in terms you don’t approve of so your child is never exposed to information you don’t want them to have? Do your kids ever have access to the Internet or smart phones? I guarantee you they are seeing a ton of sex related information.

The material is beyond sex ed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/04/11/montgomery-county-schools-lgbtq-book-opt-out/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How far back?

1.Mind your own business but don't flaunt sexual activity in front of children. That goes for heterosexual and homosexual activity.
2. No transition for children. Some kids think they are superheroes. We don't let them jump off tall buildings to see if they can fly.
3. Don't call people bigots because they think kids should not have surgery a la Dr. Mengele.

When you say sh-- like this, comparing transition to a Nazi torture doctor, you are in fact a bigot.

This is probably not the place for explicit descriptions of the results and complications of bottom surgery, but I think it is extremely unfair to call someone a bigot for recoiling at the idea of it and at it being done to young people who often have a range of other psychological issues

Kids aren’t getting bottom surgery. People are losing their minds over social transitions and puberty blockers because they’re terrified they won’t be able to look at a person, and figure out what kind of genitalia they have. That’s creepy as hell. No one has the right to know what’s in someone else’s pants.

It’s way more complicated than that. You think hormones therapies and gender changing drugs are risk free? No, when you mess with the endocrine system with growth hormones and other hormone regulating drugs, you heighten the risks for a slew of major health problems like cardiovascular disease to cancer to strokes.

Yet democrats want MINORs to make informed health decisions for elective procedures that could significantly harm their health in the future when democrats keep telling us those same minors have immature brains and not fully developed decision making skills when it comes to crime. It’s so, sooooooo hypocritical.

I did not say they’re risk free. You know what I’m not?! An endocrinologist. I’d guess you aren’t either. I can’t think of a single lawmaker who is an endocrinologist. So, if there’s a teen who’s insisted since they were 3 years old that they were another gender, and become extremely distressed by body changes that come with puberty, I think the kid and parents should talk to the f-n doctors, and make a decision together.

Why are ya’ll happily inviting the government in on your medical options? It’s nuts!! They’re not qualified. They’re also making every single thing about protecting kids from trans activities. Financial planning by legislators? Gotta watch out for money going to trans friendly organizations! Books in schools? What teachers are saying? Gotta watch out for that trans indoctrination! Swimsuits at Target? Gotta watch out because Target is trying to make your kids trans!

I can see trans people are the popular boogeyman. It’s for money. It’s for votes. It has never, ever been about kids. If it was, I would have expected these same states to deal with the number of kids dying from gunshot wounds in their state.

They act like transgender people are everywhere. It's an epidemic. Meanwhile, I'm the only trans person that posts on DCUM. It's far from common. A couple people with trans kids also post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A local public elementary school teacher (MD) was reading a book to her 6 year old students that featured a cartoon of people in fetish gear making out. Call me a reactionary Republican (I’m not), but I think it is inappropriate for children of any age, much less 6 years olds.

I’d say this is a whacko teacher and an employee issue not a reason to ban sex Ed, acknowledging the existence of gay etc.

DD had a whacko teacher in MCPS. She was convinced in the Mayan end of the world thing. It scared some kids and others knew she was full of it. This was a reason to get rid of this teacher
NOT ban any books about south and Central America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Ya wanna know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of your constant "blasted in my face" "shoved down my throat" rhetoric. I grew up in the '70s and '80s and there were rainbows all over kids stuff and NOBODY HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT and it DIDN'T TURN ANYONE GAY OR TRANS. The constant nonstop barrage of right wing freakouts is too damn much and y'all need to STFU.

Did rainbow brite symbolize LGBT?

Why is that relevant? You're not a serious person.

Contention is rainbow did not make people become LGBT, but in 1980s is rainbow considered mainstream LGBT or child's toy? I agree that the rainbow do not cast spell to make people become LGBT, however gallup data do show that more people claim LGBT (20% gen z).

That is major societial shift in very short time period. Is it realistic? Is it people convinced turned LGBT? Or is true natural population of people is 20%? People say that you can't turn people LGBT, then why such rapid change?

And interesting this dramatic increase is happening among the generation growing up around social media. There was also an increase in kids coming out LGBQT during Covid when they spent even more time at home on devices and social media apps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How far back?

1.Mind your own business but don't flaunt sexual activity in front of children. That goes for heterosexual and homosexual activity.
2. No transition for children. Some kids think they are superheroes. We don't let them jump off tall buildings to see if they can fly.
3. Don't call people bigots because they think kids should not have surgery a la Dr. Mengele.

When you say sh-- like this, comparing transition to a Nazi torture doctor, you are in fact a bigot.

This is probably not the place for explicit descriptions of the results and complications of bottom surgery, but I think it is extremely unfair to call someone a bigot for recoiling at the idea of it and at it being done to young people who often have a range of other psychological issues

Kids aren’t getting bottom surgery. People are losing their minds over social transitions and puberty blockers because they’re terrified they won’t be able to look at a person, and figure out what kind of genitalia they have. That’s creepy as hell. No one has the right to know what’s in someone else’s pants.

It’s way more complicated than that. You think hormones therapies and gender changing drugs are risk free? No, when you mess with the endocrine system with growth hormones and other hormone regulating drugs, you heighten the risks for a slew of major health problems like cardiovascular disease to cancer to strokes.

Yet democrats want MINORs to make informed health decisions for elective procedures that could significantly harm their health in the future when democrats keep telling us those same minors have immature brains and not fully developed decision making skills when it comes to crime. It’s so, sooooooo hypocritical.

I did not say they’re risk free. You know what I’m not?! An endocrinologist. I’d guess you aren’t either. I can’t think of a single lawmaker who is an endocrinologist. So, if there’s a teen who’s insisted since they were 3 years old that they were another gender, and become extremely distressed by body changes that come with puberty, I think the kid and parents should talk to the f-n doctors, and make a decision together.

Why are ya’ll happily inviting the government in on your medical options? It’s nuts!! They’re not qualified. They’re also making every single thing about protecting kids from trans activities. Financial planning by legislators? Gotta watch out for money going to trans friendly organizations! Books in schools? What teachers are saying? Gotta watch out for that trans indoctrination! Swimsuits at Target? Gotta watch out because Target is trying to make your kids trans!

I can see trans people are the popular boogeyman. It’s for money. It’s for votes. It has never, ever been about kids. If it was, I would have expected these same states to deal with the number of kids dying from gunshot wounds in their state.

Wow, you’re really dumb. It’s the law that minors cannot make informed health decisions and give informed consent. The pharmaceutical industry cannot test drugs on minors without parental permission, yet here we are with democrats demanding that children be allowed to opt in for elective medical procedures without parental permission. It’s so insanely looney that the state of California is debating on whether or not the state will take kids away from their parents if the parents don’t agree to gender affirming treatments an immature minor thinks they need.


https://www.kcra.com/article/california-bill-ab-957-parents-gender-affirmation/44191798

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Think this is a poor reading of things. Almost no one is against "the gays." Almost everyone accepts gay marriage, gay relationships, two mommies or two daddies, gay children, rainbow flags, tolerance, non-discrimition etc etc etc. That issue is settled

What people are bothered by is the "trans issue." Human beings have been around for 300,000 years. Gender fluidity is a very novel concept and the vast majority of people don't buy it. While gender dysmorphia has always existed, people are really uncomfortable being told their tomboy girl or their effeminate boy is not a real boy or girl. And they need to transition and take on a lifetime of medical intervention. Most parents don't think this is a healthy way of dealing with the turbulence of adolescence. They think that what it means to be a boy or girl should be very expansive. If you're not a Barbie or a Jock or you're attracted to people of the same gender, it shouldn't be an issue.

But there seems to be a lot of pressure in certain zip codes that if you don't conform to gender stereotypes there's something wrong with you. And now there's an entire industry that will swoop in and take advantage of it - for financial, ideological, or political reasons

That's what bothers people. It's not LGBQ. It's the T.

That's the same thing in different wrapping paper. I was there when the issue wasn't grown adults living in monogamous gay relationships, it was the CHILDREN. We can't expose the CHILDREN to gay marriage, because it will confuse them/influence them/damage them.

Now it's transgenderism. Which is a thing that exists and has existed through known history. Just like gay people. And somehow you didn't end up gay or trans. Trust your kids to find their way, too. Even if they (gasp!) see a person in a dress using the women's restroom who they think might have a Y chromosome.

Gen Z had the higher exposure to LGBT in public than earlier generation. Somehow they ended up more gay and trans.

Or previous generations suppressed themselves more.

Which leads to suicide, right? That's why we should support all this, because we can save lives through suicide. I'm sure if you look it up, you'll see graphs showing suicide and mental illness making sharp declines as we have embraced this new reality. Right? Can someone show me those graphs of all the suppressed people from 10, 20, 30 years ago killing themselves because they were men living inside women's bodies or vice versa? And how now this new treatment embrace of trans youth is causing the lowest levels of suicide in decades. Someone get those youth suicide graphs and we can settle this once and for all.

The truth is suicide rates have been on the rise the past couple decades. A recent survey showed a dramatic increase in suicidal ideation among teenagers especially girls. Approximately 20% of the the younger generation now identifies as LGBQT and according to statistics they seem far less happier and have more suicidal ideation. If historically these large numbers of gay and transgender individuals have always existed we should be able to see evidence of a lot of unexplained suicides throughout history but we don't. The suicide rate should also be on the decline with more acceptance but the opposite is happening.

Are you innumerate? There are so many factors that go into the suicide rate, you can't possibly expect to render verdict on this issue by looking at the total trend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't want to take away any rights. I'd like to turn back time for the movement that was fighting for straight rights - get married, adopt kids, etc. I am all for that.

The focus has really shifted to individual sexual expression and I don't care to support that. The trans people taking their shirts off at the White House is exactly the kind of trashy behavior I don't want to take over society norms.

You are confusing societal norms and laws. There is a huge difference. You can’t control societal norms, you can only contribute or avoid. We don’t live in a Shariah country where modesty is mandated and women are chattel. We don’t make laws outlawing sexual expression because some religions don’t like it. No one in the LGBTQ community has ever fought that straight people shouldn’t get married or adopt kids. The reverse is not true.

Separation of church and state so that individuals can be free to live their lives as they choose is a core principle of this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious what the ultimate objective of the DeSantis wing is regarding LGBTQ people. Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? Or making homosexuality a crime? It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag.

Are you really a libertarian "I don't care what consenting adults do" as long as it isn't discussed in the school system? -- as long as it is not discussed outside of participating adults.

Or do you think that the LGBTQ lifestyle itself is detrimental to national identity? - no one's sex life should be detrimental to national identity. Just because Bidens have not had sex in last 20 years, this should not be detrimental to US identity.

Are you in favor of abolishing the right to gay marriage? - No.

Or making homosexuality a crime? - No.

It does feel that something changed recently and this is the first Pride month since the late 1990's where corporations and local governments seem to be afraid to wave the rainbow flag - corporations care about business, and LGBTQ do not help any business. This is very simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How far back?

1.Mind your own business but don't flaunt sexual activity in front of children. That goes for heterosexual and homosexual activity.
2. No transition for children. Some kids think they are superheroes. We don't let them jump off tall buildings to see if they can fly.
3. Don't call people bigots because they think kids should not have surgery a la Dr. Mengele.

When you say sh-- like this, comparing transition to a Nazi torture doctor, you are in fact a bigot.

This is probably not the place for explicit descriptions of the results and complications of bottom surgery, but I think it is extremely unfair to call someone a bigot for recoiling at the idea of it and at it being done to young people who often have a range of other psychological issues

Kids aren’t getting bottom surgery. People are losing their minds over social transitions and puberty blockers because they’re terrified they won’t be able to look at a person, and figure out what kind of genitalia they have. That’s creepy as hell. No one has the right to know what’s in someone else’s pants.

It’s way more complicated than that. You think hormones therapies and gender changing drugs are risk free? No, when you mess with the endocrine system with growth hormones and other hormone regulating drugs, you heighten the risks for a slew of major health problems like cardiovascular disease to cancer to strokes.

Yet democrats want MINORs to make informed health decisions for elective procedures that could significantly harm their health in the future when democrats keep telling us those same minors have immature brains and not fully developed decision making skills when it comes to crime. It’s so, sooooooo hypocritical.

I did not say they’re risk free. You know what I’m not?! An endocrinologist. I’d guess you aren’t either. I can’t think of a single lawmaker who is an endocrinologist. So, if there’s a teen who’s insisted since they were 3 years old that they were another gender, and become extremely distressed by body changes that come with puberty, I think the kid and parents should talk to the f-n doctors, and make a decision together.

Why are ya’ll happily inviting the government in on your medical options? It’s nuts!! They’re not qualified. They’re also making every single thing about protecting kids from trans activities. Financial planning by legislators? Gotta watch out for money going to trans friendly organizations! Books in schools? What teachers are saying? Gotta watch out for that trans indoctrination! Swimsuits at Target? Gotta watch out because Target is trying to make your kids trans!

I can see trans people are the popular boogeyman. It’s for money. It’s for votes. It has never, ever been about kids. If it was, I would have expected these same states to deal with the number of kids dying from gunshot wounds in their state.

Wow, you’re really dumb. It’s the law that minors cannot make informed health decisions and give informed consent. The pharmaceutical industry cannot test drugs on minors without parental permission, yet here we are with democrats demanding that children be allowed to opt in for elective medical procedures without parental permission. It’s so insanely looney that the state of California is debating on whether or not the state will take kids away from their parents if the parents don’t agree to gender affirming treatments an immature minor thinks they need.


https://www.kcra.com/article/california-bill-ab-957-parents-gender-affirmation/44191798

I’m not stupid, but I didn’t think I had to spell every little thing out for you. That says more about your intelligence than it does mine.

Of course kids can’t seek treatment without their parents. It should be clear to you that I’m talking about states that are passing bans. I’m not taking about California, and I’m not going to play along with your game of taking it to the extremes. F off with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Ya wanna know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of your constant "blasted in my face" "shoved down my throat" rhetoric. I grew up in the '70s and '80s and there were rainbows all over kids stuff and NOBODY HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT and it DIDN'T TURN ANYONE GAY OR TRANS. The constant nonstop barrage of right wing freakouts is too damn much and y'all need to STFU.

Did rainbow brite symbolize LGBT?

Why is that relevant? You're not a serious person.

Contention is rainbow did not make people become LGBT, but in 1980s is rainbow considered mainstream LGBT or child's toy? I agree that the rainbow do not cast spell to make people become LGBT, however gallup data do show that more people claim LGBT (20% gen z).

That is major societial shift in very short time period. Is it realistic? Is it people convinced turned LGBT? Or is true natural population of people is 20%? People say that you can't turn people LGBT, then why such rapid change?

And interesting this dramatic increase is happening among the generation growing up around social media. There was also an increase in kids coming out LGBQT during Covid when they spent even more time at home on devices and social media apps.

I just looked into that poll a little closer. 15% of that 20% identify as bisexual. Is that actually something people are worried about? First off, people being free to be themselves is a good thing. Second, most bisexual people are going to end up in straight relationships.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want you to keep it in the bedroom. I don't want it blasted in my face 24/7. I don't want to talk about it all the time. I want to know you as Larlo who makes a mean hamburger, not Larla the flamboyant lesbian.

Ya wanna know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of your constant "blasted in my face" "shoved down my throat" rhetoric. I grew up in the '70s and '80s and there were rainbows all over kids stuff and NOBODY HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT and it DIDN'T TURN ANYONE GAY OR TRANS. The constant nonstop barrage of right wing freakouts is too damn much and y'all need to STFU.

Did rainbow brite symbolize LGBT

Why is that relevant? You're not a serious person.

Contention is rainbow did not make people become LGBT, but in 1980s is rainbow considered mainstream LGBT or child's toy? I agree that the rainbow do not cast spell to make people become LGBT, however gallup data do show that more people claim LGBT (20% gen z).

That is major societial shift in very short time period. Is it realistic? Is it people convinced turned LGBT? Or is true natural population of people is 20%? People say that you can't turn people LGBT, then why such rapid change?

And interesting this dramatic increase is happening among the generation growing up around social media. There was also an increase in kids coming out LGBQT during Covid when they spent even more time at home on devices and social media apps.

I don’t think people realize how closeted or semi closeted genx and older millennials still are even today. I worked at a large organization for many years. Of the 200 people in my department at least twenty percent were gay but they weren’t fully out. Once a new employee realized it was a welcoming place, they would share that they were gay or speak of the partner. All were hesitant at first and the ones that I knew were in/out of the closet to varying degrees. Many avoided putting anything in writing and closely guarded who they were open with about it. One of my friends explained that they knew there were people who would be uncomfortable with them if they knew. They had lived their lives trying to avoid discrimination so hiding it was second nature. They knew they would be bullied or ostracized in school so they learned to hide it early.

GenZ doesn’t see this and it’s an extremely positive change that teens don’t feel they will be bullied and ostracized for being gay. Shame on the nasty adults who think being gay is a contagion and long for the days when it was met with shame, violence and loneliness.