Political "pet peeves" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 02:59:34 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Forum Community (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, YE, KoopaDaQuick 🇵🇸)
  Political "pet peeves" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Political "pet peeves"  (Read 5964 times)
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

« on: April 20, 2012, 03:02:43 PM »

Personal Pet Peeve #123: People who use terms like "Cisgender" and a lot of things related to the more radical "queer" elements of LGBT, emphasis on the T part. I've noticed this one popping up a lot, along with other bizarre and unnecessary sexual labels like "demisexual," etc. I already had problems with the whole LGBT label and gay rights movement but this stuff is just well, it surpasses self parody. I almost wonder if they're just trolling us. Case in point:


Seriously, it should be realized the 90-98% of people who have normal heterosexual attractions needn't be subject to the bizarre terminology of the no more than 30% of the non-heterosexuals. I thought the whole point was to end the need for such divisive labels, not to create an endless stream of them.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2012, 03:21:39 PM »

Personal Pet Peeve #123: People who use terms like "Cisgender" and a lot of things related to the more radical "queer" elements of LGBT, emphasis on the T part. I've noticed this one popping up a lot, along with other bizarre and unnecessary sexual labels like "demisexual," etc. I already had problems with the whole LGBT label and gay rights movement but this stuff is just well, it surpasses self parody. I almost wonder if they're just trolling us. Case in point:


Seriously, it should be realized the 90-98% of people who have normal heterosexual attractions needn't be subject to the bizarre terminology of the no more than 30% of the non-heterosexuals. I thought the whole point was to end the need for such divisive labels, not to create an endless stream of them.

"normal heterosexual attractions" is a pretty loaded phrase...

I don't mean for it to be offensive. But if we accept the ultimate purpose of life of any sort to be the perpetuation of life, then yes, heterosexual relations can be deemed "normal" as they are the only kind that naturally produces life.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 12 queries.