HRC Supports Inequality?

[crashhelmet]

This link is starting to pop up around my FB feed. I wonder how much of it is true, how much is taken out of context, and how much is driven by politics or even self-discrimination.

About Those Red Equal Signs That Are All Over The Place

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to dig into this right now to give a proper opinion. Is the "Equality for me, but not for you" hypocrisy infecting the LGBT community from the inside as well? It's bad enough when minorites and women can't understand their plight.

[Kheldarson]

I don't know about HRC particularly, but I have seen the inequalities expressed online.

Khaos Komix comes to mind. Not for the comic itself, but for the comment section.

Lord help you if you used the "wrong term". Lord help you if you identified in a non-traditional way. And Lord help you if you identified as a straight ally, because you can't understand what the rest of the group goes through!

It always kind of struck me as strange.

[HYHYBT]

I don't know about the specific examples given (other than their initially saying the California lawsuit was premature, which they're far from the only ones who thought so and we still won't know whether they were right or not for three more months) and the degree is a judgement call, but they're definitely far less trans supportive than they have any business being.

[smileyeagle1021]

It doesn't surprise me that HRC isn't trans* inclusive... they need donors, and their donors are transphobic (I mean, they partner with the Advocate, which I refuse to read because of all the transphobic articles they have published)

[Nyoibo]

Is the "Equality for me, but not for you" hypocrisy infecting the LGBT community from the inside as well? It's bad enough when minorites and women can't understand their plight.

It's not infecting, it's been there for years, bi and trans phobia have been rife for years in the "LGBT" community.

[BlaqueKatt]

It's not infecting, it's been there for years, bi and trans phobia have been rife for years in the "LGBT" community.

yup bisexuals are "fence sitters", and I've heard trans people referred to as "wanting to conform to society's norms of being straight so badly they'll go through surgery for it" and when you ask about trans persons who are attracted to their own gender(meaning the gender they are inside), well "they are just straight people having surgery to be gay because they think it's trendy"

it's kind of sickening.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

yup bisexuals are "fence sitters", and I've heard trans people referred to as "wanting to conform to society's norms of being straight so badly they'll go through surgery for it" and when you ask about trans persons who are attracted to their own gender(meaning the gender they are inside), well "they are just straight people having surgery to be gay because they think it's trendy"

it's kind of sickening.

Aanndd... these are the same people who will refer to heterosexuals as "breeders" in a derogatory manner.

First of all, I am bisexual, but currently have a boyfriend. I was called a breeder to my face, and my instant reaction was, "You call me a breeder and I will call you a faggot, fuck off."

Them: You can't do that! That's hateful!
Me: Oh, so you're admitting you're a hypocrite.
Them: You just haven't been discriminated against and hated!
Me: So... that makes it okay to discriminate and hate other people? You're part of the problem, dickhead.

Yeah, it's... mind boggling.

[HYHYBT]

yup bisexuals are "fence sitters", and I've heard trans people referred to as "wanting to conform to society's norms of being straight so badly they'll go through surgery for it" and when you ask about trans persons who are attracted to their own gender(meaning the gender they are inside), well "they are just straight people having surgery to be gay because they think it's trendy"

it's kind of sickening.

And I bet they don't even realize how much they sound like those pushing reparative therapy who say being gay is caused by (specific unbalanced family dynamic) then reverse it when they find out that doesn't fit your life.

What I don't get is *why.* To me, it makes even less sense than homophobia.

[Hyena Dandy]

Makes the same amount of sense to me, and it happens for the same reason. Some people are just more interested in their 'side' winning than they are in equality. They dress it up in the language of equality. They happen to be oppressed, but that doesn't mean they don't have all the same personality foibles as the oppressors. Being gay doesn't magically make you virtuous. It just makes you like guys. Or girls if you're female.

[bex1218]

Then theres people like me out of the gender binary. Thats a whole different battle ontop of the slight transgender status I have ontop of the possiblity of being pansexual cause I do have attraction to men, women, and others outside the norm. Sexual attraction, no. Thats where my demisexual status comes in.

I am a mess of things people hate .

[Kheldarson]

Makes the same amount of sense to me, and it happens for the same reason. Some people are just more interested in their 'side' winning than they are in equality. They dress it up in the language of equality. They happen to be oppressed, but that doesn't mean they don't have all the same personality foibles as the oppressors. Being gay doesn't magically make you virtuous. It just makes you like guys. Or girls if you're female.

I can understand it to an extent, but my bigger concern is with the "win" factor. You're a group that wants to win a political battle. That means you need to have as many people on your side as humanly possible. Isn't it better to shove your own personal biases down in order to make sure you get your win?

[HYHYBT]

I can understand it to an extent, but my bigger concern is with the "win" factor. You're a group that wants to win a political battle. That means you need to have as many people on your side as humanly possible. Isn't it better to shove your own personal biases down in order to make sure you get your win?

Well, that depends. In this case, members of the general public are more likely to object to the T than the GLB.

I still don't at all get why that would be, but it makes it easier to get support for GLB matters by tossing the T overboard. Some do it solely for their own convenience, others because they never wanted them around in the first place.

[draco664]

I think one of the big problems here is the fact that there are tiers of victimhood. A white gay man is less of a victim than, say, a black gay man. Who is in turn less of a victim than a black gay woman.

When your 'tier' is seen as less of a victim than others, well, that's cause for discrimination, right there. Who is the bigger victim between a black, straight guy and a white, gay guy? Between a black straight woman and a white gay woman?

The one-upman-ship extends into politics too. This article is about a split in the National Labor Students group based on the idiocy going on in their parent organisation and the Labor party as a whole.

There's some great bits about denouncing logic as a tool to subjugate women, and having 'headmates' that can have different ethnicities and genders (excellent to enable you to claim victimhood while not actually having been a victim), but the relevant bit is this.

- A debate in National Caucus about dating preferences: some members stated that racial dating preferences is entirely racist, another criticised those who dated based on attractiveness, and one person even stated that dating based on the sex of the other is discriminatory.

So there you go. Monty Python couldn't have come up with something so idiotic.

"You don't date black people, therefore you are racist!"
"Well, you don't date ugly people, therefore you're bigoted!"
"Well, you only date girls, so you're discriminatory against guys!"

[smileyeagle1021]

"Well, you only date girls, so you're discriminatory against guys!"

That is an idiotic sentence that actually leads into a brilliant legal argument for equality though.
Gender equality is already a recognized right in this country.
So, treating the genders as equals, if a man is able to marry a woman, then a woman should be allowed to do the same.
Likewise, if a woman is allowed to marry a man, a man should be allowed to do the same.

[Hyena Dandy]

I can understand it to an extent, but my bigger concern is with the "win" factor. You're a group that wants to win a political battle. That means you need to have as many people on your side as humanly possible. Isn't it better to shove your own personal biases down in order to make sure you get your win?

A lot of people don't want to win a political battle. They want to WIN. Not win marriage equality, not win a battle for equality. They want to win at Winning. They want their group to be the top. In some cases, their 'team' is a band, a belief system, a gender, and in some cases, that group is 'Gays.' So they want gays to Win.

Not win over Republicans, or win over inequality. They want gays to Win. Our problems are more important, our sexuality is better, our Everything is more Everything than Anyone Else's Everything.

People are petty, people are tribalistic. The fact that sometimes the tribe they pick is an oppressed group doesn't make them free from the same pettiness as their oppressors.