"It's Not A Disorder!"

 If same sex attraction (homosexuality, bisexuality) and transgenderism (aka gender identity disorder) aren't disorders, but just misunderstood orientations why, across the world, are such people in said groups treated like they have a disorder? 

Why in the US are there LGBT+ "safe places" or center? Why is the Pride flag seen as some innocent do-good symbol despite its history while the American flag and Back the Blue flag are seen in a dark light? Why are there a number of tv shows and series trying to make same sex attraction "like totally normal", and the the LGBT+ character is met with tension, it's shown that they can't properly cope with it therefore they move to suicidal acts or self-harm? Let's look other minorities: blacks, Asians, Hispanics and Native American.

Besides the whole "black owned businesses" featured on Yelp and "representation", blacks tend to have decent coping skills despite Jim Crow laws and its effects. When they were barred from obtaining a basic education they made their own school and doubled their literacy rate in a relatively short time span, granted many issues still prevail in the black demographic.

Even in places where it's socially "progressive" like the Nordic countries rates of LGBT+ suicide is still high to the straight population. 

Let's face it: same sex attraction is a disorder. Same thing with transgenderism. You don't eat a rotting animal carcass like a vulture would do, do you? No. If you do you probably have a disorder such as when people crave and eat inanimate objects. Well, if you're a women who's sexually attracted to women you're going against what your biological reality is made for. If you're a guy who things he's a women then you're not acknowledging your biological reality. Funny enough, if the male and female brains are identical then the transgender advocates say that we have to look deeper because neurologically transgender females have systems similar to biological females. Wait, I thought there were no big differences between males and females?

The LGBT+ narrative isn't sound.

So those with same-sex attraction, either exclusively or attracted to both sexes, are "born that way" -  but transgenders' bodies are wrong.

Ah shit. Just ignore it.

Where does whole "body positivity" come in? There's this whole "love the skin you're in" mentality directed towards chubby and fat people, so why can't this be directed towards transgenders to just "love the skin you're in"?

"You're a racist!"

PLACE: Youtube comment section.Video about suburban life in the 1950s. Family shown is white.

Comment 1: This was when America was great! MAGA!

Comment 2: Yea, if you were white,  male and heterosexual.

Comment 3. This video isn't about race.

Comment 2: It's about the 1950s.

Comment 3: It is, but you're basically making it into something that it isn't.

Comment 2: Are you denying the fact that blacks didn't have rights before the Civil Era?

Comment 3: I'm not denying it, but why bring it in here? My parents aren't white and they're doing fine.

Comment 2: Good for your family. But plenty of minorities suffered from discrimination before Civil Rights laws were passed in the 1960's and even after that.  Ask them what life was like in the 50s. Ask the people who marched and fought for civil rights what it was like. Get your head out of your ass. Just because life was good for you doesn't mean it was good for everybody.

Comment 4: In life-your outcome is directly related to your effort. Plenty of brown skinned individuals thrive in life. They made wise choices, they pushed themselves to the next level. Prime example, Dr. Ben Carson, admirable. hard working, aimed for excellence & achieved it!! The south was & still is a different situation. We have laws to protect everyone.

Comment 2: The south does now. But back in the 50s that wasn't the case. That's the point I tried to make that some people just don't get.

Comment 3: lol telling me to get my head outa my ass when I'm not the one living the in the past. That's the MO of your kind - play the "but the 1950s" and "muh Civil Rights" cards like it just happened a decade ago. Why don't you find a black man and ask him about the 1950s, a black that's over the age of 65. The 1950s is like the boogeyman man decade for you race baiters. Shit, you should be indignant about the shootings in Chicago. More blacks are dead by their own kind than by the white man in that city. Your sorry ass is brainwashed that you look at history in a narrative/thematic way that you're unable to approach it dispassionately. 

Comment 2: Um, this is the comment section for a video ABOUT the 1950s which is why I've been talking about the 1950s. And black people in the 1950s had to fight for basic civil rights that white people took for granted. That's a FACT and part of our history whether you like it or not.

Comment 3:  It's about the lifestyle middle class 1950s, not about blacks and inequality of the 1950s. That's a fact. You commenting about civil rights in a video that has mostly nothing to do with it shows your cards of that of someone fixated on race who pathetically begrudges the decade. You might as well complain about WWII while you're at it and how Japanese-Americans were put in camps.

"That's a FACT and part of our history whether you like it or not."

Ah, the original sin of America: slavery, Jim Crow laws and racism. Hey, Skylark, get the fuck over it. The FACT doesn't sway me to adopt your mentality. In fact, I out grew it a few years ago. Now if the video commented on how everyone was happy, marriages were amazing, and there was little to no racism then I'd probably object to it, but the video said non of those things. Your facts, again, have little to do with what's being portrayed in the video. You hijacked it to shove your race bullshit here while appealing to emotions in the name of "facts." Here's a fact from the 1950s: women were mostly stay at home moms. My brown mom doesn't give two shits. But maybe some rapid feminist will, like the "concerned" Skylark does with race. #MAGA #FuckSJWs #FuckBLM

Comment 2:  I didn't hijack anything. My first comment was that life could be great in the 1950s if you were white and middle-class, which is what the video is about.  You're the one who's hijacked the discussion with your rants about race baiting and black crime. But seeing your hashtags clarifies everything so I'll consider the source and not waste any more of my time trying to argue with a racist.  Life's too short.

Comment 3:  Ya, you did hijack. You're trying hard to say, "No you're the one who did it, meanie!" A pathetic attempt to paint me as a race baiter ... Do you even know what that is? You turned the video about race. The video wasn't about race nor did it even mention it. Who's the race baiter again?

"But seeing your hashtags clarifies everything so I'll consider the source and not waste any more of my time trying to argue with a racist. Life's too short."

So you're the kind who covers his ears, shuts his eyes and says, "I'm not listening! Nah nah nah nah!" It's highly ironic you shut your brain off when you see these: #MAGA #FuckSJWs #FuckBLM But hey, I'm a "racist." And you're right, life's short - you can't start thinking critically about history or question SJW's or BLM, because that'll be "racist" and we can't have that now.

Fuck these groups.

Namely because I find them to be self-righteous and smug bastards. These groups I find are just disrespectful bastards who are vindictive. If they want to fuck tradition because they're wallowing in their bitterness because EVERY FACET OF SOCIETY HASN'T ACCEPTED ME then I say fuck the world they want to build because I know it's going to be shit.

1. Gnus
2. immensely insecure LGBT people
3. SJWs (college students, third wave feminists, liberal professors)
4. anti-theists
5. people who accuse everyone for being a "cuck"
6. black people who are hypothetically on the plantation

Honorable goes to No Country types and moderates.

For numerous reasons I'm starting to lose patience with the LGBT community and their supporters. Why do they get the star treatment?

I blame the professors and the parents.

There's something extraordinarily pathetic that is going on US university campuses nationwide. I'm speaking of the moronic tantrums that have occurred at the University of Missouri and Yale University. Each have to do with race.

At MU charges of racism - without any evidence - have angered a small group of (black) students which transitioned into 30 black athletes of the university's football team to boycott playing until the university president resigned  - which he did. Someone supposedly yelled the n-word at a group of black students on campus and drew a swastika made of feces in a bathroom. These incidents were brought to the attention of the president and he issued a statemnet for "further investigation" but that wasn't enough. Due to his "lack of action" a student staged a hunger strike and few others took notice and created the chaos that is currently happening. It doesn't help that several Missouri politicians have supported the resignation of this president. The language used to support this activism? "Healing," "family," "safe space," "inclusiveness" etc. It all sounds very communal. Of course Michael Sam made a cameo stating that "gay or straight" can fully back this type of activism.

Currently the football team has a losing season.

At Yale University, one of the most renowned and coveted institutions for higher learning, students at the residential college, Silliman College, are angered over an email of their House Master wrote, and his wife - the Associate Master - who supported, defending controversial Halloween costumes in the name of free speech and personal maturation. Her husband, who is a professor of sociology at the university, never said that he agreed with controversial costumes (e.g. black face, fake dreads) but clearly stated that the university should not control what the students wore on Halloween night; it was a form of censorship and that the university's way of combating controversial costume, though thoughtful and had the psychological well-being of the students in mind, was a poor attempt. He opted for the freedom to wear costumes that might make people offended, and with this offense would strike up a conversation between the wearer and the offended - face to face. It's confrontation in a civil manner that, with hope, each party would learn the other side's thoughts to become more aware of their mistake. The students of Silliman College were not pleased.

The Assoicate Master offered Sunday lunch to the offended with discussion but they declined. Instead DOWN (magazine for black Yale students) issued a petition, rather long winded, on how Silliman's House Master was out of line and how it invalidated Yale's minorities. The petition garnered over 740 signatures of current students, alumni and other students from various universities. The House Master's husband was willing enough to have a public talk in the college's courtyard. Bad move. The students surrounded him, arms crossed, and demanded an apology to the students he offended. One student said that if he were not to apology she'd leave; another urged the crowd to walk away and that the House Master did not deserve their time; an enraged student dropped her backpack, got into his face and said that he was unsuitable to be House Master due to him not creating a "home" for current Yale students - that his actions were urging several current Yale students to transfer.

Welcome to Yale.

Behold, the Modern Man Child.

Even though I wouldn't touch Mercedes with a ten foot pole, and she basically is a slut (there is no such thing as a "good" slut) who is misguided in her use of sexuality, I have more respect for her than I ever had for ex-NFL punter Chris Kluwe (which is close to none).

When I first heard of this guy (through deadspin) I couldn't help but think he was condescending and arrogant, with no regard to professionalism who puts in minimal effort into understanding what the opposing side has to say. 

From his articles on deadspin dripping with d-baggery, his letter to Emmett C Burns Jr., learning his favorite word: empathy, to his overall bitter existence, the guy is a perfect case of being an asshole. Straight-out. No cutting corners to it. No sugar coating it. I keep wondering to myself, "What is the deal with this guy?" As one commenter put it (from the youtube video) -

Everything that I've read from him and seen of him cements my first impressions: That Chris Kluwe is everything that he despises and nothing of which he proclaims himself to be. In other words, this is a despicable man. A man that needs therapy. If it wasn't for his pro-gay "rights" fervent crusade and his talk show circuit rounds, add in Gamer Gate, the man's public profile would be "just an NFL punter." Kluwe has a narcissistic personality disorder.

I could care less that he played on an elite sports level. I could care less that he has more money in his bank account that I'll ever have in mine. I don't really care that he's an ignorant secularist. Here's the thing: I'm not a man child nor am I a poser; when I'm caught in situations where I turn out to be wrong, if I've misunderstood, or my stance is less than stable than I want it to be, I will admit it. I may actually drop a previous held belief. Kluwe? He seems like a cool guy to play video games with and ask for punting advice, but get talking about SJW issues and "equality"? Yikes. The man turns into a child. That ain't cool.

This is what the secular-SJW-white knight-"equal rights" movement has produced. This is the type of personality and mindset that dogmatically supports such groups and stances.This is the type of personality that is drawn to the pathologically fucked up minority.

I feel sorry for his daughter. I feel sorry for his wife.

Tumblr's SJW object to Sleepy Hollow

SPOILERS

There is underlying racism at work according to some posters on tumblr.

IMDb poser MonaRich sensed something wasn't right (them spider senses are tingling!), but thanks to tumblr she was able to make sense of this warning -

Killing off/undermining/sidelining all the POC and then having actual dialogue in the show about how the four white trees will turn black and that means they're extra evil and having Moloch rip off his white skin to reveal the scary evil black thing underneath after he had masqueraded as a pure blonde innocent Aryan prince. Like this *beep* isn't even subtle. It's about as subtle as Birth of a Nation. These new writers are trash.

HarveyMidnight pitches in -

A lot of people felt that it was -- what can we say, somewhat ignorant? -- for the season 2 writers to shove Irving onto the sidelines, push Crane further forward as a 'main character' making Abbie somewhat of a sidekick instead of a balanced equal to him, and outright replace Jenny with a white man who has almost exactly the same skill-set.

Considering Crane and Abbie are the two "witnesses" and not Irving, putting Irving as a secondary character is absolutely understandable. Even in the start of the show I knew Irving wasn't a 'main character' - though one of the 'main' secondary characters. As the season went on Irving still played a vital role; he was written rather effectively and it's nice role for any actor to take on - one filled with many complexes, emotions and trials.

I do not know what show they watched, honestly, but if I'd take a guess I'd guess out of all the episodes Abbie is more of the leader in the adventures than Crane. Maybe because the two actors playing the respective roles differ in height substantially some may come to the conclusion that Abbie is the side-kick.

If we talk about portrayals, Abbie, not only being beautiful, is shown to be amazingly resilient, self-sufficient, smart and resourceful; she is Crane's guide to the modern world and sometimes acts as a bigger sister to him. Crane, when he's met with a modern phrase or piece of technology that bemuses him, is written as the comic relief in a very endearing/charming way. Abbie is practically the rock in their relationship - she may not be flashy or as endearing as her male friend, but it is more of her show than Crane's, so far.

What makes this "Abbie is getting the shaft" issue more interesting is that posters are complaining that Abbie doesn't have a love interest. Yep. Before having a love interest for our heroes would've been deemed sexist in a couple of scenarios: If it was a 'typical' relationship with some 'hot' guy or if the relationship showed the woman in a more passive light than She-Male. I thought being a strong, independent woman who doesn't need a love interest to be happy was of grave importance to show young females across the globe that they too can be She-Males? Whoops.

There's more (Akeda is the name of an episode in S.2) -

I have so many complaints about Akeda. But this is the one that hurt the most and forgive me because this is heavy and I might not be the best person to voice this, but I gotta get off my chest cause last night it had me close to tears.

Media doesn’t exist in vacuum. So what does it say when a show’s only black male lead is sidelined for the majority of the season only to be cut down after twenty minutes of focus? What does it say when the white male lead, then turns around and offers his killer a “life of his choosing” rather than insisting he be brought to any measure of justice due to some clannish misguided notion of loyalty/empathy to his own kind when it is clearly unearned?

Goffman said that they chose to kill Frank because they wanted to make the war feel real. Well thats awesome, congrats, it feels real. Too bad the Cranes didn’t get the memo. Too bad the writer’s didn’t either.

The timing is so *beep* up for this. This was beyond insensitive. This hurt.
Because Crane is suppose to be a Hero. And Frank, goddamnit - Frank mattered. Frank was a friend. His life, his family, his sacrifice all mattered.

Except it didn’t and his one champion was literally injured, tied up, and effectively silenced so the Cranes’ ‘oh so interesting’ unconditional love for their murdering white son could take center stage. And as of right now, the narrative has rewarded them for that and that is really really gross. This show is gross, the writers are gross, the ‘hero’ is gross and I don’t see any indication that that is going to change though I really hope I’m wrong.

Italics: You're making me laugh, seriously. I'll say this: Quit your bitching you little bitch. I was more upset that J.K. Rowling said Ron and Hermione was more of an accident and thought of divorce for them (did she follow through?).

Note: It doesn't help that it seems that many of the fans of Sleepy Hollow fall under the SJW/OmurGurd/My-Feelings-It's-All-About-Emotions group. Like I said in previous posts, I wish my interests and hobbies were different. But they are not.