The Mean Girl Dynamic on Company of Men

[NipLuvr212]

14 hours ago, BOZO T CLOWN said:

Nobody is going after anyone's gains. Period.
But if it makes your feel better to tilt at windmills in search of non-existent bogeymen who are out to take away our rights, go for it.

Can we now go back to the original topic of this thread?

BTC
🤡
 

I would say your post is very much reflective of the original topic of this thread.

[pubic_assistance]

1 hour ago, NipLuvr212 said:

I would say your post is very much reflective of the original topic of this thread.

I would say Bozo was spot-on. The gays are always attacking windmills. Prior to this, in the 1970s and 1980s their missions were better targeted and well meant. Since they have achieved much for those of us in the LGB community who followed, they seem to be lost and looking for a fight. So they look for things to be insulted about and wear their righteous indignation like a badge of honor. 

The commentary above about Trans and cross dressers was off topic ...true. But it was emblematic of the way gays will go out of their way to feel insulted by someone who doesn't subscribe to their group-think. If I remember correctly, THAT is exactly how "mean girls" behave. They assume they posess the right answers to everything and try to put others in their place to feel better about themselves and their perceived superiority. 

I repeat: it is not ME who belongs on the mean girl list but those who made it. 

Edited August 11 by pubic_assistance
grammar

[NipLuvr212]

9 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

I would say Bozo was spot-on. The gays are always attacking windmills. Prior to this, in the 1970s and 1980s their missions were better targeted and well meant. Since they have achieved much for those of us in the LGB community who followed, they seem to be lost and looking for a fight. So they look for things to be insulted about and wear their righteous indignation like a badge of honor. 

The commentary above about Trans and cross dressers was off topic ...true. But it was emblematic of the way gays will go out of their way to feel insulted by someone who doesn't subscribe to their group-think. If I remember correctly, THAT is exactly how "mean girls" behave. They assume they posess the right answers to everything and try to put others in their place to feel better about themselves and their perceived superiority. 

I repeat: it is not ME who belongs on the mean girl list but those who made it. 

"The gays"??? Come on, man.... at least develop the ability to read the room... but in any case, someone doth protest too much!

Edited August 11 by NipLuvr212
typo

[pubic_assistance]

11 minutes ago, NipLuvr212 said:

at least develop the ability to read the room

I am bi, not gay, not lesbian. I am speaking about a group of people who I am clearly adjacent to, but pointing out I am not speaking as one of them. Once again.. you people look under every rock for something to feel insulted.about. Then you lash-out and put-down. 

Edited August 11 by pubic_assistance
grammar

[+ SirBillybob]

Straw man argument, though, if trans legitimacy in belonging to abridged … LGB … is predicated on sexual orientation when it’s reasonable to assume that both cis and trans folks are subsumed, represented within, LGB. In the same fashion, as it’s a complex topic, attempting to deconstruct these meanings doesn’t necessarily assign the meanypants label to any one person.

It’s the gratuitous embellishment of a point with a symbolic prologue that’s part of the problem, as if one needs to raise an alert, or signify that the point itself is will have been strengthened by virtue of having dissed the other ahead if it. That’s the signification of insult, not that an opposing point of view represents an oversensitivity or a person or group prone to overinsultability. 

Edited August 11 by SirBillybob

[+ ApexNomad]

1 minute ago, pubic_assistance said:

I am bi, not gay, not lesbian. I am speaking about a group of people who I am clearly adjacent to, but pointing out I am not speaking as one of them. once again.. you people look under every rock for something to feel insulted. Then you lash out and put-down. 

Stop excluding people under the pretense that you have nothing in common with them, and there won’t be a fight to begin with.

[+ ApexNomad]

22 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

I would say Bozo was spot-on. The gays are always attacking windmills. Prior to this, in the 1970s and 1980s their missions were better targeted and well meant. Since they have achieved much for those of us in the LGB community who followed, they seem to be lost and looking for a fight. So they look for things to be insulted about and wear their righteous indignation like a badge of honor. 

The commentary above about Trans and cross dressers was off topic ...true. But it was emblematic of the way gays will go out of their way to feel insulted by someone who doesn't subscribe to their group-think. If I remember correctly, THAT is exactly how "mean girls" behave. They assume they posess the right answers to everything and try to put others in their place to feel better about themselves and their perceived superiority. 

I repeat: it is not ME who belongs on the mean girl list but those who made it. 

It’s not disagreement that’s the issue, it’s the refusal to engage in good faith, the deflection, and the labeling of anyone who challenges exclusion as oversensitive or superior. That’s not discussion. That’s a tactic. It’s exactly why so many people stop engaging altogether.

[pubic_assistance]

1 minute ago, ApexNomad said:

Stop excluding people under the pretense that you have nothing in common with them, and there won’t be a fight to begin with.

Stop with your sense of moral superiority and we can stay on subject. 

[mike carey]

It seems that the topic has reached its useby date and we've run out of things to say that address whether we have a mean-girl dynamic, and we're resorting to motives and accusations about who here is mean and in what way. This was never about attacking or defending our own, or any others' motives, and certainly not about an assessment of everyone, or anyone who falls under the LGBTIA+ banner.

The two warnings could not have been clearer. I appreciate the comments I've received about the need to address some of the exclusion and attacks that some of the posts appear to contain, but not everyone seems to have taken them on board.