What do you think about genderfluid people? (Page 9)
flappes_flappy_ears: @mynameisfrank that is very well said. Lots of people are either completely rude or biased, but that is explained in a good way. I hate gender stereotypes, and think them pointless. I used to accept it, but nowadays think "why are things that way? and also what's the point?" I mean, for example, I always wanted long hair, and though my mother let me have it long, she never approved, and always wanted it to be "in a scruffy sort of style", as opposed to curly like i wanted it. When I was 13, she did cut it like that by accident, and it looked dreadful, though my mother, stepfather, and even my grandma (who had alzheimers) told me I looked better. It grew back into its old-style thank God. I changed it to straight this year, as I liked the style. Also, unrelated to me really, my mother said the other day about a card she'd sold (she has a card business with TV characters) which usually has a green and pink colour scheme, only it was for a boy, and she said, you can't put pink writing on a card for a boy, it's completely inappropriate! I didn't say anything, but I couldn't help thinking "as long as it's got the character he wants on it, so what??" Maybe this is me overthinking things on this one, but I do believe that this is a stereotype. A similar thing was a year last christmas I asked for a cushion that was pink with clocks, it was part of a set. My mother said, I don't think you want a pink one! I thought, it's a colour? It doesn't mean anything! Soz to go on about random stories, I'm just giving examples of stereotypes that my mother is like.
Note: my stepfather had a bright pink t shirt, and weirdly she didn't say anything to him, though my sister used to call it his gay boy shirt!
Scarcastic: You know what's funny about the pink=girl, blue= boy stereotype is that historically blue used to be the colour for girls because it was associated with feminity and beauty and pink was considered a masculine colour. Knights would wear red banners in jousting tournaments etc to represent bravery and masculinity, and pink was simply light red, a version of red that seemed appropriate for children who were expected to someday grow up to become brave knights. Baby girls were wrapped in blue blankets so that they would grow up to become beautiful and feminine, and baby boys wrapped in pink blankets so that they would grow up to be brave masculine fighters.
That lasted until sometime around the 1930s if I remember correctly, when it became a widespread fad to use blue for babies with blue eyes and pink for babies with brown eyes, regardless of the baby's sex.
Then by the 1950s hospitals were colour-coordinating the babies by their sex again to help keep track of the babies, only for whatever reason they went with pink for girls and blue for boys, and it's been that way ever since.
In modern times, I feel like blue is easily considered either masculine or feminine, girls can have blue as their favourite colour, wear blue cloths, blue eyeshadow, have blue smartphones, drive blue cars etc and no one will mind. Yet pink is way more stigmatised as a "girl only" colour. You can imagine how some people react if a male says pink is their favourite colour, or pulls up to work in a pink car and has a pink smart phone and wears pink, they will get teased, or people will just assume they are gay... Even if a male picks up a pink pen to write something down he may get teased for it. It makes no sense because pink is just light red and red is still considered a colour that can be enjoyed by any sex and any gender. Pink should be the same way.
Sorry if this post drifted off topic a bit.
@mynameisfrank nice post, you made some good points and it was well written
flappes_flappy_ears: @scarcastic, don't worry, that is relevant to the topic. Society definitely needs to move away from the gender stereotypes, colour stereotypes, and also everything else. It's stopping the world from evolving in some ways! All due to silly ideas that people were brought up with in past generations. In a previous life, women were just seen as good for cooking and cleaning and not much else. Nowadays women are just as capable as the men. That society idea changed! Now they're largely seen as equal. If that changed, then why shouldn't smaller things like the above stereotypes highlighted also change? I just hope one day that this will happen.
Now I'm going a bit off topic! But you know what I mean.
(Edited by flappes_flappy_ears)
MynameisFrank: Thanks @Sarcastic & flappes, I was worried I would offend someone by saying that so thanks and I agree with what you both said after that as well. And yes they are just colors etc so yes like sarcastic said about the knights as well, that is also a bit like how make up never use to be a thing specifically for females either like egyptian pharaohs and tribal people and other males wore make up and it meant wealth or power or had spiritual meaning or it was war make up etc / a sign of importance or royalty too. But yeah it can be difficult if you have to deal with family having stereo type ways of thinking and stuff , but i guess that's how they were raised or structured by society to think like. It's amazing how influenced and conditioned we can become. But good on you and anyone else that goes ahead with how they feel despite what others think cause everyone should be able to live their own lives how they want to. I don't mean it would be good to hurt others though. But i think we should never not do what we want (if it's not hurting anyone) just because of what others might think or say.
Angry Beaver: Seems I can't walk outside in a dress without people telling me to shave me legs these days dammit!
MynameisFrank: Yeah well that's what I mean - stereo types and stupid people . I think you'd have to be a total idiot to actually care about if another person shaved their own legs or not lol? I mean yeah we all have looks and things we do and don't like , but unless it directly effects me in some way that actually matters , I couldn't care less how someone else looks or wants to dress or style themselves like ? I might think it looks good and I might not , but that's really as far as it goes unless I'm involved in some way
(Edited by MynameisFrank)
flappes_flappy_ears: For example, my mother is always saying to me things like: "I don't like you in that jumper" and refuses to let me wear it. Then precedes to say with things that aren't me at all "I like you in things like that". What has it got to do with her? if she doesn't like some things that's her opinion, but my opinion is the most important, as it's me wearing it!
Soz guys, going a bit off topic here, but the bit about "other might not like it but i couldn't care less" opinion reminded me of this.
Leda Muir: At the heart of the claim that the Bible is clear "that homosexuality is forbidden by God" is a poor biblical scholarship and a cultural bias read into the Bible. The Bible says nothing about "homosexuality" as an innate dimension of personality. Sexual orientation was not understood in biblical times. There are references in the Bible to same-gender sexual behavior, and all of them are undeniably negative. But what is condemned in these passages is the violence, idolatry, and exploitation related to the behavior, not the same-gender nature of the behavior. There are references in the Bible to different-gender sexual behavior that are just as condemning for the same reasons. But no one claims that the condemnation is because the behavior was between a man and a woman.
There was no word in Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek for "homosexual" or "homosexuality." These words were invented near the end of the 19th century when psychoanalysts began to discover and understand sexuality as an essential part of the human personality in all of its diversity. Consequently, it cannot be claimed that the Bible says anything at all about it. The writers of the Bible had neither the understanding of it nor the language for it.
There is only one reference to sexual behavior between women, and that is in Romans 1:26. The context of this reference has to do with Gentiles rejecting the true God to pursue false gods; i.e., idolatry. And, the sexual behavior described is orgiastic, not that of a loving, mutual, caring, committed relationship. What is condemned is the worship of false gods.
Sexuality is a wonderful gift from God. It is more than genital behavior. It's the way we embody and express ourselves in the world. But we cannot love another person intimately without embodying that love, without using our bodies to love. And that does involve genital behavior. Sexual love is to give and receive pleasure with our most intimate partner. It is a means of deepening and strengthening the intimate union that exists. This can only be healthy and good if our behavior is consistent with who we are and with whom we love, and when we are true to our sexuality and orientation.
Regarding marriage, it's important to remember that the Bible was written in a patriarchal culture that assumed men were in control and women were subject to them. Marriage was not an equal partnership, but a matter of a man owning a woman or women as property. Women provided men companionship, children and labor. Certainly, love between the man and woman or women could develop, but love was not the basis of marriage. Consequently, the biblical concept of marriage is not appropriate today. We no longer accept the inferiority of women and the superiority of men. We no longer accept marriage to be a property transaction. The concept of marriage has evolved throughout history. Today, we understand it to be a voluntary spiritual relationship based on love, respect, mutuality, and commitment. What matters is the quality of the relationship, not the gender of the persons involved. And marriage is created not by a religious ceremony or civil government. It is created by the persons involved who make their commitments to one another. Whether or not there is a religious ceremony to celebrate the marriage or marriage license to legalize it, the marriage two people make together in private is real and valid and should be honored as such. I hasten to add that marriage should never be understood as a requirement for two people in a relationship. Intimate relationships must not always create a marriage commitment. Marriage is a lifelong commitment that not everyone is willing to make or should make. Being single in an intimate relationship is an honorable choice.
How do I view God's position on "homosexuality?" I believe lesbian, gay and bisexual people to be a part of God's wondrous creation, created to be just who they are, and completely loved and treasured by God. I believe God does not intend for anyone to be alone but to live in companionship. And I believe God expects healthy loving relationships to include sexual love. The Bible doesn't say this, of course. But neither does it deny it. I believe this to be true not only because of the Bible's emphasis on the goodness of God's creation and the supreme value of love but because of the greater understanding of human nature that we have available to us today. I do not believe that God intends us to live in the small world of ancient biblical culture, but rather in God's larger evolving world informed by science, reason, and experience.
Bytr: Well your picture is way prettier making that big little Fart jealous! I think that guys should be able to wear makeup and nail polish, but i think people should represent the gender they are born with.
MynameisFrank: I thought I was the only one on wire that wrote massive long in-depth comments and stuff :O lol I applaud you lol
zeffur: Leda Muir's post is 100% plagiarized from here: src:
It is also a complete perversion of what the bible shows about same-sex sexual relations. Below is just one exerpt from the bible that shows a sharp contrast to the perversion of that essay:
This is part of the law that God gave to his chosen people:
"Leviticus 18:21–24: 21 You shall not give any of your offspring to sacrifice them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord. 22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. 23 You shall not have sexual relations with any animal and defile yourself with it, nor shall any woman give herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it: it is perversion. 24 Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, for by all these practices the nations I am casting out before you have defiled themselves."
Here are the dictionary definitions of 'abomination':
"What do you think about genderfluid people?"
In genuine cases, I think it is a result & symptom of a mental disorder.
In other cases, it appears to be used for attention &/or political motivations.
(Edited by zeffur)
tigermp125: WHATS THE HELL IS GENDER FLUI A SHEMALE THAT DISGISES HIS VOICE AND CANT EVEN CUMM WITH THERE COCKS THERE THINGS,DDISCUDTING ANIMALES. YOU TUBE WHETIES COMMERCIACAL BRUCE JENNER 30 SECOND VIDEO TELL ME WHAT U THINK. HE LOOKS LIKE OLDER MALANINA TRUMP.
flappes_flappy_ears: zeffur and tigermp125, you two are clearly narrow minded bigots. Nobody asked your opinion. Anything to do with God and the bible are nothing to do with it, and anyhow were written in the dark ages. And it's not an sti either. The disgusting people are people like you who are very offensive.
tigermp125: LGBT ARE VIOLENT STOP LEANING ON PROTECTION LAWS FOR YOURSELVES, U HAVE BALLS AS WOMEN RIGHT BE TWEEN LEGS,
flappes_flappy_ears: And also, this forum is NOT for negative comments, biased opinions, and trolls. This forum is for positive comments only.