Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's a government for the people, by the people, of the people, etc. Not really anything to be alarmed about since California likely attracts a lot of people that identify as LGBTQ or however it goes. Something like 10% of the population is gay last I heard.
Yeah, you can hardly find entertainment depicting girl-meets-boy plotlines.
That right there has to be one of the most divorced-from-reality statements ever put forth on this board, and there's some stiff competition.
Do you understand what happened to the Hallmark Channel?
By your statement, you have no idea. It was targeted with hate fro LGBTQ groups because it's holiday movies included hetero main characters. There were a few LGBTQ besties ... but that wasn't enough. LGBTQ demanded that more movies include more characters and MAIN storylines. For a channel that catered to an audience that was not looking for LGBTQ content.
So another channel was started to target the traditional family viewer. And the LGBTQ attacked THAT channel. Targeted Candace Cameron Burre. Because LGBTQ has a pathetic narcissistic FOMO complex where they HAVE to be the center of attention everywhere at all times.
It'd be like white people demanding to be main characters and main storylines in BET movies. That's not the target audience of the programming. Most people would agree that's ridiculous. But that doesn't matter to LGBTQ.
See, it's not enough that LGBTQ has it's own programming and channels. Every other channel MUST ALSO have LGBTQ programming. Every. Single. One.
Do you have any logic for your reasoning other than "what some people say?"
Generally, in polite English language, we include a noun when using an adjective. To reduce people to an adjective is rude. We don't say "I went to a group for autistics," because that would be inappropriate. We say, "I went to a group for people with autism" or "... for autistic people."
"A group of elderlies made this quilt at a bee last year." No. We would say, "elderly ladies" (or "elderly men").
There are some exceptions, of course. We do say "teens" and that's not considered rude. And we do use nationalities and that's fine. "The Japanese did this," or "Most Americans do that," are both fine.
Most of the time, though, we do include the person in phrases describing a group. Gay and Black are adjectives, so it's off-putting to say "the gays" or "the blacks," when discussing a group of people.
Um, I don't have a I'M A HETERO flag on my house, HETERO PRIDE bumper sticker on my car, HETERO PRIDE trinket on my key chain, or HETERO PRIDE t-shirt or HETERO PRIDE water bottle.
I don't see stores or doctor offices that have HETERO PRIDE flags or flyers in the window, letting me know I'm "welcome" to shop there or use the services.
I don't see HETERO PRIDE MONTH, where parades and "hetero entertainment" are everywhere
I don't see HETERO PRIDE incorporated into inclusiveness and diversity training programs by HR departments.
I don't see a HETERO PRIDE TV movie channel, in fact, when a movie about a hetero love story is aired, it gets hate mail. Even though no one is forced to watch it. And there are channels specifically dedicated to LGBTQ entertainment content.
I don't see educational content in schools targeting children with HETERO PRIDE acceptance and promotion of HETERO PRIDE. In fact every other type of sex is promoted. Except hetero sex.
Do I need to go on?
Fuss about being different. Laughable.
Here's the thing: You don't get to equal when you chit all over other people. Fun fact.
First of all, how is someone else being equal "chitting" over other people? If I hang a Jewish flag in front of my house, does that mean I'm crapping all over you and your Christmas lights? How would someone hanging a rainbow flag affect you in any way, shape, or form?
The reason you don't need to be welcomed into doctor's offices is because historically, heterosexual people are not disrespected at medical facilities based on their sexual orientations.
You don't need special "hetero movies" or whatever because, newsflash, pretty much every movie is about heterosexuals!
We don't need inclusiveness and diversity training to learn how to speak to white Christian women. Unless you run into some throwback from the 1960s who is saying, "hey, girlie, why don't you pour me some coffee?" and pinching your butt, you're not going to encounter discrimination based on one of your protected characteristics at work. And if you did encounter someone like that, what would you do? I would think you'd report that to HR in a heartbeat, and the offending person would be at the very least reprimanded, but more likely fired for sexual harassment. You see, there are TRAININGS on how not to sexually harass people. Do you want to know why? Because historically, men have harassed women in the workplace. Now it's much less of an issue... because they have been trained and warned not to do this. You'd think it would be common sense not to make comments about other folks' sexuality, but common sense ain't that common.
I'm pretty sure you already know this, though, and just feel like whining over whatever you can. It's Thanksgiving this week. You could just be grateful that you're not ever discriminated against based on your natural sexual orientation that you happened to be born with. Or you can decide that other people not being discriminated against is somehow taking away from your freedoms... As if freedom is a pumpkin pie and someone else getting an equal piece means you get less.
Generally, in polite English language, we include a noun when using an adjective. To reduce people to an adjective is rude. We don't say "I went to a group for autistics," because that would be inappropriate. We say, "I went to a group for people with autism" or "... for autistic people."
"A group of elderlies made this quilt at a bee last year." No. We would say, "elderly ladies" (or "elderly men").
There are some exceptions, of course. We do say "teens" and that's not considered rude. And we do use nationalities and that's fine. "The Japanese did this," or "Most Americans do that," are both fine.
Most of the time, though, we do include the person in phrases describing a group. Gay and Black are adjectives, so it's off-putting to say "the gays" or "the blacks," when discussing a group of people.
Do you understand what happened to the Hallmark Channel?
By your statement, you have no idea. It was targeted with hate fro LGBTQ groups because it's holiday movies included hetero main characters. There were a few LGBTQ besties ... but that wasn't enough. LGBTQ demanded that more movies include more characters and MAIN storylines. For a channel that catered to an audience that was not looking for LGBTQ content.
So another channel was started to target the traditional family viewer. And the LGBTQ attacked THAT channel. Targeted Candace Cameron Burre. Because LGBTQ has a pathetic narcissistic FOMO complex where they HAVE to be the center of attention everywhere at all times.
It'd be like white people demanding to be main characters and main storylines in BET movies. That's not the target audience of the programming. Most people would agree that's ridiculous. But that doesn't matter to LGBTQ.
See, it's not enough that LGBTQ has it's own programming and channels. Every other channel MUST ALSO have LGBTQ programming. Every. Single. One.
The projection is strong. Candace wosshername started an entirely new network scrubbed for LGBT content, specifically targeted at (presumably adult) people who can't handle the idea of non-traditional families. It's sad.
First of all, how is someone else being equal "chitting" over other people? If I hang a Jewish flag in front of my house, does that mean I'm crapping all over you and your Christmas lights? How would someone hanging a rainbow flag affect you in any way, shape, or form?
The reason you don't need to be welcomed into doctor's offices is because historically, heterosexual people are not disrespected at medical facilities based on their sexual orientations.
You don't need special "hetero movies" or whatever because, newsflash, pretty much every movie is about heterosexuals!
We don't need inclusiveness and diversity training to learn how to speak to white Christian women. Unless you run into some throwback from the 1960s who is saying, "hey, girlie, why don't you pour me some coffee?" and pinching your butt, you're not going to encounter discrimination based on one of your protected characteristics at work. And if you did encounter someone like that, what would you do? I would think you'd report that to HR in a heartbeat, and the offending person would be at the very least reprimanded, but more likely fired for sexual harassment. You see, there are TRAININGS on how not to sexually harass people. Do you want to know why? Because historically, men have harassed women in the workplace. Now it's much less of an issue... because they have been trained and warned not to do this. You'd think it would be common sense not to make comments about other folks' sexuality, but common sense ain't that common.
I'm pretty sure you already know this, though, and just feel like whining over whatever you can. It's Thanksgiving this week. You could just be grateful that you're not ever discriminated against based on your natural sexual orientation that you happened to be born with. Or you can decide that other people not being discriminated against is somehow taking away from your freedoms... As if freedom is a pumpkin pie and someone else getting an equal piece means you get less.
Lots of opinions and ranting. Not much else.
Do you know how LGBTQ has attacked all entertainment that does not include LGBTQ? The Hallmark Channel? Is that a hotbed of LGBTQ interest? Really? They all sit around watching what is Christian lite programming targeting heterosexuals and think, wow theses movies are SO GOOD that all of them need to have an LGBTQ main storyline? WE MUST BE IN THESE MOVIES?!?!
The projection is strong. Candace wosshername started an entirely new network scrubbed for LGBT content, specifically targeted at (presumably adult) people who can't handle the idea of non-traditional families. It's sad.
I guess BET is an entire network targeted at those who can't handle the idea of white people. It's sad.
Bring that up at the next BLM meeting. That BET needs more white people storylines.
Or that the Spanish channel? Has too many programs in Spanish. It needs to be more inclusive and have Japanese language programs.
And when you go out to dinner at that Mexican restaurant, be sure to complain that gyros aren't on the menu.
I guess BET is an entire network targeted at those who can't handle the idea of white people. It's sad.
Bring that up at the next BLM meeting. That BET needs more white people storylines.
Or that the Spanish channel? Has too many programs in Spanish. It needs to be more inclusive and have Japanese language programs.
And when you go out to dinner at that Mexican restaurant, be sure to complain that gyros aren't on the menu.
There's no lack of of heteronormative entertainment, and you of course fully well know this. But for the viewers that would be attracted to the "Great American Family" network, it is not sufficient to be solidly in the majority - they're affronted by the minority's existence even being acknowledged.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How would someone hanging a rainbow flag affect you in any way, shape, or form? 
