Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

US homophobia intensifies

I think I might need that explaining. :oops:
IIRC from GCSE Biology, all zygotes (fertilised ova) are female and start developing female genitalia, which in males later change into male genitalia. Hence the existence of intersex babies where this change has halted before the full transition for whatever reason.
This is based on 35 years old learning though - I could be wrong!
I think this may also explain why everyone had nipples, not just those with mammary glands
 
IIRC from GCSE Biology, all zygotes (fertilised ova) are female and start developing female genitalia, which in males later change into male genitalia. Hence the existence of intersex babies where this change has halted before the full transition for whatever reason.
This is based on 35 years old learning though - I could be wrong!
I think this may also explain why everyone had nipples, not just those with mammary glands

Yeah, I’m not sure that was ever quite considered correct, but it has def been superseded these days.

Maybe the cartoon is getting at something else, but unless it is pretty obscure or just going over my head I think on balance you’ve probably linked the correct idea to it.
 
These people are fucking nuts

I'd seen a lot of posts about this but hadn't listened to it now. I'm sure Rep Seekins-Crowe is someone whose views I would largely find reprehensible, but I intially found the representation of this as her saying that she was rather her child was dead than trans a bit extreme.

However, we don't know what her child was asking for. FWIW, I suspect it was more likely to be social transition than anything else, I'm sure Rep Seekins-Crowe would have mentioned if we were talking demanding surgery (which I think few teenagers do). But I think that's what she wanted people to think, so her statement was quite manipulative in that sense.

Tldr: I think saying that she says she'd rather her child was dead than transgender is overly harsh, but one way or another it sounds like she was an asshole to her child.
 
Last edited:
I'd seen a lot of posts about this but hadn't listened to it now. I'm sure Rep Seekins-Crowe is someone whose views I would largely find reprehensible, but I intially found the representation of this as her saying that she was rather her child was dead than trans a bit extreme.

However, we don't know what her child was asking for. FWIW, I suspect it was more likely to be social transition than anything else, I'm sure Rep Seekins-Crowe would have mentioned if we were talking demanding surgery (which I think few teenagers do). But I think that's what she wanted people to think, so her statement was quite manipulative in that sense.

Tldr: I think saying that she says she'd rather her child was dead than transgender is overly harsh, but one way or another it sounds like she was an asshole to her child.

It would be more accurate to say that she would rather risk that her child committed suicide than they transitioned.
 
IIRC from GCSE Biology, all zygotes (fertilised ova) are female and start developing female genitalia, which in males later change into male genitalia. Hence the existence of intersex babies where this change has halted before the full transition for whatever reason.
This is based on 35 years old learning though - I could be wrong!
I think this may also explain why everyone had nipples, not just those with mammary glands
I'm pretty sure i can remember the New Scientist report about when this was disproved. This is what i just found using Google.

Embryos aren't female by 'default' after all, study shows

A new study published in Science by Humphrey Yao, Ph.D. challenges this age-old concept of the female pathway as “default” and shows that the development of femaleness is also an active process. The authors implicated a protein called COUP-TFII as a key player that is required to actively eliminate the wolffian duct in a developing female embryo in order to give it female characteristics.
 
Writer infiltrates an anti-trans event in San Francisco

During a Q&A session at the end of the event, the speakers gave the audience the moment they were waiting for. An attendee asked them, “Who are the powers of interest behind transgender indoctrination, and what is their end goal?”

“The end goal is really dark,” said Garfield-Jaeger, and the crowd hissed and whooped in anticipation of the revelation. “Trans humanism, pedophilia … destroying the family, our culture and our society. Marxism.” The crowd went wild.

I went home, stripped off my wig and pearls, and threw up.


 
Here's another derail into religion. Ex-Christians were asked why they left the church. Almost a third said it was because of the Church's views on LGBTQ issues. Other things that came up were the treatment of women, lack of belief, behavior of the religious people around them, intellectual dishonesty, etc.:

When it comes to the moment people first began doubting their faith, LGBTQ acceptance is the most common reason, followed by the behavior of Christians, and then things not making sense on an intellectual level (an example of this would be: I couldn’t reconcile how there can be an all-powerful God and evil).

Yes, a good number of my respondents were queer, and not being accepted by their congregations was a critical motive for leaving. However, the majority of respondents were straight and cisgender, and they ultimately started doubting Christianity when they were told they couldn’t support their queer friends and family. Unable to rectify their love of LGBTQ people with the church, they chose LGBTQ acceptance. Some responses:

“I couldn’t continue to ignore the treatment of LGBTQ and other marginalized people.”

I started doubting because of “the way the church treated people of the LGBTQ community and anyone who didn’t dress/think/act/look like them.”
“I couldn’t understand why God would create LGBTQ people in a form my church claimed he hated.”

“The first thing that challenged my viewpoint directly was meeting LGBTQ people and seeing that they were kind, thoughtful and deserving of respect.”

“The first thing was noticing how what Christians preached/practiced didn’t seem to align with that I knew to be the character of God, including views on the LGBTQ community, immigration, adoption, mental health issues, ‘mission work,’ and just general treatment of others.”

The behavior of Christians

Beyond the issue of LGBTQ inclusion, Stanley did get one thing right: Many people object to the behavior of Christians, and that’s not something new.

When writing a letter to C.S. Lewis about potentially converting to Christianity, author Sheldon Vanauken wrestled with this exact thing in his book A Severe Mercy:

The best argument for Christianity is Christians: their joy, their certainty, their completeness. But the strongest argument against Christianity is also Christians — when they are somber and joyless, when they are self-righteous and smug in complacent consecration, when they are narrow and repressive, then Christianity dies a thousand deaths.

Apparently, some things never change — the behavior of Christians is a massive stumbling block for people coming to the religion and walking away. However, instead of dying a thousand deaths, Christianity is dying millions.


If religion in America is going to be viable in future, they're going to have to become better places for everyone, including those in the LGBTQ community.

And Trump was the last straw for many:

For many respondents, politics is what finally motivated them to leave Christianity. Specifically, many referenced the election of Donald Trump and the support he received from the evangelical community. In fact, the name “Trump” was mentioned 81 times in the survey responses as a key reason someone left Christianity. For example, these were some respondents’ experiences:

“A culmination of events over the course of a few months starting in the summer of 2020. I had a fight with my father-in-law over the Confederate flag being a symbol of racism, he stopped speaking to me for months and it became a whole thing. The rise in glorifying Trump and fascism disguised as democracy.”

“Seeing so many friends and family that claim to love and follow Jesus pledge their allegiance to nationalism and Trump.”

“The 2016 election. I wanted nothing to do with a group that supported Trump and his insane ideology under the pretense of faith.”

“Trump was the last straw for me. Seeing a person who should be the opposite of what Christians are called to be, being supported by evangelicals everywhere, really woke me up to some harsh American/conservative realities and how we’ve bastardized Christianity like others before to push not love or Christ but instead Republican dogma steeped in racism, sexism and greed with the Bible as a manipulation tool to get people to conform to these particular ideals that have nothing to do with the Gospels.”

Christians really need to rethink their alliance with this minor anti-Christ or face the consequences.
 
Last edited:
My state did some backroom deals and merged two bills, one limiting abortion to 12 weeks from fertilization, and another outlawing some gender affirming care for anyone under 19. Because of the way they count weeks in this bill, its really a 10 week ban. They promise to change it to a six week ban once they get the votes for it:

LINCOLN, Neb. (WOWT) - The Nebraska state senator behind the filibuster that has spanned most of the legislative session said Tuesday that the signing of LB574 wasn’t the end of her fight for the LGBTQ community.

State Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha took particular issue with a comment made by Gov. Jim Pillen, flanked by Republican senators, at the end of Monday’s question-and-answer session following the signing of the ban on gender-affirming care for minors.

“Your Nebraska Legislature believes you have been ‘duped by Lucifer,’ that you don’t love your child, and that’s why you’re giving your child the care that they need. No, you’ve been ‘duped by Lucifer,’” she said.

“You know, again, we believe in protecting our kids, making sure that they — parents and kids — don’t get duped into this silliness that if you do this, you’re gonna become happy. That is absolutely Lucifer at its finest. And we believe this law protects and allows our children to make decisions on their own when they become of age.”

Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen

Our current governor, billionaire, Jim Pillen said that parents seeking gender affirming care for their children had been "‘duped by Lucifer."

And here's the really frightening part:

And while the GOP senators who gathered in the governor’s hearing room Monday signaled the newest laws were just the beginning, Pillen said that the state was prepared for any legal challenges that might lie ahead.

LB574, which the governor called “the most significant win for social conservative agenda that over a generation has seen in Nebraska,” goes into effect Oct. 1. The law bans gender-affirming surgeries for those younger than age 19, the age of consent in Nebraska. In what the bill’s author called a compromise on the original legislation, which originally included a ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for those patients, new regulations for those treatments are set to be decided by the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services and the state’s chief medical officer, currently Dr. Timothy Tesmer, an ear, nose, and throat doctor appointed by the governor earlier this year.

As far as the GOP goes in this state, this law is just the beginning of rolling back rights for women, and LGBTQ people.

rc=1&ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=eb878c64974d47de87e54d0cee2a0fbe&ei=8

I'm really considering moving at this point. I haven't been happy where I'm at for a while now and once I pick up the degree I'm working on, I may take it somewhere else.
 
And the other shoe drops:


He cut programs for housing pregnant teens, child welfare, and Medicaid payments.

“On the eve of the Legislature voting on tax cuts that will primarily benefit the wealthy and out-of-state corporations, Gov. Jim Pillen targeted kids and vulnerable Nebraskans with line-item budget vetoes,” said Rebecca Firestone of an Lincoln-based think tank, the OpenSky Policy Institute.

Jeremy Nordquist, president of the Nebraska Hospital Association, said that cuts in provider rates, from increases of 3% and 2%, respectively, in the next two fiscal years, to increases of 3% and 0%, put the state’s health care system “at risk.”

“The Governor’s veto will increase costs for everyday Nebraskans and will hurt our communities by closing essential rural health care services,” Nordquist, a former state senator, said.

He said he hoped the State Legislature overrides the veto, adding that hospitals are “ready and willing to work with Governor Pillen to address the systemic workforce shortages he highlighted in his veto message.”

In his veto message, the governor noted that hospitals had record profits before and during the pandemic and that increasing provider rates “will not address” the workforce shortages in the health care industry.

State Sen. Rob Clements, the chairman of the Legislature’s budget-writing Appropriations Committee, declined to comment Wednesday night.

But another member of the committee, Adams Sen. Myron Dorn, said he was “disappointed” after the panel had worked cooperatively with the governor in crafting its budget.

The Appropriations Committee has scheduled a meeting for Thursday morning to discuss how to proceed, including whether veto overrides will be attempted.

Among the other items vetoed by the governor were:

A child welfare rate increase of $6 million, which would replace funding previously provided by the American Rescue Plan Act. Pillen said it was wrong to replace one-time federal funds with state taxpayer funds.

A $7 million appropriation for a rural drinking water project in Cedar/Knox County. He said the project has already received state funds.

$10 million each in fiscal year 2023-24 and 2024-25 for both rural workforce housing and for middle income housing in urban areas. It would avoid flooding the market with government-subsidized housing, the governor said, adding that $200 million has been invested in affordable housing in the past three years. Some business leaders and rural senators have called the lack of housing a major barrier to solving the state’s workforce shortage.

Reduction of additional shovel ready Capital Recovery and Investment Act funds from $90 million to $70 million in 2023-24.

Elimination of $10 million in site and building development funds to Kimball for a ground-based nuclear deterrence project.

A $5 million appropriation from the Nebraska Health Care Cash Fund in 2023-24 and 2024-25 and related transfers in the following three years from cash reserves for a pilot program related to childhood trauma and gun violence. Pillen said that over $500 million has already been invested in areas of east Omaha.

Funding for additional positions in the State Auditor’s Office, for 15% salary increases for state legislative employees, and additional court interpreters and public guardians.

Expansion of the Court-Appointed Special Advocates program that helps children in the court system.

And in the same week as banning abortion after 10 weeks, banning gender affirming care, cutting social programs, they unironically passed tax cuts for those in the top tax bracket:

LINCOLN — Under the shadow of tightening state revenues, the Nebraska Legislature gave final approval Thursday to a $6.4 billion tax relief package. State lawmakers approved income tax cuts, hikes in state property tax credits, a tax credit for child care and a boost to school funding to offset property taxes.

State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn speaks in support of LB 574 on the floor of the Legislature on Friday, May 19, 2023, in Lincoln, Neb. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner).

State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Omaha had spent years spearheading legislation that nibbled at the urban push for lowering the state’s top income tax rates and the rural push to ease the burden of local property taxes. On Thursday, she helped secure at least 39 votes in the 49-member Legislature for all three parts of a bigger bite, laid out in Legislative Bills 243, 583 and 754.


All in one week, they have managed to hit the GOP trifecta of imposing their religious beliefs onto others, cut welfare and social programs, and given themselves a huge tax break. I don't think I've ever been this discouraged.
 
Last edited:
They want you to be discouraged. I’ve come to think that’s been the point of government trolling over the last few years. Every mad policy proposal to fix every consequence of their own actions - and it is a fix, but always in the other meaning of that word. They want people to be too exhausted by it all.
 
Texas Taliban bans drag

I really don’t understand it. Are they going to be arresting every guy wearing a bit of make up next (cos that’ll affect Donald)? Who decided that was strictly female anyway - in some cultures and eras, it very much wasn’t, if anything it was male.

Does section 14 B mean the strip clubs Republican gentleman no doubt like to frequent are also to be banned? After all, that shows genitalia in a ‘lewd’ state and it may give the appearance of being of a sexually excited appearance.
 
Some of the state senators from Nebraska have been running filibusters of laws against abortion and gender affirming care.

Nebraska State Sen. Megan Hunt responded to one of her colleagues, Republican Sen. Lou Ann Linehan, who complained that the filibuster attempts to stop gender-affirming care and abortion bans have caused her to miss events like her grandson's school graduation.

Sen. Hunt, who has a transgender child, said she was sorry that she had to miss a family event, but she missed it because "You won't come off this bill that hurts my son. You hate him more than you love your own family. That's why you're here."

 
I really don’t understand it. Are they going to be arresting every guy wearing a bit of make up next (cos that’ll affect Donald)? Who decided that was strictly female anyway - in some cultures and eras, it very much wasn’t, if anything it was male.

Does section 14 B mean the strip clubs Republican gentleman no doubt like to frequent are also to be banned? After all, that shows genitalia in a ‘lewd’ state and it may give the appearance of being of a sexually excited appearance.

Selective enforcement is how they reckon they will do it. Kinda of like how certain people can get away with more permissive reading of "Stand Your Ground" laws over others.
 
Now, Tennessee is going after book publishers:

In April, the Tennessee legislature passed SB 1059, a bill that specifically calls out book publishers that distribute materials to K-12 public schools, saying those publishers can be charged with a felony and fined at least $10,000 or up to $100,000 if the materials are found to be legally obscene. Previous bills have already made it illegal to distribute “obscene” materials to minors, but this new law adds specificity, targeting book publishers and the books they provide to schools. Unlike existing laws, it also makes a first offense for publishers a felony instead of a misdemeanor.


Its not remotely constitutional, but a lot of publishers just won't want the hassle of challenging the law and pull back on potentially controversial titles. I know the company I work for would self-censor themselves under this law.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom