Realised why I struggle with LGBTQIA+ discussions

[anonwith123]

Not sure if this is the right forum for this. Need to know if anyone can relate.

I attended a work network meeting yesterday designed to support employees who are LGBTQIA+. There are also groups relating to disability and race. I'm all for this. I hate the discrimination and it's personal for me as my daughter and goddaughter have both come out to me recently.

I have no issue putting my pronouns in my email signature but this group talked about arranging work outings to Pride marches and drag/queer events and it didn't sit right with me. But I've realised it doesn't come from hate, but because whilst I'm not a prude, I just don't really like openly talking about sex and prefer to keep it private. And Pride stuff seems to be hyper sexualised, not to mention drag... As it goes, I do think that women's rights are being eroded by the trans movement and that there are massive safeguarding red flags in some areas associated with this - but equally I'm all for measures to support trans people to live as they wish and to feel safe. No easy answer, the whole debate is between a rock and a hard place.

I'm not interested in going to a pride march or drag show because of how sexualised it all seems to be. Have I got that wrong? I even went to a drag show recently as I want to listen and learn but it was so sexualised it's put me right off. But I think my preference would be seen as discriminatory. Very keen to know if anyone can relate to this?

Pride events vary massively from place to place. But I don’t think you have it wrong, there are many, many LGB people (especially women) who won’t go near a Pride event these days. I’m a lesbian and I wouldn’t go near a Pride event or drag night for exactly the reasons you mention: I’m not comfortable with the hyper-sexualised aspects. That’s not discrimination.

Of course you don’t need to go to meetings/ outings that are taking place outside working hours, no matter who or what they are purporting to support. You don’t have to explain yourself or give reasons if you don’t want to, you have a previous engagement, every time.

I wonder of the people organising the work events to raise awareness of LGB issues are also preparing work events to support womens rights, menopause awareness et etc. I bet my bottom dollar they aren’t, even though your work place probably has more women than trans people in it.

By the way, no one is stopping trans people living as they want to, many trans people , particularly transwomen, have lived as they want to for many years, it is only recently that they have decided that for them to live as they want means women should be expected to passively lose our rights to single sex spaces in prisons, hospitals and refuges, our privacy and dignity in public spaces, our right to fair sporting opportunities and to the language that celebrates our sex.

Loads of people have problems with 'LGBTQIA+' because it doesn't exist as an entity does it? It's a whole lot of forced teaming, promoted by a bunch of people who refuse to understand consent and safeguarding.

LGB = Lesbian, gay and bisexual. SEXUAL ORIENTATION. What Stonewall and Pride used to be for back in the day - equality of civil union and inheritance for same-sex couples, and asking for greater social tolerance.

T = used to be 'transsexual'. Now means 'transgender': GENDER IDENTITY. DIFFERENT FROM SEXUAL ORIENTATION.

Q = a word with fluid, changing, appropriated and re-appropriated meanings.

I = 'Intersex'. Medically the term 'DSD' is preferred and DSD people and organisations have asked to be kept right out of it. People with DSD have a biological sex.

A = as this refers to someone's private life I'm really not interested, unless they're breaching safeguarding and/or breaking the law.

Welcome to the one of many entrances to the Rabbit Hole of Rainbows!

You will be accompanied on your journey by some strange and confusing companions.
Elder lesbians, wine mums, none-wine mums, some dads, a boat load of disenfranchised lefties, conservatives (mostly small c) a handful of old style transsexuals, the odd fringe figure figure from the far right, and quite recently, hoards of gay men, plus a growing number of detrans (formerly trans) people.

At some point the rabbit hole will lead to the Portal Of Radicalisation (that’s an in joke, it’ll probably make sense when you get there).

No you are completely valid in thinking Pride and drag is too sexualised. I am bisexual and used to go to Pride as a teen, (like 15-20 years ago now), but I stopped going when it became less about actual pride and more about having your kinks on display. About 2 weekends ago we had Pride in my city and it just did not look the same as when I was a teen. It has changed.

And drag shows are sexualised, I think many drag artists would agree that kids do not belong there at all. But since drag has become much more mainstream now, people are using this as an excuse to expose kids to drag when they are way too young for it (thinking about how parents take kids along to those big drag conventions they have nowadays, or drag story time hour).

As an older lesbian, once we had legal marriage, the same rights and protections as straight people, we didn't need Pride anymore.
We're the same as everyone else, normal, and I like it that way!
It's the queer crowd and all those who want to live a lifestyle divergent from the norm who've taken over Pride.
Frankly it gives us lesbians a bad name..I don't want to be associated with them.

Please, in your mind at least, separate LGB from the TQ+. Lesbian and gay people are same-sex attracted. TQ+ denies the validity of sex and wants everything replaced with gender. TQ+ is essentially homophobic and yet it's been welded to the LGB by Stonewall. So for a start don't imagine for a second that LGB and TQ+ are happily partnered and the same kind of thing. They're not. The LGB are increasingly trying to saw through the chains that bind us to the gender lunatics.

Lots of people hate drag including a lot of lesbians and a fair few day men of my acquaintance. They find it insulting and misogynistic and fetishistic. How come it's okay for a man to put on woman-face, but if as a white person I put on black-face I'd be hounded till the end of my days? It's okay to hate drag.

Lots of LGB people, and possibly some TQ+ people, hate the fetishistic, hyper-sexualised nature of Pride and other gay stuff. Loads of LGB people no longer go to Pride because it's commercial and it trades on exhibitionism and voyerism, which is not how most LGB people behave. It's okay to hate Pride.

The kind of people who run LGB and TQ+ networks are the kind of gender-sozzled idiots who think pronouns and Pride matter. They don't. Find a quiet, rational older lesbian among your colleagues and talk to her about it.

I'm a straight woman and I went to a drag show club in the noughties , when I was in my twenties. I appreciated the local-based comedy but the jokes were still quite misogynistic. Secondly, a man coming onstage, dolled up to the nines in big hair, big makeup and small clothes, didn't fit easily with my feminist principles of not judging women solely by their appearance and not forcing women into restrictive beauty standards.

I didn't enjoy it and it made me quite uneasy. I understand its not for me but it was definitely about me!

Anyone telling you that you are not supporting them unless you engage in sexualised cultures and activities you are not comfortable with and don't want to, is not expressing any part of them to do with being LGBT+

They are expressing a part of them that wants to push your boundaries and exert control. You find that in non LGBT+ people just as much: it has nothing to do with identity or sexuality. Do what the relationships board would advise.

Everything right of LGB is straight people. Unless they happen to be gay, lesbian or bisexual as well as whatever alphabet soup they identify as.

Makes total sense to me 😊

Male gay sexuality is very different from the IKEA home-loving lesbians, just read the Cottaging thread. Frankly I don't want to be included with the G and most lesbians don't...

Doesn't sit right with me either, OP.

Tbf, I doubt your averagely hedonistic gay man WANTS the straights turning up to ruin the fun. They have their own world of bath houses and rubber men and jockstraps and they don’t want ANY women there, straight, bi or lesbian (except maybe Kylie 😉).

it’s the Q and that mysterious + on the end of the letters who want to create a shocking spectacle, who want to ‘queer’ social norms and who want an unsuspecting public to witness elderly men dressed as toddler girls in ankle socks and petticoats and for innocent kids to pet leather ‘dogs’ and bdsm ‘ponies’.

They are infringing on your right to express your sexuality as a straight person who isn’t interested in other people’s bits and pieces.

I don’t actually think this is about being ‘kind ‘ to sexual minorities ; it’s about men ( mainly) pushing other people’s ( mainly women) boundaries, either to embarrass them or to recruit them. It’s been going on forever : it’s in Dickens and in Jacobean drama for example. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was going on the caves.

when I was working, some of men used to try and show the women porn (pretty mild by todays standards) under the guise of being tolerant and open minded. One of my fellow female executives put a stop to that by throwing up over one of the blokes showing it. She didn’t care for oral sex. Obviously.

Thanks for the replies, the back up and the clarification on the LGB etc letters. Makes sense. Glad to know I'm not the only one to feel this way. My daughter who is 11 says she is gay and I'd thought maybe to take her to a Pride march to show support but on reflection, I think it's a terrible idea. Will find some other ways to support her. Thanks again everyone.

What does this have to do with work?

treat everyone the same and follow the law. Why is there one sacred cow?

I'm not comfortable with the now apparently accepted wisdom that we should encourage children to focus on, express and explore sexuality.

Obviously an 11year old is going to know who they are attracted to, and they will want to tell you about this, particularly if they are aware they are same sex attracted. But I think my response would be the same as with my heterosexual children telling me who they fancy: oh really? That's nice. Act well. But remember sex is for adults.

I'd have a chat about gay people we know, answer questions about the future but make it clear anything about sex is for the future.

I wouldn't, gay or straight, start sharing sexual images they may like with them. Or taking them to sexually provocative events.

I'd discourage them from discussing widely about their sexual orientations. Because they are children. And sex is for adults.
And if they had questions or worries they should come to me.

I know before they became sexually active they'd be thinking a lot about sex but I'd encourage that to be private, and only shared with very trusted friends.
I wouldn't think I would need to be involved in them exploring this!

I wouldn't widely share this information either. Why would I tell people about my child's developing sexuality?

They'd just need to know: being gay is fine with us, we love you and hope you'll have happy and fulfilling relationships as an adult. And we look forward to meeting your partners when you're a young adult. (But still then we don't need to know about your sex life!)

I'm trying to explore my thoughts on this as a teacher said to me last week: we had 4 children in year 5 come out as gay last term.

And I just keep returning to the thought: why are we discussing openly children's sexuality.

Was this the starting of the blurring of the lines: when we all became comfortable with the idea of publically discussing and supporting children's sexuality.

I'm not gay, my children aren't gay, so I appreciate I may be missing something I don't understand. But all the discussing of children's sexuality, as a public concept, rather than just as a private development into adulthood makes me uncomfortable.

The thing that always strikes me about things like these plans to visit Pride is that they can put many people in a workplace in a very difficult position.

One example that happened in the place I was working last year - we were having to do unconscious bias training. The trainer was talking about gender and pronouns, and mentioned that as someone who had been raise Catholic she really had to try and undo some of her upbringing and biases around this issue.

It did not seem to occur to her that there could be employees who were observant Catholics, who have a protected right to their own beliefs and opinions about, well - everything. And while it might be totally appropriate to expect them to keep those private when dealing with clients at work, they should not have to be subjected to being told they should rethink their religious beliefs by their employer.

Similarly, I went to university with a fellow who is similarly an observant Catholic, in a professional position where it really has no relevance to what he does, but where there was pressure every year for the people in the workplace to march in the Pride parade. He began to find this intrusive and because some people were aware of his religious membership they looked askance at the fact that he never did join them in the parade. He eventually left that workplace.

The places we work need to be able to accommodate all kinds of people who think differently and believe different things and live different lives, and really only in rare instances should they expect their employees to share the same belief system. Businesses have no special insight into ethical or social issues compared to individuals. And they need to stop trying to tell employees what to think.

We used to pass out buttons with all the sexuality flags where I used to work. Almost all the 11 year year old girls decided they were lesbians, pansexual, or asexual. If that reflected what they do as adults we are in for a population crash.

Another way of thinking about it that might help you, OP. You mentioned different networks at your work and that you were against discrimination.

Following on from Autumn's point, "LGBTQIA+" in itself isn't a protected characteristic under the Equality Act.

"Sexual orientation" is (the "LGB").

"Gender reassignment" is (the T, although it's as clear as mud).

But the kink and hypersexualised stuff, which as far as any of us can tell, seems to be that nebulous Q, isn't protected.

Sexual orientation (homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual) is a protected characteristic but sexuality more broadly isn't. Not wanting to support or participate in hypersexualised activities is not discriminatory (in the way you mean it). Don't feel bad if it makes you uncomfortable.

Funnily enough my 9yo recently told me that he's straight as he has crushes on girls. I said that while he probably is because the vast majority of people are, the type of attraction that adults feel for each other isn't the same as crushes that kids have. That who we are attracted to as adults can change throughout our lives too, and that he shouldn't worry about it now. But also, while he probably is straight but that if he ever feels in the future like he isn't, that he should never worry about my reaction because it won't ever change how I feel about him.

For anyone wondering why a 9 year old would even be thinking about his sexuality, a lot of my friends that he knows well are gay/bi in same sex relationships. And DS is also very comfortably gnc, in a lot of his hobbies (like performing arts/dance), toys he'll play with, prefers having longer hair, etc. While not enjoying team sports, physical fighting etc. So it's probably something he has given a bit of thought to or maybe even been asked about by his peers.

Your question - exactly. Why is this being discussed at work?

Sacred caste rather than sacred cow?

But yes, observe the Equality Act, treat everyone with basic courtesy and you're good.