#prolife lgbt

[they-are-a-prolife-autist]

I have a question. Why are you pro-life? Most pro-lifers that I have seen tell mothers to not have an abortion either because of religious reasons or because they don't think it matters that mothers sometimes need abortions to survive. Can you please answer this question? You can do it privately if you wish not to post it on your blog. This is a genuine question so please no harassment. Fair warning, I am a minor.

Of course! I am prolife because I am against any and all violence against humans. I am against the death penalty, I am against all forms of abuse, and I am against the intentional ending of a human life even if it is in utero. I have been asked before why I cannot simply hold that principle personally, and let others do as they wish. My answer to that would simply be moral consistency. What we are dealing with is a human rights issue. Questions like “what is personhood?” “when do human rights begin?” “Do the rights of a grown person outrank the rights of an underdeveloped one?” “Is intentional active violence ever a right?” “What constitutes healthcare?” And “what about people who feel they do not have any other options?” These questions are important to talk about, and my own life and personal experiences make them near and dear to my heart. A summary of my standpoint could be described by these statements:

• Human life begins at conception.

• There is no such thing as a living, human, non-person.

• Intentional, active ending of a human life is wrong.

• The vulnerable should be protected and cared for by the strong.

• No human life has priority over another.

[ophthalmotropy]

All jokes aside, it is genuinely painful to watch your country become the world's laughingstock over the course of a few months. Argentina has so much to be proud of—we have public universities that are ranked among the best in the continent; we have public hospitals where someone with a life-threatening disease can be saved even if they don't have a cent; the greatest dictator of our history died in a common prison; criminals against humanity have been tried in oral, open courts; we have some of the most advanced gender identity laws in the world, which allow access to hormones without a prior dysphoria diagnosis; and legal and safe abortions are a constitutional right. All of these things are currently under attack, of course.

[blocklists-just-4-u]

Block lists/ people to block are now here as I don’t want to clog my main!

Send me any one or thing you want a blocklist on!

Thank you!

CURATE YOUR EXPERIENCE THIS ISNT HATE THIS IS A CURATION

[yeast-infection-enthusiast]

I literally feel like a teacher writing a huge ❓ on a student's paper everytime I go to protests lately. Why are we gathered at a prolife contra protest and you have a sign with "LGBT education in schools" written on it. Why are you shouting an environmentalist slogan. This is a pro choice protest. Why are you fragmenting the group with unrelated topics? Are you a fed? Why does every protest lately have to be a buy one get one free type of event? Why is it that when our reproductive rights are threatened we feel the need to also bring up barely related topics and take away the focus from the problem at hand?

[katy-133]

I think something that has been left out of discussion that should be kept in mind if you ever wonder how James Somerton had managed to grift so much Patreon money and had been fooling so many people is that there was a point in history where, if you searched for queer readings of different works of fiction on YouTube, his videos would appear at the top. Every time. I remember this. Before the Plagiarism and You(Tube) video was released, if you keyword searched things like "video essay lgbt [insert fictional media you like]," a video from James Somerton's channel would appear first. If you were looking for queer readings, you had to scroll down to find Alexander Avila talking about queer intersectionality, or Kaz Rowe talking about gay painter JC Leyendecker, who influenced Team Fortress 2's art style.

This was because YouTube will push videos from prolific channels (read as: posts more long-ish videos) in search results in the hopes you will click on it (since YouTube gains money from ads in videos). James Somerton was able to post essay-length videos at a rate faster than the other queer media video essayists because he was stealing from them. None of the legitimate essayists could compete with him on that front because a well-researched essay takes time to fact-check and ruminate on. So every time another essayist tried to call him out on plagiarism, he'd sick his fans on the person because they were "smaller". It took Hbomberguy and Todd in the Shadows to cause a dent because their channels were larger (note that Todd in the Shadows is a music review channel and Hbomberguy covers immersive sim video games--a YouTube channel covering queer essays is more "niche" than on other websites such as Tumblr or Nebula).

James Somerton didn't just weaponise his fans. He weaponised the algorithm. He weaponised queerness being considered "niche" on YouTube to silence queer writers.

[paulsebert]

I think it’s hilarious that Chuck Dixon a homophobic conservative writer’s legacy is basically inspiring a generation of slash fic which were prolific to the point that DC Comics decided to make the characters he wrote LGBT.

[ravenkings]

i genuinely think it's because chappell has no aesthetic vision beyond maximalism. she's not trying for a message or cohesion or anything, she just likes to play dress up. it feels like she opened a halloween catalogue one day and is systematically going down the list of costumes to put together the vibe for each new performance.

i mean, she's still very early in her career (i think she's only released one full-length album so far) so i think there's definitely still time for her to find herself as an artist.

i honestly have no particular ill will towards her, and i think she's a decently talented musician from what i've heard of her music. my only real issue is that i don't find her music to be particularly interesting. i feel like she's not really taking many musical risks, which is surprising to me considering how bold her visual aesthetic is.

i think for me, the main lack of cohesion, as you put it, is the mismatch between her music and her visuals. the music itself sounds like any number of phoebe bridgers-adjacent indie pop singer-songwriters but the visuals imply avant garde art pop or at least something a little more dramatic.

like even just looking at the cover of her album:

i'm seeing visual references to hole's "live through this" album cover

and also to david bowie and klaus nomi (both lgbt and both prolific musical experimentalists even within the bounds of pop music)

not to mention nina hagen (also a prolific experimenter and risk-taker in pop/rock)

and that's just scratching the surface....

basically all i'm saying is i wish chappell took as many risks with her music as she does with her look 🤷‍♀️

[rwbyconversations]

RWBY fans will always act like the perception that they're violent bullies when faced with criticism is an exaggeration and that critics are far worse about being sexist, and then you'll check their Twitter accounts and find out that one of the most prolific debate bros on the RWBY subreddit whose entire thing is just yelling at people who criticise the show on there called a female critic of the show a cunt nearly twenty separate times in 2023, including a time he dragged the critic's sister into it.

Yeah you're never beating the allegations and deservedly so. The RWBY fandom has a chronic, undeniable history of men using the fandom's lax moral standards on responding to criticism as a way to bully minorities who criticise the show, saying the vilest stuff especially to LGBT and female critics who highlight issues with the series.

[1eos]

i like how ive already seen a post that was like 'you're missing the point if you say ofc james somerton did this he's white and cis!' its def not tho bc only a WHITE and CIS person would steal the words of trans ppl and erase the transness out, steal the words from ppl of color and erase the race connections out, be so obsessed with centering MEN to the point of just spreading misinformation to hate women, doubly so if they're lgbt, AND then BE DEFENDED from all of this by playing the ~im just a widdle gay~ card. dear white people, only Y'ALL 🫵🏾 can play that card bc only Y'ALL 🫵🏾 have white privilege. so yes only a white cis man would do this bc only a white cis man would get away with this for long enough and be so prolific

[whatitshouldvebeen]

I was wondering if guys are attracted to Johnny, I mean, just like he attracts women in a bar or anywhere, there must be boys who are attracted to him. Because why not, Johnny is handsome and very sexy ❤

Men are definitely attracted to Johnny—they have eyes after all—but Johnny looks for reasons to bully people, and being gay is one of the "easiest" things to pick on someone about.

Johnny is not a good man. He's a bully, a liar, and a narcissist that only ever thinks about himself and (sometimes) his family.

Back in 1973, it would have been rare for a man to approach Johnny. If they started to hint at flirting, they would immediately get an overwhelming sense of dread.

Johnny would hate the thought that someone might see him being flirted with by a gay man, and think he might be "one of them". The ones with self-preservation would leave him alone after they see the danger brewing behind his eyes. The ones that don't can look forward to being threatened, verbally and/or physically.

And there's another thing. Johnny isn't homophobic. He'll bully anyone for anything. He doesn't care what gay people do. He doesn't think about the LGBT at all, really, unless approached by one. The narcissistic part of him (95% of his body mass is narcissism, BTW) would like that he was recieving attention, regardless of who's giving it to him. But he'd never reciprocate. This man is violently heterosexual. (Sorry, Jeland shippers)

As an addendum I thought of because of this ask, I think Johnny is getting more sloppy with his murders because part of him wants to be found out. He wants the infamy, the acknowledgement of his status as a prolific serial killer. But the other part of him thinks well, so long as they haven't found me I'll just keep going. You can be sure Johnny never once forgot the number of people he's murdered nor the face of a person he's killed, which is why I believe every execution of his involves looking them in their eyes as he stabs them and slits their throat.

[they-are-a-prolife-autist]

Aight here we go.

I wasn’t going to make a big deal out of this but some of y’all crazy motherfuckers up in my ask box calling me (a literal victim of pedophilia) a pedo and cussing me out simply because I added they/them pronouns to my profile. Let’s get this fuckery over with.

You all are making the nature of your “activism” really obvious at this point. It is clear to me now that a lot of you do not actually care about ending violence against babies in utero, or women’s health, or really anything that matters or that I blog about. What you care about is making sure everyone else matches your exact ideology, and mercilessly bullying the people who do not.

I have struggled with who I am for a long time. I have struggled with my trauma, my recent divorce, my religious beliefs (which I have never posted about here), and yes- my gender identity.

I am fully comfortable with my biology. I do not hate my uterus, my breasts, or my vagina. I do not hate men, or women, or pro choicers or prolifers. I feel I have worked hard to make that abundantly clear on this page. Here is what I do hate: I hate violence against innocence, I hate senseless bullying and discrimination, I hate pretending you are advocating for something important and bigger than yourself, and then being an absolute dickhead to people who would otherwise be on your side. If the words that I choose to use in reference to myself upset you THAT much, please unfollow me. Please block me. Please feel free to stew and whine and cry all day every day.

But for the love of all things holy, do not pretend you are advocating for anything other than your own personal, controlling, narcissistic agenda.

I identify as a demigirl. I choose to use they/them pronouns. I am bisexual. I’m learning to be proud of who I am, and it doesn’t change my activism in the slightest. If you agreed with what I posted before, but cannot stand me anymore… the only shifting variable is your willingness to listen. Not who I am, and not what I am saying.

[eisforeidolon]

I always see this phenomenon. Do you also find it strange that mentality also trickles down to the actor? Jensen gets treated the same way. Which to me brilliantly highlights how stans are unable to disengage from media and get back to reality. Jensen isn’t actually Dean. He’s not supposed to be dying for Jared. He’s not supposed to be catering to Misha. SPN actually isn’t real life…. To your point, the Misha/Cas stans are actually losing the small territory they thought they owned. There’s so much actual representation in media now that their wails and whines don’t carry any weight (not that they carried much to begin with) I’ve seen people outside of SPN fandom rail on destiel for being total bait and not even good bait.

@holding-out-for-hea

Addressing this in a new post because I go on a bit (as per usual).

I have always found fans who treat actors like they're fictional characters rather disturbing. Whether we're talking in the sense of seeing them as actually being their characters (it's a job, ffs) or in the sense of thinking the RPF fans write must be trufax (you don't know these guys, ffs). Or both! It is an indicator of someone who has problems separating fiction and reality and strikes me as just creepily dehumanizing at its core. To be clear, I'm not talking about fans who are genuinely joking around, but I feel like sometimes the line can get so easily blurred between joking and “joking” I personally prefer to avoid even that for the most part.

As to the latter, yeah, that's why I've always scoffed at the assertion SPN's legacy was going to ultimately be heller positive in any significant way.

The first problem is that to believe D/C was ever a thing (or going to be a thing) in the canon pretty fundamentally required a deep dive into the fandom for the ship. Even if you wanted to, it's a lot harder to take meta whose underlying thesis is predicated on the existence of totally real signposts about the obviously intended ending of the show seriously when the ending of the show has aired and was so hilariously Not That. It's a lot harder to fully immerse yourself in an echo chamber of true belief when there's no active and prolific new reinterpretation content to be surrounded by on a weekly basis. It's a lot easier to see how cynically bait-y and baseless Misha's statements about the canon and Castiel's final scene were, given the nothingburger that's actually there. At the heart of it, so much of the necessary credulity relies on there being an active community to bolster it with years of sunk cost investment and ready-made nonsensically elaborate conspiracies to explain why it was totally going to happen but didn't.

The second problem is the hellers remain hung up on insisting D/C was some kind of uniquely important cause that NEEDED to be canon because it was fundamentally more important than not only SPN's actual premise on the strength of platonic love, but better representation than any other show's potential LGBT+ romances … because reasons. Aside from the usual arguments why that's absurd, i.e. it's just their personal obsession speaking and they constantly insist their ship is "proved" through toxic stereotypes which actually underlines the opposite of what they intend? They have also really showed their asses by vocally and obnoxiously crying it's totally unfair and doesn't measure up to what SPN could totes have done if they weren't cowards when other media canonizes popular ships like with Good 0mens. As you say, the more time that passes the more common it's going to be to have genuine, well-written LGBT+ love stories incorporated into new canons to be contrasted against D/C fandom's 'two dudes who were never each other's first priority, often treated each other like shit, and explicitly stated their feelings were familial … but looked at each other + obvious jokes = the greatest love story (n)ever told and the writers owed me!'. Even to someone completely unfamiliar with SPN and therefore unaware they entirely queerbaited themselves despite the show's content? The longer ago the show ended the more irrelevant and unimportant to good representation the ship not being canonized becomes, when it wasn't particularly relevant to begin with. Sure they got some sympathy from the unaware about That Scene followed by an angel-free final two episodes (though a lot of the buzz was just memeing the scnee because it was That Cringe even sans context), but now? Why not go watch something else that actually has representation instead of whining about a show from 2005 that ended in 2020, after all? It's old news, if you hated it that much there's newer better LGBT+ content out there being made every day!

So yeah, not only is there no there there, especially in comparison to any real love story? But the most obnoxious shippers continuing to loudly make genuine real life issues and other canons' legitimate LGBT+ representation about their bestest realest most totally canonest ship ever D/C that they were also totally cheated out of? It can only become even more obviously ludicrous and self-serving - and it was pretty blatant to anyone with a modicum of discernment and familiarity with shipper behavior to begin with.

[cherrytea556]

It's wild at how hypocritical right leaning/conservatives are

They say that they advocate for free speech yet be the ones to ban books they find 'inappropriate for children' (even if its a public library) and be against someone's mere existence (trans/lgbt people)

They criticize liberals/left leaning people for 'spreading propaganda/politics to children' yet do the exact same thing, just align with their viewpoints and is actually more propaganda than what they were complaining about.

They say that 'woke' comedians aren't funny yet their comedy is the most laziest types of comedies one ever has to endure, with making caricatures of left leaning/liberals saying in your face stuff while being left with a punchline that will have you confused. It's just straw man arguments being disguised as 'comedy' and if you reverse their comedy with left leaning/liberals, i guarantee you they will be complaining instead of laughing.

They say that they judge people by the content of their character and not by skin tone, yet judge people by their sexuality, gender and politics (assuming lgbt people, especially trans people, are sexual deviants grooming children while left leaning/liberals are assumed to be overtly emotional/aggressive, alien and out to 'cancel' you). Not to mention of how they too judge race/ethics (like how they portray blm as well as acting judgy towards certain ethics, like portraying arabs as terrorists), those qualities arent so much of the content of their character, arent they? Well, you can argue on politics but if thats the case, then the left leaning/liberal people should absolutely have their right to portray right wing/conservative people the same way too. Whats that, you dont think so? Oh, okay then it further proves my point that right leaning/conservatives definitely dont judge by content of character.

They call left leaning/liberal people 'snowflakes' when their the ones up in arms over an old disney princess being raceswapped or an lgbt person on screen for a few minutes (and again, get offended over a mere persons existence just because they dont understand it!)

They say that they promote bravery when their the ones dismissing kids questioning their values and just expect them to obey it without any discussion.

They say that they care for children yet ban books informing kids of sex in order to not be taken advantage of/understand their own body, be prolifers despite how children of people who want abortion would have a miserable life, dismiss trans/lgbt children and shove their political values onto kids throats, doing the exact same thing they were complaining about.

They act exactly of what their constantly complaining about, it is funny as it is stupid.

[coffeeman777]

Do you believe God may be using Donald Trump to serve as the best presidential candidate to serve your country? A lot of people have been saying his assassination attempt was “an act” which is very disrespectful to those who were involved, got injured, and the lives that were taken too soon that day. The media is also desperately trying to antagonise him to ensure he does not get elected.

He also seems to be expressing his faith in Jesus more which I think is excellent. We all need Jesus regardless of what our circumstances are. And even though God knows what his true intentions are, I keep looking back at that one quote in the Bible where as long as the message of Christ is shared for all to see, it’s worth rejoicing about.

That’s my take on the matter anyway. If you do not want to get involved with political matters you don’t have to respond to this publicly. I’m more than happy to have a conversation with you in private.

Heya! I don't mind answering publicly.

Donald Trump is the best option we have right now, surely. And if America is going to survive, Donald Trump has to win this election. I'll be voting for him.

Donald Trump is arrogant. He's not sufficiently prolife. He's very supportive of LGBT stuff. I'm not sure his faith in Jesus is real; he doesn't seem to be displaying real fruit of salvation.

That said, Trump is a very strong person. He was an excellent President the first time around, and I have no doubt he'll be excellent this time around. He's smart and capable. Most of his policies will be great for the nation. Trump will ensure that America remains the kind of place where the Gospel can still be openly preached and Christianity can be openly practiced, and that's of primary importance.

I don't believe that either of the assassination attempts were faked. I think both of them were the work of the leftist deep state. Trump is a threat to them, and they're desperate to keep him from reclaiming the Presidency. I wouldn't be surprised if they try again, if they fail to imprison him before the election.

[erasure-picnic]

In honour of both Black History Month and the UK’s LGBT+ History Month, let’s shine a spotlight on a key figure in Erasure’s brilliant stage shows - Les Child!

Child has had a prolific and storied career, working as a dancer, choreographer, and innovator in the arts. He danced with several groundbreaking troupes throughout the ‘70s and 80s, and also founded some of his own–including House of Child, the UK’s first voguing group. In the ‘80s, he branched out into choreography for music videos, which brought him into pop star circles, and at the dawn of the ‘90s, he set his sights on live tours.

According to his CV on HeadNod Agency, the first tour Child ever choreographed was Erasure’s Wild! Tour (1989-1990). Child was fond of Erasure’s music, and told Private Ear in 1992 that “it makes life a lot easier when it comes to choreographing a show if you enjoy the music”. He would go on to do the choreography for The Tank, the Swan, and the Balloon (1992), Cowboy (1996-1997), and The Erasure Show (2005). Indeed, Child seems to have choreographed more tours for Erasure than for any other band or artist. He also starred in Erasure’s short film “Dr. Jekyll and Mistress Hyde” (2003), and forged an enduring friendship with Andy Bell.

Child’s work with Erasure is really special to me. His choreography is undeniably dazzling on its own, and the dancers deliver it with athleticism and aplomb. But I’d also argue that it adds to the music, making it even better. My favourite example is “Love to Hate You” from The Tank. In this performance--which Bell introduces as “the gayest of gay tangos”--two pairs grace the stage: one male-male, one female-female. By the end of the song, they’ve swapped partners multiple times. (Check out video 1 and video 2 to see this in action.) When I first saw this, I was charmed. It was unexpected, yet it seemed natural: a nod to the sexual fluidity that runs through Erasure’s music and art. I feel that Child truly got Erasure, knew what made them “them”, and made it sparkle.

SOURCES: Cover image and CV from Les Child’s page on HeadNod Agency (headnodagency.com). “Ear to the Ground”. Private Ear, Issue 11 (1992). Retrieved via a capture of the official Erasure website (Internet Archive). December 4, 2004. “Erasure - Dr Jekyll and Mistress Hyde (Directed By Vince Clarke)”. Original video from Erasure (Mute Records), 2003. Uploaded by Erasure Música y Amigos, retrieved via YouTube. “Life Drawing with Sue Tilley featuring Les Child as model and muse.” Uploaded by Sue Tilley, retrieved via YouTube, November 27, 2021. Staples, L. “From leather daddies to ‘Drag race’, dissecting the revolutionary history of the queer aesthetic.” British Vogue. July 24, 2021.

[whiskeyswifty]

i still think it's incredibly funny that taylor swift made a whole song called "lavender haze" waxing poetic about breaking 50's gender norms and being "damned" if she cares what people say when the word, and color, are so deeply associated with not only the lgbt community's oppression and fight for equality in the 20th century, (the lavender scare in the 80s, having a "lavender" streak, etc) but eventually became synonymous with lesbians and wlw specifically, to the point where "lavender menace" was the name coined for the lesbian/wlw inclusion political group, a phrase that is so prolific in lgbt spaces even wearing a lavender menace shirt is shorthand for "i'm a lesbian." only for her to get on the horn and say "it's a phrase from Mad Men about being in love 😌" like...... mad men?? MAD MEN??? i totally understand how lavender might mean absolutely nothing to non-lgbt people, lgbt history has gone mostly unrecorded yeah yeah, but..... i've rewatched mad men THREE TIMES in my life at this point and when she said that i could not for the life of me remember that phrase. which was used ONCE in season ONE. and i just find it so funny she was like "that sounds nice. i'll write a song using that. people will get the mad men reference, right?" while it like.... just so happened to be the single color most synonymous with gay activity going back to fucking sappho ladkfjkdsfjdsk cool cool sure yeah a line from fucking Mad Men sure why not!!