Gay men's magazine bullied into grovelling

[aliasundercover]

twitter.com/BoyzMagazine/status/1332052779871965186

Looks like they're gunning for gay men now. Anything other than complete agreement is no good.

Readers here will be used to this sort of insanity:
twitter.com/robholley/status/1332054419337334789
I wonder if it will wake up those who have not seen it before?

Then people are wondering what the problem is why a gay magazine has "backed away" for want of a better word?
It's all just such a big mess, and it seems like a faction (not all) doesn't want gay (as in non heterosexual) sex spoken about/taught so can see why might have reservations if so

Whatever. It was a point made in relation to why Olivia Colman and friends were very wrong for daring to show solidarity with trans women on IDEVAW

Yeah they were fucking wrong. They told everyone we should be focusing our attention and energy on the 0 transwomen killed, backed up by the usual lies, instead of the hundreds of women we lose every year. No mention of those women from the luvvies.

It was pathetic, toe curlingly cringey virtue signalling, and completely disrespectful. The equivalent of shouting 'all lives matter' at a BLM protest. Shameful.

It was pathetic, toe curlingly cringey virtue signalling, and completely disrespectful. The equivalent of shouting 'all lives matter' at a BLM protest. Shameful.

Yes, this, absolutely.

It's back round to trans issues, seemingly in a way to deflect from what was actually asked - - which was should gay sex (as in not heterosexual before anyone doesn't understand what I mean by gay sex) be taught in schools? And that according to some we don't need to know how they have sex as it's personal business between them.

The original question asked by me still stands unanswered yet there has been plenty of deflection and twisting it to be about whether LGBT sex education should or should not be in school. And clearly one poster has little concept of actual safeguarding around this subject being taught to minors.

I asked, which LGBT resources and tools (note, not just in sex education by the way) that LGB Alliance objected to does MAdBadDaddy (who stated that they disagreed with the stance LGBA had taken) and jj feel LGBA wrongly objected to. Fairly simple for the poster who posted a twitter thread that had posts based on safeguarding issues that LGBA took a stand on.

The group being called a hate group based partly on this stance of making sure any LGBT education follows strict safeguarding protocols and current Dept of Ed guidelines.

And the question, those who have objected to the LGBA stance: have you read and reviewed the material that was objected to.

The complete lack of engagement is an indication that yet again, that would be a no.

@yourhairiswinterfire

Whatever. It was a point made in relation to why Olivia Colman and friends were very wrong for daring to show solidarity with trans women on IDEVAW

Yeah they were fucking wrong. They told everyone we should be focusing our attention and energy on the 0 transwomen killed, backed up by the usual lies, instead of the hundreds of women we lose every year. No mention of those women from the luvvies.

It was pathetic, toe curlingly cringey virtue signalling, and completely disrespectful. The equivalent of shouting 'all lives matter' at a BLM protest. Shameful.

Agree. It’s unbelievable that we have got to the stage that we believe that the most oppressed women are actually males, despite the fact that women are still being murdered by partners by an alarming rate and domestic abuse is widespread?

Could you fucking believe the abuse I’d rightly get if I said that Rachel Dolezal was the most oppressed category of black person and if I posted pictures of her and other white people claiming to be black when talking about BLM? On the one day a year to address male violence against women, public school and Cambridge-educated Olivia who hasn’t had a real job in her life says that our real sympathy needs to lie with men who claim to be women, where the murder rate is much lower than that of women. Of course women will be incensed at that.

Yes, for one thing b/c we are already there and have been for some time. There is no good reason to exclude us.

You are referring to bogs again aren't you? Have transwomen always been in women's prisons, refuges, sports?

And by the way, women saying 'I don't want to share intimate spaces with male bodies people when no one can give me any proof that a man saying he identifies as a woman suddenly makes him low risk, or means that suddenly he has a female body for playing sports' is perfectly 'good reason' to exclude males. Sorry.

Yes, and mine still stands unanswered too because it got ignored by people bringing up trans issues and pretending they couldn't understand instead
True, but seeing as gay sex doesn't end in reproduction, should they just learn about how to do it etc from playground talk/homophobic bully slurs etc as mentioned upthread then, or if not, how

and also why is what lesbian people do their own business? (which implies shouldn't be spoken/taught about?)
(Can't find the direct quote now saying that but it's there on the thread to see unless it's been deleted)

gay sex meaning not heterosexual sex

Quaagars

I don't mean this disrespectfully, but most of time, I never know what the fuck you are on about!!!

@Winesalot

It's back round to trans issues, seemingly in a way to deflect from what was actually asked - - which was should gay sex (as in not heterosexual before anyone doesn't understand what I mean by gay sex) be taught in schools? And that according to some we don't need to know how they have sex as it's personal business between them.

The original question asked by me still stands unanswered yet there has been plenty of deflection and twisting it to be about whether LGBT sex education should or should not be in school. And clearly one poster has little concept of actual safeguarding around this subject being taught to minors.

I asked, which LGBT resources and tools (note, not just in sex education by the way) that LGB Alliance objected to does MAdBadDaddy (who stated that they disagreed with the stance LGBA had taken) and jj feel LGBA wrongly objected to. Fairly simple for the poster who posted a twitter thread that had posts based on safeguarding issues that LGBA took a stand on.

The group being called a hate group based partly on this stance of making sure any LGBT education follows strict safeguarding protocols and current Dept of Ed guidelines.

And the question, those who have objected to the LGBA stance: have you read and reviewed the material that was objected to.

The complete lack of engagement is an indication that yet again, that would be a no.

Yeah, it's called putting your money where your mouth is.

You won't get a definition of lesbian, gay, homosexual, heterosexual. Nor will you get an actual description of the materials they object to.

I wonder why. What could it possibly reveal?

It's also interesting to note how these conversations simply cannot happen when people's definition of gay, homosexual, heterosexual, lesbian, are not rooted in reality.

And yet those who cannot define it, are still determined to talk about it as though we all really understand the definitions, after all.

They talk about it as though it is rooted in reality. And yet will depart from that instantly, when it serves another purpose.

Utterly risible.

Wow just read that Olivia Colman open letter and oh my fucking word. That those over-privileged idiots thought this of all days was the day to say ‘women don’t have it as bad’? It beggars belief. The statistics they cite are total and utter bullshit and bear little resemblance to reality. There are virtually no murders of trans women in the western world. Very many trans women claim to be attracted to biological women so the idea that they are at increased risk of domestic abuse (from someone likely to be smaller and weaker than them) when women are being raped and killed by male partners daily is again total hogwash. I am actually so enraged that I am lost for words. These women are no feminists.

You are referring to bogs again

It’s always bog, duckwit. Sometimes changing rooms too, but we always end up back in the bog. So to speak. So tiresome, as if that the were the sum total of women’s spaces.

*bogs, not bog.

ok
Clearer just for you

Two questions (first one went ignored and twisted to talking about trans seemingly in order to gotcha and not answer)

Seeing as gay sex doesn't end in reproduction, should they just learn about how to do it etc from playground talk/homophobic bully slurs etc as mentioned upthread then, or if not, how?

Also
Why is what lesbians do their own business? (which implies shouldn't be spoken/taught about?

Disclaimer was just for those who weren't sure what I meant by gay sex ( was just saying as in not heterosexual sex)

That those over-privileged idiots thought this of all days was the day to say ‘women don’t have it as bad’?

You have nailed why i found that letter so offensive.

To publish a letter on IDEVAW to say 'women don't have it as bad'.

Seeing as gay sex doesn't end in reproduction, should they just learn about how to do it etc from playground talk/homophobic bully slurs etc as mentioned upthread then, or if not, how?

Can you clarify what you mean by 'gay sex' here? If two men have sex (which is the definition of gay sex) but one man has a uterus/ovaries and one man has a cock and balls, then gay sex can end in reproduction?

As far as I can recall you 'accept transmen as men' and two men having sex would be gay sex, so it does end in reproduction? So why did you say it didn't?

Fucking twisting again.
Why won't anybody answer lol
Don't know why I'm bothering.
Obsessed with trans issues when what was being talked about was learning about gay sex in schools.
I think by the thread and the comments given about what lesbians do is their own business (still gone unanswered as to why, does that mean shou;dn't be spoken about/taught?) and the fact people are pretending they don't even know what non heterosexual sex is says it all really.
Sounds like a big fat no, it shouldn't be taught.

If two men have sex (which is the definition of gay sex) but one man has a uterus/ovaries and one man has a cock and balls, then gay sex can end in reproduction?

I can't even be arsed
(no pun intended)

I can't even be arsed

Why not? Trans men are men? Aren't they?

There are lots of lesbians around who have a penis?

Quaagers a few people upthread have said that gay sex is taught in schools.

My children have definitely been taught what being gay, lesbian and bisexual are in school in a factual, non-judgemental way.

Homophobic slurs are still rife in schools and both of my children's school come down hard on instances of homophobia or homophobic bullying.

In it's simplest terms, sex is intimate contact between two consenting adults which involves their genitals.

That's applicable to both heterosexual and homosexual sex.

Still no answer as people always say on here.
Then you (general you, not you personally) wonder why a gay magazine has backed away, I mean I can kind of see why?!

Quaagars I and other posters have answered you!

My children have definitely been taught what being gay, lesbian and bisexual are in school in a factual, non-judgemental way

OK, but the point was are they told about gay sex in the same way that they are told about heterosexual sex in high school?
I don't think they are (happy to be corrected though)
That was what was brought up, as in should it be different being taught non heterosexual

Obsessed with trans issues when what was being talked about was learning about gay sex in schools.

Does nobody stop to wonder why an organisation founded by GAY people for the interests of gay, lesbian and bisexual people would have an issue with gay sex education being taught in schools and want it just to focus on heterosexual couples? They. Are. Gay. Themselves. They’re unlikely to be homophobic.

Could it be that gasp their issue was with the many other things in that guide which did include things like fisting and rimming? Being taught to kids, some of whom who are legally incapable of consenting to sex due to their age. But that wouldn’t fit the narrative that they’re a far-right hate group funded by the evangelical Christians in America would it.

@Quaagars

Still no answer as people always say on here. Then you (general you, not you personally) wonder why a gay magazine has backed away, I mean I can kind of see why?!

They backed away because they got unbelievable amounts of hate on Twitter.

According to the TRA narrative, left-wing feminists have suddenly turned into right-wing nazi bigots and gay people have turned into rampant homophobes. Or, it could be that the issue actually lies with the TRA ideology itself, rather than an epidemic of radical political shifts.

Homophobic slurs are still rife in schools and both of my children's school come down hard on instances of homophobia or homophobic bullying

The poster upthread was saying that's how they learnt about gay sex though - through playground bullying, not whether or not homophobic bullying was/is tackled or not.
Just would it not be better to learn about it in school like they do heterosexual sex?

In it's simplest terms, sex is intimate contact between two consenting adults which involves their genitals
Agree, but they detail hetero sex (as in what goes where) but don't non hetero sex?
I don't think they do anyway, happy to be corrected