LGTBQ+ Donations Soar Thanks to Nazis

Yes I understand the Nazis had physical requirements too!

And yes I agree, they usually do look like land whales!

I’m down with the “it’s ok for ladies” rule, only if they’re height/weight proportional tho. Unfortunately gay women are usually disgusting land whales. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Yes he did Bam, they were just a bit harder to find than the Jews.
They could actually have blonde hair and blue eyes and fly under the radar.
They couldn't just be rounded up enmass like the Jews!
But when they were found out they got a one way ticket to Auschwitz to wear a pink triangle! Originally Posted by Big Daddy Joe

Gay activities were illegal in Germany BEFORE 1933. Around 6000 gays were arrested in Nazi Germany, 60% died. That’s a far cry from 6 million Jews. So, the Nazis killed far more straight people than gays. Around the world. If you weren’t a Nazi, they killed you. Ask the Russians.

Yeah.....

You do remember that I posted that in my first post pertaining to Ernst Rohm and the chapter 175 law.
But I'm glad you picked that up.

The population of gays dosent come anywhere near the amount of the population that is not gay no matter where you are.

And chapter 175 appears to be a law that was unenforced until the Nazis took power.

In 1934 after Rohm died the crackdown really began.
They shut down gay bars gay meeting houses and gay newspapers.
So I spite of the chapter 175 law, these place still existed openly in Germany.
And after the war started and the Nazis were taking over Europe, the Nazis amended chapter 175 was extended to the occupied lands.

An estimated 100,000 homosexual men were arrested, 50,000 were sentenced by civilian courts, 6500 to 7000 were sentenced by the mitary courts and an unknown number sentanced by special courts 5000 to 6000 were deported to the death camps, and 60% of them died that's a higher death rate than any other targeted group.

And thats not to mention the ones shot out of hand after whatever court sentanced them.

Of course this not going to come anywhere near the 6 million Jews that died because they are a small population of people.
Right now in the United States about 7% of the population is estimated to be gay lesbian LGBTQ.
Just 7% Bam!

So I'm sure that the German population had a somewhat similar distribution of members of that group.

So the were persecuted at a rate comperable to the size of they're population.

Read what you wrote below Bam.
Is that really your argument?
The Nazis killed more straight people than gay.
Did that make it ok?
What right did they have to kill anyone Bam?
We are ALL children of God Bam, he loves us all.
Dispite what you perceive to be sins, character flaws, and shortcomings!
All of us!

Gay activities were illegal in Germany BEFORE 1933. Around 6000 gays were arrested in Nazi Germany, 60% died. That’s a far cry from 6 million Jews. So, the Nazis killed far more straight people than gays. Around the world. If you weren’t a Nazi, they killed you. Ask the Russians. Originally Posted by bambino

Why would a parent want their child to be a freak of nature, and not do everything they can to dissuade them from being so? Anything less is child abuse. Raise your boys to be young men, and girls to be young ladies. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Why do you need to teach them to be young men or young women?
I thought you said gender is not a social construct?

So, shouldn’t they just naturally evolve into the socially accepted gender roles of young men and women according to their respective sex at birth?

Yeah.....

You do remember that I posted that in my first post pertaining to Ernst Rohm and the chapter 175 law.
But I'm glad you picked that up.

The population of gays dosent come anywhere near the amount of the population that is not gay no matter where you are.

And chapter 175 appears to be a law that was unenforced until the Nazis took power.

In 1934 after Rohm died the crackdown really began.
They shut down gay bars gay meeting houses and gay newspapers.
So I spite of the chapter 175 law, these place still existed openly in Germany.
And after the war started and the Nazis were taking over Europe, the Nazis amended chapter 175 was extended to the occupied lands.

An estimated 100,000 homosexual men were arrested, 50,000 were sentenced by civilian courts, 6500 to 7000 were sentenced by the mitary courts and an unknown number sentanced by special courts 5000 to 6000 were deported to the death camps, and 60% of them died that's a higher death rate than any other targeted group.

And thats not to mention the ones shot out of hand after whatever court sentanced them.

Of course this not going to come anywhere near the 6 million Jews that died because they are a small population of people.
Right now in the United States about 7% of the population is estimated to be gay lesbian LGBTQ.
Just 7% Bam!

So I'm sure that the German population had a somewhat similar distribution of members of that group.

So the were persecuted at a rate comperable to the size of they're population.

Read what you wrote below Bam.
Is that really your argument?
The Nazis killed more straight people than gay.
Did that make it ok?
What right did they have to kill anyone Bam?
We are ALL children of God Bam, he loves us all.
Dispite what you perceive to be sins, character flaws, and shortcomings!
All of us! Originally Posted by Big Daddy Joe

I’m just pointing out the Nazis didn’t just go after Gaymos. They killed everyone in their way, until they got killed. Dems the facts. Now run along Joey.

Why do you need to teach them to be young men or young women?
I thought you said gender is not a social construct?

So, shouldn’t they just naturally evolve into the socially accepted gender roles of young men and women according to their respective sex at birth? Originally Posted by Dreamgurrl

That may have been true years ago, and I suspect it still is to a lesser extent, before the media/school/political freakshow took hold. Nature and good parents are now forced to compete with the flat earth society. Many of them are losing, for a variety of reasons, most prevalent being no father in the home.

Gaymos?

Yep time to go!

That may have been true years ago, and I suspect it still is to a lesser extent, before the media/school/political freakshow took hold. Nature and good parents are now forced to compete with the flat earth society. Many of them are losing, for a variety of reasons, most prevalent being no father in the home. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

You’re proving my point for me. It’s all socially constructed.

I could be wrong but I feel like you’d be hard pressed to find a plethora of flat earthers who are also pro trans rights, so I’m not really sure how that is relevant.

It’s the election deniers who are actually dangerous, flat earthers are just stubborn and won’t admit being wrong.

But anyway, like I said in another thread it is heterosexuality that folks have been conditioned to and sexualized by.

Not sure I follow your meaning here. You’re saying if a kid comes to his parents and says they’re gay, that the parents should be supportive of that? I’d consider that the opposite of caring, but might be mistaking your point. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Maybe it should be the opposite. Gay youth who aren’t accepted by their families have a way higher chance of committing suicide. If you want your gay kid to off themselves, call them a freak show.

This has happened for a long time, since before gay people even were allowed on TV.

But hey, some folks are going to get triggered by gay people. And the anger is tremendously profitable to all sorts of media and politicians out there, who need to feed the anger in order to stay relevant.

Why would a parent want their child to be a freak of nature, and not do everything they can to dissuade them from being so? Anything less is child abuse. Raise your boys to be young men, and girls to be young ladies. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Damn, I didn’t know this board was so homophobic.

Members we are walking a very thin line I’m posting this as a reminder

#10 - Topics regarding children, and certain images depicting children are not material for an adult-themed board. You must be at least 18 years of age to register and participate here, and along those lines, our subject matter is to surround individuals of the proper age range. Any mention or reference to underage sex is strictly forbidden and may result in loss of your posting privileges.

I thought one had to be over 18 to work at a freak show?

You’re proving my point for me. It’s all socially constructed. Originally Posted by Dreamgurrl

Nope. Your point is garbage, but a bit tough to expand on why within the forum rules. Suffice it to say that there’s a big difference between a man and an adult male. Left to their own devices and free of outside influences, all boys, short of some sort of mental illness, will develop into adult males. Fathers teach them how to be men, not just a postpubescent person with a dick.

Nope. Your point is garbage, but a bit tough to expand on why within the forum rules. Suffice it to say that there’s a big difference between a man and an adult male. Left to their own devices and free of outside influences, all boys, short of some sort of mental illness, will develop into adult males. Fathers teach them how to be men, not just a postpubescent person with a dick. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

So you’re a scientist are you? Because a lot of people hide non-binary development for fear of harassment, or getting the shit kicked out of them because wanna be scientists make shit up (and use scientific names like freak show). A lot of reporting seen in the media is actually shit that’s gone on behind closed doors since the beginning of humanity, but never acknowledged because of stigma. Most people know a few people that have developed in a non-binary way, but are not aware of it because it’s hidden.

Scientifically speaking of course.

I thought you said gender is not a social construct? Originally Posted by Dreamgurrl

It's not. There are only two sexes. A gay man is still a man. A lesbian is still a woman. Most Americans accept gays. It's the damn trannies who are fucking everything up for the rest of the gay community by trying everyone's tolerance with their absurd demands!

Here ya go, DG... read this and learn...

If you get it, you'll be smarter than our newest Supreme Court Justice, who couldn't even answer a simple softball question like "Can you provide a definition of the word 'woman'?"

It's hilarious that we live in an age when a scientist even has to make a case for this!


A Biologist Explains Why Sex Is Binary

In an effort to confuse the issue, gender ideologues cite rare ambiguous ‘intersex’ cases.

By Colin Wright
April 9, 2023 1:15 pm ET


The transgender movement has left many intelligent Americans confused about sex. Asked to define the word “woman” during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings last year, Ketanji Brown Jackson demurred, saying “I’m not a biologist.” I am a biologist, and I’m here to help.

Are sex categories in humans empirically real, immutable and binary, or are they mere “social constructs”? The question has public-policy implications related to sex-based legal protections and medicine, including whether males should be allowed in female sports, prisons and other spaces that have historically been segregated by sex for reasons of fairness and safety.

Chase Strangio of the American Civil Liberties Union frequently claims that the binary concept of sex is a recent invention “exclusively for the purposes of excluding trans people from legal protections.” Scottish politician Maggie Chapman asserted in December that her rejection of the “binary and immutable” nature of sex was her motivation for pursuing “comprehensive gender recognition for nonbinary people in Scotland.” (“Nonbinary” people are those who “identify” as neither male nor female.)

When biologists claim that sex is binary, we mean something straightforward: There are only two sexes. This is true throughout the plant and animal kingdoms. An organism’s sex is defined by the type of gamete (sperm or ova) it has the function of producing. Males have the function of producing sperm, or small gametes; females, ova, or large ones. Because there is no third gamete type, there are only two sexes. Sex is binary.

Intersex people, whose genitalia appear ambiguous or mixed, don’t undermine the sex binary. Many gender ideologues, however, falsely claim the existence of intersex conditions renders the categories “male” and “female” arbitrary and meaningless. In “Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex” (1998), the historian of science Alice Dreger writes: “Hermaphroditism causes a great deal of confusion, more than one might at first appreciate, because—as we will see again and again—the discovery of a ‘hermaphroditic’ body raises doubts not just about the particular body in question, but about all bodies. The questioned body forces us to ask what exactly it is—if anything—that makes the rest of us unquestionable.”

In reality, the existence of borderline cases no more raises questions about everyone else’s sex than the existence of dawn and dusk casts doubt on day and night. For the vast majority of people, their sex is obvious. And our society isn’t experiencing a sudden dramatic surge in people born with ambiguous genitalia. We are experiencing a surge in people who are unambiguously one sex claiming to “identify” as the opposite sex or as something other than male or female.

Gender ideology seeks to portray sex as so incomprehensibly complex and multivariable that our traditional practice of classifying people as simply either male or female is grossly outdated and should be abandoned for a revolutionary concept of “gender identity.” This entails that males wouldn’t be barred from female sports, women’s prisons or any other space previously segregated according to our supposedly antiquated notions of “biological sex,” so long as they “identify” as female.

But “intersex” and “transgender” mean entirely different things. Intersex people have rare developmental conditions that result in apparent sex ambiguity. Most transgender people aren’t sexually ambiguous at all but merely “identify” as something other than their biological sex.

Once you’re conscious of this distinction, you will begin to notice gender ideologues attempting to steer discussions away from whether men who identify as women should be allowed to compete in female sports toward prominent intersex athletes like South African runner Caster Semenya. Why? Because so long as they’ve got you on your heels making difficult judgment calls on a slew of complex intersex conditions, they’ve succeeded in drawing your attention away from easy calls on unquestionably male athletes like 2022 NCAA Division I women’s swimming and diving champion Lia Thomas. They shift the focus to intersex to distract from transgender.

Acknowledging the existence of rare difficult cases doesn’t weaken the position or arguments against allowing males in female sports, prisons, restrooms and other female-only spaces. In fact, it’s a much stronger approach because it makes a crucial distinction that the ideologues are at pains to obscure.

Crafting policy to exclude males who identify as women, or “trans women,” from female sports, prisons and other female-only spaces isn’t complicated. Trans women are unambiguously male, so the chances that a doctor incorrectly recorded their sex at birth is zero. Any “transgender policy” designed to protect female spaces need only specify that participants must have been recorded (or “assigned,” in the current jargon) female at birth.

Crafting effective intersex policies is more complicated, but the problem of intersex athletes in female sports is less pressing than that of males in female sports, and there seem to be no current concerns arising from intersex people using female spaces. It should be up to individual organizations to decide which criteria or cut-offs should be used to keep female spaces safe and, in the context of sports, safe and fair. It is imperative, however, that such policies be rooted in properties of bodies, not “identity.” Identity alone is irrelevant to issues of fairness and safety.

Ideologues are wrong to insist that the biology of sex is so complex as to defy all categorization. They’re also wrong to represent the sex binary in an overly simplistic way. The biology of sex isn’t quite as simple as common sense, but common sense will get you a long way in understanding it.

Mr. Wright, an evolutionary biologist, is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute