Liberal Terminology

[nessuno]

I don't know what kind of world we live in.
It is all very sad.

The thread doesn't really make me uncomfortable, Rubystars.
As much as I will not get down in the dirt and argue with a liberal on their level.
G-d meant for a man and a woman to be together.  Period.

After awhile I think people are smart enough to know if their child is gay, bi, or blah, blah, blah ...
No matter what denial or deviousness ( using code words) comes out of their mouth.
People need to stand behind thier beliefs with conviction...especially, in front of thier children.
For me that doesn't mean ostracizing a child that is confused about their sexuality.  It is attempting to guide them in the ways G-d expects us to live our lives.

I , and I'm sure most JTFers, appreciate your efforts though.  And they will put your hard work to good use.

[Spiraling Leopard]

I would not get into such depth arguing with a liberal.
Why legitimize words and ideas they choose, co-opt, or make up in an attempt to legitimize deviant behavior?
You are never going to convince them of your beliefs.
We better concentrate on educating our young...before they do.
And talking to children does not have to include educating them on every deviant behavior there is.
That is what is being done to them.  With clubs in schools like the Straight and Gay Friendship Clubs.  Propaganda.
You have to try to remind them what is expected of them from G-d (based on the religious upbringing they have) and from you.
You can be decent to others...that doesn't mean you have to accept their lifestyle.  That is what I try to tell my child.
We must prepare children to have a backbone and not follow the herd.

Bravo.

[Rubystars]

I don't know what kind of world we live in.
It is all very sad.

The thread doesn't really make me uncomfortable, Rubystars.
As much as I will not get down in the dirt and argue with a liberal on their level.
G-d meant for a man and a woman to be together.  Period.

After awhile I think people are smart enough to know if their child is gay, bi, or blah, blah, blah ...
No matter what denial or deviousness ( using code words) comes out of their mouth.
People need to stand behind thier beliefs with conviction...especially, in front of thier children.
For me that doesn't mean ostracizing a child that is confused about their sexuality.  It is attempting to guide them in the ways G-d expects us to live our lives.

I , and I'm sure most JTFers, appreciate your efforts though.  And they will put your hard work to good use.

I agree with you that people need to stand up for their conservative beliefs. I'm trying to help people be able to do that. I only have a few more posts to go on this particular subset of liberal terminology, then I will move onto another set of liberal terminologies. Those will usually be less gross/disgusting/squicky. I don't like this stuff either.

I also believe that you can treat someone decently without agreeing with their lifestyle choices. I try to be kind to just about everyone I meet.

However the liberals believe that if you're not an ally, you're an enemy, so they make enemies out of conservatives. They set one person against another. The conservatives are not causing this problem. We didn't start this fight but we may have to finish it.

[Rubystars]

Here's my plan for the rest of this topic before I move on to another one:

1. A list of definitions of sexual orientations with notes
2. A list of romantic orientations and an explanation of how this is different from sexual orientation
3. A terminology "Quiz" with both the liberal and conservative answers to show how they are different.

I plan to post these over the next three days.

Then I will begin to post terminology from another topic.

Please be patient and understand this is being posted with the best intentions and I hope it is helping people to be able to decode the liberal speak.

Please feel free to ask questions along the way as some JTFers have been doing. It really helps if someone is confused about something if they ask a question, then I can clarify and it might help another reader to understand things better too.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

I wonder if an average Liberal actually believes in the sexual deviancy nonsense. Many Liberals may be Liberals by default since they don't know any better or have not been exposed to the truth. Many Leftists probably don't approve of homosexuality. I know in Israel even many Leftists who are Left Wing on Israeli politics probably can't stand homosexuality. Political correctness has not taken over in Israel. Only the hardcore Peace Now type Leftists promote homosexuality there. Many Secular Jews there are Leftist by default because they don't know any better. They probably are Leftists because they want to do whatever they feel like even if it's against Judaism but at the same time, they can't stand homosexuality nonsense.

[Rubystars]

I wonder if an average Liberal actually believes in the sexual deviancy nonsense. Many Liberals may be Liberals by default since they don't know any better or have not been exposed to the truth. Many Leftists probably don't approve of homosexuality. I know in Israel even many Leftists who are Left Wing on Israeli politics probably can't stand homosexuality. Political correctness has not taken over in Israel. Only the hardcore Peace Now type Leftists promote homosexuality there. Many Secular Jews there are Leftist by default because they don't know any better. They probably are Leftists because they want to do whatever they feel like even if it's against Judaism but at the same time, they can't stand homosexuality nonsense.

If they vote for left wing politicians they support the homosexual agenda as a package deal. So, regardless of their personal feelings on homosexuality, they are still supporting the homosexual political agenda.

Many black people for example do not approve of homosexuality,same sex marriage, or many of the deviant things I've been discussing so far. However that doesn't matter one bit if they voted for Obama because he's black. They just supported the homosexual agenda in a meaningful way.

A lot of these black people go to church on Sunday and sing Amazing Grace, praise Jesus, and give testimonies about how Christianity is important to them and changed their life. However if they went to the voting booth and cast their vote for Obama, they just supported discrimination against Christians and Christian values. All their personal beliefs don't matter because their actions have supported the evil agenda.

So if leftist Jews declare themselves to be leftists and support the leftist agenda, they support the whole leftist agenda whether they realize it or not. This is particularly true if they support the UN in any way. The UN is notorious for pushing the left wing agenda world wide.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

I had an affirmative action teacher in college in a seminar called "White Culture" which she basically defined as being racist against blacks. I wrote my final paper on real white culture and how whites are diverse and there are many kinds of white culture. I wrote about Chabad as an example of a sect of a white ethnic group (Jews). That teacher said there was no white culture in Europe and it only came to be when whites were around non-whites. She also made us buy a book called "How the Irish became white". I looked up the author and it was by some Left Wing Anti-Israel animal.

Well the AA teacher said that as a religious Jew, she doesn't understand why I wouldn't vote for Obama. She also claimed that black Jews had the "purest" form of Judaism, I because she is against the real [Rabbinic] Judaism. She also said everyone was black and said the Garden of Eden was in Ethiopia and used Left Wing archeology for that even though the archeologists were talking about evolution. She said the Bible is mostly in the Middle East and Africa. Africa does not play a large role in the Bible other than Egypt.

She seemed to be a confused Christian as well because she thought Obama was a religious Christian and she was opposed to abortion and said abortion is a form of eugenics if used to abort unhealthy babies.

I actually showed her JTF's page with a picture of Obama dressed up in Muslim garb in Kenya and she said "Dat's not Muslim grab, dat's African grab.". This was during the Fall 2008 Election season. She didn't believe Obama was a Muslim.

So the teacher thought that what I wrote about the ideology and origins of Chabad was irrelevant. Also, in the part she thought was relevant like the Crown Heights Pogrom, she said "Why call the man racist?" when I called Dinkins and Sharpton racist. She also thought I should have focused more on the clash of Chabad and white rural America in Iowa at the kosher slaughterhouse in Postville.

The reason I had to take that class was because I needed a seminar to graduate and there were only two offered and only 15 people could be a class and the other one was full. The other one was probably nonsense also. It was a by a white teacher who taught African History and it focused on something about economics and the Third World. I don't remember exactly. My dad thought it was funny that the white teacher taught Africa and the black teacher taught "white culture". But the "white culture" class was basically black nonsense anyway.

[Rubystars]

Instructors/professors tend to be the looniest of leftists. They are put in a position of authority and use that to try to indoctrinate other people into their leftist ideology which is often much stranger and more left wing than that of the average liberal on the street.

I had an affirmative action teacher in college in a seminar called "White Culture" which she basically defined as being racist against blacks.

Liberals believe that whites should not identify with their own culture or cultures. Instead whites are taught that they should consider themselves to be raceless in most circumstances. The only time a white person should self-identify as white is when it's time to feel bad or guilty about it, or to take on the blame and shame of everything bad any white person has ever done in history. White people are said to be "privileged" even though affirmative action and other race-based programs do not benefit whites.

To liberals, white people as a whole are seen as bloodthirsty racist barbarians who only made any progress at all because they were taught everything by smart black people and other "people of color". If it weren't for people of color, according to liberals, whites would still be banging rocks together as a main profession and talking in grunts and eeks.

The fact that this doesn't fit reality or true history doesn't matter to the liberals. They see reality as flexible and don't believe in absolute truth.

I wrote my final paper on real white culture and how whites are diverse and there are many kinds of white culture. I wrote about Chabad as an example of a sect of a white ethnic group (Jews). That teacher said there was no white culture in Europe and it only came to be when whites were around non-whites. She also made us buy a book called "How the Irish became white". I looked up the author and it was by some Left Wing Anti-Israel animal.

There was hatred and discrimination that was intra-racial. Some groups of whites enslaved other whites and some groups of whites were looked down upon by other groups of whites. This doesn't make Irish people Asian or African though simply because they faced discrimination or hatred in the past by other groups of white people.

Liberals would tell you that the definition of "white" has changed. This may be true for the social aspects, but there are also biological and physical differences between the races which most liberals refuse to acknowledge that show in general who belongs to what racial group.

Well the AA teacher said that as a religious Jew, she doesn't understand why I wouldn't vote for Obama.

That's because most "religious Jews" she's encountered have been extreme leftists. She probably considers Reform and Conservative Judaism to be religious Judaism on the same level as Orthodox Judaism.

She also claimed that black Jews had the "purest" form of Judaism, I because she is against the real [Rabbinic] Judaism. She also said everyone was black and said the Garden of Eden was in Ethiopia and used Left Wing archeology for that even though the archeologists were talking about evolution. She said the Bible is mostly in the Middle East and Africa. Africa does not play a large role in the Bible other than Egypt.

That's the standard liberal fantasy.

She seemed to be a confused Christian as well because she thought Obama was a religious Christian and she was opposed to abortion and said abortion is a form of eugenics if used to abort unhealthy babies.

It doesn't matter. She supports Obama, she supports abortion. She supports eugenics and the extermination of many black babies especially who would otherwise have been born. She may not think she supports these things, but when she chooses to vote for liberals, she is choosing to support abortion.

I actually showed her JTF's page with a picture of Obama dressed up in Muslim garb in Kenya and she said "Dat's not Muslim grab, dat's African grab.". This was during the Fall 2008 Election season. She didn't believe Obama was a Muslim.

It's African Muslim garb.

So the teacher thought that what I wrote about the ideology and origins of Chabab was irrelevant. Also, in the part she thought was relevant like the Crown Heights Pogrom, she said "Why call the man racist?" when I called Dinkins and Sharpton racist.

I am going to get to this in a later post, but basically racist only applies to white people (unless a nonwhite attacks someone higher on the liberal totem pole). Liberals argue that a "person of color" can't be racist because they are not part of the "White heterosexual patriarchal power structure". Therefore they don't, according to liberals, have any power to wield against other races. Therefore people of color can't be "Racist". Only whites can be "racist" because whites have a place in the "power structure" and have "white privilege".

It doesn't seem to matter that Obama holds the most powerful position (in theory) in our government right now. This kind of cognitive dissonance is normal for liberals.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

That's because most "religious Jews" she's encountered have been extreme leftists. She probably considers Reform and Conservative Judaism to be religious Judaism on the same level as Orthodox Judaism.

She might have said "as an Orthodox Jew", she doesn't understand why I wouldn't vote for Obama.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

http://www.tonyathamestaylor.com

I found her webpage.

Her name be LaTonya, UMM HMM!

She also doesn't capitalize her name. I asked her why and she said she never did. But the university capitalized her name. I think she ended up being chair of the History Department after I left. I graduated in Decmeber, 2008, so when I was in her class, it was my last semester (Fall, 2008). She gave me a C. The grades don't matter anyway because if you are a white person in this country, you can't get a job if you are college educated. They'd rather hire uneducated simple people "dat be talkin' like dis". The whole system when applying for a job is based upon them. You usually apply on a computer and the computer rejects people automatically. It also give silly quizzes that have nothng to do with the job. They'd rather hire blacks who enter their race as black than whites that are smart. If it asks race, I would usually decline to answer.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

Here is an article I found about her. I saw her on the local news a few months ago acting like Jesse Jackson (Accusing people of being racist.).

By Michaelle Bond, Inquirer Staff Writer
Posted: October 02, 2013

COATESVILLE With the highly offensive text messages in hand, the two employees of the Coatesville Area school board reached out to the one person they thought could be trusted to do the right thing: Tonya Thames Taylor.

The choice made sense. Taylor was both president of the local chapter of the NAACP and a member of the school board. She would become a key figure in the drama that led to the resignations of Superintendent Richard Como and athletic director Donato.

Taylor, however, has not escaped unscathed. During a contentious meeting of the school board last week that culminated in the board's accepting Como's and Donato's resignations, Taylor faced criticism from some in the audience who accused her of not moving quickly enough once she had the texts in hand Aug. 18.

The board has said it acted as swiftly as possible, given the circumstances. Taylor said the fact that the two employees entrusted the sensitive information to her shows how well regarded she is in the community, as an activist and member of the school board.

"It was a reflection that, in the face of this enormous betrayal, I was the one person they could reach out to and talk to," Taylor, a history professor at West Chester University, said in an interview.

Still, some in Coatesville argue that Taylor cannot be both a civil rights activist and a member of a board that some say might have been inclined to cover up the texting scandal. "That's nonsense," Taylor said. "Then you can never work in America if you work in civil rights." She noted that she was already a member of the school board when the local NAACP chapter elected her president.

Sylvia Washington, a member of the local NAACP, disagreed with Taylor's detractors and said she acted appropriately.

"It would have been a conflict if she had gone to the NAACP. From a legal point of view, she did the right thing," Washington said. "To use this as a platform to target her while the real issues aren't being addressed is a disservice to the community."

As to criticism that there was a delay in acting on the text messages, Taylor said the board first had to confirm that they were authentic and were exchanged between Como and Donato. Not doing so could have exposed the board to legal action.

Criticism of Taylor has also come from some members of the local chapter of the NAACP, whose executive board met last night at Taylor's request. Hank Hamilton, a vice president of the local chapter, said some members questioned Taylor's leadership and her decision to hold the meeting, given her role on the school board.

"I didn't want to jeopardize the local chapter's authenticity and reputation," Hamilton said. "The public has their eye on us. . . . The right thing is not to have a conflict of interest."

Elwood Dixon, an executive board member of the NAACP's local branch, said Taylor should have told the local chapter about the text messages before members heard about them in the news media. In his view, Taylor put the good of the school board before the good of the NAACP and the community.

"I, myself, would like to see her go," he said. "I really don't think we have any leadership. And it's because of the conflict of interest."

Taylor is vehement in her defense. "I know that my actions through this entire process show I operated with integrity and fidelity in a way that was best for the district," she said.

The local chapter last night voted to accept a role in an inquiry by the NAACP's Pennsylvania chapter. It will set up any public meetings and collect any complaints filed against the school district.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=1192968

I found people exposing her.

[muman613]

My experience in the Software Engineering field is that without the requisite skills, you are not even considered for the position. I work in a field where what you know is way more important than who you know. There are no affirmative action workers in my field. They would not be able to survive.

Currently there are no african american software engineers in my company. And most of my company is composed of ethnic Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc) and then with several Europeans (French, Romanian, Hungarian, Moldavian, etc)... I am one of about four natural born Americans working here...

[Binyamin Yisrael]

My experience in the Software Engineering field is that without the requisite skills, you are not even considered for the position. I work in a field where what you know is way more important than who you know. There are no affirmative action workers in my field. They would not be able to survive.

Currently there are no african american software engineers in my company. And most of my company is composed of ethnic Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc) and then with several Europeans (French, Romanian, Hungarian, Moldavian, etc)... I am one of about four natural born Americans working here...

Well obviously a true AA person could not work in that type of job. Only an intelligent person could do that. I'm talking about simple jobs like working in a supermarket. They think I'm overly qualified. Only in Israel do college degree people get lower jobs. Many Jews from Russia were doctors but in Israel they got lower jobs because there was less of a demand in Israel because there is not room for everyone to have a high paying job. The real problem in the US for Jews is that Jewish restaurants and other Jewish businesses don't hire enough Jews. They hire other people that could work at non-kosher places. Non-Jews shouldn't get a job at the expense of Jews if it's a Jewish business. If you work in a Jewish store, it's easier to take off for holidays and you don't have to explain why you can't work certain days and have to go home early.

Most people can forget about it if they want to work at a large corporate owned store such as a supermarket or pharmacy (Like CVS). The easiest way to get a job is if the application is handwritten and if the store is locally owned with only one location. But there are not enough people in those jobs. I don't even bother looking for a job because they would never hire me. When I graduated college, I thought the next step in life is to get a job and get married. It's way easier to get a college degree than to find a job. I'm sure working once you have a job, is easier to work than getting a college degree but finding a job is very hard. In this country it's not a RIGHT to have a job. It's a PRIVILEGE of the select few. Members of the ruling class (the blacks) have the easiest time finding a job. Some whites have specialized skills at jobs that involve Science or being a lawyer. But if you are a white person who doesn't have those skills but are intelligent and interested in different subjects, you will never find a job in this country.

[Rubystars]

My experience in the Software Engineering field is that without the requisite skills, you are not even considered for the position. I work in a field where what you know is way more important than who you know. There are no affirmative action workers in my field. They would not be able to survive.

Currently there are no african american software engineers in my company. And most of my company is composed of ethnic Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc) and then with several Europeans (French, Romanian, Hungarian, Moldavian, etc)... I am one of about four natural born Americans working here...

It must be good to work in an industry like that where your skill matters more than your background. Some highly skilled jobs like that will have very few to zero blacks in them because they actually need to be done right. I'm sure that some black activist somewhere like that instructor that was mentioned in this thread may one day find out about your company and others like it and accuse them of institutional racism. For the liberals to acknowledge that blacks are in general less likely to be qualified for such a job would be for them to be ejected from the liberal community.

[Rubystars]

The definitions today will be about sexual orientations.

You might think I've already covered this, but I have not covered it in-depth yet. I've covered gender identity, the difference between gender and sex, and sexual identities. Sexual orientations are something different.

Some of this material might be disturbing but I feel that it is necessary to define many of these terms.

Many conservatives are not familiar with most of these terms and that's why I'm trying to help teach what they mean.

TRIGGER WARNING! I will warn again that this material might have triggers for people who are sensitive to triggers.

29. Heterosexual
To conservatives, this means that a man is sexually attracted to women or a woman is sexually attracted to men. To liberals, it means someone with a male gender identity is sexually attracted to people with a female gender identity or someone with a female gender identity is sexually attracted to people with a male gender identity.

The difference is important because to a liberal, a man who is sexually attracted to other men isn't necessarily a homosexual. If the man has a female gender identity and is sexually attracted to men, liberals would consider him to be a heterosexual woman. Conservatives would see him as a homosexual man.

30. Straight
This usually refers to heterosexuals by the conservative definition, but can apply to the wider liberal definition of heterosexual depending on how it's used. For example I was once told by a transwoman that "Lots of straight men would be interested in marrying a transwoman." When I argued that they wouldn't be straight "she" got offended and said that "she" would be a woman after transition and many "straight men" would recognize her as such.

31. Homosexual
Conservatives would define this as a man that is sexually attracted to other men or a woman that is sexually attracted to other women. Liberals would define this as someone with a male gender identity being sexually attracted to other people with a male gender identity or someone with a female gender identity being sexually attracted to other people with a female gender identity.

If a woman with a male gender identity is sexually attracted to other women who have a female gender identity, conservatives would say she is homosexual. Liberals would say she is heterosexual.

32. Gay
Someone with a male gender identity who is sexually attracted to other people with a male gender identity is said to be gay. Most of the time this is a man that is sexually attracted to other men but by liberal definition a "man" is not always a man.

Occasionally liberals will also include lesbians under this term. A "gay pride parade" for example is for both male and female homosexuals, whether they be gay or lesbian.

33. Lesbian
Someone with a female gender identity who is sexually attracted to other people with a female gender identity. Most of the time this is a woman who is sexually attracted to other women but by liberal definition a "woman" is not always a woman.

Gay men are never included under this term unless they have a female gender identity. A man with a female gender identity who is sexually attracted to another man with a female gender identity would be considered to be a lesbian, not a gay man by liberals. A man with a female gender identity who is sexually attracted to women would also be considered to be a lesbian by liberals.

Also a transwoman who is attracted to women, other transwomen, or males with a female gender identity would be considered to be a lesbian.

34. Queer
In terms of sexual orientation, queer can mean anything that's not straight or heterosexual. "Queer pride" is a more inclusive term than "Gay pride".

35. Bisexual
This involves people who have both heterosexual and homosexual sexual attraction. They may prefer one over the other but be open to both, or they may have sexual attraction to men and women equally.

36.Asexual or Ace
This is a person who is not sexually attracted to other people. They may or may not have sex. Some asexual people choose to have sex to please a romantic partner or for the purpose of having children but they have no true sexual attraction to other people.

37. Hyposexual, Gray-A, or Gray Asexual
These are people who do sometimes experience sexual attraction to other people, but not as often or as strongly as most people do, or they have a low sex drive.

38. Demisexual

These are people who only feel sexually attracted to someone else after they form an emotional bond or attachment with that person.

39. Pansexual or Omnisexual
This is a person who is sexually attracted to all genders.

40. Heteroflexibility
A person who is heteroflexible usually is heterosexually attracted but occasionally has homosexual attraction or is open to occasional homosexual sex even though they primarily prefer heterosexual sex.

Important Note: This is part of what Alfred Kinsey followers use to claim that 10% of the population is homosexual.
 
41. Homoflexibility
A person who is homoflexible usually is homosexually attracted but occasionally has heterosexual attraction or is open to occasional heterosexual sex even though they primarily prefer homosexual sex.

42. Bicurious
A bicurious person is someone who is predominately heterosexual or homosexual but is curious about exploring a sexual relationship with the type of person they are not usually attracted to. They have no or very little experience with this type of sexual relationship but are curious about trying it.

43. Questioning
A questioning person is someone who is not yet sure what their sexual orientation is, but is open to different options.

Important Note: Children in sexual education programs in public school are often encouraged to question their own sexual orientation. They are told that they might be gay, or straight. This plants a seed in the mind for them to think that way then they otherwise might not have considered themselves anything but normal. This is especially damaging if it is done in younger aged classes.

44. Skoliosexual

Someone who is skoliosexual is primarily attracted to people who are of non-binary gender identity. They would be primarily attracted to people who identify as genderqueer. Even many liberals don't know what this one means so by knowing a term like this you can trip them up when they try to call you "ignorant" or "uneducated" for being conservative.

45. LGBT
An acronym meaning Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender.

46. Allies

These are people who are not of a particular sexual orientation but choose to be supportive of those who are or of the gay rights/queer rights agenda as a whole. Usually this is meant to refer to straight or heterosexual allies of the "LGBT" community but can also refer to people of any sexual orientation who are allies of non-standard orientations. Liberal anti-bullying campaigns usually encourage straight people to be "allies". When someone declares that they are "straight but not narrow", they are declaring themselves as an LGBT ally.

47. LGBTQIA or LGBTQQIAA
An acronym meaning Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (or Questioning), Intersex, Allies (or Asexual) 


48. Intergenerational intimacy/minor attracted people - These are pedophiles. Liberals want to normalize pedophilia.

Important Note: Look at how Michael Jackson continues to be put up on a pedestal even though he was known to have victimized young boys sexually. This is because the liberal establishment sees nothing wrong with this behavior.


49. Sadomasochism or S&M
This involves being turned on by particpating in various acivities involving physical pain, injury, and/or being tied up/caged, either as the dominant or the submissive role.

50. Dom/Top - The dominant partner in a sadomasochistic relationship

51. Sub/Bottom - The submissive partner in a sadomasochistic relationship

There are many deviant practices that fall under the S&M banner. What is important to know is that this kind of deviancy is being promoted as normal and healthy by liberals when it is certainly not.

Important note: One of the complaints from people attending Disney world during an un-announced "Gay Day" is that they and their children were subjected to seeing Doms leading their Subs around on leashes and ordering the Subs around. This is an important part of the larger gay subculture even though not all homosexual people engage in it and sadomasochism is also practiced by heterosexuals. Normal people may run across these practices in public (such as the people who went to Disneyworld not knowing it was one of their gay days) and be shocked by it, especially if they don't know what's going on.

I know that some of the material in this post is very disturbing but keep in mind that liberals want to make all of these things completely acceptable in society, including the most horribe such as pedophilia.

They will do disgusting things in public in order to shock conservatives and then accuse the conservatives of hatred and bigotry for not embracing it. They may go out and act hateful/obscene/disgusting, but then they will accuse you of hatred/bigotry for considering their behavior wrong. They will say you, the normal person, is in the wrong and that you need to accept their behavior as normal and healthy no matter how disgusting or destructive it is.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

Isn't sexual orientation itself a madeup nonsense word? It's like politically correct and affirmative action which are words that mean nothing together and were put together by Leftists for made for their madeup words. Even religious preference is a madeup words. I remember once on Yom Kippur when the rabbi was talking about Yonah who said "I'm a Hebrew who fears Hashem Who created the seas and the dry lands.", he mentioned how people talk about "religious preference". It's not a choice. If you are Jewish, that's it. There is no choice. Jews must be Jews. I guess other religions would say the same about their own religions as well.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

It's also silly how sometimes on online surverys, they sometimes (rarely) ask about "sexual orientations". First it says heterosexual and the other choices are all homosexual choices (Homo, bi, and trans.). I guess they don't ask gay or lesbian because they already ask if you are male or female.

It's also silly when they ask if you are Hispanic. Sometimes they ask it on the same screen where in a different question they ask race. But what if when someone puts in Hispanic they don't ask them their race separately? They try to deny whites from Latin America from being white. They also give a ton of chocies of what kind of Hispanic [Meaning countries but not the relevant racial choices (White, black, Amerindian, Mestizo, or Multatto.).] but no sub-choices choices under white. But then under "Asian" they give a choice of many countries and they include Indian under Asian even though Indians are not of the same race as Orientals.

Sometimes they list Middle Eastern separate from white. If they do that I click on white because Middle Eastern is not my race. It's my ethnicity. In a question where white and black are choices, they shouldn't list non-race names. If they asked ethnicity and the choices were European, Middle Eastern, African, East Asian..., then I would put Middle Eastern. People act like only Europeans are white. All those Liberals make me angry with their "politically correct" language. It reminds me of when I was younger and get mad and yell at people and call Nazis and say Yimach Shemo, etc....

Besides Jews and Arabs, there are many other white Asian groups, some of whom would be considered European culturally such as Georgia and Armenia. I think those countries are actually in Asia but they are culturally like Greeks and other Southeastern Europeans. Some people are just so stupid and don't understand basic map skills so they dumb down everything and all the definitions.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

This usually refers to heterosexuals by the conservative definition, but can apply to the wider liberal definition of heterosexual depending on how it's used. For example I was once told by a transwoman that "Lots of straight men would be interested in marrying a transwoman." When I argued that they wouldn't be straight "she" got offended and said that "she" would be a woman after transition and many "straight men" would recognize her as such.

I heard of a man marrying such a "woman". He said it didn't bother him because "she" was just like any woman he's ever been with. I might have seen it from a post on the forum. Well they were both ugly anyway.

Do they get offended when we say we're straight and they're crooked? What is the origin of the term straight to refer to normal people? Was it made up normal people? I remember the Boy Scouts had the word straight in their oath or whatever it was called and because of that, they didn't allow homosexuals in the organization until they were sued.

[Ephraim Ben Noach]

I had an affirmative action teacher in college in a seminar called "White Culture" which she basically defined as being racist against blacks. I wrote my final paper on real white culture and how whites are diverse and there are many kinds of white culture. I wrote about Chabad as an example of a sect of a white ethnic group (Jews). That teacher said there was no white culture in Europe and it only came to be when whites were around non-whites. She also made us buy a book called "How the Irish became white". I looked up the author and it was by some Left Wing Anti-Israel animal.

Well the AA teacher said that as a religious Jew, she doesn't understand why I wouldn't vote for Obama. She also claimed that black Jews had the "purest" form of Judaism, I because she is against the real [Rabbinic] Judaism. She also said everyone was black and said the Garden of Eden was in Ethiopia and used Left Wing archeology for that even though the archeologists were talking about evolution. She said the Bible is mostly in the Middle East and Africa. Africa does not play a large role in the Bible other than Egypt.

She seemed to be a confused Christian as well because she thought Obama was a religious Christian and she was opposed to abortion and said abortion is a form of eugenics if used to abort unhealthy babies.

I actually showed her JTF's page with a picture of Obama dressed up in Muslim garb in Kenya and she said "Dat's not Muslim grab, dat's African grab.". This was during the Fall 2008 Election season. She didn't believe Obama was a Muslim.

So the teacher thought that what I wrote about the ideology and origins of Chabad was irrelevant. Also, in the part she thought was relevant like the Crown Heights Pogrom, she said "Why call the man racist?" when I called Dinkins and Sharpton racist. She also thought I should have focused more on the clash of Chabad and white rural American in Iowa at the kosher slaughterhouse in Postville.

The reason I had to take that class was because I needed a seminar to graduate and there were only two offered and only 15 people could be a class and the other one was full. The other one was probably nonsense also. It was a by a white teacher who taught African History and it focused on something about economics and the Third World. I don't remember exactly. My dad thought it was funny that the white teacher taught Africa and the black teacher taught "white culture". But the "white culture" class was basically black nonsense anyway.

That is so funny! I was talking to a lady today that is married to a Russian Jew from Postville...

And I hear there may be a Kosher company reopening the packing house in my hometown.  My hometown has pretty much rotted away, this would be great for the locals, as long as they don't bring in illegals.

[Rubystars]

Isn't sexual orientation itself a madeup nonsense word? It's like politically correct and affirmative action which are words that mean nothing together and were put together by Leftists for made for their madeup words.

They're definitely socially constructed. Basically people's behavior used to be considered to be their behavior. Now someone's sexual preferences and how they act on them define what they are, as a type of person to be.

Homosexual used to refer to homosexual actions (a man having sex with a man, a woman having sex with a woman). Now it refers to some aspect of a person's identity. They are said to be "a" homosexual rather than simply to be engaging in homosexual actions.

On the other hand if someone has an exclusive preference toward one type of person then I can see how it might be descriptive of the person as well, but the whole gay identity/gay culture/homosexual identity/queer identity stuff is fake for the most part.
 

Even religious preference is a madeup words. I remember once on Yom Kippur when the rabbi was talking about Yonah who said "I'm a Hebrew who fears Hashem Who created the seas and the dry lands.", he mentioned how people talk about "religious preference". It's not a choice. If you are Jewish, that's it. There is no choice. Jews must be Jews. I guess other religions would say the same about their own religions as well.

Words like that are used in very sneaky ways to manipulate how people think.

I heard of a man marrying such a "woman". He said it didn't bother him because "she" was just like any woman he's ever been with. I might have seen it from a post on the forum. Well they were both ugly anyway.

We wouldn't really consider him to be straight but liberals would.

Do they get offended when we say we're straight and they're crooked? What is the origin of the term straight to refer to normal people? Was it made up normal people? I remember the Boy Scouts had the word straight in their oath or whatever it was called and because of that, they didn't allow homosexuals in the organization until they were sued.

They don't believe anyone is crooked because there's no standards of normalcy. They don't believe they are deviants because there's no standard to deviate from. They don't believe that heterosexuality is normal and they are abnormal. Liberals put all sexual preferences on equal footing and say they are all equally normal and part of the human experience.

We on the other hand would say that heterosexuality is the normal, natural state of human beings, and homosexuality and other orientations that aren't heterosexuality are deviant.

I don't know the origins of the word straight as it applies to a sexual orientation, but the boy scouts oath saying to be straight in all their ways wasn't talking about it in terms of that. It just meant they were supposed to act in an honorable, truthful manner.

[Rubystars]

I left out a couple of definitions from the earlier post:

52. Gynosexual -
These are people who feel sexually attracted to people with a female gender identity or to femininity. This would include straight men, lesbians, bisexuals, and anyone else who has an attraction to females.

53. Androsexual -
These are people who feel sexually attracted to people with a male gender identity or to masculinity. This would incldue straight women, gay men, bisexuals, and anyone else who has an attraction to males.

A romantic orientation is different from a sexual orientation because they don't always match. Someone might be sexually attracted to one group of people but be romantically attracted to another. Someone who has no interest in sex might still want a romantic partner to spend their life with.

A liberal woman said on tv "I don't mind going to bed with a man but I want to wake up to a woman".  This would be an example of someone who is at least sometimes heterosexually attracted but is also homoromantic.

A man who commits fornication as often as possible but has no emotional attachment to the women he has sex with could be considered an aromantic heterosexual.

54. Heteroromantic
A person with a male gender identity who is romantically attracted to people of female gender identity, or a person with a female gender identity who is romantically attracted to people with a male gender identity.

55. Homoromantic
A person with a male gender identity who is romantically attracted to people of a male gender identity, or a person with a female gender identity who is romantically attracted to people with a female gender identity.

56. Biromantic
A person who is romantically attracted to people with a male or a female gender identity. They might prefer one over the other or be romantically attracted to both equally.

57. Aromantic
A person who has no interest in romantic relationships.

58. Panromantic
A person who is interested in romantic relationships with people of any gender identity.

59. Skolioromantic
A person who is interested in romantic relationships with non-binary or genderqueer people.

60. Gray romantic

A person who only occasionally experiences romantic attraction or experiences it but not strongly enough to want to actually follow through on forming a romantic relationship.

61. Demiromantic
A person who is only interested in a romantic relationship with someone they've already developed an emotional bond with. They are not romantically attracted to people they don't have that connection with already.

Now that I've defined all these terms then you can see all the pieces of the puzzle that fit together.

Most conservatives on this board would probably fit the following profile:

Male (or female) sex, Male (or female) gender, Cisgendered, Heterosexual, Heteroromantic.

This means that you fit the gender "binary" (you are either male or female), your gender identity is the same as your physical sex that you were born with, you are sexually attracted and romantically attracted to the opposite sex.

Most people in the world fit that profile. That's the normal and default position of humanity.

Liberals like things to be as far from that as possible so this is why they push for the normalization and acceptance of anything that is different from that profile.

Liberals like to exploit Intersexed individuals and try to recruit them into the LGBT cause simply because these individuals do not fit the gender binary of male and female. Some people really are born intersexed but liberals see this as an opportunity to exploit these people for their own causes rather than trying to help them fit into a mostly binary society.

Liberals promote transgender ideas because it is different from the normal, cisgender people. Anyone who might be insecure about their gender identity is exploited by liberals, and rather than trying to help them feel more secure in their bodies, liberals tell them to embrace the deviant or disordered feelings and even alter the body to suit the mind rather than the other way around.

Liberals promote all deviant sexual identities because they don't want heterosexuals to be seen as normal and healthy. They want to normalize all sexual orientations no matter how sick or destructive.
Liberals promote homoromanticism for the same reason they promote homosexuality.

The different pieces to the puzzle that are shifted around to create a personal Gender/Sexual identity are
1. Sex
2. Gender Identity
3. Whether the above two match or not (cisgendered or transgendered)
4. Sexual orientation
5. Romantic Orientation

It is interesting to note that liberals generally see sex and gender as fluid and subject to change over the course of someone's life, but they see sexual orientation as being fixed and unchangeable.

Laws are being passed now to prevent reparative therapy from being conducted to help change someone's sexual orientation because liberals see this as abusive and ineffective. It's also not helpful to the liberal cause if someone does change.

Liberals are not above using the law to get their way and will do it as often as possible.

There are some different attempts by liberals to create gender-neutral pronouns. This would be a pronoun that someone who self-identifies as genderqueer or otherwise prefers a gender-neutral pronoun might want to be used to refer to them. They would also be more "politically correct".

Some of the ones that have been used more often have been ones based on Z.

Instead of he or she, Ze is used.
Instead of himself or herself, zirself is used.

Here's an example of a shirt design with this "gender neutral" language on it:
http://snaptee.co/t/nvf6m?r=cl

I've seen this ze/zirself terminology around somewhat but I don't think it's gotten super popular yet. I expect to see this in more mainstream sources within the next few years though like news articles, so now the first time you see this, you won't be confused by it.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

They're definitely socially constructed. Basically people's behavior used to be considered to be their behavior. Now someone's sexual preferences and how they act on them define what they are, as a type of person to be.

In college they tell you that race is a social construct.

All these terms remind me of how in Colonial Latin America, they had terms to describe every possible racial identity. Besides from white, black, and Amerindian, and Mestizo, there were lots of names for any combination of the above. Someone who is half white, and half Mestizo would be called Castizo (Basically someone who is 3/4 white and 1/4 Amerindian.). The teacher in that class said the Spanish wouldn't consider her to be white even though she is lighter skinned than most of the 100% European Spaniards. Maybe they meant white as in pure, rather than the color. I guess Spaniards thought they were superior. That was the same time as the Spanish Inquisition.

The AA teacher I mentioned earlier also said race is a social construct. I told her that you can tell if someone is white or not regardless if they have white or dark skin. So she asked if I meant by phenotype. I told her that there are Middle Eastern Jews that are white but darker than she is. White doesn't have to do with the skin tone. It has to do with physical features. Most Europeans are light skinned so that's why they chose the color white for the race. People may have said it to mean white is pure and clean as opposed to dark. Politically correct people would say it's because they thought whites were superior.

[Rubystars]

In college they tell you that race is a social construct.

All these terms remind me of how in Colonial Latin America, they had terms to describe every possible racial identity. Besides from white, black, and Amerindian, and Mestizo, there were lots of names for any combination of the above. Someone who is half white, and half Mestizo would be called Castizo (Basically someone who is 3/4 white and 1/4 Amerindian.). The teacher in that class said the Spanish wouldn't consider her to be white even though she is lighter skinned than most of the 100% European Spaniards. Maybe they meant white as in pure, rather than the color. I guess Spaniards thought they were superior. That was the same time as the Spanish Inquisition.

The AA teacher I mentioned earlier also said race is a social construct. I told her that you can tell if someone is white or not regardless if they have white or dark skin. So she asked if I meant by phenotype. I told her that there are Middle Eastern Jews that are white but darker than she is. White doesn't have to do with the skin tone. It has to do with physical features. Most Europeans are light skinned so that's why they chose the color white for the race. People may have said it to mean white is pure and clean as opposed to dark. Politically correct people would say it's because they thought whites were superior.

Someone's racial background is based on their heritage. Cultures are socially constructed but race is not.

Personally I only consider people of European descent to be white, but there is a larger Caucasian race. White people are a sub-set of that larger grouping.

[Binyamin Yisrael]

So that means you would consider Jews not to be white?