stepping in here to say: you are not making a very good impression in this thread. people are trying in good faith to explain why you are mistaken here—and how even biological sex is better understood as bimodal rather than binary—and you keep going to somewhat eyebrow-raising, contrarian places and not really engaging with their arguments. we are permissive to a degree of ignorance/lack of knowledge/genuine curiosity that might be prickly for some people, but your current conduct in this thread is pushing the line and likely to get you removed from at least this section if you continue.

i don’t think “adding race-specific stripes to a pride flag” is a bad thing, is “treating people differently based on skin tone” except in the most cringeworthy, pedantic, I See No Color way possible, or is “racist”—and i think that if you believe these things you probably will not be allowed to partake in discussions like this on our instance after today

Otherwise you could claim a crossdresser were trans or people who claimed they were “attack helicopters” would have to be accepted as trans because there would literally be no argument you could make against it.

this just sounds like a skill issue on your part, i’m sorry–this is not an issue if you have a postmodernist understanding of gender, which most trans people (myself included) subscribe to.

at the end of the day when you drill down? there really is not a material difference between the “real” and “fake” genders–gender is entirely socially constructed, and the designations of “male” and “female” that most people fall into are as arbitrary as any xenogender (real or frivolously created by right-wingers). you only “lose” by entertaining frivolous designations if your understanding of gender is already so narrow that you can’t conceptually accommodate anything beyond a handful of stock gender identities to begin with.

apparently quite–these were the attitudes in 2022: Asked about the Civil Partnership Bill to legalise same-sex marriage, 79.62 per cent agreed with the move, while 20.38 per cent disagreed.

He said during his standup act at Capital One Arena in Washington that he granted the photo request by Boebert for a human moment to bridge the political divide but felt “blindsided” by her, according to a progressive influencers’ blog.

“It’s a shame she tricked me,” Chappelle said, according to Call to Activism. “I had two tickets to ’Beetlejuice’ and I was going to give her one!”

this is, and i mean this respectfully, one of the weakest condemnations imaginable if he’s actually got a problem with her doing this. this has zero teeth. it’s also literally Lauren Boebert, a person who has made her name being a freakish culture warrior–what did he think she was going to do?

respectfully: why are you throwing a tantrum and screaming at people about this extremely minor deal instead of doing literally anything else

just to add to the plethora of responses: it rather defies belief that he’s purely “joking” when, among other things, he’s taken photos with anti-trans legislators like Lauren Boebert and let them frame those photos in this manner:

now that the site is back up: will add, thank you for the suggestion

this is the definitive image on all LGBTQ+ gatekeeping discourse, in my humble opinion (but especially during pride month.) i am constantly obligated to say: i don’t care if you think asexuals aren’t valid, or bi/pan lesbians don’t exist, or yadda yadda we need to keep pride safe for work. shut the fuck up! these don’t matter!

and while i’m sure some people do hold them very sincerely: it’s definitely conspicuous how i have almost never heard these positions expressed in any real-life queer space. these issues are so distorted by online spaces in terms of how prominent they are, and it’s worth remembering that