2014: the year Ellen Page made scores of neckbeards cry out in psychic anguish

[brian trageskin]

Why don't you want gays to be able to marry?

 

you see, this is exactly why this thread keeps going on and on. your whole perspective on shit is biased because you won't take other factors in consideration.

the matter here is not about wanting or not wanting gays to be able to marry, it's about how a so-called democratic government acts undemocratically, and how it justifies its arbitrary decisions with intellectual frauds, with straw men such as:

- if you don't want our unilaterally-decided reform on marriage to be voted, you're being intolerant towards gay people;

- if you don't want our unilaterally-decided eductional program on sexuality and girl-boy equality to be teached, you're being intolerant.towards gay people.

who asked for marriage to be reformed in france? not the gay community, but LGBT activists.

who asked for gender theory to be teached in french schools? LGBT activists.

 

marriage is by nature, an undemocratic (in the societal sense of the term) institution, in that homosexuals can't have access to it. up until recently, nobody in france gave a rat's ass about the discriminating nature of marriage, apart from LGBT activists, who know better than homosexuals how they should feel about it. i'd like to be explained what's democratic (in the political sense of the term) about a lobby + a government imposing that to be changed, without asking anybody's opinion, and without considering a single adverse opinion. doing so is by nature undemocratic (in the political sense).

intellectual considerations on social equality in absolute terms, social equality in a vacuum, make no sense. equality is a concept that's based on relativeness.

one cannot simply ask for equality to happen in a vacuum. if you do so, welcome to ARBITRARYLAND. a world where you don't need to justify your acts, where the means used to get a result don't matter. sounds familiar.

[LimpyLoo]

Yes and as I've said that shit happens with every civil rights movement and it's necessary and good.

 

 

If you thought gay people actually deserved to marry then you simply wouldn't say the things you are saying.

[hoggy]

Brian! What gender theory is being taught? How do you know?

 

marriage is by nature, an undemocratic (in the societal sense of the term) institution, in that homosexuals can't have access to it.

 

 

[...]

 

i'd like to be explained what's democratic (in the political sense of the term) about a lobby + a government imposing that to be changed, without asking anybody's opinion, and without considering a single adverse opinion. doing so is by nature undemocratic (in the political sense).

So you support democracy only when it supports your argument?

 

one cannot simply ask for equality to happen in a vacuum. if you do so, welcome to ARBITRARYLAND. a world where you don't need to justify your acts, where the means used to get a result don't matter. sounds familiar.equality is a concept that's based on relativeness.

So all that can ever be concrete is traditional culture, nothing can ever be changed, otherwise the world may tip over on it's axis and everyone will fall into space

[eugene]

i don't understand what's undemocratic about what you presented, is it the elected government who ultimately decides whether/how to implement those requested reforms by lgbt ngo's or ngo themselves force schools to change curriculum and force governmental recognition of gay marriage ?

[brian trageskin]

don't even

 

i just rollerbladed in to the france discussion to add this thing that seemed interesting:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/26/gay-marriage-protest-france_n_3339705.html

 

the top of the comments dude added some weird nuance to brian's argument that i thought was relevant here.

 

 

 

Yank_in_France

48

POLITICAL PUNDIT·2,625 Fans·Egalité Fraternité Fiscalité ! - Les Inconnus

 

As usual, when it comes to France, HP's coverage is lacking, perhaps because much of it comes from cheap translations by uber politically correct French people who lack the ability to see the nuances in politics. No matter. Here's the real deal.

 

The forcing opposing gay marriage in France are a bit more complex than present in this article.

 

First, the night club comedian, a woman who created a stage name based on a goof on Brigitte Bardot by calling herself Frigid Barjot. OK, we all knw what "frigid" means, but "barjot" in French is slang for "crazy" or "whxxxy" (sorry can't say that word on HP although it is not a dirty word).

 

The thing about "Frigid Barjot" is that she makes her living doing shows in gay nightclubs!

 

The second thing is that her anti-gay marriage organizations are also led by two militant gay organizations who refuse straight marriage as a diseased institution for straight people that they do NOT want spreading to gays!!

 

Yeah, there is the far right and the militant Catholics in these demos, but most of the anti-gay marriage people are NOT anti-gay!

What's that, you say? Have I gone "barjot"?

 

No, most of those opposing the current law are far more concerned about gay adoption and what the French call PMA (medically assisted procreation) which the pro-gay marriage people want the national heatlhcare system to pay for IN ENTIRETY.

 

People are worried about the adoption issue because, given that gay couples do not produce children on their own, they are going to be the biggest demanders for adoption. Even if they only represent 10% of the population, they could flood the tiny French adoption market. (French adoption is already difficult due to archaic laws that provide for the right of the natural mother to reclaim her child(ren) at any time during their childhood, regardless of their attachment to their foster parents. Obviously not many want to adopt kids under those harsh conditions.)

 

In a world of strident, self-righteous individuals, it is hard to debate these matters in a rational manner, but I am for gay marraige in the US and against it in France because the French are SLAVES of logic, so the govt will "logically" say that, since gays are to be equal, they must have equal access to parenthood and the only way for them to have that sort of equality is by having the rest of society pay for it.

 

But the national healthcare fund is already under severe financial stress, which is why so many medications are only covered by 30% to 50%. And now the PC crowd is demanding that we paying 100% for medically assisted procreation. Sorry, but in a world of limited means where choosing one thing means foregoing another, I say NON to paying for medically assisted procreation!

 

yep, that's pretty relevant and spot-on. i didn't want to go into this, into the actual points against gay marriage because i'm not informed enough, and i'm more interested in the political context in which this debate takes place.

If you thought gay people actually deserved to marry then you simply wouldn't say the things you are saying.

 

i don't care what they deserve or not deserve, it's none of my business here.

[xox]

Yes and as I've said that shit happens with every civil rights movement and it's necessary and good.

 

 

If you thought gay people actually deserved to marry then you simply wouldn't say the things you are saying.

 

 

deserved? i don't think it's the right word

 

 

also, LGBT activists are trying to push the subject of marriage cause of children adoption by their community members the most. they got all the legal marriage rights in croatia (more then 60 laws in total) and the LGBT activists are not happy because they still can't adopt children...and THAT is the main reason ppl opposing to gay marriage. nobody (or majority don't) have problem with gay marriage at all. they're living together anyway, so why wouldn't they have the rights married ppl have. but children adoption by gay couples is still a controversial question in croatia as i think is in france and i don't think it would be good to undemocratically change that.

some of gay ppl want to adopt a child but the rights from the marriage law is of bigger importance to them and i understand why.

 

 

also, few yrs ago one gay friend of my gf changed his mind regarding his sexuality (completely even not a bisexual) and started dating a girl, soon his own ex gay friends attacked him physically for stating this on the net, they're still attacking him verbally, stalking him on the facebook...bla bla..

i couldn't believe what he said to my gf about the gay community in croatia. i dont want to say much here cause some could get offended and other ppl could get an idea that all gays are like that (it's their views and life styles not everybody's) but i'll say this: he was shocked how much of his gay friends actually hate kids...let alone wishing to adopt them. some of them want kids yes, but they're in a big minority, according to him. he also said that they life styles and relationships are a totally diff planet compare to non-gay, day and night i a lot of things.

i'd also leave the possibility that he lied.

[brian trageskin]

Brian! What gender theory is being taught? How do you know?

 

children books about homosexual parenthood, transvestism are at the disposal of teachers for the youngest. a film about transvestism is proposed for educational purposes. the ministry of education created an informative website about sexuality at the disposal of teenagers. a gender theory-inspired chart is available on the website: http://www.ligneazur.org/sante-sexuelle/situations-individuelles-multiples .

the minister of women rights (najat vallaud-belkacem) stated that the republic has the duty of fighting against sexual stereotypes, and had to do so for the youngest ones. the minister of education (vincent peillon) stated in an interview that school has to wrest pupils from social, ethnical, family and intellectual determinisms.

 

So you support democracy only when it supports your argument?

 

the word "democracy" can have 2 main different meanings:

- the concept of popular sovereignty

- the concept of equal rights.

 

if you read again what i wrote, you'll see that i used it to indicate popular sovereignty in one case, and to indicate equal rights in the other. equal rights are not my business here. popular sovereignty is.

 

 

one cannot simply ask for equality to happen in a vacuum. if you do so, welcome to ARBITRARYLAND. a world where you don't need to justify your acts, where the means used to get a result don't matter. sounds familiar.equality is a concept that's based on relativeness.

So all that can ever be concrete is traditional culture, nothing can ever be changed, otherwise the world may tip over on it's axis and everyone will fall into space

 

i never said this. i said the concept of equal rights has no argumentative weight in this discussion.

[brian trageskin]

i don't understand what's undemocratic about what you presented, is it the elected government who ultimately decides whether/how to implement those requested reforms by lgbt ngo's

 

it's this. except the government won't consider popular rejection of this reform. they won't hold a referendum, which is the very least they could do. that's what's undemocratic.

[Guest A/D]

i never said this. i said the concept of equal rights has no argumentative weight in this discussion.

Welp that explains why this discussion felt so pointless. I don't know where you're coming from, and I don't want to. Have fun!

[brian trageskin]

 

 

some parents might disagree with teaching of physics and math, you never know if your child is gonna open a black hole or develop a miniature nuke or something, other might diasgree with teaching of theory of evolution and so on. all of the decisions in centralised educational programs are political in nature, so why gender studies get some special treatment from you ? what's wrong with political claims of 2 lesbian activist (and why even emphasize the fact that they're lesbians) ?

 

your prejudice is getting very obvious.

 

 

hehe, i knew we'd get there.

the difference with teaching of math, for example, is that the ministry of education doesn't hide it's teaching math. everybody knows what math is.

with teaching of theory of evolution, the ministry doesn't hide it either. the fact it can be used for political purposes doesn't change that people know what it's about.

what's different with gender theory is that the ministry's hiding the fact that it's being teached it at school. most parents don't know what it's about, they're not being given the tools to figure out what it's about, and they don't know it's being teached to some of their kids. there's no transparency.

 

now, there's nothing wrong with lesbian activists making political claims, they have the right to do so. but the funny part is their manifesto is like a prophecy that's currently being fulfilled. many of the amendments proposed in it were voted, or are being discussed. such as gay marriage, gender theory at school etc.

why is it relevant to underline that they're lesbians? because i read the thing, and it's basically 2 lesbians pretending to have authority on the matter of homosexuals being discriminated, and women being discriminated, just because they're women, and gay. hahaha. their reasoning doesn't make much sense yet they ask for radical societal changes. i wish you could read the thing, it's pretty bonkers.

 

Conspiracy theorist warning in bold.

 

i don't see what's conspiracy theoristic (not sure i got this word right lol) about stating that 2 ministers are defending equal-rights-issues-regarding-gender/sexuality educational programs into school, and deny this reality.

[brian trageskin]

 

i never said this. i said the concept of equal rights has no argumentative weight in this discussion.

Welp that explains why this discussion felt so pointless. I don't know where you're coming from, and I don't want to. Have fun!

 

 

your concern is equal rights issues as observed in a vacuum. mine is equal rights issues as observed relatively to social context.

[hoggy]

children books about homosexual parenthood, transvestism are at the disposal of teachers for the youngest. a film about transvestism is proposed for educational purposes.

 

What's the problem?

 

the ministry of education created an informative website about sexuality at the disposal of teenagers. a gender theory-inspired chart is available on the website: http://www.ligneazur.org/sante-sexuelle/situations-individuelles-multiples .

 

The table is apparently only meant to illustrate the modest point that there are many different kinds of gender and sexuality if you read more closely.

 

the minister of women rights (najat vallaud-belkacem) stated that the republic has the duty of fighting against sexual stereotypes, and had to do so for the youngest ones. the minister of education (vincent peillon) stated in an interview that school has to wrest pupils from social, ethnical, family and intellectual determinisms.

Fighting stereotypes - yes, why not, depending on in what sense this is meant.

 

"The goal of the secular morality is to remove all family, ethnic, social and intellectual determinisms from the pupil" - this is more problematic, as was the banning of burkhas in France. This I find a more interesting and murky debate, but has this notion (taken from a single quote by a single person) been implemented in any meaningful way? Certainly not in any harmful way according to the other points above. Homophobic parents should not be free to instil homophobia in their children. Also, he says 'determinisms' - that is significant. Determining what? It depends what the quote is in reference to.

 

the word "democracy" can have 2 main different meanings:

- the concept of popular sovereignty

- the concept of equal rights.

No. Democracy is a system of government.

 

 

 

one cannot simply ask for equality to happen in a vacuum. if you do so, welcome to ARBITRARYLAND. a world where you don't need to justify your acts, where the means used to get a result don't matter. sounds familiar.equality is a concept that's based on relativeness.

So all that can ever be concrete is traditional culture, nothing can ever be changed, otherwise the world may tip over on it's axis and everyone will fall into space

 

i never said this. i said the concept of equal rights has no argumentative weight in this discussion.

 

Because you believe that only traditional established forms of society hold weight.

[brian trageskin]

 

the ministry of education created an informative website about sexuality at the disposal of teenagers. a gender theory-inspired chart is available on the website: http://www.ligneazur.org/sante-sexuelle/situations-individuelles-multiples .

 

The table is apparently only meant to illustrate the modest point that there are many different kinds of gender and sexuality if you read more closely.

 

i read carefully. but what you won't consider is that it's not the role of the ministry of education to put informative platforms about gender issues at the disposal of pupils.

 

 

children books about homosexual parenthood, transvestism are at the disposal of teachers for the youngest. a film about transvestism is proposed for educational purposes.

 

What's the problem?

 

since when is school a place where sexual identity-related issues are to be discussed? sexuality is a private matter, and school is not about discussing private matters, it's about learning/teaching public-related things.

 

the word "democracy" can have 2 main different meanings:

- the concept of popular sovereignty

- the concept of equal rights.

No. Democracy is a system of government.

 

 

the system of government based on the concept of popular sovereignty. it also refers to the concept of equal rights. semantics bro.

[Silent Member]

Reading this thread turned me gay. Thanks guys.

[eugene]

 

 

children books about homosexual parenthood, transvestism are at the disposal of teachers for the youngest. a film about transvestism is proposed for educational purposes.

 

What's the problem?

 

since when is school a place where sexual identity-related issues are to be discussed? sexuality is a private matter, and school is not about discussing private matters, it's about learning/teaching public-related things.

 

since discrimination and homophobia is a public problem, and the key to fixing it is education.

[hoggy]

 

 

the ministry of education created an informative website about sexuality at the disposal of teenagers. a gender theory-inspired chart is available on the website: http://www.ligneazur.org/sante-sexuelle/situations-individuelles-multiples .

The table is apparently only meant to illustrate the modest point that there are many different kinds of gender and sexuality if you read more closely.

 

i read carefully. but what you won't consider is that it's not the role of the ministry of education to put informative platforms about gender issues at the disposal of pupils.

 

Why not?

 

 

 

children books about homosexual parenthood, transvestism are at the disposal of teachers for the youngest. a film about transvestism is proposed for educational purposes.

What's the problem?

 

since when is school a place where sexual identity-related issues are to be discussed? sexuality is a private matter, and school is not about discussing private matters, it's about learning/teaching public-related things.

 

It's not about discussing private matters, it is about learning about one's responsibility to treat people of alternative genders with equal respect and acceptance and to create an awareness of their existence for those pupils who may have been sheltered (for whatever reason) from knowing that they exist.

 

 

 

the word "democracy" can have 2 main different meanings:

- the concept of popular sovereignty

- the concept of equal rights.

No. Democracy is a system of government.

 

the system of government based on the concept of popular sovereignty. it also refers to the concept of equal rights. semantics bro.

 

I'm not your bro.

[brian trageskin]

since gender and sexuality-related issues are private problems, and the key to fixing it is brainwashing.

 

fixed. lol

[brian trageskin]

I'm not your bro.

 

alright pal.

[hoggy]

Do you think I'm rattled Brian?

[Adieu]

 

since gender and sexuality-related issues are private problems, and the key to fixing it is brainwashing.

 

fixed. lol

 

 

This is why I've openly called this dude scum. Right here^. Why even bother arguing with a bigot?

 

Only an oppressive force would actively attempt to limit information for the sake of upholding "values". If the information doesn't stand to reason then it will be cast aside. No one is telling people to be gay, or trans, or poly, or whatever. If opening the dialogue for such a thing is a problem then all you have to do is look at the people opposing it to see who the enemies of freedom are. The "right" people will not be the ones who try to restrict thought and experience on the grounds of righteousness.

 

 

The real reason they want to limit this information is because parents don't want their children exposed to different viewpoints on the matter. Otherwise, it makes it harder to indoctrinate them with hate and intolerance. It's like that movie The Village.

[brian trageskin]

Do you think I'm rattled Brian?

 

lol what? i'm just having a bit of fun with you mate. i got no problem with you, nor anyone else btw

my only concern is how to eradicate gay people from this planet.

[hoggy]

haha funny Brian

[danshoebridge]

Here's the thing about 'democratic governments acting undemocratically': At any given time, any government you care to choose will be pushing through stuff that doesn't have the support of over 50% of the population. If the big thing you're concerned about is gay marriage, consider yourself lucky. It's something that will have no direct consequences for any of the (straight, 'traditional') French population except in a obscure, totally theoretical way. Practically, it will not change their lives in any way whatsoever.

 

Here in the UK, the government are (for example) privatising the NHS. This has massive consequences for me and lots of people like me. By the time I get to an age where I require health care I'll likely have to pay for a significant amount of it. Meanwhile the taxes I paid throughout my life for healthcare will be funnelled into various offshore balance sheets. There is NO public support for this outside a few free market wingnuts and the people who stand to get rich from it.

 

So I have to wonder why people are getting bent out of shape by this issue in particular. Surely the French government is doing something else equally unpopular that actually makes a difference to your life? It bears repeating; gay people getting married will not change your life in even the slightest way.

[brian trageskin]

Here's the thing about 'democratic governments acting undemocratically': At any given time, any government you care to choose will be pushing through stuff that doesn't have the support of over 50% of the population. If the big thing you're concerned about is gay marriage, consider yourself lucky. It's something that will have no direct consequences for any of the (straight, 'traditional') French population except in a obscure, totally theoretical way. Practically, it will not change their lives in any way whatsoever.

 

Here in the UK, the government are (for example) privatising the NHS. This has massive consequences for me and lots of people like me. By the time I get to an age where I require health care I'll likely have to pay for a significant amount of it. Meanwhile the taxes I paid throughout my life for healthcare will be funnelled into various offshore balance sheets. There is NO public support for this outside a few free market wingnuts and the people who stand to get rich from it.

 

So I have to wonder why people are getting bent out of shape by this issue in particular. Surely the French government is doing something else equally unpopular that actually makes a difference to your life? It bears repeating; gay people getting married will not change your life in even the slightest way.

 

read all the posts i made to have a comprehensive view on my opinion. i'm not obsessed with gay marriage, i don't even care about the fight against gay marriage, per se.

at the end of the day, this whole thing is one big smoke screen to me. and a very effective one.

[Alcofribas]

one time i met gays that were in a bar. we talked until the end of the night. at one point i was like "are all of you gay guys gay?" and they all laughed and were like "uh, yeah."

 

pwn