If 'he was a she', take a walk on the wild side............got me beat Dorian 

I need a new dictionary.

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-does-lgbtq-mean-5069804

LGBTQ+ stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (or sometimes questioning), and others. The "plus" represents other sexual identities including pansexual and Two-Spirit. The first four letters of the acronym have been used since the 1990s, but in recent years there has been an increased awareness of the need to be inclusive of other sexual identities to offer better representation. 

I always thought I was a heterosexual male, end of story, but it turns out I'm also cisgender. Moreover, the notion that your sex could be "assigned" to you at birth, as opposed to simply being born with a particular sex, leaves the door open for human intervention. Who knows what the future will bring?

Cisgender: This term refers to individuals whose gender identity corresponds to the gender associated with the sex they were assigned at birth.

dorian wrote:

---

Cisgender: This term refers to individuals whose gender identity corresponds to the gender associated with the sex they were assigned at birth. 

---

Thanks for that. I have been meaning to look it up for about five years :)

Great old blues song by Howlin' Wolf covered by the Yardbirds.
A bit male chauvanistic for "these delicate times" though.

the rocket wrote:

---

I need a wine.

---

I do too, but I only have it on the weekend.  

A wine that is! 

Plain Truth wrote:

---

Be careful,they are watching you say,

 

---

 A conspiracy theory within a conspiracy theory. Interesting twist ...

I found these URLs which both proclaim the UN's intention to create a blacklist:

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/un-human-rights-office-prepares-global-lgbt-hate-groups-blacklist/

https://c-fam.org/friday_fax/un-human-rights-office-prepares-global-lgbt-hate-groups-blacklist/

The authors refer to "a call for inputs from the UN rights office published last month [Jan 2021], primarily addressed to LGBT groups". They appear to be quoting from some UN document, but they provide no URLs to same.

Where is the UN document? I'd like to read it and interpret it for myself, without religious bias.

I deeply sympathise with anyone who is traumatised by an inner conflict over their own gender identity. I can't imagine what that would be like, although I did get an insight via an ABC documentary about a 10-year-old (?) schoolboy who identified and lived as a girl.

However, advocacy groups like Stonewall behave more like mind control thugs and intimidators, if you believe what some commentators write about them. My impression of them is that they have a modus operandi akin to Scientology.

https://unherd.com/2022/07/how-allison-bailey-crushed-stonewall/

Edit: Here it is.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/ie-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/call-input-thematic-report-gender-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity

Mike Harding wrote:

---

Interesting catch PT, when I first saw your post I thought it must be a conspiracy spoof but Dorian's link indicate, astonishingly, that it's real! Although I cannot find a report from an established news source?

---

PT's source claims that "the UN rights office's call for input denigrates defenders of life and family who dispute 'gender ideology' as conspiracy theorists". However, there is no reference to "conspiracy" in the "call for input" document ...

That said, the document does appear to unilaterally impose its own view of gender theory on the reader, leaving no room for alternative viewpoints, whether scientifically based or otherwise.

Very clever. I was looking forward to a good read, but the magazine covers are all there is.

https://cosmarxpolitan.tumblr.com/

It's getting even more complicated:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/08/10/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-nonbinary-skeleton/

"According to woke archaeologists and anthropologists, ancient human remains should no longer be classified as either male or female. Apparently, this is because we do not know how these people would have identified themselves."

I'm getting to (being driven to) the point where if a person does not identify as male or female I'm quite happy using the pronoun "it" which doesn't seem very popular?

Craig1 wrote:

---

Mike, possibly because you forget the " SH " prefix

---

 Nice one Craig! Does the old "Adam's Apple" trick still work? Cheers

Mike Harding wrote:

---

I'm getting to (being driven to) the point where if a person does not identify as male or female I'm quite happy using the pronoun "it" which doesn't seem very popular?

---

Here is a person who looks to be a biological male, but the ABC refers to "him" using "them", "they", "their":

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-24/warning-from-australian-with-monkeypox-in-germany/101340226 

Political correctness is becoming a minefield.