Sam Smith comes out as genderqueer

[Harry 26,836]

2 hours ago, misunderstood said:

How old are you may I ask? It's this kind of logic and childish behavior so many people aren't willing to listen to your views because you won't listen to theirs.

?? The user responded "what a mess" to an explanation that he asked for. That kicked off the exchange. I think they're more guilty of being childish and not listening?

[FameHookah 4,572]

12 hours ago, Antonoff said:

I'm shook by the fact he's 25  Thought he was like 30 something

ikr? im 25... he looks 40 and very gaunt x.x i love daddies but he's a no no for me 😶

[scallywally 626]

20 minutes ago, Harry said:

?? The user responded "what a mess" to an explanation that he asked for. That kicked off the exchange. I think they're more guilty of being childish and not listening?

The letters are a bit of a mess, id agree with that. When will it end? People that like being smothered in cake and add on a C??

I'm kidding of course. I don't think the poster was calling the people a mess

[That J 12,166]

It's so interesting to me personally how I've been gay for a very long time now (lol) and I have no idea what some of these newer terms are! My boyfriend, who is younger, finds it interesting trust me!!  There was always gay, straight, bi and trans and now there's some I just have to look up. The thing that irritates me about that is Im a very smart person in many areas so it's discouraging to know Im out of a loop on this situation!  Just another reason I love GGD so much...I still learn things daily!! 

Its not my job, role, taste or style to say what another person should be or whatever. Sam isn't someone I follow or really care too much for but I've felt that since he hit the scene. I don't think a person has to expose every aspect of themselves immediately, if ever, to the public. I personally like when a person reveals themselves in layers rather than unloading it all at once. I'm sure you guys have heard of such Onion Girls, right?  😉

[Miky 9,400]

Lmao. People mistaking personality for a new gender. 

[ToGa 35]

He is so boring! 
As is his music. 
Frankly I think he just tries to get attention because his new single is flopping. 

[BlaqJezus 1,027]

Congratulations...? I applaud him being himself, but being genderqueer is a choice to not follow the norms of society and to live between gender norms instead of to one side of the scale.

[OOPS22 4,202]

Sorry but how many labels are we going to create? Let's just say we're being ourselves and leave it at that. 

[StrawberryBlond 13,284]

It never fails to amaze me how terms like this did not exist a few years back and now all these people are coming out the woodwork defining themselves as gender-nonconforming in some way. It just suggests a bandwagon approach as people are so low on self-esteem that they feel they have to join up to a group and give themselves a label to make them feel accepted. If Sam wants to dress in "female" clothes, that doesn't necessarily make him any less of a man. My cousin crossdresses and assumes a female name when he does so but that has never changed his gender identity. He believes that clothes are just clothes and everyone should be allowed to wear what they want without anyone assuming anything about them. He has a girlfriend and is perfectly happy dressing "like a man" most of the time. There are also straight male drag queens who are married with children. The thing is, clothing is just fabric. It doesn't mean anything, we have put a gender identity onto it. Why can't you just wear whatever you want without thinking that it somehow changes your gender identity? How you choose to dress doesn't make you any less of a man or woman, if it's just the superficial notion of dress that we're talking about. Wanting to dress in women's clothes does not mean you're automatically identifying as a woman in any way. You just like dressing in women's clothes. It's that simple, stop trying to complicate things.

Roaming Millenial did a great video about this idea and her views on gender identity are so much more progressive that the very limiting and ironically outdated SJW view of it. The whole video's good but, for the sake of this particular topic, watch 3:04-4:07 in particular:

 

23 hours ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

The key word was "respected", however they are also not authorities. They do not study gender for a living or for professional, anthropological, sociological, humanitarian, or even academic reasons. They are also occasionally hateful people that are factually incorrect about aspects of gender frequently, and appeal to an ignorant base that sees them as token examples to reinforce their own bias. They know their experiences are anecdotal, but they still use this base in order to gain acclaim, followers, and support for their own ignorant worldviews  Which just helps to perpetuate ironically anti-trans, regressive views about gender and reinforce rigid binarism  

I am not a respected authority, but I have been academically studying feminism and gender for several years.  I also experience gender dysphoria (not that that has ANYTHING concrete to do with how reliable you are about gender related subjects, lol. The fact that the 3 of us alone have had different experiences and outlooks alone disproves this qualifier)

Just saying. Be critical of the people you look up, or trust for information. Gender is surely political, and prone to bias but there are more reliable accounts and studies done on it from more reputable sources than social media celebs  

While some YouTubers perhaps aren't the most educated examples, if they've lived with being trans and the concept of being confused about their gender, they are as good a source as any in my book. I'll pay more attention to people who have lived it as opposed to someone who's merely studied it from an outside perspective. I don't think that being "educated" is the only thing that should give you grounds to be listened to in these situations. While I'm not the biggest fans of these people and can understand why their level of close-mindedness can be problematic, it doesn't take away how right they are about some things. I think even the worst people can be right. Just because I'm a liberal doesn't mean that I shut out any and all conservative or alternative viewpoint. It's actually a big part of my mission to hear all sides of a debate in order to formulate a truly coherent opinion. When you won't listen to certain people just because they sometimes say things you don't agree with or don't have the same political view as you, your opinion will always be limited and you'll struggle to converse with people. These people aren't always ignorant about everything. They sometimes just acknowledge the facts that the SJWs don't know about/want to silence.

Trust me, I'm critical of everyone I look up and trust for information. I do that to those on my own side as well, which a lot of liberals fail to do. I'm afraid that a lot of what you're describing about only trusting "educated" and "reputable" sources just sounds like classism. Facts are facts, logic is logic, I don't really care who it's coming from. I support the people who are speaking sense and you don't have to have a university degree or be employed at Buzzfeed to do that.

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

We knew this though, right? Back when he wasn't famous he was known to dress up and express his genderqueerness. 

On 10/22/2017 at 2:52 PM, AmericanGUY said:

this is gonna make Grammy categories a little complicated 

Gender doesn't equal sex.

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

4 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Trust me, I'm critical of everyone I look up and trust for information. I do that to those on my own side as well, which a lot of liberals fail to do. 

General sweeping statements like this is kind of a poor excuse to make tbh. Just state a couple of real life examples instead of placing millions of people into one bag.

[StrawberryBlond 13,284]

3 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

General sweeping statements like this is kind of a poor excuse to make tbh. Just state a couple of real life examples instead of placing millions of people into one bag.

What do you mean by that? I genuinely don't know what you're trying to say here.

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

3 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

What do you mean by that? I genuinely don't know what you're trying to say here.

I think we need to work on not making general statements like saying that liberals can't critically look up information. It's a statement that has zero credibility or source study. I clearly made that argument in direction to your post. Very clear.

[StrawberryBlond 13,284]

Just now, ZacharyMark said:

I think we need to work on not making general statements like saying that liberals can't critically look up information. It's a statement that has zero credibility or source study. I clearly made that argument in direction to your post. Very clear.

I'm not saying that every liberal thinks this way. But a lot do, now more than ever. Say what you want about conservatives, but a lot of them are all about citing their sources. I've seen too much liberal media where no sources are cited but we're just supposed to take their bizarre "findings" at face value. Liberals of today are notorious for just accepting whatever mumbo jumbo comes out the mouth of another liberal without actually pausing to see if what they're saying has any truth or so much as pauses to go: "hold on, that doesn't sound right." Even liberal news channels have been altering/cutting footage to wipe out the truth to push their agenda. But liberals just watch it and assume it must be true because liberals never lie and are never biased, apparently. You don't need "source studies" to see this. Just go out and live life and you'll witness it. Why is it that liberals will only accept something if it's "supported" by "credible" sources (sometimes, "another liberal" is all the credible sources" they need anyway). Why must they always approach things from a long list of perspectives ending in "ogical?" How about applying standard common sense without all the big words and high faluting phrases? How about accepting science and dictionary definitions all the time, not just when it suits the liberal agenda? It's no wonder I'm at a loss politically with no clue who to really get behind anymore.

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

3 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I'm not saying that every liberal thinks this way. But a lot do, now more than ever. Say what you want about conservatives, but a lot of them are all about citing their sources. I've seen too much liberal media where no sources are cited but we're just supposed to take their bizarre "findings" at face value. Liberals of today are notorious for just accepting whatever mumbo jumbo comes out the mouth of another liberal without actually pausing to see if what they're saying has any truth or so much as pauses to go: "hold on, that doesn't sound right." Even liberal news channels have been altering/cutting footage to wipe out the truth to push their agenda. But liberals just watch it and assume it must be true because liberals never lie and are never biased, apparently. You don't need "source studies" to see this. Just go out and live life and you'll witness it. Why is it that liberals will only accept something if it's "supported" by "credible" sources (sometimes, "another liberal" is all the credible sources" they need anyway). Why must they always approach things from a long list of perspectives ending in "ogical?" How about applying standard common sense without all the big words and high faluting phrases? How about accepting science and dictionary definitions all the time, not just when it suits the liberal agenda? It's no wonder I'm at a loss politically with no clue who to really get behind anymore.

Huh? 

I never said anything about conservatives...

And there's literally no source of credible study that backs up your claim.

"we're just supposed to take their bizarre 'findings' at face value" That's you trying to make up a narrative and contradict your previous statement.

This isn't a liberal issue. This issue can literally be found anywhere you look no matter the person.