All forms of queer news and culture. Nonsectarian and non-exclusionary.
See also this community's sister subs Feminism, Neurodivergence, Disability, and POC
Beehaw currently maintains an LGBTQ+ resource wiki, which is up to date as of July 10, 2023.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
“Until the age of 18, I believe you belong to your parents,” this is a disgusting view.
People who hold this view: "Why don't my children talk to me anymore?"
This is the start of the idea that a man owns this wife and the rest of his family. This is just the start of the domination and control for hierarchial power. Keep this in mind for all the talk about school choice
In a world where every man is a rapist, and every woman is incapable of fending for herself... "protection", control, hierarchical power, are just pieces that fall into place by themselves.
Once inequality gets entrenched as a fact, nothing good can come out of it.
More like a reactionary return to than the the start of.
Can we please move past this puritanical fear of the existence of sexual acts between consenting adults?
Edited to add:
Stewart added, “I personally don’t feel comfortable with the plus category only because I don’t understand it and I have never gotten a clear answer.”
I doubt this person has ever had an honest conversation on the subject. Aside from that, "I don't understand this" is not an excuse to vote against something, either bring in someone to explain it to you or abstain from voting because you aren't qualified.
"Never got a clear answer" is just code for them admitting they never cared enough to understand
Yep, in my experience "I don't understand this" means "I don't want to understand this."
At least when "I don't understand this" is used as an excuse to for things like this.
There are times where I feel like I don't understand things, maybe partly because I'm probably autistic and probably deal with dpdr. I'm still not confident in my understanding of sexual attraction. Gender is still a mystery to me and I consider myself under the trans umbrella and spend a lot of time in trans communities, so it's not from a lack of trying. Emotions(?) like pain and hunger also confuse me (at least one person has told me they're not emotions, but for me there seems to often be a disconnect between the stimuli and my brain's reaction to them so I'm often not sure how to answer when someone asks if im hungry or if something hurts because im not sure how my experience map to their words). But I don't use my lack of understanding to tell others they should not take pain pills, for example.
"Never got a straight answer" would have been perfect.
I don't understand how gears work and never got a clear answer either.
Nobody understands how magnets work either, we should ban those too.
(obligatory: https://youtu.be/MO0r930Sn_8)
Better ban 'em.
None of this newfangled machinery to enter our lives. Toil & the Lord shall provide!
Ah yes the Ace community, famous for it’s acts of bondage. Yup the those asexuals, really out here tying each other up and whipping each other completely non-sexually just for shits and giggles.
...many asexual people still have a libido and might experience sexual desire. Asexual people might still masturbate or have sex. After all, sexuality doesn't always mean someone doesn't enjoy sex. It just means they don't experience sexual attraction.
https://www.healthline.com/health/what-is-asexual
BDSM doesn’t have to be sexual in nature—some people like it for the power only.
I know, I’m asexual, I’m just pointing out that the I and the A which are so often added and that the plus is often substituted for to cover even more bases, are really weird things to associate with BDSM.
Kinda missed the point there dude.
Axs, nbs, and the rest of the soup aren't well known for their spanking proclivities
Eh. I'm in the ace umbrella and I'd be honored to be associated. One of the most important tenants of BDSM is consent. And if everyone is consenting, I won't be forced into situations I'm uncomfortable with. These people probably associate BDSM with Fifty Shade of Gray, which the BDSM community, last I checked, hates with a burning passion because it's very nonconsensual.
r/BDSM_Aces would like to have a word with you. :)
Today i learned that, despite being a cis man who is exclusively attracted to women, this city council considers me to be a part of the LGBTQ+ community
Mmmm i hear those G's promote butt stuff. Better remove that one too. And the Q's a slur don'tcherknow. And better take out the T, i hear they bust into women's toilets wildly waving their penises.
And why don't we add an "S" for straight in order to not exclude anyone? After removing the letters we remain with LBS which doesn't sound bad, it looks like a household brand...
Oh, the B can also promote butt stuff so let's remove that one as well. The L takes away from the S men so we should remove it so everyone gets an equal share. Ahhh, there we go. S. The acronym is complete.
What do you mean we're right where we started?
I don't know what world you're living in, but God I wanna live there too.
had to be removed due to his personal discomfort...
Waiting for the next politician to feel personal discomfort with one of the other letters. Is the bar really that low?
Even if it did stand for BDSM, so what?
Folsom street represeeeeeent!
So what? If BDSM folks feel represented by LGBTQ+ they have every right to be part of it. What's wrong with BDSM anyway?
Not like LGBTQ+ promotes anything at all besides that it is okay to be who you are.
I feel like the vast majority of LGBTQIA2S people would be upset by zoophiles and pedophiles* feeling included by LGBTQ+. Personally I don't care if they're included or not. They're definitely GSRMs imo, so I don't think they need to be included in LGBTQ+. But a lot of them have the same issues of realizing their sexual attraction is not like their peers at some point and dealing with the fear of ostracization and violence if people found out what thoughts they have.
*Not to be confused with people who practice bestiality or child molestation.
How did we get here? What a bad take. Consent is obviously required, it's that simple.
Neither children nor animals can consent therefore they are not welcome in any shape or form. This also excludes rape and other forms of abuse from any LGBTQ+ space/group/community.
Which is why I explicitly excluded those who engage in sexual acts with children or animals?
You did not, you said that you do not mind or care. No one wants them there except the pedophiles themselves.
The people have problems, but they need other help than acceptance. It does not work, it is abuse and the LGBTQ+ community always clearly distanced themselves from them.
Implying any connection at all is dishonest and a huge disservice to all people under the LGBTQ+ umbrella. Hence it is a terrible take.
Bad take. No one thinks these people are part of the comm in any way shape or form outside someone terminally online who has never seen grass
That's my point though. We already exclude some sexual and romantic orientations. I'm not suggesting we change that or suggesting anyone (except homophobes) are doing that.
My point is LGBTQ+ isn't just a catchall for everything. I don't see why sex-act preference (or non-sexual BDSM/kink preference) would be included. Just like it doesn't include people simply for being jewish, neurodivergent, or every other marginalized group.
Still, even if LGBTQ+ did include the kink community, that still does not justify removing city-sponsored LGBTQ+ pride support. If anything, they should more explicitly state their support for kink community.
"We accept you for who you are after we have judged you"
Even if it did, what's wrong with it?
I think the state has a responcability to act impartial. I find lgbt flags (or any none state or national flag, the confederacy flag would be inappropriate) on government buildings and the pledge of allegiance in school to be uncomfortable uses of state privilege to push agendas. Teaching kids in school about the existence of gay people and their normality, to me, is the time and place for the state to be both impartial while normalizing an important group of American citizen
Except that we are talking about a group that is being actively targeted by political and religious groups within the country (and the world tbh). Manifesting support for minorities falls well within any state's prerogatives.
I would concede that this is a mostly empty gesture in most places if not followed by actual tangible measures.
The abuse that LGBT people have experienced is immense. Any normalization of those who are harmlessly different is good, but normalization isn't always used for good. A state building can wave an anti LGBT flag in support of some hijacked vision of traditional values. I think it is important for government to host a culture of neutrality. Neutrality builds trust and fairness, and in a time when trust in all forms of government is down and thinning hope for change, I believe fundamentally states must act neutrally, for the sake of the LGBT.
As a bi man, I frequently find myself giving short lived sympathies to right leaning people because in some aspects, they have a point. I think that Americans have every right to be skeptical of the state to a point, but I disagree that Trump was the solution.
I think you no one, and especially not any government, can actually be "neutral" on such a topic. Because there is a status quo of marginalization and structural discrimination. If a government decides to be "neutral"/"impartial" it is actually promoting the status quo to continue going on and thus it indirectly promotes discrimination. It is a false, a pretended neutrality benefitting the hegemonial class. Sure, in an ideal world the government should definitely be impartial and accept everyone as they are. But the problem is that this is not possible in our current society. I see it as necessary that a government takes sides with marginalized and structurally discriminated people in order to be progressive. Obviously not only virtue signalling but actually taking responsibility for the government's own actions.
It is a bit like if you argue with someone what is fair. Like, if you share a flat with someone and discuss what everyone pays. Is it totally fair if everyone pays equal amounts even though one person has rich parents who support them and the other person has debts and is working their ass off to make ends meet? It is not so easy as to say what is actually fair or neutral and what's not. I rather feel like saying that we need to have this fake impartiality is a talking point of privileged people because they will benefit of everything staying the same.
Fascists don't care if you try to be impartial and "neutral". They'll simply step back and ask you to meet in the middle again...
Why do these people hold a position of power?
Because 18-25 demographic never fucking votes.
They do. They are by far outnumbered by most older generations though.
Y'all do my eyes deceive me or is the "L" using the lipstick lesbian flag instead of the sunset?
Looks like the right one to me
I honestly have no view about this I just think there are a thousand more important problems than what attracts you and what you do in bed.
Gonna feel silly when they find out all the other letters represent BDSM too. Every community has a sub-set of people interested in BDSM. Cishet ppl too. :/