Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Texxers)
    They love shoving their agenda up people's throats. Their little marches and anti-biological nature.
    I'm in the community and I hate it when people think it's a great idea to shove it in peoples faces. We should just exist as we are. We don't need the bullcrap.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fr0g)
    They do far too much propaganda, it's so annoying how they're always trying to shove homosexuality down your throat no homo. Their agenda is to turn normal people gay.
    We don't want you gay but I do personally hate when we think it's great to shove our stuff in everyone's faces.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    You are right.

    I bet a vast majority of those in support of homosexuality can't bare watching homosexual porn. Many of the ones I have spoken to in real life actually admit they can't even watch the kissing but are adamant they support all homosexual rights. They are entitled to these disparities but it does come across as an oxymoron.

    So I am shocked when one poster earlier said that disgust to homosexual activity is taught and not natural.
    Its not an oxymoron.Why would a straight guy want to watch homosexual porn? Hes attracted to women so why would he like watching naked men? That does not mean that he can't support other peoples right to do what they like though.I hate curry but that doesn't mean that I ban everybody-else from eating it.Because that would be totalitarian and fascist.In the same way a straight man might be disgusted by homosexual porn but still support other peoples right to watch it.Hows that an oxymoron? Gay people have been around for literally millenia and shockingly the world has not yet ended.People should just get over it.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    There's not a 40% failure rate so...
    Well, it is reference to what you said in the quote below that I extracted from memory.

    Methodology or not, pretty high figures. Not that effective is it?

    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Fortunately, science doesn't really care about your laughably wrong opinions. Facts are that WPATH standards of care decrease gender dysphoria and improve mental health (thats' five different links by the way). And, since I know you're just itching to demonstrate you've not read beyond headlines and parrot the "40% of trans people attempt suicide" claim, be aware where that number comes from and how limited the methodology is.


    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Think you meant to quote yourself there.

    Except that's not remotely comparable - this is a case of a decades worth of research showing that transitioning works, and given health care is constantly progressing, modern research, particularly when it is so conclusive, definitely overturns old research on more primitive care.

    Project harder...
    No, I was quoting you.

    Now you are making the claims up as you go along to back up your conjecture and dogma?

    Can you show me any evidence that says the work of Birmingham is "outdated"?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robby2312)
    In general its the religious who are most homophobic and anti-gay.I was merely pointing out the irony of religious people calling gay/transgender people mentally ill when that's actually a very apt description of themselves.Of course he might not be religious but I still thought it was worth pointing out.
    What has the religious objecting to homosexuality have to do with him and the argument he made?

    Have you ever learnt to focus on the debate and the arguments made?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Because nobody has the right to police the gender that you love??? Literally, there's nothing wrong with it tf
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by godhatessonny)
    I'm in the community and I hate it when people think it's a great idea to shove it in peoples faces. We should just exist as we are. We don't need the bullcrap.
    I 100% agree.

    An attempt was made last year to force all Premier League footballers to wear rainbow bands and laces.

    The National Trust also forced employees to wear rainbow badges.

    Complete fascism and nazism at work.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robby2312)
    Its not an oxymoron.Why would a straight guy want to watch homosexual porn? Hes attracted to women so why would he like watching naked men? That does not mean that he can't support other peoples right to do what they like though.I hate curry but that doesn't mean that I ban everybody-else from eating it.Because that would be totalitarian and fascist.In the same way a straight man might be disgusted by homosexual porn but still support other peoples right to watch it.Hows that an oxymoron? Gay people have been around for literally millenia and shockingly the world has not yet ended.People should just get over it.
    What a poor use of analogy. Your analogy does not fit.

    If someone wants to convince others that there is nothing wrong with something, it might be decent of them to do such but it is still a pure oxymoron when they are revolted by the thing they proclaim is not wrong at all.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    Incredibly, some SJWs still want to deny that their is no homosexual agenda in the UK despite all the blatant evidence.

    Another ongoing one is the desperation of UK media to find, persuade and get homosexual footballers to come out. Why is that an obsession of the likes of BBC if not to strengthen the homosexual agenda?

    Everytime someone comes out as an homosexual, the Western media, Entertainment industry and Hollywood all of a sudden do their best to make the person a star and more prominent in public.

    I knew once Sam Smith announced he was a homosexual, he was certainly going to win the Grammies he was nominated for. Ed Sheeran had no chance that year, even though many felt he deserved some grammies.

    Same with Frank Ocean, he comes out as a homosexual, and awards fall in including grammies.

    If someones else says something regarded as not supportive of homosexuality in Hollywood or Entrertainment, their career would go into limbo, or in suspension at best.

    And someone still refutes there is an agenda.
    I️ completely agree. And it’s getting even worse given there’s thousands of different sexualities and gender now apparently. The moment you question that, you’re done for.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    Well, it is reference to what you said in the quote below that I extracted from memory.

    Methodology or not, pretty high figures. Not that effective is it?
    Try reading the bloody sources. That 40% figure is lifetime attempts at suicide, it does not make clear whether the attempt is pre or post-transition. As such it cannot be used as evidence that transition is not effective, and only someone who doesn't have even the slightest clue what they're talking about would even attempt to do so. Well done, you've proven that it's pointless trying to reason with you because you have no desire to be anything other than ignorant.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaftVader)
    I'm not going to argue the morals of this, but legally, freedom from hatred trumps freedom of speech in this area. It's a bit of a grey area really but the socially acceptable view is that hate speech is wrong to the point where silencing it is ok.
    The problem with this is that all they said was they don’t support the LGBT community. That is NOT hate speech! Yet so often SJWs and leftys just cry homophobe whenever they hear viewpoints that aren’t their own. They never said that LGBT people don’t deserve the same rights as everyone else. If his speech was taking away their rights, that would be a problem but it’s not.

    You can feel, dress,sleep with, look however you want but the burden should not be on the rest of the world to have to change their thinking or pretend you’re someone you aren’t just to make you feel better about yourself.**If LGBT people just minded their business their lives would be much easier. It’s not your right to be liked or accepted by everyone, yet these people are pushing so hard and criminalizing everyone who won’t completely conform to their idea of “normal” (which completely defies the principles that have been prevalent throughout the entirety of human history up until this point😂 i.e. gender, biology, etc.).

    I really think its sad and almost paradoxical that so many LGBT people think the world is out to get them but if they just got over the fact that not everyone has to like or accept you their lives would be sooo much easier. But instead most of them so ardently protest and make their own lives worse by assuming they’re victims of some force that wants to change them - which there isn’t. There are no legal codes in our country stopping them from doing what they want, and there’s no law that states everyone has to accept homosexuality and trans and all 3,000 other genders and sexualities there apparently are nowadays. There’s not even laws that say hating someone is a crime! Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. These lefty’s advocate free speech and individuality but as soon as they hear an opposing viewpoint they’re on the attack and somehow that’s okay.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oliviaminor)
    The problem with this is that all they said was they don’t support the LGBT community. That is NOT hate speech! Yet so often SJWs and leftys just cry homophobe whenever they hear viewpoints that aren’t their own. They never said that LGBT people don’t deserve the same rights as everyone else. If his speech was taking away their rights, that would be a problem but it’s not.

    You can feel, dress,sleep with, look however you want but the burden should not be on the rest of the world to have to change their thinking or pretend you’re someone you aren’t just to make you feel better about yourself.**If LGBT people just minded their business their lives would be much easier. It’s not your right to be liked or accepted by everyone, yet these people are pushing so hard and criminalizing everyone who won’t completely conform to their idea of “normal” (which completely defies the principles that have been prevalent throughout the entirety of human history up until this point😂 i.e. gender, biology, etc.).

    I really think its sad and almost paradoxical that so many LGBT people think the world is out to get them but if they just got over the fact that not everyone has to like or accept you their lives would be sooo much easier. But instead most of them so ardently protest and make their own lives worse by assuming they’re victims of some force that wants to change them - which there isn’t. There are no legal codes in our country stopping them from doing what they want, and there’s no law that states everyone has to accept homosexuality and trans and all 3,000 other genders and sexualities there apparently are nowadays. There’s not even laws that say hating someone is a crime! Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. These lefty’s advocate free speech and individuality but as soon as they hear an opposing viewpoint they’re on the attack and somehow that’s okay.
    I'm well aware that a neutral viewpoint isn't hate speech. It's neutral, by definition. However, people feel so strongly on this matter (on both the pro and anti sides of the argument) that from their perspective people with a neutral view are opposition.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Try reading the bloody sources. That 40% figure is lifetime attempts at suicide, it does not make clear whether the attempt is pre or post-transition. As such it cannot be used as evidence that transition is not effective, and only someone who doesn't have even the slightest clue what they're talking about would even attempt to do so. Well done, you've proven that it's pointless trying to reason with you because you have no desire to be anything other than ignorant.
    Well, if you don't have clarity of if it is pre or post ops, have you got any alternative evidence of it being lower and effective for you to claim it is the most effective treatment?

    By all available indications, many transgender people are still in a bad state after transitioning:

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0016885

    Higher suicide, depression, crime, substance abuse etc. rates.

    Do you have anything contrary to these?
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    Well, if you don't have clarity of if it is pre or post ops, have you got any alternative evidence of it being lower and effective for you to claim it is the most effective treatment?
    Ive posted them once. Then quoted them at you again because you ignored them. You refuse to learn, that's your problem, I'm out.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Ive posted them once. Then quoted them at you again because you ignored them. You refuse to learn, that's your problem, I'm out.
    No, your problem is that you are just stuck in your dogma and will not listen to anything that does not make you look liberal. That is the problem with many of the SJWs, they advocate diversity but definitely not diversity of ideas or opinions.

    Your highlighting improvement is not proof it is the "most effective".

    If I had an issue affecting my mental health, a solution that gives me an "improvement" is unlikely to be what I would call "effective". It is just a help, I need a resolution or at least gaddam close to it to consider the solution effective. We would not even talk about the scores that regret transition and wish they never did.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    Who is the character?

    Is the character just religious or stories are written to integrate the religion into the plot?

    Do the plots reflect the challenges the character face because of their religion and storyline delivered in such a way the audience have some empathy?

    Is the character's persona overly positive and likeable?

    If I was to transpose those questions to address LGBT characters on TV shows and films, the answers to all the last 3 questions would be an emphatic "Yes, Yes, Yes!".
    Dot Cotton is the current one, who is in her 80s, I believe. They had an entire episode centred around her talking about her Religion, and she’s a very liked character, so in her case the answer to all 3 is yes, as it is with another of their Religious characters - who again, had plots around their Religion, and was a likeable character, so she’s not just an exception.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    Dot Cotton is the current one, who is in her 80s, I believe. They had an entire episode centred around her talking about her Religion, and she’s a very liked character, so in her case the answer to all 3 is yes, as it is with another of their Religious characters - who again, had plots around their Religion, and was a likeable character, so she’s not just an exception.
    After 3 days, you come up with ONE character, in ONE episode, in ONE show out of the at least 100 episodes of the show that runs weekly every year; a show that has been ongoing for more than probably over 30 years, to prove to me that religion is highly represented on TV shows like homosexuality is.

    Wow! Please wait. I need to stand up and give you a standing ovation for that attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.:congrats::congrats::congrats::congrats::congrats:
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    After 3 days, you come up with ONE character, in ONE episode, in ONE show out of the at least 100 episodes of the show that runs weekly every year; a show that has been ongoing for more than probably over 30 years, to prove to me that religion is highly represented on TV shows like homosexuality is.

    Wow! Please wait. I need to stand up and give you a standing ovation for that attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.:congrats::congrats::congrats::congrats::congrats:
    That was actually two characters, and I did already point out that was purely because it happens to be the only one of the examples you gave that I watch. Incidentally, I note that you haven’t done anything to dispute the fact that it was a ‘yes’ answer to all three of your previous questions, despite the implication that that would only be true for LGBT+ characters.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    That was actually two characters, and I did already point out that was purely because it happens to be the only one of the examples you gave that I watch. Incidentally, I note that you haven’t done anything to dispute the fact that it was a ‘yes’ answer to all three of your previous questions, despite the implication that that would only be true for LGBT+ characters.
    I think the standing ovation is sufficient for the 2 unknown characters you specified out of all the 100s of TV shows churning out at least 10 episodes a year we have seen in the last 30 year.

    So I don't really need to dispute any further that your claim of 3 'yes'es, because your answer of 'yes'es to the 3 is actually false and a desperation to prove what you know is not true.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    I think the standing ovation is sufficient for the 2 unknown characters you specified out of all the 100s of TV shows churning out at least 10 episodes a year we have seen in the last 30 year.

    So I don't really need to dispute any further that your claim of 3 'yes'es, because your answer of 'yes'es to the 3 is actually false and a desperation to prove what you know is not true.
    You gave an example of 3 shows, of which I selected 2 main characters; they are neither unknown, nor out of 100 shows, simply 1 show out of 2 you mentioned.

    It’s not remotely false, I specified a character, and you only tried to turn it to something else once we’d verified that both characters meet your criteria. As does, for example, Connie from Holly City.

    Incidentally, I’d also argue that this doesn’t, in fact, need to be the way this is argued - why are we disputing whether Religious or LGBT+ people are represented most right now, when we could instead be pushing for both to have better representation?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.