Jump to content

LBGTQ


Mo Horn

Recommended Posts

The strangest trans name I've ever experienced was also my first.  She was my professor in the ACTLab at UT back in the early 90's so she was definitely a trailblazer.  Anyway, her name was Allucquére, which kinda sounded like "All Look Queer" to me, so I used to wonder if that's why she chose it.  Of course, most people just knew her as Sandy.

Sandy Stone (artist) - Wikipedia

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I am not a Mildred nor do I happen to know any personally but I see nothing wrong with it.

It means gentle strength and that seems rather charming if you ask me (not that anyone did but this is Surly). I did know a Walter in school, the only one I've ever known until a SIL gave one of her sons the name as his 'middle' name.

I find names kinda cool in general. They can be common or unique but each of us takes our name (or chooses it later) and makes it a part of us. We can be teased for it or admired or shortened or nicknamed (from our original name) but no matter what, it is us in all our messy complicated history of our time on this pale blue dot.

 

 

Edited by Mrs Whiggins
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, troph said:

 

Flowers have sex too. Doesn’t sound terrible fun but it happens.

Yep.  You ain't lived till you've fucked an orchid.  At least, that's what orchids say.  But who knows...orchids lie.

  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shot:

On 2/27/2024 at 12:55 PM, immamac said:

DEI isn't politics what are you even talking about? 

Chaser:

5 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Daughter just texted and said UT is shuttering their DEI program effective immediately.

Here is the communication from Hartzell:

image.thumb.png.0627ebd71df278863f1704edba94402a.png
 

image.thumb.png.048c82109c9d7eddfb44c07af1c0f2e4.png
 

image.thumb.png.b94f5a343218d0f3c4cc3d815c653b0b.png

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Shot:

Chaser:

 

So like 15 people who were exclusively focused on DEI with no legal overlap somewhere else where they could broaden scope are out and all the other programs are just being absorbed and expanded effectively having no change to the DEI mission without specifically calling it DEI? cool, cool, cool. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yep.  You ain't lived till you've fucked an orchid.  At least, that's what orchids say.  But who knows...orchids lie.

I've fucked a Rose, a Daisy, a Lily, and an Iris, but never met anyone named Orchid so I'll have to take your word for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

I've fucked a Rose, a Daisy, a Lily, and an Iris, but never met anyone named Orchid so I'll have to take your word for it.

You thought we wouldn't notice you skipping right past the time you banged Petunia, didn't you?

Petunia_Pig.svg

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, safe sex said:

Lmao, Mildred is pretty tame as far as chosen names for trans people go.

I've lost track of the number of trans Leafs, Rivers, Siriuses, Jupiters, Lucifers, Mosses, Herculeses, Ramseses, Rains, etc etc that I've met while both working in queer healthcare and being a big gaymo myself

I have two Nirvanas in my neighborhood orbit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, immamac said:

So like 15 people who were exclusively focused on DEI with no legal overlap somewhere else where they could broaden scope are out and all the other programs are just being absorbed and expanded effectively having no change to the DEI mission without specifically calling it DEI? cool, cool, cool. 

If what you suppose is the case, and maybe it will turn out that it is, why did our elected politicians need to pass a law to address it? That just feels to me like we made university administrators do a lot of work to restructure programs all in the name of politics.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, royiv said:

If what you suppose is the case, and maybe it will turn out that it is, why did our elected politicians need to pass a law to address it? That just feels to me like we made university administrators do a lot of work to restructure programs all in the name of politics.

It is a carefully worded statement, but Hartzell does say some “student facing programs” will not exist next semester, as well as admit that all remaining programs will be become broader. Which limits the effectiveness of targeted efforts. It would be nice to think, like Imma, there will be no change, but I guess I am more cynical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

It is a carefully worded statement, but Hartzell does say some “student facing programs” will not exist next semester, as well as admit that all remaining programs will be become broader. Which limits the effectiveness of targeted efforts. It would be nice to think, like Imma, there will be no change, but I guess I am more cynical.

Count me in the more cynical camp. I’m just curious about his opinion that this isn’t political when these changes are being brought on in response to legislation that was passed and signed into law by politicians.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wait, what? Everything about academia has been politicized as of late, and DEI is so obviously conflated with "CRT." 

 

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

The strangest trans name I've ever experienced was also my first.  She was my professor in the ACTLab at UT back in the early 90's so she was definitely a trailblazer.  Anyway, her name was Allucquére, which kinda sounded like "All Look Queer" to me, so I used to wonder if that's why she chose it.  Of course, most people just knew her as Sandy.

Sandy Stone (artist) - Wikipedia

I remember her, an ex took her class. I had no idea that UT faculty in the RTF dep't were such cunts to her. Pathetic. She was well-liked and well-respected by her students as far as I knew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cinnamon Toast or Raisin Toast?  Because one violates anti-DEI legislation and the other doesn't.

Levity aside, I wouldn't fault Hartzell for this.  He didn't want this, but his hands are tied by the Board of Regents, most of whom are Abbott stooges (two were against this bullshit but couldn't do much about it).  I will give Hartzell additional credit.  He and his team worked their ass off to rework the structure of our academy for high school kids that will become first generation students of color to attend 4-year university.  We got it done so it's technically protected from this and will endure.  But yeah, there's gonna be a lot of other fall-out for current students in need of DEI services and community and engagement.  But hey, this is Texas, right?  Why should people be exposed to the liberty to onboard new ideas?  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, royiv said:

Count me in the more cynical camp. I’m just curious about his opinion that this isn’t political when these changes are being brought on in response to legislation that was passed and signed into law by politicians.

 

37 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

It is a carefully worded statement, but Hartzell does say some “student facing programs” will not exist next semester, as well as admit that all remaining programs will be become broader. Which limits the effectiveness of targeted efforts. It would be nice to think, like Imma, there will be no change, but I guess I am more cynical.

So I guess it's all in what you think DEI should be focused on and how it should work.

I think it should be representative and focused on gearing up clearly underrepresented diversity, equity or inclusive policies. What DEI has become synonymous with is overrepresentation by targeted efforts with KPI's that aren't really about aligning it with anything in particular except "MOAR DIVERSITY". More diversity isn't necessarily a "good" thing when its starts to no longer be representative of what is actually going on in and around the institution/world/whatever. 

Do I think that some aspects are underrepresented and thus will have a negative impact from this? absolutely. I also think that this balances out some of the egregious overrepresentation that some are getting with targeted programs. 

Inclusion should be a very broad sweeping, deeply integrated plan and culture throughout an organization. == "Include everyone who is qualified to be included in what is available"

Equity likewise should be something that everyone strives for as it leads to more consistent and predictable results. == "Treat all participants the same regardless of outside influences based on available data"

Diversity is harder to just say "oh yeah more of that" as a tuning knob because it's the hardest to measure accurately/in a consistent manner for what people are defining as diversity. Is there such a thing as "too much diversity?" that seems stupid to say, but there is something to say about certain populations being over and under represented vs the real/natural world. I think it's most important to focus on the outcome of a diversity program (typically diversity of thought and background) moreso than a hard number of a diversity program (% representation of race/gender/creed/religion/orientation/etc). == ?? this one goes different ways depending on how you want to define, promote and measure diversity

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, immamac said:

 

So I guess it's all in what you think DEI should be focused on and how it should work.

I think it should be representative and focused on gearing up clearly underrepresented diversity, equity or inclusive policies. What DEI has become synonymous with is overrepresentation by targeted efforts with KPI's that aren't really about aligning it with anything in particular except "MOAR DIVERSITY". More diversity isn't necessarily a "good" thing when its starts to no longer be representative of what is actually going on in and around the institution/world/whatever. 

Do I think that some aspects are underrepresented and thus will have a negative impact from this? absolutely. I also think that this balances out some of the egregious overrepresentation that some are getting with targeted programs. 

Inclusion should be a very broad sweeping, deeply integrated plan and culture throughout an organization. == "Include everyone who is qualified to be included in what is available"

Equity likewise should be something that everyone strives for as it leads to more consistent and predictable results. == "Treat all participants the same regardless of outside influences based on available data"

Diversity is harder to just say "oh yeah more of that" as a tuning knob because it's the hardest to measure accurately/in a consistent manner for what people are defining as diversity. Is there such a thing as "too much diversity?" that seems stupid to say, but there is something to say about certain populations being over and under represented vs the real/natural world. I think it's most important to focus on the outcome of a diversity program (typically diversity of thought and background) moreso than a hard number of a diversity program (% representation of race/gender/creed/religion/orientation/etc). == ?? this one goes different ways depending on how you want to define, promote and measure diversity

Great summary of your thoughts. I agree with pretty much everything you state here with a slight nit to pick with “egregious over representation.” That’s going down a Newsmax path, IMO, even if I don’t think you’re taking it to that extreme.

As for your original statement of DEI isn’t politics, I think maybe what you’re saying is DEI shouldn’t be politics, because what we’re seeing DEI has very much been a target of politicians. If that’s what you’re saying, I agree, DEI shouldn’t be politics, but when we have shitheel politicians actively attacking diversity, I think we have to have some guardrails and protections in place.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I am not a Mildred nor do I happen to know any personally but I see nothing wrong with it.

It means gentle strength and that seems rather charming if you ask me (not that anyone did but this is Surly).

Mildred is a great name, but the only Mildred’s I knew were all in their 60s and up.  They were wonderful ladies and the name crossed my radar when we were looking at girl names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, royiv said:

Great summary of your thoughts. I agree with pretty much everything you state here with a slight nit to pick with “egregious over representation.” That’s going down a Newsmax path, IMO, even if I don’t think you’re taking it to that extreme.

As for your original statement of DEI isn’t politics, I think maybe what you’re saying is DEI shouldn’t be politics, because what we’re seeing DEI has very much been a target of politicians. If that’s what you’re saying, I agree, DEI shouldn’t be politics, but when we have shitheel politicians actively attacking diversity, I think we have to have some guardrails and protections in place.

yeah we are in agreement. The topic of DEI isn't politics, but it has been made political clearly by policy specifically calling out these types of programs by public institutions, even though it's common and standard practice for any global corporation or private sector company.

What I mean by egregious over-representation is the stuff that is in the outrage cycle that is getting full on programs related to it, when in reality it's essentially a nothingburger that should be monitored, but not actively targeted. This is why the affirmative action thing turned into a bit of a nothing burger, there are ways once you balance out everything that you don't have to "overcompensate" anymore to balance it out. Some things are never out of balance and just get into the conversation by nature of existing, those things have a strange effect of getting more attention than they deserve for problems that may or may not actually exist if you are holding true to the inclusion and equity portions of DEI. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, royiv said:

Great summary of your thoughts. I agree with pretty much everything you state here with a slight nit to pick with “egregious over representation.”

I was wondering about the same sentence.
 

I guess it speaks to my lack of awareness, but I assumed these programs were about identifying marginalized groups, and supporting individuals in practical day to day issues, as well as assistance in class work and, as per Brisket, mentoring abut future options, but also about informing the broader community about those on the margins. 
 

Details on these programs would be helpful. I’ll look into it.
 

Edited to say that I see Imma already spoke to the question.

Edited by Willfully Horn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today’s missive from Hartzell must not acknowledge UT already closing the decades old Multicultural Engagement Center. 
 

To wit, the university bulldozed the many programs that the Multicultural Engagement Center housed, including: the New Black Student Weekend, Adelante, CultivAsian, Bloq Party, Four Directions, the Leadership Institutes, Afrikan American Affairs, the Asian Desi Pacific Islander American Collective, Latino Leadership Council, Native American and Indigenous Collective, Queer Trans Black Indigenous People of Color and Allies, Students for Equity and Diversity, and signature graduation ceremonies like Black Graduation, Latinx Graduation, GraduAsian, Lavender Graduation, the Monarch Center. The Gender and Sexuality Center was also replaced by the Women’s Community Center.”

https://www.texasobserver.org/anti-dei-law-implementation-has-been-a-disaster/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

I remember her, an ex took her class. I had no idea that UT faculty in the RTF dep't were such cunts to her. Pathetic. She was well-liked and well-respected by her students as far as I knew.

I didn't know about any of the faculty drama surrounding her, but I, and my classmates, really liked her.  

To be honest her sexual identity was never discussed.  I assume we all "knew" she was trans, or at least had our suspicions based on her size, build, and appearance, but someone being out as trans wasn't super common back then, so I'm sure the medical care, in terms of hormone treatments and reassignment surgery, was much more limited than it is today.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 3/2/2024 at 9:00 AM, troph said:

parading around and fucking total strangers sounds horrible. 

I'm with you sister!  It sounds fun in theory but the few times I went down that road it was not at all fun.

On 3/13/2024 at 10:25 PM, troph said:

 

interesting fact the upside down pink triangle that is now (or recently was as now we’ve moved to variations of rainbow flags) a symbol of queer folk was a symbol of the nazis for lgbtq people. They made (mostly) gay men  but also trans women and cross dressers to wear a pink triangle patch for identification in camps.

Yep, I have that pink triangle tattooed on my back, because it represents that we were marked for slaughter, and I want to make sure to always remember that those days could come back if we don't remain vigilant. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, you could have just written yourself a note to carry around instead of a back stamp.  ;)  

What almost none of them have learned from history is the first thing their idols do in order to glean loyalty is they give up their family and friends who are "different."  Be they Jews, Gays, Elderly, Disabled, Retarded, Mixed Race, et. al.  As a show of allegiance, they start with the "different" people that their supporters know and 'loved.'  Once they see who is loyal and who is not, then the real work begins.  We are seeing it already just here in Texas.  Literally bounties upon people getting abortions, teaching DEI, LGBTQ+ books and medical care, people seeking political asylum.  The last gasp of a dying way of life.  But they are not out of fuel yet.  They're demanding people start turning on their neighbors.  And a frightening number of people are going along with it.  

We came this far only to quite possibly collapse and die in sight of the finish line.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

3b7c09df-1943-47eb-b700-f291ea56832f.png

Dawn Staley is awesome. She knows she's the best in the business and what the fuck are they gonna say to her so she's going to speak the truth. Saying all of this while also living in fucking South Carolina. I love her. Absolute queen.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2024 at 5:00 PM, troph said:

if it's a proper noun it's ok?

 Not really, and I know it wasn’t meant is malice in this post. The people hurt by it are the least likely to come after you, so I’ve noticed it’s come back into fashion among people who’d never think of using a racial or LGBTQ slur. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

 Not really, and I know it wasn’t meant is malice in this post. The people hurt by it are the least likely to come after you, so I’ve noticed it’s come back into fashion among people who’d never think of using a racial or LGBTQ slur. 

I was trying to be irreverent and highlight the absurdity of the use of the word.

i agree 100%.

my best friends daughter has Rett Syndrome - while she would squarely fit in the slur if used by someone - she is hardly deserving of such a name. Though unable to control her body and unable to speak she is a nuanced and complex person with emotions, thoughts, hopes and desires and someone that knows she’s not like the others and has done the hard work to cope with her condition. Hardly what I would consider “retarded”  it’s a terrible word.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, troph said:

I was trying to be irreverent and highlight the absurdity of the use of the word.

i agree 100%.

my best friends daughter has Rett Syndrome - while she would squarely fit in the slur if used by someone - she is hardly deserving of such a name. Though unable to control her body and unable to speak she is a nuanced and complex person with emotions, thoughts, hopes and desires and someone that knows she’s not like the others and has done the hard work to cope with her condition. Hardly what I would consider “retarded”  it’s a terrible word.

Got it, need to adjust my meter. I’ve just noticed that one was always favored by the shithead right but recently adopted by the asshole dirtbag left to prove they can be edgy too. It really just shows they’re mean and too cowardly to use slurs that might get them punched or canceled.

Not putting Lobo in either category, I know it’s not malicious just a linguistic relic we can afford to toss.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I know it’s not malicious just a linguistic relic we can afford to toss.

Just as intelligence occurs on a spectrum, so do emotions and one thing I've observed is that many humans on one end of the intelligence spectrum (especially those with chromosomal disorders) are some of the most loving people out there and forgive trespasses easily. Such is the gift of the human species.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Just as intelligence occurs on a spectrum, so do emotions and one thing I've observed is that many humans on one end of the intelligence spectrum (especially those with chromosomal disorders) are some of the most loving people out there and forgive trespasses easily. Such is the gift of the human species.

True and it makes Rett syndrome that much more heart breaking - debilitating physical disabilities and unable to speak - yet many girls and women with Rett have the internal thought life of a preteen by the time they are adults. My friends daughter has had crushes, has cried because she wasn’t able to have a normal prom, and the list goes on and on. Truly someone trapped in a body that doesn’t function. Anyway, dehumanizing slurs can all DIAGF.

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because -- and this is very, very important -- the Bible commands that you be as fucking cruel and vindictive against thuh gayz as you possibly can be.  It's right there, in the Bible.  What, you didn't read that part, atheist libtard?

 

Truly.  It's amazing to watch people fight so hard for the right to be absolutely fucking mean without repercussions.  Why the fuck is it so important to you to have the right to harass and abuse gay people?  Seriously....why?  What the fucking fuck is fucking wrong with you sick fucks?

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Rage+1 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...