Gay Marriage Legalized in NY

[Michi]

This is exactly the sort of thing I hate. The fight against heteronormality isn't exclusive to cisgendered gays and lesbians.

Nobody said that the proposed shirts should be exclusive to cisgender people. The case he was referring to would be if gays and lesbians (the people primarily affected by the recent vote) were to wear said shirts. I'm sure he didn't mean to exclude anyone.

 

[Adriane]

Wait, how is "I <3 NY...and so does my boyfriend" offensive exactly? o.o

I'm perplexed as to why you find a burst of gay pride after the passing of a same-sex marriage bill to be insulting.

Nobody said that the proposed shirts should be exclusive to cisgender people. The case he was referring to would be if gays and lesbians (the people primarily affected by the recent vote) were to wear said shirts. I'm sure he didn't mean to exclude anyone.

Miss, miss, and miss again.

The new "I <3 NY" shirt should read "I <3 NY...and so does my boyfriend" and exchange "boyfriend" for "girlfriend" if it's in women's sizes.

I would seriously hope the queer community can identify inhibitors like these that perpetuate the fixed gender binary.

 

[Zeph]

The new "I <3 NY" shirt should read "I <3 NY...and so does my boyfriend" and exchange "boyfriend" for "girlfriend" if it's in women's sizes.

I would seriously hope the queer community can identify inhibitors like these that perpetuate the fixed gender binary.

Well yeah, but the idea was that these shirts would be catered for homosexual couples who can marry from now on. A woman wearing a shirt saying "I <3 NY and so does my boyfriend" (or the opposite) would in no way imply that that they <3 NY because of gay marriage's legalisation there. A MAN wearing such a shirt (Or a woman wearing a girlfriend one), however, would imply such.

If I've missed your point and you're talking about non-binary couples, then the point still stands of whoever it was who said that shirts made for trans couples would have a really, really small audience.

Anyway, hooray for the increasing rapid progress of America! Well done, you country, you.

 

[Adriane]

If I've missed your point and you're talking about non-binary couples, then the point still stands of whoever it was who said that shirts made for trans couples would have a really, really small audience.

So you're instead satisfied with the capitalising of the bill? Either way, it's the mindset I have an issue with. You can't just go and add hypotheticals on top of hypotheticals when the notion of the first hypothetical was "this would be neat" rather than "this is going to happen".

 

[Zeph]

So you're instead satisfied with the capitalising of the bill? Either way, it's the mindset I have an issue with. You can't just go and add hypotheticals on top of hypotheticals when the notion of the first hypothetical was "this would be neat" rather than "this is going to happen".

Well no, that wasn't my point; while I'm all for the breaking of the gender binary and such, I just don't see how the proposed T-shirts were offensive to trans couples. I mean, what would you suggest they should say instead/trans-tailored shirts should say? "I <3 NY and so does my partner?" Again, that doesn't really carry the intended connotation.

Besides, I'm pretty sure that the whole T-shirts thing was pretty much a joke in the first place anyway.

 

[Adriane]

Besides, I'm pretty sure that the whole T-shirts thing was pretty much a joke in the first place anyway.

Ohh, a joke! Well, pardon me! That just excuses just about everything, doesn't it? How nice it is to be able to dismiss everything at a whim by merely joking about it.

 

[Zeph]

Ohh, a joke! Well, pardon me! That just excuses just about everything, doesn't it? How nice it is to be able to dismiss everything at a whim by merely joking about it.

Wait what? My point was that whoever it was who originally said the thing about the T-shirts, whoever it was, I can't be bothered to check, was not being serious about it, and so was evidently not going to go particularly deep into it and say "Oh and there should be 'And so does my trans partner' ones too". Kindly don't be superiorly sarcastic like that, it doesn't help your argument.

 

[Adriane]

Wait what? My point was that whoever it was who originally said the thing about the T-shirts, whoever it was, I can't be bothered to check, was not being serious about it, and so was evidently not going to go particularly deep into it and say "Oh and there should be 'And so does my trans partner' ones too". Kindly don't be superiorly sarcastic like that, it doesn't help your argument.

You are missing my point entirely, and I am being serious. A relationship between a cis man and a trans man is still a gay relationship. This seems to slip under the radar for way too many people. Please don't interject if you're going to just ignore what I'm actually saying because that doesn't help your argument any.

 

[Aobaru]

I would seriously hope the queer community can identify inhibitors like these that perpetuate the fixed gender binary.

Okay, so what you're saying is that the "I <3 NY... and so does my boyfriend/girlfriend" shirt should be available in both men's and women's sizes? Or am I still missing the point?

 

[shy ♡]

Okay, so what you're saying is that the "I <3 NY... and so does my boyfriend/girlfriend" shirt should be available in both men's and women's sizes? Or am I still missing the point?

Yep, that's what ve's saying.

 

[Eloi]

You are missing my point entirely, and I am being serious. A relationship between a cis man and a trans man is still a gay relationship. This seems to slip under the radar for way too many people. Please don't interject if you're going to just ignore what I'm actually saying because that doesn't help your argument any.

One question: What do you want them to say instead?

 

[Karkat Vantas]

Why not just make them unisex shirts?

 

[Tailsy]

Unisex shirts are baggy and they fit really badly! Why would I want to wear that?

 

[Eloi]

Why not just make them unisex shirts?

Because it defeats the point, which is explicit support for a same-gender relationship.

 

[Adriane]

One question: What do you want them to say instead?

Because it defeats the point, which is explicit support for a same-gender relationship.

Have you not read a thing I've said this entire thread? Also please stop equating sex and gender because they're not the same.

 

[Karkat Vantas]

Unisex shirts are baggy and they fit really badly! Why would I want to wear that?

Baggy clothes are awesome, silly!



Exhibit A

 

[Eloi]

Have you not read a thing I've said this entire thread?

I have read everything you have said, I just don't understand your arguments.

Also please stop equating sex and gender because they're not the same.

I know of these differences, I am not sure where the implication was that I didn't. A same-sex relationship would be a trans man and a cis woman getting together. A same-gender relationship would be a trans man and a cis man getting together.

But mainly my point is:
a) There already exists these shirts for opposite-gender (and presumably sex) couples.
b) Shirts for same-gender couples don't exist.
c) Hence, they should be made, but they might not be if you protest them under the grounds of it being unfair to gender-variant/deconstructionist people because same-gender couple-affirming people would be more likely to care en masse.
d) Hence, only the shirts for opposite-gender (and presumably sex) couples would exist because they aren't likely to give a crap about the opinions about gender-fluid people en masse.

 

[shy ♡]

I know of these differences, I am not sure where the implication was that I didn't. A same-sex relationship would be a trans man and a cis woman getting together. A same-gender relationship would be a trans man and a cis man getting together.

Nnnoooo. A cis person still has a gender. It just happens to co-align with the gender they were assigned at birth. Two cis people dating, of the same gender, are still a same-gender couple. Sex is pretty much irrelevant, other than being a physical marker.

 

[Eloi]

Nnnoooo. A cis person still has a gender. It just happens to co-align with the gender they were assigned at birth. Two cis people dating, of the same gender, are still a same-gender couple. Sex is pretty much irrelevant, other than being a physical marker.

Yes, I know. That's what I was trying to demonstrate. Seriously guys, I know (and care about) this stuff.

 

[Jolty]

A same-sex relationship would be a trans man and a cis woman getting together. A same-gender relationship would be a trans man and a cis man getting together.

this is bollocks
my girlfriend and I are in an opposite-sex relationship
the fact that I possess two x chromosomes does not change that

when you're talking about sex and gender in this context, they're the same, surely????