Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

@DixonHur do you agree that the law requires you to have a license to drive? If the law wouldn't give you a license because of your sexual orientation, would your response be (a) frustration and anger and advocating that the law should change or (b) not caring because you believe the law is stupid. And if (b) would you feel the same way if you were jailed for driving without a license?  

That's what you're arguing Dixon. It is really stupid stuff. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
48 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Oh, ok, so opinions are only correct if the state agrees with them.  Gotcha. 

I think I need a break from the mental gymnastics of the CR.  Goodbye.

man, i have been around hornfans, shaggy, and surly long enough to have seen some real non sequitur doozies in my life...but this one may take the cake.

if your takeaway from my post was that your opinions regarding marriage and the tax code are not "correct" because the state does not agree with them, you have completely lost the fucking plot buddy.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

You know someone is irritated when they don't even stop to capitalize. Lulz

wait until he tells you how he helped his uncle jack off a horse.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

The biological reality? What about intersex people?

Exactly. 
 

And the human brain being exponentially more complex is another biological reality.

  • Like 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, troph said:

IMG_5913.jpeg

was that to all agency heads? it doesn't specify how or even what he's saying to take action on... is each agency's HR gonna have to figure it out? are they all going to be requesting AG opinions? i assume it's employees as well as the public...employees turning each other in has to be coming.

i'm really, truly sorry troph 😞 

Posted
Exactly. 
 
And the human brain being exponentially more complex is another biological reality.

Not if it’s a Republican brain. Then it’s just “Og feel good if Og hurt Grog.”
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
Posted

Can't imagine how you do it, @troph Here's wishing you as much strength and resilience as you need to outlast the bastards.

I have been remembering lately the slime in the air when George Wallace was at his worst in the 60s, and as a kid I watched people who seemed normal doing mental backflips to support the caste system. You won't find many people now willing to admit that they backed that. A few years back @Bama Chick rightfully pointed out that School-House-Door-Wallace support didn't drop to a tiny percentage (in Alabama, believe it or not) because suddenly people just treated it as a normal option. It took shunning, and some economic losses as drooling axe-handle types in Georgia pretended to be moderate.

Anyway, lots of words to lead up to how I've  started to treat Trumpkins this past week. Just like I would a non-senile segregationist. They have come back by playing the hits from 1925 (1825?) "If yew don't like it here why don't yew bla bla bla" except they are smart enough to use current acronyms. "I dunno, I like it here. How bout you drag your ass to Idaho. Take snacks."

It is usually a comical old-man squabble. Funny thing though-- there are a shit-load of possible Trump voters who don't want to be that Wallace fan. They lay low, don't support their buddy. A fair number of people I thought were Trumpy based on assumptions, they come out of the woodwork and just needed an ally to say otherwise.

tldr/BustEmUp.

 

Posted

We will probably leave the country in 4 years. I know I’m all over the place in terms of plans but we have 3-4 years to decide. My wife has quietly been whispering we may need to leave the country for a while now, I’m finally paying attention. Not sure a blue state is enough, as much as I’d love to live in California or Colorado, I think the combination of the political assault on TQ folk, the aggression from trumpers and the dismantling of the federal government that is on going will make the US untenable for us. 

I think we will leave, retire and chase the sun. 

in the meantime, I do it with more resiliency that you can imagine. I’ve only been cultivating that strength since I was 5 or 6. No one is allowed to fuck with my head space without my permission. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
Posted (edited)

silver lining - looks like State is currently leaving existing passports alone as long as they have an F or M on them (X are toast). Trans reddit is reporting little problems coming back into the US. I renewed mine early (still had 3 years to go) back in December, so I'm good til 2035 if the current State position remains. 

Now I need that Texas law that's proposed to retroactively reverse changes on Texas DLs to die in committee and then I'm good for at least 2 years. 

I need a 4 year reprieve to get my kids out of school and then we leave but we get to leave with my identification from the US the way it's supposed to be.

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 1/30/2025 at 3:23 PM, DixonHur said:

Good god, have some fucking perspective

In case any of y’all were wondering what irony looks like

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)

Just want to get this off my chest regarding a trans person I know. 

My ex's family unit when we were together was a stepfather, mother, sister, and 2 stepsisters. The stepfather was a successful exec who made a lot of money, and also spent a lot of money. One of the stepsisters is divorced and has a 10 year old son. They started transitioning to a trans man 4-5 years ago, let's call them Q. 

Everyone in that family has a transactional love with their stepfather(and each other, honestly). If he's generous with his money, they stick around and spend time together. When the money dried up after a forced retirement, they got mad and distanced themselves. It's gross. But Q was never like that. They worked hard and never depended on their dad's money. They disliked the family dynamic as well, and visit only during the holidays or birthdays, while purposefully living their own independent life.  I haven't seen Q in a few years, but my 7 year old occasionally does. A couple of weeks ago my son said he saw Q and their son. He told me Q had grown a beard like mine and it was "weird". He didn't say it with any judgment, more just matter of fact in his mind. That was a good time for me to talk to him about it, that Q was doing what felt right to them to live their life to the fullest. That it's a positive situation. That Q's son is good and kind and loves their parent, which he agreed with as they are friends and "cousins". My son absorbed it and we moved on. 

On the surface, the stepfather, mother, ex, sister, and other stepsister seem "normal" and "presentable" to everyone else.  But all of them are deeply flawed and unhappy people. The one normal, respectable, mature, confident, and grounded person in that family is Q. I have immense respect for them. 

 

Edited by Hank Kingsley
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I hope there is a special hell for these haters, and I hope it's somewhere here on earth.

Oh, there is, and it is.

Bad news: it's called "America."

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Chopper said:

These courtroom exchanges are memorable to say the least.

 

That is amazing. There is a not insignificant possibility that some DOJ lawyers may get disbarred or suspended based on the arguments they are having to make. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Why doesn't Kyle Cheney include that attorney's name?

No shit, its public record and he leaves no doubt who the judge is.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/20/upshot/lgbtq-survey-results.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yU4.50fR.Yy50F8HAVLrX&smid=url-share

Nearly One in 10 U.S. Adults Identifies as L.G.B.T.Q., Survey Finds

New data shows a rapid increase in recent years, driven by the young. The Trump administration has recently been rolling back L.G.B.T.Q. initiatives.

Nearly one in 10 adults in the United States identifies as L.G.B.T.Q., according to a large analysis from Gallup released Thursday — almost triple the share since Gallup began counting in 2012, and up by two-thirds since 2020.

Posted
10 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

And half of them probably voted for trump. 

Doubtful. On the gay dating app I occasionally use where guys can note their political views, I'd estimate 1 in 10 identify as conservative. Though a fairly high and disappointing number identify as non-political or moderate. 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, safe sex said:

I figured but I guess I didn't understand it

Just a play on the ridiculous conservative claim that drag queens reading to kids are turning them gay 

Posted

that 10% number is old news. It's been 7-10% for a long time now depending on who does the polling. remember, LGBTQ includes your garden variety homos.

Posted
On 2/20/2025 at 7:38 AM, Orale said:

Doubtful. On the gay dating app I occasionally use where guys can note their political views, I'd estimate 1 in 10 identify as conservative. Though a fairly high and disappointing number identify as non-political or moderate. 

Eh, most dudes don't identify as being a conservative on dating apps because they know it's a turn off. If they state non-political or moderate they more than likely wear a red hat.

 

Posted

Republicans are feeding their Nazi souls.

Quote

The Department of Homeland Security has eliminated policies preventing the investigation of individuals or groups solely based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis quietly updated its policy manual earlier this month, as first reported by Bloomberg, removing LGBTQ+ identities from the General Requirements section that prohibit surveillance based solely on immutable characteristics. 

The manual now states: “OSIC Personnel are prohibited from engaging in intelligence activities based solely on an individual’s or group’s race, ethnicity, sex, religion, country of birth, nationality, or disability. The use of these characteristics is permitted only in combination with other information, and only where (1) intended and reasonably believed to support one or more of I&A’s national or departmental missions and (2) narrowly focused in support of that mission (or those missions).

https://www.advocate.com/politics/dhs-allows-surveillance-sexual-orientation

  • Rage+1 3
Posted
1 hour ago, safe sex said:

HB3399

Transitioning to be made illegal for all persons in Texas, effective Sept 1st. Pending bill approval of course 

We're cooked, chat

Authored by Brent Money, who is one of Paxton’s hand selected reps.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, safe sex said:

HB3399

Transitioning to be made illegal for all persons in Texas, effective Sept 1st. Pending bill approval of course 

We're cooked, chat

I read the bill to be that using barring public monies to fund transition was what was proposed. That being said, it has similar characteristics to the chipping away strategy that the GOP used for Roe v Wade and will use for other rights they oppose.

Posted

The part about State money read to me like an additional fuck you, with the first part of the bill being a blanket ban. Granted, I'm not a lawyer so I could def be wrong there. But as you said, regardless of the content of this bill, the end result will ultimately be the same

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I read the bill to be that using barring public monies to fund transition was what was proposed. That being said, it has similar characteristics to the chipping away strategy that the GOP used for Roe v Wade and will use for other rights they oppose.

They are banned. The public money part says:

Quote

Public money may not directly or indirectly be used, granted, paid, or distributed to any health care provider, medical school, hospital, physician, or any other entity, organization, or individual that provides or facilitates the provision of a procedure or treatment  to a person that is prohibited under Section 161.702.

So if you do provide or facilitate any of those services, like teaching them at a medical school, you are banned from receiving government money period. Not just funding for those sorts of procedures. So even if you do those sorts of procedures for cash only, you aren't getting public money for other things.

You can do gender affirming care to help intersex people conform to be male or female. I guess when nature fails to do the natural thing and make just male and females, then the government can intervene. You know, to make people natural.

Edited by Valmy77
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

They are banned. The public money part says:

So if you do provide or facilitate any of those services, like teaching them at a medical school, you are banned from receiving government money period. Not just funding for those sorts of procedures. So even if you do those sorts of procedures for cash only, you aren't getting public money for other things.

You can do gender affirming care to help intersex people conform to be male or female. I guess when nature fails to do the natural thing and make just male and females, then the government can intervene. You know, to make people natural.

Thanks for the clarification.

  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...