Disney announces task force for LGBTQ content for CHILDREN

Is this coming from the guy who thinks teaching kids that gay people exist and the struggles they often endure is indoctrination that grooms kids to turn gay and transgender?

 

You really shouldn't base your outrage on words you put into my mouth, but which I never said. Not a single one of the statements you are attributing to me were actually made by me.

I am actually being extraordinarily patient with you here.

 

OK, groomer.

 

Just thought I'd point out that you're in social media right here. Carry on.

 

Y'all went from zero to pedophilia real quick.

 

This being "social media" is as loose of a definition as you can get. You might as well say texting is too. I don't know why it's so hard for everyone to understand that some people make opinions based off of their own observations and values/principles . I don't believe in discrimination of ANY kind. I also believe in doing right by people and their own beliefs/principles. If someone wants to transition to, be a certain sexual orientation that is really none of my business. However, its started to take a turn to where everybody else is constantly walking on eggshells and forced to conform rather than just be accepting is what ATW is trying to say.

I've had this conversation so many times and the response that myself and everybody else is met with is being "anti". At a certain point it gets tiring pressing the same buttons, especially when people have known me to be accepting of all groups through my 13 years or so posting here. So forgive me if I don't elaborate.

 

The foundation of our entire value system/beliefs is based on our personal experiences stemming from as far back as we can remember and probably even before. This existed prior to social media. We need to have the realization there is more to just our day to day encounters and an "n = 1,2,3 experience" but can't discount the former

I understand your fundamental point and agree that social media has turned this into a dangerous situation where people become more and more polarized, being exposed to stronger and stronger view points within their own echo chamber like @Os Trigonum frequently does with his posts. However, you can't generalize and portray everyone that holds a certain view point to be a product of babylon bee and twitter diarrhea

 

I'm black and I've never once seen someone call a group of black people BIPOC...

Yall just making up stuff to be outraged over now. Never have I ever seen this discussed on black twitter or anything of the sort of black people going "Should we or should we not be called black people or BIPOC?"

The only point in that tweet is the Latinx, that other stuff doesn't exist. I've never seen a gay person get mad at someone using the LGBTQIA+...remove a few letters, its all the same.

Also, many people endorse these labels, not just white people. They exist for the simple reason of classifying something and being more specific, other than Latinx, the other two are not trying to replace anything, these other two are just used as abrreviations in text, no one walks up to a gay person going "Hey, LGBTQIA+ man!" or to a black man "Hey BIPOC man!" it really is just something someone would use in an article or on twitter because you have to abbreviate things.

The irony of the post is that it complains about generalizing when it does the exact same thing. Either way, the entire thing is...silly.

I mean this is the culture war? Imaginary battles over whether black people would rather be called black or BIPOC and the latter not even being a thing?

I also do not see many liberals even caring about these terms as much.

The left culture wars of the past few decades was literally fighting for the rights of people while the right wing version of culture wars is getting mad that someone uses the term BIPOC or that someone uses another person's desired gendered pronouns.

 

cool story bro. on a related note some people here actually believe I'm Republican

 

LosPollos needs to change his narrative, maybe take Clutch up on the one-time name change offer. Become LasPollosHermanas or something with an X attached to it

 

All these "but the children!" threads speak to a very smart (I hate to admit) campaign that will build to a fever pitch by November: the Democratic party is coming to turn all yer childrenz to trannies!1!! They want teh trannies because trannies vote for teh Demoncrats!


Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to more viewing, more donating, and more voting. Yessss.

 

posted about that on Friday

https://theweek.com/politics/101200...red-in-the-rights-culture-war-trap-once-again

How Democrats got themselves ensnared in the right's culture-war trap once again
The GOP has succeeded in taking the 'center' out of the center-left
DAMON LINKER
APRIL 1, 2022

Democrats were always going to have a tough time in the 2022 midterm elections, given historic trends and the party's already extremely narrow majorities in Congress. Add in surging inflation and a brutal war being waged in Europe and things begin to look especially bleak.

But that doesn't mean all of the party's woes are circumstantial. Some are self-inflicted — especially when it comes to the culture-war issues that increasingly dominate American politics.

In recent years, Republicans have become experts at leveraging their own extremism on these issues for electoral gain. The game goes like this: Stake out a right-wing position that cheers the GOP's base, thereby ensuring high turnout in the next election; count on progressive activists to respond with their own mirror-image form of left-wing maximalism and Democratic officeholders to adopt that message as their own; use those words and deeds both to justify the right's original impulse toward extremism and to portray the Republican Party as the country's sole defenders of common sense against an insidious form of progressive ideology.

Then rinse and repeat.

If Democrats want to avoid a wipeout in 2022 and perhaps in 2024 as well, they need to stop responding to the right's extremism with a counter-extremism of their own.

Take abortion. As I recently noted, Republicans in states across the country are busy passing extraordinarily restrictive laws against the reproductive rights of women and handing off enforcement powers to private individuals. These "bounty hunter" provisions, which empower people to sue those who procure (or who aid someone else in procuring) abortions, allow these states to sidestep judicial review and avoid injunctions imposed by federal courts. (If states aren't directly enforcing the statutes, no one has standing to seek relief from the penalties they impose.)

Polls consistently show that something close to 60 percent of Americans think abortion should be legal in all or most cases. That means a very solid majority should be sympathetic to a message like this: In passing laws like these, Republicans are revealing themselves to be radicals far out of step with the American mainstream. Some restrictions on abortion should be permissible, but outright bans are draconian, and efforts to skirt judicial review are un-American in intent and downright authoritarian in effect. What's next? The death penalty for women who have abortions, as some Republicans have proposed?

The point of such a response would be to portray the Democrats as the reasonable party upholding moderation and decency in the face of a lunatic assault on the rights and freedoms of the female half of the population.

Instead, in late February, 48 Democrats voted in favor of a bill — the Women's Health Protection Act (WHPA) — that would enshrine the right to an abortion through all nine months of pregnancy in the country as a whole and potentially knock down parental consent laws in 37 states. A solid majority may think abortion should be legal in all or most cases, but support for post-viability, late-term abortions is far lower, and the most recent Gallup poll to ask about parental-consent laws (from 2011) found 71 percent support for them.

That means Democrats have somehow managed to place themselves on the negative side of public opinion on an issue where they should easily be able to portray their opponents as the extremists. That might delight single-issue activists and the most ideologically progressive donors to the party, but it could well turn out to be electoral poison in November and beyond.

A similar dynamic is playing out around Florida's "Parental Rights in Education" bill, which Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed into lawearlier this week. LGBT activists have had considerable success in persuading journalists and Democratic officeholders to label the legislation the "Don't Say Gay" bill and in describing it as motivated by anti-gay and anti-transgender animus, which could well be both true and an effective message for Democrats, at least in some parts of the country.

There is legitimate reason to worry that the law, which seems to have been written in intentionally vague language, could be interpreted to permit sweeping restrictions on what teachers of all grades can say about sexuality and gender in schools. Yet the passage of the bill that has gotten the most media attention is one that bans"classroom instruction" on "sexual orientation or gender identity" from kindergarten through the third grade. That makes it sound like Democratic opposition to the bill is motivated by the desire to teach young kids about subjects that most parents are likely to consider, quite reasonably, inappropriate for them. (Polling on the bill has been all over the map.)

How can it be that Democrats have ended up, by implication, defending the position that public schools should be free to teach children younger than 8 years old about sexual orientation and gender identity? Coming on the heels of controversy about the teaching of "critical race theory" in public schools and residual animus against teacher's unions for demanding pandemic-related school closings, this stance could ultimately blow up in the face of Democrats big time.

And not without reason. Trying at the state level to regulate the details of public-school curricula and restrict what teachers can say in the classroom is a bad idea. Saying so could give Democrats leverage to oppose bills like the one DeSantis championed in Florida while rallying the American majority to their side. But only if it's paired with a defense of giving local school boards the power to make these decisions for themselves. Taking the opposite view — that parents should get no say in what their kids are taught and implying that teachers and administrators should be empowered to introduce little kids to issues in sexuality and gender — is a politically toxic position that could only appeal to a progressive activist.

In political terms, the culture war is a battle over definitions: Which party is narrowly extreme and sectarian? And which stands with America's conflicted majority? In repeatedly taking the Republican bait, Democrats deny themselves of the chance to prevail by refusing to confirm the right's caricature of their position. We're not the extreme ones! They are!

The only way for liberals to win the right's radicalizing culture-war game is not to play.


#1077Os Trigonum, Friday at 3:24 PM
​