View Full Version : CNN's Town Hall LGBTQ event tonight
I'd be curious to hear folks' thoughts after this is done.
So far, I'm liking this format better than the Thunderdome Debate format, as each candidate is getting 30 minutes, and more nuanced responses seem to be coming out.
catherine
10-10-19, 9:26pm
Watching right now. Will chime in when it's over.
iris lilies
10-11-19, 10:14am
I didn’t know this was a thing until this thread. I don’t watch these debates and wouldn’t change my mind because of this one. A forum to invite candidates to speak on their positions for a small community (Lgbtetc) seems self aggrandizing.
When I skim the news for a summary of this event, I see there were antics. Did someone really chide the moderator as violent for miss pronouncing her name? Was there really a lengthy protest of trans people that interrupted the proceedings? To what end?
I’m just getting this from a written account of the event.
Sounds like Theater of the absurd.
Did someone really chide the moderator as violent for miss pronouncing her name?
In this case 'Shea' is pronounced 'Shee-uh' and "“It’s violence to misgender or to alter the name of a trans person, so let’s always get that right first,”
It may be safer to refer to everyone as 'Hey You'
People have mispronounced my name. Other people have punched me in the face. I always found the second faux pas the more objectionable.
"A forum to invite candidates to speak on their positions for a small community (Lgbtetc) seems self aggrandizing."
Why? Aren't candidates invited all the time to speak to different communities, such as unions?
iris lilies
10-11-19, 11:43am
In this case 'Shea' is pronounced 'Shee-uh' and "“It’s violence to misgender or to alter the name of a trans person, so let’s always get that right first,”
It may be safer to refer to everyone as 'Hey You'
Could the signaling of virtue BE any more ludicrous?
SMH
iris lilies
10-11-19, 11:58am
"A forum to invite candidates to speak on their positions for a small community (Lgbtetc) seems self aggrandizing."
Why? Aren't candidates invited all the time to speak to different communities, such as unions?
One Candidate’s narrowly focused speech to — your example, unions – is not broadcast in entirety by legacy media to the entire world, pre-empting regular programming. Not regularly, anyway. Although granted, CNN is becoming more and more of a niche News outlet. So maybe that’s how I need to view it, a small news company broadcasting an unimportant political event.
If that is marginalizing the event and the audience and the content, so be it. I would argue that the participants marginalized themselves by being ridiculous.
gimmethesimplelife
10-11-19, 1:35pm
Could the signaling of virtue BE any more ludicrous?
SMHWe represent more disposable income on average than straight people do - supposedly, though in my life I have not always seen this to be the case. Those with money tend to not be afraid to show their support of pro gay anything via consumer spending or voting or donations. It's not entirely virtue signaling but cold blooded economic common sense for Democrats. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
10-11-19, 1:40pm
One Candidate’s narrowly focused speech to — your example, unions – is not broadcast in entirety by legacy media to the entire world, pre-empting regular programming. Not regularly, anyway. Although granted, CNN is becoming more and more of a niche News outlet. So maybe that’s how I need to view it, a small news company broadcasting an unimportant political event.
If that is marginalizing the event and the audience and the content, so be it. I would argue that the participants marginalized themselves by being ridiculous.Speaking to the issues of a historically marginalized community in the US equals marginalizing their candidacies? Scary stuff, IL, very scary. I'm not in your face with my orientation either at work nor in the 85006.....but people very quickly know I'm gay. In my case my voice gives me away if nothing else does. Speaking to my issues equals marginalization? See why I'll never be a Conservative? My.issues as a gay man are equally as valid as any issues you might face, Thank You very much. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
10-11-19, 1:42pm
Why? Aren't candidates invited all the time to speak to different communities, such as unions?[/QUOTE] Thank You, Tybee. Rob
A forum to invite candidates to speak on their positions for a small community (Lgbtetc) seems self aggrandizing.
This, in a nutshell is one of the core differences between the democratic party and the republican party. The democrats understand that various minority groups gave specific needs and concerns that the majority may not have and the republicans prefer a one size fits all approach.
gimmethesimplelife
10-11-19, 1:49pm
One Candidate’s narrowly focused speech to — your example, unions – is not broadcast in entirety by legacy media to the entire world, pre-empting regular programming. Not regularly, anyway. Although granted, CNN is becoming more and more of a niche News outlet. So maybe that’s how I need to view it, a small news company broadcasting an unimportant political event.
If that is marginalizing the event and the audience and the content, so be it. I would argue that the participants marginalized themselves by being ridiculous.
This, in a nutshell is one of the core differences between the democratic party and the republican party. The democrats understand that various minority groups gave specific needs and concerns that the majority may not have and the republicans prefer a one size fits all approach.Yes! Yes! YES! Thank You. jp1. You get it. And put it into easy to understand words. Rob
iris lilies
10-11-19, 1:49pm
We represent more disposable income on average than straight people do - supposedly, though in my life I have not always seen this to be the case. Those with money tend to not be afraid to show their support of pro gay anything via consumer spending or voting or donations. It's not entirely virtue signaling but cold blooded economic common sense for Democrats. Rob
It may be true that cisgendered straight households have more less disposable income than other households but show me those numbers.
I vaguely remember stats that show two gay men have a DINK income that is significantly more than a household of two gay women. I don’t know how offspring come into the picture but it is an easy assumption that the cost of raising children has something to do with it.
In my neighborhood of many many gay households, I can think of one set of male friends who produced children via donors. Another gay man here donated sperm to a gay woman here. Other gay men have children from previous marriages to women.
In general in my neighborhood which I consider to be representative of stable and kinda staid gay partnerships, small children and their upbringing are very rare.
edited for clarity
gimmethesimplelife
10-11-19, 1:52pm
One Candidate’s narrowly focused speech to — your example, unions – is not broadcast in entirety by legacy media to the entire world, pre-empting regular programming. Not regularly, anyway. Although granted, CNN is becoming more and more of a niche News outlet. So maybe that’s how I need to view it, a small news company broadcasting an unimportant political event.
If that is marginalizing the event and the audience and the content, so be it. I would argue that the participants marginalized themselves by being ridiculous.
It may be true that cisgendered straight households have more disposable income than other households but show me those numbers.
I vaguely remember stats that show two gay men have a DINK income that is significantly more than a household of two gay women. I don’t know how offspring come into the picture but it is an easy assumption that the cost of raising children has something to do with it.
In my neighborhood of many many gay households, I can think of one set of male friends who produced children via donors. Another gay man here donated sperm to a gay woman here. Other gay men have children from previous marriages to women.
In general in my neighborhood which I consider to be representative of stable and kinda staid gay partnerships, small children and their upbringing are very rare.This last of yours I will agree with. One of the reasons for more disposable income is the tendency not to raise children. That much is true. Rob
Good grief--we have cable with hundreds of channels broadcasting 24 hours a day, surely we can occasionally present something more compelling than endless home dec shows and old movies to provoke a national discourse.
iris lilies
10-11-19, 1:59pm
I am not sure if I should be mad glad or sad that I cant think of any isms I need the Democratic party to address for me personally.
I can think of things I’d like them to stay the **** away from, you know, like just drop their hovering interest in, so I suppose that is the reverse of finding out what Presidential Candidates will do for me but in the same universe.
When someone sets it up, I will tune into a teevee broadcast of the candidates speaking only on the topic “Here is what I will NOT do when in office because that is not the role of the Federal government.” What a breath of fresh air that would be.
IL, be glad you dont have an ism other than being an ordinary american. The candidates will by default focus on a lot of your concerns. Of course if you were a large corporation ‘person’ with unlimited lobbying money you’d probably get better actual results, but that’s a whole other problem.
iris lilies
10-11-19, 2:46pm
IL, be glad you dont have an ism other than being an ordinary american. The candidates will by default focus on a lot of your concerns. Of course if you were a large corporation ‘person’ with unlimited lobbying money you’d probably get better actual results, but that’s a whole other problem.
But even this special targeted audience forum didn’t make everyone happy. According to Vox “lesbians were completely ignored.” There was somebody screaming about black trans women being ignored. There was the protest by trans people that interrupted the forum.
The LGBTQ community wasn’t taking very good care of its members in this display.
Probably another debate featuring mini micro issues of micro communities is called for. I’m glad I’m not Senator Warren who actually has responsibilities for serving in the Senate that she was, you know, elected to do. Another round of podium appearances for the lgbtq etc community before moving on to many other marginalized communities and their dissected sub-groups and sub-sub groups seems called for.
iris lilies
10-11-19, 2:54pm
Good grief--we have cable with hundreds of channels broadcasting 24 hours a day, surely we can occasionally present something more compelling than endless home dec shows and old movies to provoke a national discourse.
Well you said it. If CNN is only one of hundreds of channels, Kamela Harris can hope all she wants to that by speaking on LGBTQ issues she will receive the name recognition that the Property Brothers have. But I doubt it, because it just isnt appealing.
What I am saying is ultimately micro issues in front of micro audiences delivered from micro channels will not accomplish “Provok[ing] a national discourse” about that which people do not care. That’s why we have remote controllers.
iris lilies
10-11-19, 3:22pm
We represent more disposable income on average than straight people do - supposedly, though in my life I have not always seen this to be the case. Those with money tend to not be afraid to show their support of pro gay anything via consumer spending or voting or donations. It's not entirely virtue signaling but cold blooded economic common sense for Democrats. Rob
If you read my comment carefully you will (perhaps) comprehend that my statement about “signaling of virtue “ was entirely about Shea’s bitch-slap to the moderator for mispronouncing Shea’s name, and Shea tying that affront to keeping the Trans Woman down.
This is not a position worthy of my respect. I’m sure there were issues covered in the forum that were worthy of respect, I just didn’t watch.
I would t worry too much about warren’s senatorial duties. Mitch diesnt bring any of the bills the house passes to the floor so being a senator right now is probably a cushy job with lots of free time.
And you’re right about the LGBT community. For example A black trans woman in Alabama is going to have different concerns than an upper middle class, middle aged white dude who lives in a major urban area in a blue state.
It's discouraging that people are more concerned with the likes of the Kardashians than actual (non-manufactured) people with legitimate issues, but you're probably right, unfortunately.
iris lilies
10-11-19, 3:27pm
I would t worry too much about warren’s senatorial duties. Mitch diesnt bring any of the bills the house passes to the floor so being a senator right now is probably a cushy job with lots of free time.
And you’re right about the LGBT community. For example A black trans woman in Alabama is going to have different concerns than an upper middle class, middle aged white dude who lives in a major urban area in a blue state.
Here’s the real ticket to being “heard “: y’all just need to move to the interstate 80 Corridor in Iowa because all candidates will be there 24/7 during some periods. They will talk to you all you like about your issues.
IL, be glad you dont have an ism other than being an ordinary american.
If such a thing still exists, surely it will soon just become another minor identity category in the great intersectional matrix our progressive clerisy is so diligently constructing for us. The complexity of the many oppressor/oppressed relationships is staggering. How can a politician profitably pander to one subcategory without arousing the jealousy of others? We saw this more than once during the debate.
If such a thing still exists, surely it will soon just become another minor identity category in the great intersectional matrix.
I think that’s the most optimistic thing i’ve ever read that you have written!
I think that’s the most optimistic thing i’ve ever read that you have written!
Ultimately the taxonomists of identitarianism will refine our grievances with such precise granularity that we will effectively become individuals again. What Ayn Rand referred to a “the smallest minority”.
...but people very quickly know I'm gay. In my case my voice gives me away if nothing else does.
How does your voice betray your sexual orientation?
iris lilies
10-13-19, 9:05am
How does your voice betray your sexual orientation?
Something like gender essentialism going on here.
ApatheticNoMore
10-13-19, 12:01pm
It might seem focusing on a narrow issue. Context though, context. The reason the issue is coming up might not just be to focus on one issue, but things like the Supreme Court possibly ruling that it's ok to fire someone for their sexual orientation or gender identification.
We will see, but that that should even be an issue is shocking. Of course it's not ok to discriminate that way in employment. Gah why would anyone think it is, and here all along I thought discrimination in employment on the basis of race, culture, religion, gender, sexual orientation etc. was outright illegal (although of course not perfectly enforceable) and only age discrimination protections were REALLY not being enforced (well sadly they really aren't and older people often bear the brunt, but apparently they want it to be ok to discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identification as well).
Now none of the Dems are likely to support any of that so there is probably no disagreement on that part. If the law doesn't directly protect people from such discrimination which I always thought it did (and actually I think many state laws outright do), it should.
Under federal law are certain specific protected classes of employees. Discrimination in hiring/firing decisions based on any of these classes is illegal. They are:
Race.
Color.
Religion or creed.
National origin or ancestry.
Sex.
Age.
Physical or mental disability.
Veteran status.
Genetic information.
Citizenship
Everything else is fair game. Sexual orientation is a perfectly legitimate reason to fire someone under current federal law.
Since inly democratic politicians express any concern that this is a problem this is one of the reasons that lgbt people vote heavily democratic. If their state doesnt have a nondiscrimination law that includes sexual orientation keeping their job may be at risk. An example. I have a friend in NY state who taught music at a catholic elementary school. After NY legalized same sex marriage but before it became legal across the country, he married his long term partner. Previously the school had known of the partner’s existence but turned a blind eye. Once they were married they fired him for being gay because they felt that they could no longer turn a blind eye to his sexual orientation.
Teacher Terry
10-13-19, 3:05pm
That’s disgusting! I didn’t realize some people aren’t protected.
sweetana3
10-13-19, 6:54pm
jp1, we have that whole scenario happening in Indiana. In fact, one religious school caved to the Catholic Church and the Jesuits did not. So the Church somehow decommissioned? them and they could not do certain functions of the religion at the private school. They are fighting it.
I am all for commitment and who cares what someone else's sexual orientation is anyway? Just as with religion, so long as they are not in my face trying to convert me or mine, live and let live.
Part of the issue is that the catholic church claims that teachers in catholic schools are ‘ministers’. The supreme court is deciding this term a couple of cases regarding whether sexual orientation is part of the protected class of ‘sex’ in terms of discrimination. It’s anyone’s guess how they will decide since there has been a stolen seat and a conservative hack installed since the last time an lgbt case came through. Hopefully next year’s election will put enough democrats into the senate and white house to render the harm that may occur short lived.
The simple way to solve the problem is to have the feds take over religion. Beto is already talking up punishing churches who don't preach to his satisfaction, essentially promoting a state religion.
Beto is going to far. The simple way to solve this is for the feds to say teachers are teachers and priests are priests.
And republicans wonder why only upper middle class old white guys are the only lgbt folks interested in supporting them...
And republicans wonder why only upper middle class old white guys are the only lgbt folks interested in supporting them...That's probably because only upper middle class old white guy lgbt folks realize that republicans don't think they're anything special. All the rest seem to enjoy believing republicans think about them a lot, which in my experience isn't true.
I’d be fine with not being thought anything special. I’m not ok with being thought less than the same treatment as anyone else. Which is what the typical republican viewpoint seems to be. And couching things like marriage equality and employment discrimination as anything other than ‘they are less than me’ is dishonest. My friend that was fired from the catholic school was not a minister. He was teaching do re mi to kindergartners. His firing was based on a pathetic lie to justify discrimination based on his sexual orientation.
I’d be fine with not being thought anything special. I’m not ok with being thought less than the same treatment as anyone else. Which is what the typical republican viewpoint seems to be.
I've always enjoyed it when others tell me what I think, though my wife thinks I'm a little too easily entertained.
You’re a typical republican? I didn't say that. You seem far
More thoughtful than a typical republican. I’m only commenting on what anyone with half a brain can see is reality about typical republicans.
ApatheticNoMore
10-14-19, 1:04am
Under federal law are certain specific protected classes of employees. Discrimination in hiring/firing decisions based on any of these classes is illegal. They are:
Race.
Color.
Religion or creed.
National origin or ancestry.
Sex.
Age.
Physical or mental disability.
Veteran status.
Genetic information.
Citizenship
Everything else is fair game. Sexual orientation is a perfectly legitimate reason to fire someone under current federal law.
Age discrimination is really not enforced though, yes it's technically illegal, but pro-publica had a whole bunch of articles on how it's not enforced even to the degree that other protections are. I live in fear of eventually reaching my un-employable age (50 something I guess).
The simple way to solve the problem is to have the feds take over religion. Beto is already talking up punishing churches who don't preach to his satisfaction, essentially promoting a state religion.
Sort of like the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association? Why would someone who didn’t share Catholic values want to work in an institution built around those values? And should government interfere on their behalf? Would the position of pro life staffers at Planned Parenthood be the same?
That’s disgusting! I didn’t realize some people aren’t protected.
Doesn’t the term “protected classes” imply that some are and some are not?
iris lilies
10-14-19, 9:22am
Sort of like the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association? Why would someone who didn’t share Catholic values want to work in an institution built around those values? And should government interfere on their behalf? Would the position of pro life staffers at Planned Parenthood be the same?
Come now, pro-life staffers at Planned Parenthood are guilty of Wrong-think, they not saddled with an intrinsic characteristic that puts them in a vulnerable position.
My gay Catholic friend kinda looks at the Catholic Church’s position as the Church doesnt have a problem with
homosexuals, it has a problem with homosexual activity. To some this is a difference with no distinction kinda like love the sinner hate the sin but it makes sense to me.
But I think the real life application, and this is just me spinning theory, is that likely the Church wants its gay sons to join the priesthood. That keeps them out of harm’s way (theoretically!) and also swells their numbers which are dwindling precipitously. win /win.
But I think the real life application, and this is just me spinning theory, is that likely the Church wants its gay sons to join the priesthood. That keeps them out of harm’s way (theoretically!) and also swells their numbers which are dwindling precipitously. win /win.
For a long time they were able to keep the priests out of harms way. The alter boys, not so much.
Surveys have shown that catholic parishioners ignore their church's leaders on the subject of marriage equality, with something like 60% supporting it. They also differ from their leadership on birth control, with 98% in a survey a few years ago saying that they had used birth control at some time in their life.
ApatheticNoMore
10-14-19, 10:50am
Why would someone who didn’t share Catholic values want to work in an institution built around those values? And should government interfere on their behalf?
because they need a job? And it might be some generic position having little to do with Catholicism that they are qualified for, maybe administrative stuff etc.. I mean the fantasy world where people work only in institutions sharing their values is nice, but not one many of us live in. Until pretty soon we're at: why is someone concerned about climate change working at an airport, why is a vegetarian working at McDonalds etc. etc. Uh no doubt because they needed the job. Like I've said, I have a few lines in the sand, that I've stood by come heck or high water, very few because otherwise I'd starve.
I’m only commenting on what anyone with half a brain can see is reality about typical republicans.I'm still intrigued by the idea of a typical republican. Where do they fit on the bitter clingers to deplorables scale and how do you recognize one?
Someone said (I got that "source in the wind" trick from Trump/Fox News) recently that he was pleasantly surprised to meet a Republican whose moral compass didn't point to their wallet. I thought that was a fair characterization of many conservatives.
Someone said (I got that "source in the wind" trick from Trump/Fox News) recently that he was pleasantly surprised to meet a Republican whose moral compass didn't point to their wallet. I thought that was a fair characterization of many conservatives.
That's funny! It fits nicely with my occasional surprise to meet a liberal who's moral compass also doesn't point to my wallet.
iris lilies
10-14-19, 7:42pm
That's funny! It fits nicely with my occasional surprise to meet a liberal who's moral compass also doesn't point to my wallet.
Ba-da BAM!
Ladies and gents, Alan will be here all week
I'm still intrigued by the idea of a typical republican. Where do they fit on the bitter clingers to deplorables scale and how do you recognize one?
If one could apply mean, median, and mode to voters the mode would be the typical republican since mode is the most commonly occurring thing in any set of things. Judging from how fearful republican politicians are to get on trump's bad side by calling out anything he does the mode of republican voters would seem to be trump's staunchest supporters which are the evangelicals who don't want to get gay married and the white folks that think that the coastal liberal elite and immigrants and other minorities are all out to screw them over somehow.
Anyone whose moral compass points to any wallet should probably find a better compass.
That's funny! It fits nicely with my occasional surprise to meet a liberal who's moral compass also doesn't point to my wallet.
Ba-da BAM!
Ladies and gents, Alan will be here all week
Hahaha! I forgot Alan had such deep pockets. I'll have the veal.
I'll have the veal.
Be careful. The #meattoo movement is growing every day. Itchy twitter fingers could come gunning for you for even joking about devouring innocent veal calves.
JaneV2.0
10-15-19, 10:09am
Be careful. The #meattoo movement is growing every day. Itchy twitter fingers could come gunning for you for even joking about devouring innocent veal calves.
I have no doubt. But I've done my penance as a vegetarian, and they'll get my cutlet when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
iris lilies
10-15-19, 10:34am
Hahaha! I forgot Alan had such deep pockets. I'll have the veal.
Well I really meant that Alan and his comedy show will be performing all week.
But if he he is offering his deep pockets to all of us that is good too!
But if he he is offering his deep pockets to all of us that is good too!
Unfortunately for all involved, my pockets are rather shallow. Would someone please tell the Democrats, they won't listen to me.
gimmethesimplelife
10-22-19, 8:37am
A typical Republican? Republicans don't believe in the common good or of the duty of society to protect and support the weakest and most fragile. Republicans believe winner takes all is perfectly acceptable and that there can never be enough money shifted up to those at the top. I find their thinking overall toxic and inhumane but they do have one valid point - US debt can not keep accruing like this forever. I'll give them that much. Rob
Teacher Terry
10-22-19, 12:04pm
I totally agree Rob.
JaneV2.0
10-22-19, 12:33pm
Well I really meant that Alan and his comedy show will be performing all week.
But if he he is offering his deep pockets to all of us that is good too!
I pictured him at a dinner club where they served veal (which I haven't had for decades, but it fit the joke).
A typical Republican? Republicans don't believe in the common good or of the duty of society to protect and support the weakest and most fragile. Republicans believe winner takes all is perfectly acceptable and that there can never be enough money shifted up to those at the top.
I hear they eat babies too.
gimmethesimplelife
10-22-19, 12:45pm
I totally agree Rob.Thank You, TT. Rob
A typical Republican? Republicans don't believe in the common good or of the duty of society to protect and support the weakest and most fragile. Republicans believe winner takes all is perfectly acceptable and that there can never be enough money shifted up to those at the top. I find their thinking overall toxic and inhumane but they do have one valid point - US debt can not keep accruing like this forever. I'll give them that much. Rob
I tend to agree with this--at least as an assessment of today's Republicans. Getting big money out of politics and regulating lobbying would be a start. I don't much difference between how this country runs and a true oligarchy.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.