Hey Reich wing culture warriors, what do you have against Trans people?

There is something here deeper at play and I’ll resort to a personal situation to illustrate…… Mid-1970’s I had the longest hair in school and thrived in the bad-boy persona. Fact is, I was mortally terrified of drugs…. But due to peer pressure, I started smoking cigarettes and faked smoking pot with the cool guys. I became desperately addicted to the cigarettes but still carry an internal fear of illicit drugs….. Point being, I wouldn’t have trod either path had it not been for peer pressure…… Here we are in 2023 and the peer pressure I faced was nothing compared to what these kids deal with today. Yes, I do believe that there are folks that feel trapped in one gender or the other, but I am wholly convinced that 75% of what is taking place today is nothing more than immature reaction to peer pressure. And I’m telling you, I have witnessed exactly this in my own home.

 

For this discussion, I don't actually care WHY someone is trans. Or gay. Or straight. Or bi. Or anything else.

I'm not against any adult doing whatever they want in their own bedroom and I'm not against anyone dressing however they want.

The problem I have is that there is a movement among a certain liberal community to push for little children to make a decision to transform their bodies before they can even ride a bicycle. They're also proponents of having pornographic books in places accessible to small children who don't have the slightest clue what the difference is between a penis and a vagina.

No, this movement is insidious and perverted. Rational and reasonable people everywhere should be against it with every fiber of their being.

 

I'm not saying that "being gay, trans, or any other non-heterosexual" orientation is pornography. I'm saying pornography is pornography.

This is some of the material in the book "Gender Queer" which is marketed to children and is/was on the shelves of public libraries. You can be the judge whether or not it's pornographic. Since it's still available in some libraries, it shouldn't be a problem posting these pics on PL:

- Removed as pornographic material -

 

Sorry Libs, but OKC is dead on . . . (Material removed as pornographic).

From Wikipedia . . . "in 2020, an award given by the American Library Association to "books written for adults that have special appeal to young adults ages 12 through 18."

You've gone over the edge, and further. This is not edgy . . . this is corruption of our youth.

I used to give you the benefit of the doubt . . . now you've removed all doubt.

You are my sworn enemy.

 

I’m glad you removed the material, TC. It actually IS pornographic and it’s being marketed to little kids in our public libraries.

Since PL has more sensibility than our public libraries, I encourage anyone here to search for images taken from the book “Gender Queer” and then tell me if those images are NOT pornographic.

It says something about the current state of our society when we allow kids to see hardcore porn on the shelves of our public libraries, but not books by Dr. Seuss.

 

It was an eye-opener OKC, and I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it for myself. These liberals are pigs to think it okay to put this crap on the shelf at the public library.

 

My sentiment exactly. Yet they continue to push for this crap. Like I’ve said before, it’s insidious and parents (and anyone else who cares about children) should demand that this material be removed from the hands of little kids. Sick, sick, sick.

 

And here's another thing to think about . . . Since when does the American Library Association treat 12-17 year olds as "young adults"? They are not adults at all, until 18.

 

My apoligies to all the informed members from missing this nonsense. I'll run these fools off tonight with simple questions they cannot respond to.

 

Think people are against left wing going after kids.

 

It's weird to me that the outrage comes due to the cartoony drawings. That's the only part you take issue with right? There's always been much more explicit stuff on the shelves, it just isn't drawn.

As an extreme example: A Clockwork Orange. For a recent example, I remember when I was in high school the Fifty Shades of Grey books were quite popular (explicit BDSM romance novels). Everyone in high school was reading Game of Thrones. Heck people murder each other in Harry Potter.

 

Please don't minimize the impact that pornography, whether it be realistic depictions or fantasy depictions, has on young impressionable minds. If you're an advocate of showing explicit pornography to children, you and I have nothing further to discuss.

I realize your father was probably one of those "expose them to everything in the world at the earliest possible age" types, but I find it abhorrent, personally. YMMV.

 

I'm not familiar with Game of Thrones, have only seen one of the Fifty Shades movies on television, and saw A Clockwork Orange on stage many years ago. I have not read any of the books. I presume the Fifty Shades film was in keeping with the book, in which case I don't think that was all that bad, however it may have been heavily edited for TV. A Clockwork Orange was definitely an over the top portrayal, but violent and sexualized nonetheless. Definitely not material for youngsters . . . at least not those who have not been conditioned to understand what to expect of, and how to interpret "art".

As concerns the outrage, it's very important to note that, unlike works that are text only, little kids will pick up what looks "cartoony" and give it the time of day. Such works of pornography, as in Gender Queer do not belong on the shelf in a public library where kids can pick it up.

 

I'm watching Game of Thrones right now. X-rated and nudity. Cable TV is fill with this sort of stuff. Boardwalk Empire is another. Any boy with cable can watch X-rated adult stuff that I would not want my children watching. It is a way to lower the morals of our country and bring it down.

I along with the atheists will feel the wrath of our Creator for how the world has evolved. While I would not like my children under 18 to see any of these shows, they are doing much worse in real live!

 

@JoeNation posted this thread: At CPAC, A Call For Trans People To Be 'Eradicated' Gets Big Cheers.

IT REMINDS ME exactly HOW MY GOD was treated by the democrats at THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION.

BTW Chin Chin (AKA Joe-no-Nation), this is AMERICA so Every Defective Person (DP's) has a right to life, just as the unborn inocents.

 

JoeNation, posted: "I care because I don't want to see people "eliminated".

Truth be told Chin Chin, I think very few members of PL would like to see anyone actually "elininated." I think the same would be said one-on-one by any of those rilled up CPAC yellers. Although I'm sure we could find a few who were there.

"And you're confused. You should either look up the definition of pornography or explain to us how being gay, trans, or any other non-heterosexual orientation is pornagraphy."

Have you ever been to a Gay Pride Parade? Of course not so you can continue to show what an ignorant, non-engaging, propaganda spreading nuisance you continue to be. Do you ever post an original thought besides the writings of others?

"Eliminated??? You people are way sicker than any trans kid."

"Eliminated" was answered above. And your true feeling has come out! @JoeNation ALSO AGREES WITH CPAC THAT TRANS KIDS ARE DEFECTIVE IN SOME WAY - "SICK."

"This is straight up Nazi eugenics crap."

Unfortunately CHIN-CHIN, your complete ignorance of eugenics, the movement, its founders (Not the Nazis), and the history of the democrat party in america has exposed you AGAIN to be nothing but an uneducated, old, ignorant, brain-washed, lying propagandist.

We are all here to help you Theodore. But first you mus want to be helped. Then you can prove you want to be helped by answering direct questions like: IS JOE BIDEN A LIAR?

 

Man, wait until you learn what they put on the internet

 

I'd be careful about conflating depictions of nudity and even sexuality with pornography. Some required reading when I was in middle school was the Diary of Anne Frank.

In some passages, she writes about being attracted to women and her experiences discovering her sexuality. Should we ban the Diary of Anne Frank?

What makes something "pornography" is the intention of it to arouse. I think you'll find even in books like Gender Queer it serves a much more nuanced purpose and arousal of the reader is far from the intended purpose.

 

There's neither conflation nor confusion going on here . . .

 

I didn't see what you removed earlier in this thread. Do you think it's explicitly trying to arouse the reader, or was it serving some other narrative purpose?