Jump to content

Menu

LMD

Members
  • Posts

    5,765
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by LMD

  1. 1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

    If the activist label (new to me) puts me on the outs with Melissa and LMD, COUNT ME IN!

    Find the insult. Suggesting the hormonal imbalances of PCOS don’t create different special attractions absent evidence to the contrary, personal or otherwise, is bigotry. WOMEN who experience PCOS should speak to that.

    1. I have pcos. Diagnosed 18 years ago.

    2. I said nothing about pcos & attraction, YOU brought that up

    3. Bigotry? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    4. A female specific medical issue has nothing to do with diagnoses of sexual development (intersex) or trans and it is both incorrect and offensive to say it does. I'm not less of a woman or a little bit or a man because my unbalanced hormones affect my ovaries That was my point.

    • Like 9
  2. 7 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

    Thanks. Proud of it.  Will wear with pride. Sick of bigots driving the bus. Lemme know which gay/lesbians under 40 use those terms affectionately. The one in my home has never uttered it. EVER.

    Lol

    Insults don't make your case.

    Google can help you. Though I suggest keeping some eye/brain bleach nearby. 

    5 minutes ago, KSera said:

    I'm so lost. I'm pretty sure you're all agreeing that attraction doesn't have to do with what body you have. So then I'm lost on where the argument is?

    Sexual attraction does have to do with specific bodies. To say otherwise (not saying you're saying otherwise ksera) is pretty homophobic, amongst other things.

    • Like 1
  3. Please feel free to point out any bs. I'm more than happy to discuss this.

    Just now, Sneezyone said:

    Attraction has ZERO to do with the body you’re born in. And, I guess I’m an activist now b/c the line of BS Y’all are spouting is polarizing/animating and not in the way you probably want/

    Yes, you sound like an activist. An ignorant one. S!ssy is not my word, it's theirs, they love it.

    Good luck convincing people that 'attraction has zero to do with the body' - pretty sure gay men and women would have some issue with that 'framing'

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  4. 1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

    Love that for her, not. That does not address or implicate the notion of hormonal imbalances associated with PCOS impacting same sex attraction.

    Poly cystic OVARIAN syndrome only affects the FEMALE BODY. Attraction is not gender identity.

    'They' is the activists that keep posting those awfully sexist 'sex spectrum' graphics.

    • Like 3
  5. 16 minutes ago, Ginevra said:

    I’m not going to elaborate on this very much but doing things with someone who has intersex features is a kink, is most likely highly available in the P@rn market, and may be shaping the erotic “mapping” of millions of young people. There is also a significant overlap in anime (as entertainment) and anime P@rn. 
     

    Yep.

    There's also the s!ssy hypn0 variety (don't google) & the extreme degradation.

    • Like 2
  6. 1 hour ago, Ginevra said:

    The bolded is one of the faulty narratives going in LGBTQIA circles, and has been for several years now. There once was only two biological factors that would lead to an intersex diagnosis - ambiguous genitalia at birth and/or anomalies of chromosomes. But this has been changing for a while. Now, lots of young people think they are intersex because of feelings about things. 
     

    In some ways, the narrative seems designed to push this conclusion. At a diversity conference I attended, the speaker said there were three “areas” of attraction that we experience - s€xual attraction (what sex organs you want to be involved with), romantic attraction (not necessarily party to the first), and “emotional attraction,” (not necessarily party to the first two), which is the silliest of all. IMHO, the point of all this hair-splitting is to make a case that everybody is “a little bit something”. Like when someone who has only ever played out a hetero  s€xual reality affirming that, actually, they are about 60% “bi-passing”. So because they - I don’t know - think their best (girl) friend looks really great dressed up for the club, or they have ever fantasized about playing with another female body, they think that means they *are* some category of not hetero. Besides, hetero is so boringly ordinary. 
     

    I think our actions bear out what we are, which then reinforces our identity of what we are. 

    Yep, they've been running the 'pcos etc is on the intersex spectrum' stuff for ages - which is very offensive imo. Someone here told me they were 'hormonally intersex.' A lot of girls who declare a trans identity and take testosterone feel better - which makes sense because testosterone boosts energy & helps with dopamine production - and use this as proof that they must be truly intersex somewhere deep down.

    Eta - also our brains are plastic & highly malleable. Our actions *do* influence our brain. P0rn is a gigantic elephant in the room...

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
  7. 5 hours ago, KSera said:

    I think this is funny, because if you are making the wrong judgment, how would you know you were wrong? I agree it’s pretty clear for people who aren’t transgender. I’d be very surprised if you have never interacted with any post transition people who you never guessed were transgender. It might be different if you lived in a small town, but having lived in New York and I think California? That seems very unlikely.

    I just... don't believe it. And pretending it's true seems awfully cruel. I've met the most passingly passing trans people and there are still tells in real life. I may not immediately consciously guess trans but my brain is hiccuping, because there is something that doesn't fit. Hormones don't change gait or skull/hand size, for a start. There are thousands of ways our sexed bodies are differentiated that our brains are exceptionally good at recognising. We are sexually reproducing mammals, recognising the sex of members of our species is what we do.

    I also think the push to medicalise younger and younger in order to 'pass' better is unconscionable.

    • Like 9
  8. 17 hours ago, wisdomandtreasures said:

    Toxic. Scenario 3 has happened in my family since my oldest child was 3 and has caused problems with deception and dishonesty, and an attitude of "If I want it or take delight in it, that's all the permission I need" that have continued to today (despite exhausting all efforts, depleting our savings on resources to try and stop it, many long talks with him, taking a course with a therapist, reading many many parenting books from all persuasions from Dobson to Laura Markham) and he's almost 14. Good luck! Hopefully this won't be your outcome.

    Yep. We're further down this path and I'll just say, these toxic people didn't have my parenting-back when it was really needed and absolutely helped ruin relationships. Beyond repair. Devastating.

    • Like 1
    • Sad 1
  9. 11 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

    My entire grade read Flowers in the Attic at 12 and not a one of us felt scarred. Mostly, we just developer a whole lot of bad taste jokes about donuts.

    Maybe we were a particularly rough lot. 

    I do think not being a visualizer made it so that books really do glance off for me. I don't get pictures stuck in my head. 

    Missed this. Every girl in my school had read the whole series by the end of 6th grade. I would have been 10-11 years old. I really liked them...

    • Like 1
  10. 4 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

    I must have read dd2 about a million of those rainbow fairy books! At some stage I revolted and made dd1 read them aloud. I think I also got dd1 to read the Babysitters club to her as well. And the Saddle Club. Poor dd1!

    😄 

    This was my oldest, and no way was I reading them lol. 

    I guess I do censor for insipidity. And aggressive annoyingness.

    • Like 1
  11. I censored those stupid rainbow fairy books. Monstrosities. 

    Actually, I limited them to 1 a library visit. 

    I had a kid who would latch on to unhealthy imagery (written or visual) and be unable to regulate.

    Mainly I tried to moderate with balance, exposure to good stuff and lots of discussion. I very rarely said no. Sometimes we read it together (eg miss peregrine). They read the giver, hunger games, lots of teen dystopia (went through a maze runner phase), 1984 between around 7th-10th

    If anything I'd go back and censor more. That dark teen dystopia stuff can be too much, imo.

    • Like 2
  12. On 6/29/2023 at 8:59 AM, Heartstrings said:

    A lot of formerly homeschooled adults do talk about not having shared cultural literacy as being something that they feel made them stick out uncomfortably with their peers and do feel like it interfered with social relationships in college and as a young adult.  I think those are voices we do well to listen to and at least consider if there is a way to mitigate those effects on our own children.  This is a path that others have gone down before and we can benefit from their perspective.  
     

    Maybe seeing more kids movies in the theater, or a family movie night can be a compromise.  We also watch TV shows together as a family, like the Mandorian and all the Star Wars spin offs.    Most series are only 8 episodes now, so once a week commitments for a limited time frame.  

    I get what you mean, I really do and we were always conscious of avoiding making our hs kids extra weird, but to play devil's advocate, if this is their childhood complaint then they are remarkably blessed. Perhaps what they're really missing isn't 'culture' but 'perspective/gratefulness' with maybe a dose of 'maturity.' 

    Sometimes homeschooled kids tend to blame all their awkwardness on homeschool, when it's often just life. Lots of people don't fit in for lots of reasons. Reading literature instead of watching tv is a much better reason than violent stepdad for example, in my experience. 🤷‍♀️ 

    • Like 4
  13. Sure, I respect that position. We have real nazis here too, the women had nothing to do with them but still get blamed. So I am very wary of the 'supporting nazis' 'nazi aligned' garbage as another way to silence women and punish them for daring to speak. 

    • Like 6
  14. 10 minutes ago, KSera said:

    I don't think this is a good defense of aligning with a group like Turning Point. And in the long run, it does nothing but hurt the cause they are trying to advocate for. I'm not going to go work with Neo-Nazis or Klansmen on something simply because they're the only ones who will hear me out. I think this strategy has done nothing but make it look even more like anyone with concerns is coming from a bigoted far right view and it has made people on the left unwilling to listen. I myself will not click on stories or links on this topic on far right, conspiracy theorist or propaganda websites.

    I understand that boundary.

    My question is what is the other option. Women have been very severely silenced from even discussing this issue. Bans. Lawsuits. Decades of work lost. Much worse. The left has lost a lot of former supporters - who have not turned right wing - because of this. Our greens party here is currently imploding over this issue (they kicked out a gender critical woman, they kept a pedophile-apologist man 🤷‍♀️) 'No debate' was pushed & enforced by the pro-trans side. It's a bit rich to then punish women for getting their story out however they can.

    Eta - not working with Nazis, obviously, but interviewing on 'right wing' platforms. And after seeing up close how easily nazi is thrown around, I'm reeeeeally skeptical about lumping anyone slightly less than extreme left as 'right wing nazi', ymmv in your location.

    • Like 7
    • Sad 1
  15. 19 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

     

    No one has yet to answer the question well here: where should trans people go to the bathroom if individual units aren’t available. Saying that trans people chose to undertake that risk by being trans isn’t fair because until this last year or two, it was widely accepted that people would go with whatever bathroom they chose. This wasn’t a fuss here until it became political in this election cycle.

    Make the males an open/unisex option. 

    Because the only alternative is the opposite or free for all, which only increases risk for everyone. 

    And instead of campaigning against women having boundaries, campaign for respectful compromise. 

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
  16. I'll pm you @prairiewindmomma

    and anyone else interested in my friend's experience, pm me.

    But I will say, I have known her since we were teenagers, she is more compassionate and puts-her-money-where-her-mouth-is kind than anyone else I have ever met. She has had her whole trauma history exposed, her children threatened, been degraded & outright lied about through all of our media (hence defamation). I am very protective, so if you're looking for 'context' to brush this off, then just block me now.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • Sad 5
×
×
  • Create New...