'Bathroom Bill' proponent misgenders opponent in VA GOP sponsored mailer

[Belsnickel]

So, this story is irritating to me. I know the VA GOP is trying to play on the fears of their constituents regarding the LGBT community, but claiming it is only about the issue and not the person while the candidate constantly misgenders her and then misgendering her on an official party mailer just shows an hostility in politics that is all too prevalent right now.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/campaign-flier-paid-for-by-virginia-gop-misgenders-democratic-candidate/2017/10/28/91e28e6c-bc1d-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.html?tid=ss_tw-amp&utm_term=.e11ffba7ea6f

[GMDino]

(10-30-2017, 09:17 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, this story is irritating to me. I know the VA GOP is trying to play on the fears of their constituents regarding the LGBT community, but claiming it is only about the issue and not the person while the candidate constantly misgenders her and then misgendering her on an official party mailer just shows an hostility in politics that is all too prevalent right now.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/campaign-flier-paid-for-by-virginia-gop-misgenders-democratic-candidate/2017/10/28/91e28e6c-bc1d-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.html?tid=ss_tw-amp&utm_term=.e11ffba7ea6f

Obviously they know their voting base.  Hate and fear play well.

After all "democrats" are making it all about culture!  Right?  

[Benton]

I miss the old GOP. The one that said 'great, do whatever you want, just stay off my lawn.'

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2017, 09:17 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, this story is irritating to me. I know the VA GOP is trying to play on the fears of their constituents regarding the LGBT community, but claiming it is only about the issue and not the person while the candidate constantly misgenders her and then misgendering her on an official party mailer just shows an hostility in politics that is all too prevalent right now.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/campaign-flier-paid-for-by-virginia-gop-misgenders-democratic-candidate/2017/10/28/91e28e6c-bc1d-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.html?tid=ss_tw-amp&utm_term=.e11ffba7ea6f

Deciding to not play along with make believe and a candidate’s mental disorders is not hostile. It’s telling the truth to the voters.

Last time I checked that was what voters wanted.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2017, 10:56 AM)Benton Wrote: I miss the old GOP. The one that said 'great, do whatever you want, just stay off my lawn.'

Still here..... just don’t make us call a candidate A woman when they are clearly not.

[Benton]

(10-30-2017, 12:12 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Still here.....   just don’t make us call a candidate A woman when they are clearly not.

But that's the issue. That's not 'you do your thing, I'll do mine.' That's 'you do your thing,  and I'll tell you it's wrong and what you should be doing.'

That's no better than what the Democrats have become. It's just a different version. Anyway, that's getting a bit off topic, and I apologize for that. Sorry, Belsnickel.

[Belsnickel]

(10-30-2017, 12:10 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Deciding to not play along with make believe and a candidate’s mental disorders is not hostile. It’s telling the truth to the voters.

Last time I checked that was what voters wanted.

Except you are stating they have a mental disorder, which may be your opinion, but do you have the credentials to back it up? It's no different than people trying to diagnose Trump with mental conditions when they don't know his whole situation. It's disrespectful, it's hostile, and it's unnecessary. That may be what some voters want, but for those of us that prefer civility, it's not.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2017, 12:19 PM)Benton Wrote: But that's the issue. That's not 'you do your thing, I'll do mine.' That's 'you do your thing,  and I'll tell you it's wrong and what you should be doing.'

That's no better than what the Democrats have become. It's just a different version. Anyway, that's getting a bit off topic, and I apologize for that. Sorry, Belsnickel.

When you run for public office it’s worthy to note. When it’s average joe citizen playing dress up then it’s no big deal let them be weird on their own time. Just like the weird family that used to go to my church years ago.... their dad dressed up as a woman. Everyone just rolled their eyes and steered clear.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2017, 01:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Except you are stating they have a mental disorder, which may be your opinion, but do you have the credentials to back it up? It's no different than people trying to diagnose Trump with mental conditions when they don't know his whole situation. It's disrespectful, it's hostile, and it's unnecessary. That may be what some voters want, but for those of us that prefer civility, it's not.

You can not pretend to be something you are not and Run for public office. Just because you love these people and make it your personal soapbox to defend their stuff doesn’t mean average normal people have to be subjected to something they are clearly not buying.

You can’t represent yourself blatantly incorrectly and run for public office. Not if you expect to be taken seriously.

As for it being hostile, disrespectful, .... I do not Think so at all. It’s being factual. Is it unecessary? I can go a little there but then I don’t know how this dude was representing himself in the campaign. And quite frankly if he candidacy is so weak he can’t survive being called a dude then he wasn’t winning anyway.

[Belsnickel]

(10-30-2017, 02:35 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You can not pretend to be something you are not and Run for public office. Just because you love these people and make it your personal soapbox to defend their stuff doesn’t mean average normal people have to be subjected to something they are clearly not buying.

You can’t represent yourself blatantly incorrectly and run for public office. Not if you expect to be taken seriously.

As for it being hostile, disrespectful, .... I do not Think so at all. It’s being factual. Is it unecessary? I can go a little there but then I don’t know how this dude was representing himself in the campaign. And quite frankly if he candidacy is so weak he can’t survive being called a dude then he wasn’t winning anyway.

I'm not really sure why I continue to engage with you on LGBTQ matters when you continually express harmful, discriminatory, prejudicial opinions and a lack of common decency with regards to the community.

[BmorePat87]

(10-30-2017, 02:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm not really sure why I continue to engage with you on LGBTQ matters when you continually express harmful, discriminatory, prejudicial opinions and a lack of common decency with regards to the community.

Because you're a glutton for punishment. 

[GMDino]

(10-30-2017, 02:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm not really sure why I continue to engage with you on LGBTQ matters when you continually express harmful, discriminatory, prejudicial opinions and a lack of common decency with regards to the community.

Some people are doomed to forever try and educate or at least teach and reach a middle ground even if they cannot show someone the error of their ways.

(10-30-2017, 02:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Because you're a glutton for punishment. 

Or this.  

[*bfine32*]

(10-30-2017, 02:35 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: You can not pretend to be something you are not and Run for public office.  Just because you love these people and make it your personal soapbox to defend their stuff doesn’t mean average normal people have to be subjected to something they are clearly not buying.  

You can’t represent yourself blatantly incorrectly and run for public office.  Not if you expect to be taken seriously.    

As for it being hostile, disrespectful, ....   I do not Think so at all.   It’s being factual.   Is it unecessary?   I can go a little there but then I don’t know how this dude was representing himself in the campaign.   And quite frankly if he candidacy is so weak he can’t survive being called a dude then he wasn’t winning anyway.

You are partially correct. Someone running for office cannot "pretend" to have the credentials required to run. For instance I could not be 25 and say I identify as an older person so I meet the age requirements. As to the case at hand, if a certain gender is not a requirement, then I see no problem with a candidate identifying as whatever they wish.

I will be up to the voters, as to whether it is relevant. Perhaps some will point to studies of increased suicide attempts by those who are gender fluid and state we don't need that, perhaps others will just say we don't need that kind representing us. The voter has the right to make his or her choice as long as the candidate is qualified.

As to the other candidate calling the opponent by his/her biological sex pronouns. that's his choice and once again the voters decide. Folks like Bels will hold it against him; while folks like you will applaud him for it and there will be those that focus on their stance on issues.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2017, 03:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You are partially correct. Someone running for office cannot "pretend" to have the credentials required to run. For instance I could not be 25 and say I identify as an older person so I meet the age requirements. As to the case at hand, if a certain gender is not a requirement, then I see no problem with a candidate identifying as whatever they wish.

I will be up to the voters, as to whether it is relevant. Perhaps some will point to studies of increased suicide attempts by those who are gender fluid and state we don't need that, perhaps others will just say we don't need that kind representing us. The voter has the right to make his or her choice as long as the candidate is qualified.

As to the other candidate calling the opponent by his/her biological sex pronouns. that's his choice and once again the voters decide. Folks like Bels will hold it against him; while folks like you will applaud him for it and there will be those that focus on their stance on issues.

Precisely. Which is why this shouldn’t even be an issue.

[Mike M (the other one)]

Oh I dunno,
If you are a Human and you think you are an animal, then you are diagnosed with a mental affliction of some sort, why doesn't it apply with someone's genetics?

Genetics is not fluid, gender ROLES are.

[Benton]

(10-30-2017, 04:12 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Oh I dunno,
If you are a Human and you think you are an animal, then you are diagnosed with a mental affliction of some sort, why doesn't it apply with someone's genetics?

Genetics is not fluid, gender ROLES are.

Since when are humans plants or minerals?

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2017, 02:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm not really sure why I continue to engage with you on LGBTQ matters when you continually express harmful, discriminatory, prejudicial opinions and a lack of common decency with regards to the community.

I am just fine with the gays and whichever else group you want to throw in there under the never ending letters....

There is nothing wrong with just calling people by the proper terms. Not some leftist term that is only there to make odd people feel special.

There is nothing discriminatory, prejudicial, or even violating common decency. No one said this guy couldn’t run... the way he dresses and acts is on him.

The fact you think this is a story is hilarious.

My opinions on this matter have been consistent and clear. You won’t change my mind and I certainly won’t start using that ridiculous list you posted for me to refer to.... it’s either man or woman. He or she. You and whoever else here can live in fantasy land where everyone gets their own made up pronoun, and you can just celebrate that over and over. Just don’t expect to infringe on my rights and everyone else who is just tired of all this nonsense and prefers to focus on their actual life rather than irrelevant petty nonsense.

If a poster here is one of these then more power to them.

The day I start calling everyone their pronoun of choice is the day you all start referring to me on here as your magesty. Since I choose to identify that way.

[Belsnickel]

(10-30-2017, 03:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to the other candidate calling the opponent by his/her biological sex pronouns. that's his choice and once again the voters decide. Folks like Bels will hold it against him; while folks like you will applaud him for it and there will be those that focus on their stance on issues.

My issues with the GOP candidate are on his policy decisions. My issue with this sort of thing from the state GOP party is that it is a devolution of civility in politics.

[Griever]

(10-30-2017, 12:10 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Deciding to not play along with make believe and a candidate’s mental disorders is not hostile.   It’s telling the truth to the voters.  

Last time I checked that was what voters wanted.

you cant be serious, right?

not playing along with make believe from the party that pretends to believe in an imaginary being in the sky?

just be honest

[StLucieBengal]

(10-30-2017, 04:52 PM)Griever Wrote: you cant be serious, right?

not playing along with make believe from the party that pretends to believe in an imaginary being in the sky?

just be honest

No one has forced you to say God exists or pray to him.

We are all being forced to call this dude a woman or face ridicule being c asked a homophobe.