Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

I'm kind of double dipping since I posted this in the Joe Biden thread but still I'm going to go on a rant I've been holding back for a long time. You can downvote me to oblivion if you want, but there's no way I can even broach this topic without hurting people's feelings.

What is the LGBT movement's endgame? What are you guys trying to ultimately accomplish? Are we supposed to have a completely genderless society? Is everyone's gender and orientation supposed to be constantly in flux? Should all public facilities and athletic competitions be genderless? Should I or anyone else be able to enter any restroom, locker room, or other facility I chose without regard to sex or gender segregation?

Is sex/gender segregation the same thing as Jim Crow racism? Should everyone be allowed to compete with each other regardless of testosterone or estrogen levels? There are serious implications here for the future that everyone seems to want to sweep under the rug as arbitrary bigotry. I mean, I grew up in the 90s and was instilled with a pretty binary concept of gender. I didn't even know what transgender meant until high school, and didn't know what nonbinary or truscum meant until just last year. So, how should society treat sex, genitalia, and gender roles? Should it do away with such concepts altogether? What do you really want?

🔻(outsider viewpoint) 🔻

Most progressive movements don't really have an endgame. Endgames are suicidal for progressivism. The moment a progressive movement declares final victory it ceases to exist, and all its power and influence is lost. As soon as a person says, "We've done enough. We have achieved goodness. All that is left is to protect what we have made." that person ceases to be a progressive and becomes a part of society's newest generation of conservatives and enemy to the new generation of progressives.

Progressivism is like that metaphorical shark that must swim forever lest it die the moment it becomes still. It is dynamic and dependant on conflict. So, no. The LGBT movement has no endgame.

Gender abolitionism and post-genderism seem to be considered fringe. Despite being extremely prominent online, trans people are only 0.56% of the US population according to most surveys (I tried finding numbers for other countries, but I could not find anything concrete; the numbers are likely similar though)--although GLAAD claims it to be over 3% (and Washington DC is nearly 3% trans). Of course, the trans-cis binary is a Western concept--with many cultures having different systems. Granted, one needs a chart to really understand what the label "trans" really entails.

My guess is that they want people to be what they want without any pushback. I could be wrong with my assessment, however. All I know is that mpreg is real and that perturbs me.

Speaking as a cis-hetero:

>What are you guys trying to ultimately accomplish? Are we supposed to have a completely genderless society? Is everyone's gender and orientation supposed to be constantly in flux?

I'm pretty sure the answer is "no". No movement like this can survive without adhering to the golden rule: do unto others as you would have them do to you. If they want you to stop claiming their non-binary genders don't exist they can't turn around and say we're not allowed to identify as "standard male" and "standard female". There's a reason "die cis scum" is considered a tumblr meme, rather than something that gets real news coverage

>Should all public facilities and athletic competitions be genderless?

My first college experimented with all genderless bathrooms in the dorm buildings. It seemed to go over with basically no fuss. High-traffic buildings (the five dining halls) still had separate men/women/handicapped bathrooms though.

Not sure about sports though. I suspect that if we get any change in segregation, it would more resemble the boxing weight class model insofar that gender is the least of your concerns. But that's just a guess

As for the genders in general: frankly with how weird hormones and chromosomes are, who am I to try and say there can't be stuff in the middle? Why force someone with Klinefelter syndrome to choose two options that obviously don't fit them? Then there's people with Turner syndrome, and people with various forms of hermaphroditism. And people with less physical but still real things going on in the brain. All of the above are just as human as me, and 99% of them just want to chill out the same way cis people can. I've never seen the argument "you're saying I have to let perverts into the women's bathroom just because they identify as female?" (and it is almost always that, verbatim) made in anything but obvious bad faith

The year is 2121

Femboy supremacy

My goal atleast is lgbt people being treated the same as straight/cis people

I mean, no gendered restrooms would save on costs for new buildings

and sports should be more based on weight levels or something, not just shpve all the men and women together, due to males and females having differing hormones

The movement's been fractured in the US ever since gay marriage was accomplished, with no goal that's really "unifying" as far as I can tell (and gay marriage wasn't even unanimous).

In terms of end goals most likely to succeed, I'd place my bets on the gay assimilation camp.

WarriorTang wrote:

Thanos_VerbalASE_Beatbox.mp4

Okay what strain of crack are you smoking and where's your dealer

Back on topic: Honestly I doubt there is an end goal for the same reasons Nox Lucis said above, but if there was I'd place the end goal as the world embracing full egalitarianism in terms of sexual orientation where everything within reason is accepted (MAPs/pedos do not, nor will ever, count as "LGBT" no matter how hard they try to insist otherwise, same with actual zoophiles)

Infowars is that way

I mean gays might be somewhat socially accepted but trans folk sure as hell arent they ar hardly even accepted by the left (look at terfs) part of the "endgame" is helping trans rights imo

End game? My guess is just having equal rights and the like where those that are homosexual, asexual, Transgender and the like are able to have equal rights like the heterosexual and cisgenders. That said, it's not just having those rights and the like but that they are kept, respected, and perpetuated until the end of time.

Equality.

Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism?

Making Pokemon into a Homestuck/My Neighbor Totoro/Terraria/Peppa Pig crossover fanfic

I'm pretty sure the endgame for the casual LGBT community is universal tolerance (no bigotry against their choice – which unfortunately is never going to happen). Any other agenda is just piggybacking off the movement.

As long as the human population is greater than one, hatred will always exist.

the "endgame" is that LGBT people can live in peace without the fear of discrimination or getting killed for having a different sexuality or gender identity

Infeasible as long as fundamentalist Christianity and Islam exist.

The main ones were de-stigmatization, a cure for HIV/AIDS, and same sex marriage. Whether those have been achieved will depend who you ask.

The problem is movements don't simply disappear once they achieve their goals. What happens instead is infighting over new issues to champion and grifters and corporations trying to mine the movement for good will through virtue signalling.

Then you have internet echo chambers who basically guarantee you only see the most extreme of the LGBT and anti-LGBT (because neither have to care about how they look to "normies", just other people who already agree with each other.) Most people who aren't Twitter or /pol/ addicts don't care that much.

They hated him because he told the truth

To that point I'm rather curious. If there's no endgame what is "next" for the LGBT movement? If inalienable rights are secured for LGBT+ people (something that I know is a long, arduous battle ahead for sure) what is the next step?

The common demeaning argument I hear is that the LGBT movement is a slippery slope into more deviant things like pedophilia and bestiality. I don't agree with that line of thought but your comment on the shark must keep swimming made me reflect on it. If the train MUST keep going where are the tracks heading next? Is there absolutely no danger of falling into the unethical, even if the movement promotes relationships such as BDSM and polyamory that require discipline to prevent abuse and harm?

I don't want this criticism to seem like a condemnation of the LGBT+ lifestyles. I find the notion of a movement without limits to be extremely susceptible to letting in bad actors.

I know, right?

Both Leviticus and the Sharia are very clear on the issue of homosexuality, so as long as Biblical/Quranic literalists exist, they are going to quote their holy books when they say that killing gays is morally just.

Well, that sounds like a good "endgame" or at least a goal. Make sure medieval religions don't gain power and backslide society into a theocracy.

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance", sometimes the endgoal is making sure everything works.

I think one "endgame" that I don't agree with but is about to become a utilitarian necessity is gender/orientation fluidnormativity. As medical technology increases, I think more people will identify outside of traditional gender norms. I don't support this because it requires me to retroactively change my base perception of reality. For me, it's not even in the realm of ethics anymore. I was instilled with a binary view of gender at childhood, and interpret it in the same way I interpret colors or shapes. For me, it's like learning that saying "the sky is blue" is all of a sudden a bigoted, hateful belief.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postgenderism

Also, I agree that the train of progress always has to keep moving. Who knows what the playbook of sexual ethics will say in 20, 30, or 50 years? And I mean that quite literally. DSM-5 is quite different from DSM-1. I can't wait to say what DSM-6 and DSM-7 have to say.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders
.

I mean, the original translation is more along the lines of "You shall not lie with boys as you do with women," condemning pedophilia, and in the New Testament, What does Jesus say about people who engage in same-sex relations? Or about people who identify with as something other than heterosexual, who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, queer, pansexual or any other “orientation”? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

But I agree, religious puritans can find any way to twist millenia old text around to their own interpretation.