There are none

It seems we can never have clarity or precision or accuracy in this discussion now. PBS shows us why right in the headline.

Supreme Court rules against Colorado’s ban on ‘conversion therapy’ for LGBTQ kids | PBS News

But what is conversion therapy for LGBTQ kids? Nothing. It can’t be anything, because those 5 items are not identical. T is not the same as L or G, or L and G. They are, in fact, opposites. L and G are real categories, easily specified. T is a destructive invasive fiction.

I suppose the perceived connection is that some gay men lean girly while others don’t, and some lesbians lean butch while others don’t. Rachel Maddow assures us that her wife wears skirts, never trousers. But…you know…the gap between that and actually being F or M because skirts or trousers is enormous. If Trump rocks up to the camera, takes his ugly blue trousers off, and puts on an ugly blue skirt, he doesn’t then become a woman.

An 8-1 high court majority sided with a Christian counselor who argues the law banning talk therapy violates the First Amendment. The justices agreed that the law raises free speech concerns and sent it back to a lower court to decide if it meets a legal standard that few laws pass.

It’s the latest in a line of recent cases in which the justices have backed claims of religious discrimination while taking a skeptical view of LGBTQ rights.

But, again, they shouldn’t be bundled together. LGB rights are different from purported T rights. (What Q rights are is anyone’s guess.) The right to love, marry, have sex with, raise children with same sex people is not the same as the purported right to be treated as the sex one is not in all circumstances.

Being able to talk sensibly about this subject would be a lot easier if the news media would stop framing it so dishonestly.

Comments

3 responses to “There are none”

  1. Your Name's not Bruce? Avatar
    Your Name’s not Bruce?

    Being able to talk sensibly about this subject would be a lot easier if the news media would stop framing it so dishonestly.

    The fact that that framing is carefully and deliberately dishonest says nothing good aboiut the media, and does nothing good for the media’s reputation and standing. It’s like giving the right wing a free square on their “Fake News BINGO” card. Genderism is not worth the price they’re paying (and that we’re all paying, through the inevitable erosion of trust that comes with the media promoting and defending outright lies.) And to what end? For what purpose?

  2. Your Name's not Bruce? Avatar
    Your Name’s not Bruce?

    Rachel Maddow assures us that her wife wears skirts, never trousers. But…you know…the gap between that and actually being F or M because skirts or trousers is enormous.

    Maddow can not not know that supporting forced teaming like this can only damage her rights as a female, and as a lesbian, though she probably thinks she’s not going to pay this price personally, even though she already has. Trust and integrity are not so easily regained once they’ve been squandered on obvious bullshit. Blowback doesn’t really care who or what you are, and as others have noted, if you’ll forgive the terminology, karma’s a bitch. So what’s in it for her? Is this ideological purity (and incoherence) so priceless that she’s willing to sign a blank cheque over to genderism with no thought as to how many zeros they’ll put to the left of the decimal? The lies are really not that shiny. At least not to those of us on the outside seeing their true cost.

  3. What a Maroon Avatar
    What a Maroon

    If Trump rocks up to the camera, takes his ugly blue trousers off, and puts on an ugly blue skirt, he doesn’t then become a woman.

    You owe me some brain bleach to get rid of that image.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *