Why are they trying to force sexual fluidity onto gay men

[jaybee0560]

I know this to be an old, tired discussion, but I can't help but be resentful. What we have today in the U.S. in gay freedom and rights (I'm speaking for those of us who have always lived as gay men.) was hard earned and not without suffering on the part of those who lived through some very tough times.

A few of us had the support of our family and straight friends as we buried our partners from AIDS, healed in a hospitals after being beaten within an inch of existence by xenophobes, or lost the security of jobs because of our sexual preference. But many of us were cast out, shunned, and disowned.

Today, I have many acquaintances were married most of their lives. They've come out after the wife died, the kids were grown and gone, they're bored with their sham marriages, or it's now convenient to do so.

and it seems all that was learned from that was to apply the same level of misinformation and bigotry to sexually fluid people.

Its been said on this thread several times - saying some people are sexually fluid does not mean all people are sexually fluid.
Recognizing and representing sexual fluidity
a) is barely happening
b) has no impact on any other person's rights unless you can't make the distinction between "some" and "all".

 

[Beegun84]

and it seems all that was learned from that was to apply the same level of misinformation and bigotry to sexually fluid people.

Its been said on this thread several times - saying some people are sexually fluid does not mean all people are sexually fluid.
Recognizing and representing sexual fluidity
a) is barely happening
b) has no impact on any other person's rights unless you can't make the distinction between "some" and "all".

Point A: has been seen in recent TV shows or movies aimed at older youth like Elite, OG Pretty Little Liars, Degrassi, Blocco 181, Sex Education, 13 Reasons Why, Riverdale, The Politician etc and the probably the upcoming Netflix movie/award-bait Maestro

Point b: Gay rights have been regressing in a lot of countries around the world. This anti-gay sentiment only got worse because what queer theory (which includes fluidity and gender) that defies biology really powers up the bigots argument that THE WHOLE of LGBTQIA+ community belongs in mental institutions. And also made our allies doubt us.

And you NEVER answered my question about the benefit/upside of this queer theory/sexual fluidity at all while I already told the downsides. A handful of sexually-fluid people is not worth sinking the whole ship.

And the most bi-phobic people are actually straight people. I know for example a celeb who is considered a gay icon in the USA who filed a divorce because her ex-husband slept with a man. You can say you're bi while in a relationship with the same-sex but most likely wouldn't be able to if you're married with the opposite sex with kids.

 

[sslance]

And the most bi-phobic people are actually straight people. I know for example a celeb who is considered a gay icon in the USA who filed a divorce because her ex-husband slept with a man. You can say you're bi while in a relationship with the same-sex but most likely wouldn't be able to if you're married with the opposite sex with kids.

This is anecdotal but in my experience the most biphobic people I have encountered have been from the queer community.

 

[dreambridger]

Point b: Gay rights have been regressing in a lot of countries around the world. This anti-gay sentiment only got worse because what queer theory (which includes fluidity and gender) that defies biology really powers up the bigots argument that THE WHOLE of LGBTQIA+ community belongs in mental institutions. And also made our allies doubt us.

Beautifully said. Queer theory is a crime against humanity. Judith Butler should be in prison; some of the heinous stuff she endorses we're not even allowed to talk about on lpsg.

 

[Jeffer2580]

This is anecdotal but in my experience the most biphobic people I have encountered have been from the queer community.

Experiences really differ. I think it depends on your clique,after my stint with conversion therapy and trying to find myself again and heal with psychotherapy,I apparently selected a new group of friends and cut off the toxic ones both queer and straight but in my experience,the straight ones were the most biphobic including family members, although in my defence,I did grow up in a super conservative country (Nigeria) before migrating to the states and I'm still trying to heal but I can tell you I have the most amazing group of friends, thanks to my ex boyfriend who's a transman and the first man I ever slept with and dated, his friends became my friends, both queer and straight. Moreover,I think generations play a major role, thankfully in my generation (I'm in my early 20s and I'm so happy I'm part of this generation),we are much more in tune with ourselves venturing into political correct culture,before anyone makes a biphobic or queerphobic speech,they are called out, although I kinda want a diverse group of friends because sometimes, it's like I'm listening to the beat of my own drum

 

[Smallteaplant]

Experiences really differ. I think it depends on your clique,after my stint with conversion therapy and trying to find myself again and heal with psychotherapy,I apparently selected a new group of friends and cut off the toxic ones both queer and straight but in my experience,the straight ones were the most biphobic including family members, although in my defence,I did grow up in a super conservative country (Nigeria) before migrating to the states and I'm still trying to heal but I can tell you I have the most amazing group of friends, thanks to my ex boyfriend who's a transman and the first man I ever slept with and dated, his friends became my friends, both queer and straight. Moreover,I think generations play a major role, thankfully in my generation (I'm in my early 20s and I'm so happy I'm part of this generation),we are much more in tune with ourselves venturing into political correct culture,before anyone makes a biphobic or queerphobic speech,they are called out, although I kinda want a diverse group of friends because sometimes, it's like I'm listening to the beat of my own drum

The thing about progress is that there is no progress. Human rights is a fiction. The only thing that matters is power and wealth.

 

[jaybee0560]

Point A: has been seen in recent TV shows or movies aimed at older youth like Elite, OG Pretty Little Liars, Degrassi, Blocco 181, Sex Education, 13 Reasons Why, Riverdale, The Politician etc and the probably the upcoming Netflix movie/award-bait Maestro

Point b: Gay rights have been regressing in a lot of countries around the world. This anti-gay sentiment only got worse because what queer theory (which includes fluidity and gender) that defies biology really powers up the bigots argument that THE WHOLE of LGBTQIA+ community belongs in mental institutions. And also made our allies doubt us.

And you NEVER answered my question about the benefit/upside of this queer theory/sexual fluidity at all while I already told the downsides. A handful of sexually-fluid people is not worth sinking the whole ship.

And the most bi-phobic people are actually straight people. I know for example a celeb who is considered a gay icon in the USA who filed a divorce because her ex-husband slept with a man. You can say you're bi while in a relationship with the same-sex but most likely wouldn't be able to if you're married with the opposite sex with kids.

Someone experimenting with a same sex kiss =/= sexual fluidity - Bi people does not automatically mean all bi people are sexually fluid. And there is still a far greater abundance of both gay and straight representation than the handful of shows you listed above that don't even directly or indirectly address the notion of sexual fluidity.

Saying that Gay rights has been regressing in "some" countries" around the world and then attaching that by default to queer theory is unsubstantiated association. Conservatism is on the rise in some countries and this is for a whole host of reasons that have nothing to do with sexual fluidity or gender - also -there is absolutely no reason to combine gender theory with sexual fluidity. They are two entirely different things.

The benefits of giving visibility to sexual fluidity is obvious - Because it exists and they are real people and its also describes an aspect of human sexuality that sheds a light on our understanding of how that all works. Same exact reason why despite the vast minority of the population being gay - we have fought for representation as well.
Saying this will "sink the ship" is simply another assertion you are making that is entirely unfounded. You have already made your motives clear - you are arguing from Tribalism, and have no interest in how this affects anyone outside of your tribe. You have made it clear that your position is fear based given you are worried about how representing other actual real people in this world will effect you. This is the same tired old argument that has been used to keep gays in the closet for years based on the tribe that had the most power for centuries - we do not advance by simply waiting till we are equipped with decent power base and then use that to keep someone else down. You have already said you are happy to throw anyone under the bus to preserve your rights.

The most bi-Phobic people I have met are the gay community by a long stretch. Most of whom consider bi to simply be a stepping stone to gay and just claim that bi people don't have the balls to go full homo - which is my personal experience as a bi man and, much like your assertion, is anecdotal.

How this sort of representation benefits anyone is pretty simple. If your entire argument for gay rights rests on the notion that being gay is some immutable characteristic printed into our DNA - then you are missing the entire point of why gays have been granted any rights at all. The movement was around gaining rights because
A) regardless of whether its genetic or preprogrammed, there is nothing wrong with being gay.Its a morally neutral sexuality.
B) Anyone who isn't straight and is having consensual has a right to be that person and enjoy the full support of the law and be seen as human beings with representation across the board in the same way that hetro's have enjoyed.

Splitting into tribes and dolling out considerations for a persons sexuality based on existing power structures regardless of the actual merits of the respective positions is playing the rights game wrong.

I can name several conditions that are potentially innate/immutable possibly genetic that will and should never be recognised as valid legally permissible presentations of the human experience.

 

[Nomebear]

Growing up as a "gay" man in a small, rural, farming and ranching community was rough. I was born this way. It's like eye color, being left handed, hair parting on one side rather than another, the color of my skin, and etc., I did not have a choice then, nor do I have a choice today.

Bisexuals in the community could pass for straight, and were married, but hit on me every chance they could. Why? Because I could pass for straight, was a cowboy, a rancher, and served time in the Army. I was also a mechanic, builder, electrician, and heavy equipment operator. No, I didn't hang drapes, do hair, sew, have a lisp, or walk funny, so how could I possibly be gay?

I couldn't trust any of the local switch hitters, because they'd no sooner throw me under the bus before they'd let anyone find out about their true nature. That didn't mean that I went without in the community, but after plowing some dude for three hours straight, I'd see him out with his lady friend holding hands, and he'd never acknowledge me while he was with her, or in a public place. If I mentioned it to him later, the response was: "Well, that's just how it is." I can't remember how many times I was the "best man". I'd be standing there in my rented tux for a man whom I topped mere hours before the wedding. This went on, and on, and on. I sold out and moved away.

Recently, I went back for a visit and no a g-damned thing has changed. An old acquaintance did not want me visiting him because people might suspect he was gay. Oh please! Now, the fucker is dying and wants to see me. Well guess what? I don't have the time.

 

[jaybee0560]

Growing up as a "gay" man in a small, rural, farming and ranching community was rough. I was born this way. It's like eye color, being left handed, hair parting on one side rather than another, the color of my skin, and etc., I did not have a choice then, nor do I have a choice today.

Bisexuals in the community could pass for straight, and were married, but hit on me every chance they could. Why? Because I could pass for straight, was a cowboy, a rancher, and served time in the Army. I was also a mechanic, builder, electrician, and heavy equipment operator. No, I didn't hang drapes, do hair, sew, have a lisp, or walk funny, so how could I possibly be gay?

I couldn't trust any of the local switch hitters, because they'd no sooner throw me under the bus before they'd let anyone find out about their true nature. That didn't mean that I went without in the community, but after plowing some dude for three hours straight, I'd see him out with his lady friend holding hands, and he'd never acknowledge me while he was with her, or in a public place. If I mentioned it to him later, the response was: "Well, that's just how it is." I can't remember how many times I was the "best man". I'd be standing there in my rented tux for a man whom I topped mere hours before the wedding. This went on, and on, and on. I sold out and moved away.

Recently, I went back for a visit and no a g-damned thing has changed. An old acquaintance did not want me visiting him because people might suspect he was gay. Oh please! Now, the fucker is dying and wants to see me. Well guess what? I don't have the time.

what point does this make?

 

[Nomebear]

The point is: The pain is more than I care to deal with. I'm tired of hearing about some "gender fluid" dude whom I knew that's been found by his wife or kids hanging from the rafters or a tree in the back yard. I'm done with it.

 

[jaybee0560]

The point is: The pain is more than I care to deal with. I'm tired of hearing about some "gender fluid" dude whom I knew that's been found by his wife or kids hanging from the rafters or a tree in the back yard. I'm done with it.

What you have described isn't "Gender fluid" - its not even "sexual fluidity" ..You described a bunch of people who are in the closet who are possibly either bi or gay living in a homophobic community and cheating on their partners.

 

[Beegun84]

Someone experimenting with a same sex kiss =/= sexual fluidity - Bi people does not automatically mean all bi people are sexually fluid. And there is still a far greater abundance of both gay and straight representation than the handful of shows you listed above that don't even directly or indirectly address the notion of sexual fluidity.

Saying that Gay rights has been regressing in "some" countries" around the world and then attaching that by default to queer theory is unsubstantiated association. Conservatism is on the rise in some countries and this is for a whole host of reasons that have nothing to do with sexual fluidity or gender - also -there is absolutely no reason to combine gender theory with sexual fluidity. They are two entirely different things.

The benefits of giving visibility to sexual fluidity is obvious - Because it exists and they are real people and its also describes an aspect of human sexuality that sheds a light on our understanding of how that all works. Same exact reason why despite the vast minority of the population being gay - we have fought for representation as well.
Saying this will "sink the ship" is simply another assertion you are making that is entirely unfounded. You have already made your motives clear - you are arguing from Tribalism, and have no interest in how this affects anyone outside of your tribe. You have made it clear that your position is fear based given you are worried about how representing other actual real people in this world will effect you. This is the same tired old argument that has been used to keep gays in the closet for years based on the tribe that had the most power for centuries - we do not advance by simply waiting till we are equipped with decent power base and then use that to keep someone else down. You have already said you are happy to throw anyone under the bus to preserve your rights.

The most bi-Phobic people I have met are the gay community by a long stretch. Most of whom consider bi to simply be a stepping stone to gay and just claim that bi people don't have the balls to go full homo - which is my personal experience as a bi man and, much like your assertion, is anecdotal.

How this sort of representation benefits anyone is pretty simple. If your entire argument for gay rights rests on the notion that being gay is some immutable characteristic printed into our DNA - then you are missing the entire point of why gays have been granted any rights at all. The movement was around gaining rights because
A) regardless of whether its genetic or preprogrammed, there is nothing wrong with being gay.Its a morally neutral sexuality.
B) Anyone who isn't straight and is having consensual has a right to be that person and enjoy the full support of the law and be seen as human beings with representation across the board in the same way that hetro's have enjoyed.

Splitting into tribes and dolling out considerations for a persons sexuality based on existing power structures regardless of the actual merits of the respective positions is playing the rights game wrong.

I can name several conditions that are potentially innate/immutable possibly genetic that will and should never be recognised as valid legally permissible presentations of the human experience.

I wasn't the one that said that I was happy to throw anyone under the bus to preserve gay rights.

And you too, don't care for anyone outside of your own tribe, the sexually-fluid people. I can argue that your points are anecdotal too after all everyone experiences differ. It's the bi guy who suggested to the gold star gays to try vagina for the first time in that documentary from The Netherlands. And you're the one that gave examples of sexual fluidity from bi to gay to bi to straight.

What the Western "YT" gays dan social media influencers (and porn stars) did to push sexual fluidity isn't anecdotal. It's there for all to see. The straights (men) doesn't have to do that because incels scream and shout expletives whenever they see something even a little bit gay.

 

[jaybee0560]

I wasn't the one that said that I was happy to throw anyone under the bus to preserve gay rights.

And you too, don't care for anyone outside of your own tribe, the sexually-fluid people. I can argue that your points are anecdotal too after all everyone experiences differ. It's the bi guy who suggested to the gold star gays to try vagina for the first time in that documentary from The Netherlands. And you're the one that gave examples of sexual fluidity from bi to gay to bi to straight.

What the Western "YT" gays dan social media influencers (and porn stars) did to push sexual fluidity isn't anecdotal. It's there for all to see. The straights (men) doesn't have to do that because incels scream and shout expletives whenever they see something even a little bit gay.

No, you didn't explicitly say that you would throw anyone under the bus - its just your entire line of reasoning that makes that point. You appear to acknowledge that sexual fluidity is a real thing that effects actual people, but you are happy for that to have no visibility because you are afraid of any risk to what you consider to be advances for gay rights .. if that aint throwing people under the bus then you are gonna have to explain how it's not.

And nope - there is no equivellence here vis a vis me throwing anyone under the bus, you're just not paying attention. Visibility for sexually fluid people is visibility for sexuality that counters the dominant straight narrative. That lifts all boats. its your contention that any narrative that suggests anyone can be fluid with their sexuality automagically means the argument that everyone can be fluid with their sexuality will be used to counter any gay rights advances>

Saying this is horseshit isn't anecdotal. Its obviously wrong. Again ..literally no one has ever suggested that everyone is fluid and not one single law has ever been written to advance gay rights that rests on the assumption that being gay is absolutely 100 % immutable for every single gay man.
We have made advances in this regard because of the combination of religion being removed from laws, constitutional privileges being applied more fairly and a lack of evidence to suggest that being gay or bi is something that should carry a social stigma.

Trying a vagina for the first time doesn't make someone sexually fluid - Jesus christ if you can't even argue with respect to the subject matter - what is the point here?

I gave you context around what I said about how sexual fluidity works - the primary point being that it rarely results in sexuality "swinging like a pendulum" I also said its rare .. and who the fuck cares about any of that ?

Once again - no one has ever been granted a human right based on some immutable characteristic of thier sexuality .. there is either a reason accepts a thing or reject it based on the merits of that thing.

Every single argument you have made is absolutely fear based.

If we accept the facts that sexual fluidity is uncommon - is real and effects actual people - what rational argument would anyone ever have not to have this represented ?

 

[Beegun84]

No, you didn't explicitly say that you would throw anyone under the bus - its just your entire line of reasoning that makes that point. You appear to acknowledge that sexual fluidity is a real thing that effects actual people, but you are happy for that to have no visibility because you are afraid of any risk to what you consider to be advances for gay rights .. if that aint throwing people under the bus then you are gonna have to explain how it's not.

And nope - there is no equivellence here vis a vis me throwing anyone under the bus, you're just not paying attention. Visibility for sexually fluid people is visibility for sexuality that counters the dominant straight narrative. That lifts all boats. its your contention that any narrative that suggests anyone can be fluid with their sexuality automagically means the argument that everyone can be fluid with their sexuality will be used to counter any gay rights advances>

Saying this is horseshit isn't anecdotal. Its obviously wrong. Again ..literally no one has ever suggested that everyone is fluid and not one single law has ever been written to advance gay rights that rests on the assumption that being gay is absolutely 100 % immutable for every single gay man.
We have made advances in this regard because of the combination of religion being removed from laws, constitutional privileges being applied more fairly and a lack of evidence to suggest that being gay or bi is something that should carry a social stigma.

Trying a vagina for the first time doesn't make someone sexually fluid - Jesus christ if you can't even argue with respect to the subject matter - what is the point here?

I gave you context around what I said about how sexual fluidity works - the primary point being that it rarely results in sexuality "swinging like a pendulum" I also said its rare .. and who the fuck cares about any of that ?

Once again - no one has ever been granted a human right based on some immutable characteristic of thier sexuality .. there is either a reason accepts a thing or reject it based on the merits of that thing.

Every single argument you have made is absolutely fear based.

If we accept the facts that sexual fluidity is uncommon - is real and effects actual people - what rational argument would anyone ever have not to have this represented ?

So far you only sided with straight and sexually-fluid people the entire time. Even with the other bi poster saying that they experience biphobia from straight people and you reduce it to being anecdotal or pointless.

Straight people go for the kill and deal with bi/sexually-fluid people quietly most of the time. Unlike "gay" people online that push sexual fluidity by saying they're gay but they screw pussy from time to time. This made gay people wary of bi people. And this fluidity representation usually comes at the cost of gay or lesbian representation, never straight ones. Bohemian Rhapsody for example saying heterosexuality is pure and good while gay ones will lead to AIDS and misery. It always saying heterosexuality=good, gayness is something to be avoided. Hollywood hasn't made even a single good entertainment beyond the basic coming out stuff like Heartstopper and Heartstopper isn't even from Hollywood. WE NEVER HAD A GAY ERA just pre-gay and immediately post-gay starting in 2016. It was strange that back in 2015 when marriage equality becomes legal in the USA the gays weren't allowed to "talk" about it. In the much lauded (by the mainstream media) Glass Onion doesn't even show Hugh Grant in the same room as Daniel Craig's character. People still afraid of gay PDAs and now you want to move on to sexual fluidity? The immutable people from either side are tired of being told to experiment but straight people have all the power and the gay and lesbians will be left holding the bag along with the consequences.

Unfortunately the majority of the world is still fearful of gayness and the whole queer thing. It is not the fear talking it's real life.

 

[jaybee0560]

So far you only sided with straight and sexually-fluid people the entire time. Even with the other bi poster saying that they experience biphobia from straight people and you reduce it to being anecdotal or pointless.

Straight people go for the kill and deal with bi/sexually-fluid people quietly most of the time. Unlike "gay" people online that push sexual fluidity by saying they're gay but they screw pussy from time to time. This made gay people wary of bi people. And this fluidity representation usually comes at the cost of gay or lesbian representation, never straight ones. Bohemian Rhapsody for example saying heterosexuality is pure and good while gay ones will lead to AIDS and misery. It always saying heterosexuality=good, gayness is something to be avoided. Hollywood hasn't made even a single good entertainment beyond the basic coming out stuff like Heartstopper and Heartstopper isn't even from Hollywood. WE NEVER HAD A GAY ERA just pre-gay and immediately post-gay starting in 2016. It was strange that back in 2015 when marriage equality becomes legal in the USA the gays weren't allowed to "talk" about it. In the much lauded (by the mainstream media) Glass Onion doesn't even show Hugh Grant in the same room as Daniel Craig's character. People still afraid of gay PDAs and now you want to move on to sexual fluidity? The immutable people from either side are tired of being told to experiment but straight people have all the power and the gay and lesbians will be left holding the bag along with the consequences.

Unfortunately the majority of the world is still fearful of gayness and the whole queer thing. It is not the fear talking it's real life.

Dude - no. So far I have defended my position (being sexually fluid people deserve representation - also - I am not afraid of this representation) against the claims that to represent fluid people would mean to somehow damage gay rights.
I have not once attacked or criticized gay representation - you're the bigot asking us to stay in the closet to protect what you consider to be the fragility of gay rights.
I literally said my experience (literally the definition of anecdote) was that the gay community is by far the most bi-phobic in response to the claim that it was straights that were bi phobic - the difference between your anecdote and mine is that mine is lived where are yours yet another pointless fabrication - its not like there was a source to the claim is there?
"Straight people go for the kill and deal with bi/sexually-fluid people quietly most of the time."
What does this even mean?

"Unlike "gay" people online that push sexual fluidity by saying they're gay but they screw pussy from time to time ,,, And this fluidity representation usually comes at the cost of gay or lesbian representation"

Just more bullshit unfounded assertions. As has been stated ad nauseum - there are far more representations of Gay people are only interested in fucking gay people than there are any other flavour of non straight sexuality. Just cos every now and then a bisexual man appears in a show or some gay guy fucks a women hardly means there is any cost to the gay community - you keep banging on with this same assertion like you saying it makes the case .. the 'best you have managed is to fabricate some meritless argument around the perception that if people are fluid then putting a gay man in front of kids would make them gay and "Oh Noes" .. if you can't counter ridiculous arguments like that on merit without having to throw fluid people under the bus - that is your failing, not an argument against fluid representation.

"Bohemian Rhapsody for example saying heterosexuality is pure and good while gay ones will lead to AIDS and misery."
And again - a little insight into how if you're a hammer all you see is nails ammirite ? .. You may be surprised to learn that Bohemian Rhapsody was an account of the life of the very real Freddie Mercury who did end up with very real AIDS ..How the fuck else where they supposed to tell that story? ..
Gay = Bad - AIDS was not the actual point was it - there was literally the Movie Rocketman that came out around the same time about Elton John which - amazingly told his life story of being a gay man who didn't get aids.
I watched the Story of Anne Boleyn the other day - guess you'd charactorise that story as Becoming a queen is bad and will get your head chopped off"

FFS man - I'd done dealing with you and your bigoted fear dressed up as considered reason . knock yourself out and do to fluid people what straight people have been doing to gays forever .. everyone thinks they do shitful things for all the right reasons - the difference here is you should know better. Clearly there was a lesson missed and that is your failing

 

[Beegun84]

Dude - no. So far I have defended my position (being sexually fluid people deserve representation - also - I am not afraid of this representation) against the claims that to represent fluid people would mean to somehow damage gay rights.
I have not once attacked or criticized gay representation - you're the bigot asking us to stay in the closet to protect what you consider to be the fragility of gay rights.
I literally said my experience (literally the definition of anecdote) was that the gay community is by far the most bi-phobic in response to the claim that it was straights that were bi phobic - the difference between your anecdote and mine is that mine is lived where are yours yet another pointless fabrication - its not like there was a source to the claim is there?
"Straight people go for the kill and deal with bi/sexually-fluid people quietly most of the time."
What does this even mean?

"Unlike "gay" people online that push sexual fluidity by saying they're gay but they screw pussy from time to time ,,, And this fluidity representation usually comes at the cost of gay or lesbian representation"

Just more bullshit unfounded assertions. As has been stated ad nauseum - there are far more representations of Gay people are only interested in fucking gay people than there are any other flavour of non straight sexuality. Just cos every now and then a bisexual man appears in a show or some gay guy fucks a women hardly means there is any cost to the gay community - you keep banging on with this same assertion like you saying it makes the case .. the 'best you have managed is to fabricate some meritless argument around the perception that if people are fluid then putting a gay man in front of kids would make them gay and "Oh Noes" .. if you can't counter ridiculous arguments like that on merit without having to throw fluid people under the bus - that is your failing, not an argument against fluid representation.

"Bohemian Rhapsody for example saying heterosexuality is pure and good while gay ones will lead to AIDS and misery."
And again - a little insight into how if you're a hammer all you see is nails ammirite ? .. You may be surprised to learn that Bohemian Rhapsody was an account of the life of the very real Freddie Mercury who did end up with very real AIDS ..How the fuck else where they supposed to tell that story? ..
Gay = Bad - AIDS was not the actual point was it - there was literally the Movie Rocketman that came out around the same time about Elton John which - amazingly told his life story of being a gay man who didn't get aids.
I watched the Story of Anne Boleyn the other day - guess you'd charactorise that story as Becoming a queen is bad and will get your head chopped off"

FFS man - I'd done dealing with you and your bigoted fear dressed up as considered reason . knock yourself out and do to fluid people what straight people have been doing to gays forever .. everyone thinks they do shitful things for all the right reasons - the difference here is you should know better. Clearly there was a lesson missed and that is your failing

It's obvious that we will never see eye to eye so I'm not gonna bother. I will just say that this whole gender and fluidity circus is part of the much broader "woke" agenda/phenomenon of recent years. Teal Swan has a recent YouTube video on this from 2-3 days ago, she explains it better than I do. I don't buy her new-age stuff but her explanations on this are on-point.

Yeah see, even the critics who gives good reviews to Bohemian Rhapsody didn't say that it's accurate. One critic David Edelstein from NYMag/Vulture even said that it got a million things wrong but the strength of the songs carried it. The producers/Brian May did a revision and put everything bad into Freddy from being rude and unprofessional to their boss to the one that broke the band up and caused them to record their own solo projects. And how Freddy and Jim Hutton met, he didn't sexually harass him like in the movie etc etc you can google all the inaccuracies.

The AIDS storyline was dropped from the release of Rocketman. It's in the deleted scenes as extras.

 

[jaybee0560]

It's obvious that we will never see eye to eye so I'm not gonna bother. I will just say that this whole gender and fluidity circus is part of the much broader "woke" agenda/phenomenon of recent years. Teal Swan has a recent YouTube video on this from 2-3 days ago, she explains it better than I do. I don't buy her new-age stuff but her explanations on this are on-point.

Yeah see, even the critics who gives good reviews to Bohemian Rhapsody didn't say that it's accurate. One critic David Edelstein from NYMag/Vulture even said that it got a million things wrong but the strength of the songs carried it. The producers/Brian May did a revision and put everything bad into Freddy from being rude and unprofessional to their boss to the one that broke the band up and caused them to record their own solo projects. And how Freddy and Jim Hutton met, he didn't sexually harass him like in the movie etc etc you can google all the inaccuracies.

The AIDS storyline was dropped from the release of Rocketman. It's in the deleted scenes as extras.

No - we're not gonna see "eye to eye" given you have no idea how to make a valid point based on merit rather than assumption, projection and fear.
You have repeatedly made the assertion that "Fluid representation" damages "Gay" representation. and then pointed to mostly references of people exploring their sexuality/ being Bi-sexual in a handful of shows ignoring any points made clarifying
a) most of your examples have nothing at all to do with "Fluidity"
b) for every vague reference to fluidity - there are thousands of representations of characters that are gay/Bi/Straight and not fluid - but this has got ya clutching your pearls cos - apparently any representation of this real thing is both "An agenda" and "A threat" .. because - something about kids and staight gay power inbalances.

Sound familiar - remember when any sort of gay representation in movies was considered dangerous and part of an "Agenda" .. That is where you are at. Those arguments were made by bigots that feared what would happen if we messaged anything other than being gay is disordered and dangerous - that is the intellectual company that you choose to keep - not me. Enjoy.

There isn't a person on the planet who doesn't know that Bohemian Rhapsody isn't 100% factual - you're being deliberately obtuse again - which is another reason why there is little point in attempting explain shit to you.
Freddie's death was a reasonably well known fact that was material in the telling the story of his life. You tried to paint this as some Gay = AIDS tactic - Which is just laffable. Freddie died of actual AIDS - this was not made up. How does pointing to other inaccuracies in the movie alter this point?

The AIDS story line in Rocket man was dropped because it had little to do with Eltons life and would have created a seperate focus from the films narrative - it was not Eltons AIDS. And had they included it - it wouldn't have been Gay = AIDS = Bad .. the point of that narrative was to explain why Elton set up the AIDS foundation and got sober.

Also - they DID NOT INCLUDE IT IN THE MOVIE so - what possible point do you think you are making?

Exec summary - you appear to have no idea at all what sexual fluidity is but - you're really mad at it cos - y'know - bi people and people that at some point in their life question their sexuiality.
Something about some person being made at woke and cos you agree with her you believe that makes points against fluid - which its worth repeating - you don't seem to understand either.
And everything you see that vaguely represents sexual fluidity is part of an agenda - as opposed to gay representation regardless of how any suggestion of sexual fluidity is dwarfed by actual gay representaton.

 

[Beegun84]

No - we're not gonna see "eye to eye" given you have no idea how to make a valid point based on merit rather than assumption, projection and fear.
You have repeatedly made the assertion that "Fluid representation" damages "Gay" representation. and then pointed to mostly references of people exploring their sexuality/ being Bi-sexual in a handful of shows ignoring any points made clarifying
a) most of your examples have nothing at all to do with "Fluidity"
b) for every vague reference to fluidity - there are thousands of representations of characters that are gay/Bi/Straight and not fluid - but this has got ya clutching your pearls cos - apparently any representation of this real thing is both "An agenda" and "A threat" .. because - something about kids and staight gay power inbalances.

Sound familiar - remember when any sort of gay representation in movies was considered dangerous and part of an "Agenda" .. That is where you are at. Those arguments were made by bigots that feared what would happen if we messaged anything other than being gay is disordered and dangerous - that is the intellectual company that you choose to keep - not me. Enjoy.

There isn't a person on the planet who doesn't know that Bohemian Rhapsody isn't 100% factual - you're being deliberately obtuse again - which is another reason why there is little point in attempting explain shit to you.
Freddie's death was a reasonably well known fact that was material in the telling the story of his life. You tried to paint this as some Gay = AIDS tactic - Which is just laffable. Freddie died of actual AIDS - this was not made up. How does pointing to other inaccuracies in the movie alter this point?

The AIDS story line in Rocket man was dropped because it had little to do with Eltons life and would have created a seperate focus from the films narrative - it was not Eltons AIDS. And had they included it - it wouldn't have been Gay = AIDS = Bad .. the point of that narrative was to explain why Elton set up the AIDS foundation and got sober.

Also - they DID NOT INCLUDE IT IN THE MOVIE so - what possible point do you think you are making?

Exec summary - you appear to have no idea at all what sexual fluidity is but - you're really mad at it cos - y'know - bi people and people that at some point in their life question their sexuiality.
Something about some person being made at woke and cos you agree with her you believe that makes points against fluid - which its worth repeating - you don't seem to understand either.
And everything you see that vaguely represents sexual fluidity is part of an agenda - as opposed to gay representation regardless of how any suggestion of sexual fluidity is dwarfed by actual gay representaton.

Lol of course it is seen as an agenda. What happens if a straight guy told another straight guy to try dick maybe he'll like it. Outside the West it'll get very dangerous, even in America with guns all over the place. Doesn't matter which mouth it comes from if you tell a gay man to try pussy and see if he likes it. The words are the same. Same old conversion therapy but repackaged. Still trying to transfer one pool of "fluid" from one pool to another.

The point that I make in the previous post about Bohemian Rhapsody is that the other straight members of the band are portrayed as saints without fault and they're all heterosexuals. Only Freddy was reckless, rude, promiscuous etc etc albeit talented they all dump the negatives on his character and not others. Very imbalanced and considering the other major gay character is the big villain.

 

[jaybee0560]

Lol of course it is seen as an agenda. What happens if a straight guy told another straight guy to try dick maybe he'll like it. Outside the West it'll get very dangerous, even in America with guns all over the place. Doesn't matter which mouth it comes from if you tell a gay man to try pussy and see if he likes it. The words are the same. Same old conversion therapy but repackaged. Still trying to transfer one pool of "fluid" from one pool to another.

The point that I make in the previous post about Bohemian Rhapsody is that the other straight members of the band are portrayed as saints without fault and they're all heterosexuals. Only Freddy was reckless, rude, promiscuous etc etc albeit talented they all dump the negatives on his character and not others. Very imbalanced and considering the other major gay character is the big villain.

JFC you are damaged

 

[Anthooonnnyyy]

Because you see it everywhere in gay TV shows they have The gay male character have sex with a woman to discuss sexual fluidity. there’s a Broadway play called "cock" with the guy from Kingsman playing a gay guy who fell in love with a woman. sex shops are selling pussy toys to gay men and gay porn they have an so-called openly gay men having sex with women. It’s like they pushing this straight agenda onto gay men but they’re not doing that to lesbian women because if they try to do that to lesbian the lesbian women will be upset. they are literally try to erase the G to change it into a umbrella term. The whole queer community has a strong hatred towards gay men in a try to say they going after white gay men but they’re actually going after gay man of every race. They try to maké bisexual pansexual and whatever new label they come up with popular and try to get rid of the existence of gay men who are the foundation of the LGBT community. they literally using homophobia against gay men and homophobic tactics like gay men are misogynistic for not dating a woman or having sex with a woman. The weird queer community is trying to say that game and are living in a box because they do not wanna have sex with a woman how we are living in a box and we are living outside the box of normalcy they trying to literally trying to push us back in the box pushes back in the closet I thought I heard is homophobic conversion therapy rhetoric from the right wingers but now I’m hearing this same homophobic stuff from the left-wing as well this is getting freaking ridiculous

Because you see it everywhere in gay TV shows they have The gay male character have sex with a woman to discuss sexual fluidity. there’s a Broadway play called "cock" with the guy from Kingsman playing a gay guy who fell in love with a woman. sex shops are selling pussy toys to gay men and gay porn they have an so-called openly gay men having sex with women. It’s like they pushing this straight agenda onto gay men but they’re not doing that to lesbian women because if they try to do that to lesbian the lesbian women will be upset. they are literally try to erase the G to change it into a umbrella term. The whole queer community has a strong hatred towards gay men in a try to say they going after white gay men but they’re actually going after gay man of every race. They try to maké bisexual pansexual and whatever new label they come up with popular and try to get rid of the existence of gay men who are the foundation of the LGBT community. they literally using homophobia against gay men and homophobic tactics like gay men are misogynistic for not dating a woman or having sex with a woman. The weird queer community is trying to say that game and are living in a box because they do not wanna have sex with a woman how we are living in a box and we are living outside the box of normalcy they trying to literally trying to push us back in the box pushes back in the closet I thought I heard is homophobic conversion therapy rhetoric from the right wingers but now I’m hearing this same homophobic stuff from the left-wing as well this is getting freaking ridiculous

this is very much true cause where is heterosexuality illegal? It’s very Orwellian. The play was written by a straight male. I think it’s interesting that people think it’s a joke as well. Like a man and a woman fight over a gay man? Please. It’s strange like hetero normative people can’t get it through minds that men don’t want to be with women/females and that’s okay. There’s nothing inherently nefarious going on. It shows that for as much society “accepts” they will always try to change and convert us to what they want. This is why practicing same language is vital and being honest about lesbian and gay history. We are truly in the age of the Handicapper General.