LGBTA Thread

This isn't a liberal or conservative issue. To think it is means you haven't thought too far into the issue. The issue is addressing the civil protections given by a governing entity based on the sovereignty of its citizens. If the government wants to tax our asses and make us conform to laws, then it damn well better protect its citizens, in this case the LGBT minority, from discrimination. Just like the transgender community can't control their sexual identity, they can't control the poor upbringing and subsequent poor views of the prejudice population. It's the government's responsibility. That is exactly what they are there for. 

Speculative fiction is a great way of exploring the 'emotional' (for want of a better umbrella term) aspects and therefore the biology does not need to be viable, it only needs to be conveyed in a way that is not distractingly unbelievable (as opposed to believable). I once wrote a short story where an ephemeral mated with a mortal and realigned the gender of its corporal form after sensing the sexual emotions of the mortal - rationalising of the biology of that was unnecessary because it was fantasy fiction not science or speculative fiction.

How? Maybes and somehows will not result in a self-sustaining species capable of natural procreation therefore will always require artificial propagation. This is not procreation or reproduction but propagation.

If, as I speculated, a new sex-determinate chromosome mutated naturally from a fragile "X" chromosome then the resulting offspring would not be female but (let's say) newmale - to be regarded as a sex-determinate chromosome that would have to be able to procreate with a female and the resulting offspring would be either female or newmale, and again following generations would only result from female-newmale procreation.

Yup - that's dyslexia for you. Now I have to correct it because you have pointed it out, however I have done it in such away as not to hide my embarrassment or affliction.

I have nothing against genetically modified humans per se. It's an interesting topic. So while I appreciate the humour and will respond with a similar  - there is a more serious side to explore that appeals to me.

There are two possibilities for female-female propagation:

If the embryo was created artificially would that would not qualify as a new species since the female-only offspring (I would perhaps use the term like 'scion' here rather than 'offspring') would not be able to reproduce naturally with another artificially created female offspring to create the next generation, they would still be able to reproduce naturally with male of the species.  The problem there would be if sexual orientation is not hereditary (and there is no evidence that it is) so prevention of male-female reproduction would have to be forced for the male of the species to die out. Of course in the absence of males the artificial reproduction would have to continue in order to propagate and sustain the human species. If the technology is lost then the whole of the human race would die out. We would also have to consider what the "Y" chromosome brings to the party and whether, over time, a "Y" equivalent would not mutate naturally from a fragile "X".

Nope. Even as a dyslexic I can spell lavatory and toilet. The ¹ was used to indicate the footnote at the bottom of the post. 

The fact remains that people discriminate. It's what we do all the time whether we like it or not because the ability to recognise a distinction and to differentiate is an inherent ability we all have. The problem is prejudice. When prejudice is used to discriminate then everything goes tits up - you cannot legislate against prejudice, you can only legislate against using prejudice to discriminate. Anti-discrimination law will always be flawed because discrimination is flawed and a flawed anti-discrimination law is better than no anti-discrimination law. Opposing discrimination is not "being liberal" nor is it restricting personal (read: religious and/or political) freedom, it is a means to mitigating the effects of prejudice. When discrimination is tolerated then prejudice will grow, it's a self-sustaining loop and the only way to stop it is to break the loop.

Prejudice is born out of ignorance, fear and hatred and all four feed each other. We can reduce prejudice by chipping away at the causes of fear, ignorance and hatred and we cannot do that using our own prejudices because that is self-defeating.

Fear alone is not the issue. Friede is not fearful that all men in uni-sex public lavatories¹ will waive wave their cocks at her, it is the fear that one idiot might. That is not the result of ignorance, nor is it a sign of prejudice or misandry. This is not the same as people being prejudiced against LBGT because they fear pederasts and paedophiles because that is a sign of ignorance and misinformation.

/edit: spelling error corrected 

I realize that many people can't afford surgery, it would just make me personally feel uncomfortable if someone who was biologically female was in the same restroom that I was in. That's why I think uni-sex restrooms are a good thing.