Letters to the Editor
-
Sick of special privilages
This whole notion of protecting "communities" of people by assigning them special rights is crap. All employers should have the right to hire, fire or promote whomever they want for whatever reason they want. NO ONE has the "right" to any job. The job belongs to the employer and he/she can fill it as they see fit. Anyone who supports something like ENDA is nothing but a god damn Fascist.
-
Wait! There's More!
Add a "P" for the polyamorous. . .
a "Be" for the beast-attracted. . .
a "Ped" for the pederast crowd. . .
a "C" for the Cushies. . .
don't forget an "N" for the Nambla folk. . .
an "SM" for the leathers. . .
why stop there? Anything goes, right?
-
The real issue for progressive liberal communities, is why do us progressive liberals put up with politically correct speech codes?
Political correctness does exist, and it is the ruination of the left.
Whether it is John feeling unable to even ASK questions concerning the transgendered,
Or Modern Feminists beating down people that question their strategies, tactics, allies,
Or even the liberal war-hawks that demanded we go to Iraq and ruled the tv stations, the newspapers and the magazines, and kept sensible people off the airwaves
Political correctness is our worst enemy. Political correctness allows the emperor to go out naked, because no one is allowed to say that he has no clothes.
-
This is a pretty good argument
in support of the fact that no matter who you are, there is always someone else you can shit on.
It never ceases to amaze me how people who struggle with something can turn right back around and fuck other people with the same zeal they've been fucked with.
Black people against gay rights, gay people against transgendered rights. What a joke.
-
The Fall of Rome Satire Where You Judge Caligula
I think you now must know how conservative straight people feel about you. Listen to yourself:
"It is simply not p.c. in the gay community to question how and why the T got added on to the LGB, let alone ask what I as a gay man have in common with a man who wants to cut off his penis, surgically construct a vagina, and become a woman. I'm not passing judgment, I respect transgendered people and sympathize with their cause, but I simply don't get how I am just as closely related to a transsexual (who is often not gay) as I am to a lesbian (who is). Is it wrong for me to simply ask why?"
I have many gay friends, have for years, lost four to AIDs. I really didn't have much in common with them. other than say, being created in the image of God, breathing air, bleeding when I'm cut, needing to love and be loved, feeling guilty, feeling forgiven, (I could go on, but you get it, right?)
It's so sad. We live in a culture where our greatest debate about human rights is getting a gay guy a job in federal government or having the right to kill and die in combat wearing our uniform if you like oral or anal sex with members of your gender. History is going to get a huge kick of our poor ass "Rome" parody.
You are so sad, my petite noisette.
-
NYU Student
I cannot believe you are pulling an anti-semitic argument out of your ass. When you don't agree with someone but don't have an actual argument to make, call them antisemitic. You know, use whatever rationalizations you like to make it OK to allow the transgender community to continue without protection after relying on their support for lo these many years. That makes YOU the hero, not a coward just out to get yours while the getting is good while you piss on your allies. I'm glad there are righteous dudes like you out there protecting your own narrow interests.
-
I sympathize with Aravosis and Frank up to a point
If the bill really is known to be vetoed by Bush, then I don't what Frank, et. al., have to gain by splitting the T off.
But if the bill stood some non-small chance of passage, I think divide and conquer is a well known successful strategy.
A lot of this however, is the obvious result of any identity politics movement.
When we allow Feminists to claim their movement is aimed to increase human rights for all, and then they conspicuously omit men when it comes to protection against domestic violence, and they explicitly discriminate against fathers when Feminists lobby against shared custody laws, and we do this because it seems politically correct or expedient, then the result is going to be one group against another. Or divide and conquer again, but this time with the winners being the conservatives.
-
Mireille
Ohhh.. So aggressive. I kinda like it.
I didn't say "anti-semitic" - I said "offensive." Holocaust imagery is completely inappropriate in this debate as is the excessive personalization you keep falling back on because you can't back yourself up with facts. As I stated before - no one is talking about STRIPPING rights from the transsexual community and you know it. How is not extending a set of protections to a group which has never had them and doesn't posses them currently analogous to the Holocaust? It doesn't and it is offensive to say it does. Nazi analogies shouldn't be thrown around lightly.
And I am kinda righteous as well as a dude. I appreciate the compliment.
-
The Shoehorn Comment
"It seems, from my limited knowledge of transsexuals, that they really don't fit in with the other groups without some serious shoehorn."
The poster who wrote this, a self-described white male heterosexual, ought to try to broad his limited knowledge of transexuals. And humanity. Because what you imply is that trans people don't fit into any group without serious shoehorn. They are part of the human race and they have a horrible birth defect. That's what legitimate physicians say.
I would appreciate it if our so-called "straight allies" would really think about what they are saying and doing to help the gay community. Cause it ain't been much. They accused us of poisoning the 2004 election, blaming us for unleashing the anti-gay fundies. But nobody came to our defense. The Democratic politicians did nothing while the fundies were out getting double and triple gay marriage protection (because one law just won't do). They were silent.