So I have some questions to ask with no agenda. I'm seeing several tweets today that "sexual preference" is an offensive term, and as a straight guy I'm a bit confused.
Wouldn't the claim that this is an offensive term itself be offensive to bi/queer people?
It would seem that saying that preference doesn't exist would be synonymous with telling bisexuals they're just confused.
And as we work to move gender away from binary descriptions, why is it either politically or scientifically beneficial to move sexuality back into a binary?
I certainly understand that the vast majority of both straight and gay people feel strongly about their attractions and have no interest in deviating, and I agree that this is most likely built in. But that doesn't seem to mean that "sexual preference" should be offensive.
I hope asking these questions doesn't offend anyone. I'm just trying to understand, and am hopeful this can be explained to me.
So to sum up comments and DMs and feedback elsewhere it seems like the issue is using the phrase in the context of identity and general orientation where it's offensive but that this doesn't imply anything about how people express preference in any particular situation.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So I just looked at CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX news website front pages.
Fox has three stories covering this propaganda email thing. Their top three stories.
None of the other networks have it on their front pages.
So for all the criticism that other major networks are falling for this nonsense, it looks like (at the moment) maybe they really aren't.
Of course the reality is that if GOP members of Congress start talking about it incessantly, major press will have to cover it. This is exactly why Russians have been successfully targeting GOP members of Congress with their propaganda.
The McConnell rule makes zero sense. When the Senate and the president are the same party there is no check whatsoever against court packing. When the Senate and the president are different parties there is an inherent built-in check in place.
Why then did McConnell completely block the nomination from even going to a hearing in 2016?
Did he not even have the votes to block her?
FYI, since 1980, three Justices were confirmed by mixed President/Senate (though not in an election year). All nominated by Republicans and confirmed by Democrats.
(Thomas and Alito, confirmed by Dems, and Breyer, confirmed by Republicans)
It's interesting that the agency that Alferova and Klyushin used in their communications related to Trump and Miss Universe, "Innovation & Development Agency", used this name in English.
It's still on Klyushin's facebook page but was recently removed from Alferova's.
(Based on a google search which seems to think that text was on that page.)
While her page used "LLC", I haven't yet found any indication that such an LLC existed.