Thread by @rdqb80

What Nightmares May Come - A Thread

This is the paragraph section that Chase Strangio was sharing in their “strange” (pun intended) tweet a while ago. I’ve highlighted the pertinent sentences in yellow and green.

It’s from the current case being brought to the Supreme Court regarding the “trans woman” who was fired from the funeral home because of work attire:

The definition of sex is perfectly sound. And it is correct to define gender identity as fluid and subjective. But notice that sexual orientation is also being defined as fluid and subjective. I think most homosexual men and women would take issue with that.

But most LGBT orgs currently praise the sexual fluidity of “pan”, “queer” and “trans” identities. They have even defined sexual orientation in terms of gender rather than sex. Yet most lesbians and gay men understand their orientation to be based on exclusive same-sex attraction.

So what’s going on? Simple, LGBT orgs in the USA have failed to properly define sexual orientation on the basis of sex and seek protection against discrimination for it at the federal level. In fact, the argument being made against is that both sexual orientation and gender...

...identity are not protected at the federal Title VII level. Instead LGBT orgs have preoccupied themselves with assimilating into marriage and now protecting gender identity for trans activism which redefines sexual orientation as based on “gender”.

Sexual orientation may fall on a spectrum, but it’s not fluid especially when it falls on the exclusive homosexual and heterosexual ends. And it’s definitely not subjective, it’s based on the material reality of biological sex. But since LGBT orgs in the USA are more...

...concerned with “feelings” than facts; even to the point of denying biological sex; lesbians, gay men and bisexuals are pretty much unprotected from discrimination in a lot of places in the US. No one is defining sexual orientation correctly to make it a protected category.

On the other hand, gender identity is 100% a subjective category based on the psychological self-perception of oneself, even to the point of denying biological sex. It can’t be legislated. If we were talking about medical interventions like HRT and SRS it might be a different...

...story. But this is the direction that trans activism has taken and is fully support by LGBT orgs to the point of total takeover and to the point of being detrimental. Any LGB person who supports trans doesn’t know the danger they are unwittingly pushing for themselves.

Denying the reality of biological sex in the courts could set back gains that LGBs have made in the US for the past few decades. It’s only with the definition of sex that we can define sexual orientation correctly and then seek protections. Other countries have done it.

So we can all thank trans activism and those in the LGB who blindly support it for whatever is coming. And you can’t blame the Right-Wing on this one. They are simply going by the definitions currently provided and promoted by the pomo queer theorists running the LGBT.