LGBTQ acceptance dropping among Millennials

[Cohen]

I think it's more, that guy over there is great, I have no idea what his sexuality is and I don't care. Those guys however are annoying me because they are doing..insert whatever here.

And I think it’s a bit of “I am sorry I got your label wrong”. And the response from the Loud ones being “You’re not sorry enough. You don’t know my plight. How dare you mislabel me. I’m going to ruin you.” The one in the corner is happy to be in public. The loud ones are pissed you acknowledge their differences. 🙄

 

[Puppet]

Actually, I think a more correct 'story' is, that guy who is quiet and unobtrusive is friends with the annoying guys, and so I leave him be because he might be just as bad, or worse, once I get to know him. It's idiotic and senseless, but it's unfortunately what happens when one 'group' gets too loud.

 

[HowiMetdaSlayer]

But the problem is that the annoying parts of feminism (and I don't know if the same is true for LGBT) don't want the same rights that real feminists do; they don't want women and men to be equal, they clearly want it to be women's turn to be 'in charge' and they don't hide it well at all.

That's not feminism. That's straight up misandry. They should stay out of feminism, it's not for them. Feminism is supposed to be for men and women. The name is merely due to the history associated with it. People who hate all men are just sexist idiots, same as men who hate/ discriminate against women. It goes all ways.

reminded me of this scene...

 

[katmobile]

reminded me of this scene...

It's pretty hard to define precisely what is a broad movement SOME feminists are misandrists (also some are just people who hate everyone like Germaine Greer) and they might have reasons for that just as SOME lesbians are transphobic but not ALL are. I'm sick of the narrative that marginalised groups are to blame for their own victimisation because they're assertive, sometimes over zealous and some of them have severe preduices because members of ALL groups have that. To adopt that is to drink the Kool Aid of the alt right.

 

[Anyanka Bunny Slayer]

I have a couple more thoughts on this. People have already mentioned the rise of the far right. Certainly in the UK and USA recent elections have validated those with hateful ideologies. It's not that everyone voting a certain way is awful, its that a section of awful people feel that their crap is now perfectly acceptable.

Ah, yes. The Democrats. Something really should be done about them.

 

[TriBel]

Last time I looked it was 2019, so why are we still discussing "Feminism" and the "Gay Community" as though they're monoliths when it's generally accepted each takes a myriad of forms? Intersectionality makes far more sense and has done for the last 30/40 years.

On that note: Live coverage of the NY Pride parade and the Queer Liberation March in Greenwich Village (it's 50 years since Stonewall): New York leads way as Pride marches mark 50 years since Stonewall – live

For those who think enough's been said and done for LGBTQ people - this from the UK Government Equality Office's National LGBT Survey:

"Our Parliament now has the highest proportion of openly lesbian, gay and bisexual members of any legislature in the world and we are consistently ranked as one of the best countries in Europe for LGBT rights.

Despite this progress on legal entitlements, research and evidence has continued to suggest that LGBT people face discrimination, bullying and harassment in education, at work and on the streets, hate crime and higher inequalities in health satisfaction and outcomes.

"Although respondents were generally positive about the UK’s record on LGBT rights, some of the findings make for difficult reading:

• LGBT respondents are less satisfied with their life than the general UK population (rating satisfaction 6.5 on average out of 10 compared with 7.7). Trans respondents had particularly low scores (around 5.4 out of 10)
• More than two thirds of LGBT respondents said they had avoided holding hands with a same-sex partner for fear of a negative reaction from others
• At least 2 in 5 respondents had experienced an incident because they were LGBT, such as verbal harassment or physical violence, in the 12 months preceding the survey. However, more than 9 in 10 of the most serious incidents went unreported, often because respondents thought ‘it happens all the time’
• two percent of respondents had undergone conversion or reparative therapy in an attempt to ‘cure’ them of being LGBT, and a further 5% had been offered it
• twenty four percent of respondents had accessed mental health services in the 12 months preceding the survey" National LGBT Survey: Summary report

 

[AlphaFoxtrot]

Every poll done during the Obama administration was wrong, and this is just a post-Brexit recalibration of the way polling is done in the Anglosphere. In addition, Libertarians can support gay marriage as a libertarian issue. They cannot support the equality act or randomly throwing the power and resources of the state at a baker or a florist. Finally, the focus has transferred to Transgendered Rights, who have always required much more in the way of audience participation. So that would probably explain about a 10-15% change. The focus has changed to issues that aren't as popular or easy as gay marriage was.

 

[Cohen]

Finally, the focus has transferred to Transgendered Rights, who have always required much more in the way of audience participation. So that would probably explain about a 10-15% change. The focus has changed to issues that aren't as popular or easy as gay marriage was.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. It’s much easier to support gay/lesbian rights because in the views of others, they aren’t changing anything. But when a transgendered person begins their transition, that’s MUCH more difficult for other heterosexuals, and religious people, to understand. It’s tough for a lot of gays to understand. So the issues are much more intricate, which leads to the lower support from heterosexuals.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

In British Columbia, a judge has ruled that a father who called his transgendered son "she" is guilty of family violence. Parents have been warned that any attempt to dissuade their children from trangendering, even expressing the truth that this will commit the child to a lifetime of hormone "therapy", is to be considered child abuse. It seems that our freedom of speech and opinion have been removed and unless you have the finances to challenge this in the Supreme Court (where you would probably win), the LGBTQ movement is an enemy of the individual civil liberties we thought we had until Bill C-13 came along.

One thing no one has mentioned is that the continued use of hormones in food animal feedstock for those of us who are omnivorous and the use of various additives, supplements and even the plasticizers used in food packaging have dropped the age of puberty. For me and my wife, it was 13. For my daughter, it was 11. In some African-American places in the US, the age of puberty dropped by four years in a generation. This may also have an effect on sexual identity - 15% of millennials identifying as non-straight is a lot higher than the 5% from my generation (boomers) and this may be a chemical effect rather than cultural.

I support the right for LGBTQ people to be open about their sexuality without fear of consequences but I oppose any attempt to force people to follow the pronoun references and underlying ideology of compelled speech patterns.

 

[Cohen]

I’m going to disagree about higher identified sexuality being tied to chemical rather than cultural change. There could have been just as many homosexuals in the boomer generation but that was an entirely different cultural time. In fact before this past decade, it was not largely accepted in our culture. Many celebrities up through 2012 were still being discouraged from coming out, as it could affect their careers.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

@thrasherpix

My comments about hormones added to meat and the chemical effects of plasticizers does not come from Alex Jones. Whether there is an effect on the percentage of non-straight sexual identity could be debated but the effect on the age of puberty is established and with the amount of change we have seen, it would not be surprising that there would be an effect on sexual identity. This may be a less threatening time to come out but I doubt this would account for a factor of three difference. The extra hormone and plasticizer content seems to be more of a problem for the concept of masculinity as the changes tend to change masculine to feminine.

 

[November]

Sigh.....my understanding of hormones is that trans kids are put on puberty blockers to delay puberty because if you don't feel you are the gender you were born or you have doubts then going through puberty in the wrong gender is going to be stressful I mean my God puberty is stressful enough for cis kids. The idea is that you delay puberty for as long as you can to give the kid as much mental maturity you can so they can decide if they want to develop as cis in which case they come off the blockers or trans in which case their hormones are swapped. Let's face it being trans or gender queer and adolescent are both confusing in and of themselves. I can't believe that letting trans kids develop 'normally' is going to be less stressful for the kids or that trans community encourages 'excessive' use of hormones. Whatever you think of it there are going to be good reasons behind it even if it's lesser of two evils ones. Hormones are a necessity for trans people and in some cases surgery.

As for divisions within LGBT+ they are going to be conflicts within any community. You do get a radical feminist lesbian element that hates trans people and there are actually straight people who'd like civil partnerships too and straight people who have unconventional consental non monogamous relationships. Gay marriage is still a good thing for people who want it.

You've misunderstood my post, which happens every single time I enter these threads. You've assumed my stance without understanding what I have said, perhaps because I chat in casual language. I duno if there is much point in responding but it does get on my nerves when people misquote me and school me when they haven't even grasped what I have meant. My vocab is limited due to brain injury, there is less acceptance of disability in this world than there is of sexuality. Atrocious really. I talk in observational language because it is all I can do. While your post is by far not the worst I have copped in these discussions but it is the last I will respond to. I have the right to have my quick rant too.

I do not support marriage by law at all. The big argument here was that "marriage" must be passed for tax, death and welfare purposes. Family units have changed and marriage by law is an outdated concept. We now have aunties, grandparents, adoptive parents, step parents, siblings and all sorts being in charge of the family unit. To restrict the head of family to a married couple is backwards. I fully support legal union of anyone who wants it. The term 'Marriage' should be left to those who are committed to a life long relationship (generally those who see it as a productive spiritual bond). 'Union' seems to me a better way to link a couple, and gives the chance for both in that couple (or more) to disintegrate that union without having to jump through the legal loops of divorce. Relationships are more fluid than gender.

I have no issue with people being gay or dressing as the opposite sex. Heck, I have been a bit gay myself. I have issue when I am scolded and told what I "should" believe because it's the latest trend in a long line of social trends. And don't use the "Christians did it first" argument. For anyone who has actually read the bible. you will see that pushing the belief of God on to others is not supported, but lighting the way is.

I wasn't talking about hormones for the children I was referring to. I was talking about the use of SSRI's, SNRIs, Benzo's, stimulants and antipsychotics in kids under the age of 25. This is proven dangerous. I am against the use of excessive psychiatric drugs for children. The kids I worked with were required to do a medical before participation - the list of psych meds they were on was horrendous. These children were from a locked psychiatric ward, permitted to participate in a christian run organisation. We were schooled on correct pronouns and used them to the T - the disabled children they were working with, on the other hand, frequently asked who was a "boy or girl" and had a lot of difficulty understanding the culture. Meltdowns resulted in more psychiatric drug administration all round. I have more knowledge and experience in this than the general population do.

The hormones used in adulthood also cause mental distress. I have seen it as I have watched a local here go through transition. This person is now on a handful of psychiatric medications as well as the hormones and every time I see them they lift their shirt to show me the body changes... Which are really not that huge to be honest. I can support sucking out fat from your arse and using it to shape a body, we were moulded by clay after all. I do not support synthetic hormones being used to grow the shape of that body. Reminds me of mice growing ears on their backs. At this stage it is still experimental. And it is all for fashion. I will never see mutilation of genitals as any more than extreme socially supported self harm.

I wear pants, I don't see why blokes can't wear skirts, I have said before I am pretty sure Jesus wore a dress... The ideals of gender fashion are modern and twisted. In my religion, we're actually all genderless aliens and this is just a skin suit for this part of the journey. If I have to go way out of my way to not be deemed offensive in my limited capacity, why can't people stop assuming my beliefs 😛

 

[thrasherpix]

@thrasherpix

My comments about hormones added to meat and the chemical effects of plasticizers does not come from Alex Jones. Whether there is an effect on the percentage of non-straight sexual identity could be debated but the effect on the age of puberty is established and with the amount of change we have seen, it would not be surprising that there would be an effect on sexual identity. This may be a less threatening time to come out but I doubt this would account for a factor of three difference. The extra hormone and plasticizer content seems to be more of a problem for the concept of masculinity as the changes tend to change masculine to feminine.

In that case I'm going to assume Alex Jones took an actual concern and went nuts with it, and that him aside there may be real cause for concern (and if the effects of such chemicals weren't being monitored and investigated, at least publicly, then it would beg the question why, though I can think of why Wall Street--which has extensive power well beyond the USA--would want to stymie any such investigation as they do so many others on the effects of their products, or the products that make their own business more profitable even if it screws over society and/or environment in the process).

Heck, I have to wonder about restrictions on selling milk straight from the dairy. There is a long historical tradition in the United States of dairy farmers using dirty tricks (the least of which was watering down milk, and in many cases adding dangerous chemicals to it, all in the name of a few extra bucks, no matter how much it sickened others) so that plenty of people would, if they could, buy it straight from the farm as they watched (even then the sight could be disturbing...the things they fed cows, including distillery waste, and how they kept milking them when the cows were too sick to stand up, would be disturbing sights in of itself). I have suspected many laws today are actually to protect the milk industry more than the public. I've drank plenty of raw cow milk and never got sick from it (but then my immune system was allowed to fully develop, unlike many in the US today).

With that in mind, there could be real effects from the hormones that are known but findings suppressed as they often will be until it crosses a threshold (like the Gulf Oil spill in 2010 that--presumably--mandated changes from reckless practices that had been long poisoning the environment from before then).



While I don't know the actual numbers, it SEEMS to me that lesbians are roughly the same in number as gay men, and that transmen are roughly the same in number as transwomen (if there is a big difference, either way, then I'd want to know why that is as well). Assuming that's the case then hormones don't seem the culprit.

But I think I recall reading somewhere that obesity lowers testosterone (but I'm not about to make myself a lightning rod for weight loss ads and who knows what else by trying to google it). I know that fat is at least necessary for the production of estrogen, at least a family doctor said my puberty was delayed because of my low fat (and muscle didn't count), advising my grandmother to fatten me up and restrict my exercise. I wonder if obesity could also create estrogen in males? If so, then it could be the obesity that's contributing to I guess what one would call feminizing males. And obesity could also be behind puberty happening earlier. (But then one runs into the difference between correlation and causation.)

But even then I don't think that would affect orientation. Too many gay men are masculine in personality and physique (and at least a few years ago the big thing on their hookup site was "masc for masc"), and too many lesbians are feminine. And I've never heard of a sexual orientation changing when people "cross over" with hormone replacement therapy.

 

[katmobile]

You've misunderstood my post, which happens every single time I enter these threads. You've assumed my stance without understanding what I have said, perhaps because I chat in casual language. I duno if there is much point in responding but it does get on my nerves when people misquote me and school me when they haven't even grasped what I have meant. My vocab is limited due to brain injury, there is less acceptance of disability in this world than there is of sexuality. Atrocious really. I talk in observational language because it is all I can do. While your post is by far not the worst I have copped in these discussions but it is the last I will respond to. I have the right to have my quick rant too.

I do not support marriage by law at all. The big argument here was that "marriage" must be passed for tax, death and welfare purposes. Family units have changed and marriage by law is an outdated concept. We now have aunties, grandparents, adoptive parents, step parents, siblings and all sorts being in charge of the family unit. To restrict the head of family to a married couple is backwards. I fully support legal union of anyone who wants it. The term 'Marriage' should be left to those who are committed to a life long relationship (generally those who see it as a productive spiritual bond). 'Union' seems to me a better way to link a couple, and gives the chance for both in that couple (or more) to disintegrate that union without having to jump through the legal loops of divorce. Relationships are more fluid than gender.

I have no issue with people being gay or dressing as the opposite sex. Heck, I have been a bit gay myself. I have issue when I am scolded and told what I "should" believe because it's the latest trend in a long line of social trends. And don't use the "Christians did it first" argument. For anyone who has actually read the bible. you will see that pushing the belief of God on to others is not supported, but lighting the way is.

I wasn't talking about hormones for the children I was referring to. I was talking about the use of SSRI's, SNRIs, Benzo's, stimulants and antipsychotics in kids under the age of 25. This is proven dangerous. I am against the use of excessive psychiatric drugs for children. The kids I worked with were required to do a medical before participation - the list of psych meds they were on was horrendous. These children were from a locked psychiatric ward, permitted to participate in a christian run organisation. We were schooled on correct pronouns and used them to the T - the disabled children they were working with, on the other hand, frequently asked who was a "boy or girl" and had a lot of difficulty understanding the culture. Meltdowns resulted in more psychiatric drug administration all round. I have more knowledge and experience in this than the general population do.

The hormones used in adulthood also cause mental distress. I have seen it as I have watched a local here go through transition. This person is now on a handful of psychiatric medications as well as the hormones and every time I see them they lift their shirt to show me the body changes... Which are really not that huge to be honest. I can support sucking out fat from your arse and using it to shape a body, we were moulded by clay after all. I do not support synthetic hormones being used to grow the shape of that body. Reminds me of mice growing ears on their backs. At this stage it is still experimental. And it is all for fashion. I will never see mutilation of genitals as any more than extreme socially supported self harm.

I wear pants, I don't see why blokes can't wear skirts, I have said before I am pretty sure Jesus wore a dress... The ideals of gender fashion are modern and twisted. In my religion, we're actually all genderless aliens and this is just a skin suit for this part of the journey. If I have to go way out of my way to not be deemed offensive in my limited capacity, why can't people stop assuming my beliefs 😛

Ok I can see you're not malacious and have geunine concerns but you admit you have a brain injury that may not help you understand someone else's perspective. To be honest many people I think struggle with it. You don't have to believe in the same things others do just in their rights to them if it hurts no one else. You see surgery that changes people's bodies as multilation they see it as becoming their real selves same with hormones also again you ever think being trans is stressful in and of itself and trans suicide rates are much lower if the person is supported. You may not see changes but I bet the trans person does.

 

[TriBel]

This from today's Guardian (emphasis is mine). How can you accept gay people, but find it distasteful that they have sex? | Barbara Ellen

The number of people believing there is nothing wrong with gay sex has fallen for the first time since the Aids crisis. The British Social Attitudes survey puts it at dipping from 68% in 2017 to 66% in 2018, leaving a third of the population in some way opposed. NatCen, who conducted the survey, said that, while further polling was advisable, “liberalisation of attitudes does seem to be slowing down”.

The findings coincide with the first decrease in more than a decade of people comfortable with pre-marital sex. On the plus side, last week also saw the Commons victory for gay legislation in Northern Ireland. Still, what a hammering same-sex couples have had recently – everything from attacks on buses to Ann Widdecombe (the Aunt Lydia of Brexit, anyone?) pondering how science could “produce an answer” to gayness. In this context, is the NatCen survey indicative of new attitudes, or yet more evidence that people are feeling bolder about expressing previously veiled prejudices?

 

[Cohen]

In this context, is the NatCen survey indicative of new attitudes, or yet more evidence that people are feeling bolder about expressing previously veiled prejudices?

I think it’s the latter. In this Trump age, people feel much more emboldened to reveal their prejudices—racial, religious, and sexual. It’s a scary time. We have made so many strides, and then one horrible election where a leader made it okay to vocalize prejudices yet again has thrown us back. The complacency and apathy American government officials have had in regards to this blatant form of prejudice is absolutely despicable.

 

[Taake]

People feel much more emboldened to reveal their prejudices—racial, religious, and sexual. It’s a scary time. We have made so many strides, and then one horrible election where a leader made it okay to vocalize prejudices yet again has thrown us back.

But if the prejudices were still there, but not vocalized, can you really say that many strides were/had been made?
It just suggests people didn’t dare to speak their minds but no real change had been made, no?

 

[Cohen]

But if the prejudices were still there, but not vocalized, can you really say that many strides were/had been made?
It just suggests people didn’t dare to speak their minds but no real change had been made, no?

I think the strides in knowing that it isn’t okay to say or think those things. Inner prejudice will always be there. But Trump made it okay to be overt about it. As it was in the 60s.

 

[TriBel]

But if the prejudices were still there, but not vocalized, can you really say that many strides were/had been made?
It just suggests people didn’t dare to speak their minds but no real change had been made, no?

Last week, my eldest son was crossing the road on his way back from work (5.30ish) when a man came behind him and said "Get out of my way you f-word, F-word for a gay man (family friendly board 😉 )". My son's gay but not obviously so. He's open about it but he doesn't flaunt it. He still doesn't know whether the term was a direct reference to his sexuality or whether it was being used as a general insult. Either way, it angered and upset him.

On the 17 June 2016 (I know the date - it was the day after the murder of the British MP Jo Cox by a man with connections to far right groups here and in the US (see Wiki)*. It was also a week before the EU referendum) I heard a group of Christian Fundamentalists preaching in Manchester City Centre. They claimed all gay people were going to Hell. One "very nice" woman explained to me that gay people were genetically flawed. It wasn't "their fault", they were like "children with Downs Syndrome". On the train back I joined up the dots and had a horrible epiphany. It became absolutely clear to me that a) prejudices hadn't changed as much as I thought they had and b) the political situation here and in the US had emboldened people.

As far as I'm concerned, the earlier incident was people vocalizing an opinion (I voiced mine - I wasn't as polite). The recent one wasn't "speaking his mind" or showing hidden prejudice - it was out and out aggression from a guy who felt entitled to say what he said. That it happened within the University Quarter and 400 yards from Manchester's Gay Village (a "safe space" in a city that prides itself on being gay friendly) is - I think - even scarier.

*"He believed individuals of liberal and left-wing political viewpoints, and the mainstream media, were the cause of the world's problems"

 

[Buffy Summers]

IBut Trump made it okay to be overt about it. As it was in the 60s.

That is just not true. Today is nothing like the 60s. Just because liberal politicians say Trump and conservatives are racist, doesn’t make it true. If anyone in government is racist, it is the Democratic officials who gain power by trying to keep people of color dependent on the government and inciting racism.