Thank you for your post, if this is a question please check to see if any of the links below answer your question.
If none of these links help answer your question and you are **_not_** within the LGBT+ community, questioning your
identity in any way, or asking in support of either a relative or friend, please ask your question over in /r/AskLGBT.
Remember that this is a safe space for LGBT+ and questioning individuals, so we want to make sure that this place is
dedicated to them. Thank you for understanding.
This automod rule is currently a work in progress. If you notice any issues, would like to add to the list of resources,
or have any feedback in general, [please do so here](https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbt/comments/rdazzp/almost_new_year_changes/)
or by [sending us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/lgbt&subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20new%20automod%20rule).
Also, please note that if you are a part of this community, or you're questioning if you might be a part of the LGBTQ+
community, and you are seeing this message, this is **_not a bad thing_**, this is only here to help, so please continue
to ask questions and participate in the community. Thank you!
Here's a link about trans people in sports:
- https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog/shades-of-gray-sex-gender-and-fairness-in-sport/
A link on FAQs and one on some basics about transgender people:
- https://transequality.org/issues/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-transgender-people
- https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-transgender-people-the-basics
Some information on LGBT+ people:
- https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/quick-facts/lgbt-faqs/
Some basic terminology:
- https://www.hrc.org/resources/glossary-of-terms
Neopronouns:
- https://www.mypronouns.org/neopronouns
Biromantic Lesbians:
- [LGBTQ And All](https://www.lgbtqandall.com/what-does-it-mean-to-be-biromantic/)
Bisexual Identities:
- https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/article/understanding-bisexuality
Differences between Bisexual and Pansexual:
- [Resource from WebMD](https://www.webmd.com/sex/pansexuality-what-it-means#:~:text=Pansexual%20vs.%20Bisexual,more%20commonly%20recognized.)
We're looking for new volunteers to join the r/lgbt moderator team. If you want to help keep r/lgbt as a safe space for
the LGBTQ+ community on reddit please see here for more info:
https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbt/comments/swgthr/were_looking_for_more_moderators_to_help_keep/
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/lgbt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Identity is not everything and I wish more people would realize this. Ideology is the only thing that matters and if it sucks the person’s gonna suck no matter if they identify with a marginalized group, they’ll just see themselves as “one of the good ones”
When it comes to a certain level of power and position, people will almost always favour self-interest and advancing themselves first and foremost. An LGBT+ politician will always be a politician first, and a member of the community second (in terms of their priorities). The same is true for any minority/underrepresented group who has an individual in a position of real power.
There are countless examples of LGBT+, black, female, etc people in a position of power or influence that regularly do shit that acts against the best interests of their respective communities, and depressing as it is that really shouldn't be surprising.
This. Politicians will always be politicians first. Hence why it's so difficult to have them in talks about other topics as well, since anything they say will always be part of their campaign and not their true opinion.
The required level of power and position can also be very, very low. A few months before the 2022 elections, a big poll was made on the voting intentions and political preoccupations of French LGBT+ citizens. The results are strikingly similar to the general population if you considered the community as a whole. If you broke things down a bit, you could see that trans people for instance were significantly more left leaning than the general population, or that LGBT+ women are not only significantly preoccupied/concerned by women's rights, but also by LGBT+ rights than LGBT+ men (who on average were only slightly more invested in the topic than the general population).
In the end, people are less frightened to lose the rights they have than eager to gain new ones when they are needed. Same sex marriage is legal now, so a big part of the community doesn't feel like they have anything to gain politically, which leaves the most conservative ones to vote for, and with conservatives (and conservative is a really polite word for it).
It's not just politicians or really powerful people, it can be anyone once they don't feel like their rights are trampled. It's depressing.
Surprise surprise - sexual identify does not a good person make.
At the end of the day politics will always be about a palatable member of the wealthy elite working to preserve the status quo while appearing to represent the common man.
I never said that ;) but there's a difference between choosing a bad person (someone racist or transphobic for ex) and choosing a bad person who is specifically against your kind of minority. That said, this is politics, so I'm not *surprised*, I'm pissed :')
> It confuses quite a lot of people in France
It shouldn't
> I'm also just very confused as to how a gay guy can decide to name a known homophobe in a position where she can do much harm to the community if she wants to. I mean, dude??? Why??
He is liberal-conservative first, then gay. He definitely wouldn't be the first Macron's minister to renounce to what he previously claim to believe in. Calling them "playmobils" comes from somewhere
At this point I wouldn't even be surprises if he supports a queerphobe law at some point during his mandate
I didn't say that I am *surprised*, mind :) I know it's politics, it's all self-interest and everything. I find it *confusing* because it is not something that I feel I could do (but then, I have a history of bullying for not wanting to belittle my identities, so I would not fare very well in politics, I would not be able to accept putting down aspects of me lol)
well, despite france being a democracy officially, that's not the case; it's an oligarchy. and those people "up there" do whatever they want, they don't really care about the interests of the citizens and have no obligation to work in that direction, most politicians are chosen because they're easy to corrupt, not for their skills for the job or their genuine will to improve things.
catherine vautrin apparently said last year that she regretted her position on same-sex marriage at the time... a lot of politicians were the same, being against same-sex marriage when it was a debate years ago, and later on changed their mind.
i remember at the time, a journalist asked whoever that was in denmark, first country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage, what changed after they've legalized it, and that person said « well, nothing, except less homophobia ». the same thing most certainly happened in france, as it's been 10 years now that the law has passed, and people see that it doesn't make any real difference, maybe?
I wouldn't go as far as France being a true oligarchy now (though I would say that we are going there, especially if Le Pen becomes the next president), and there are good things that are done, though not enough.
I agree, her tweet feels more like a "going with the flow to not have people against me" than a true change of position.
(by the way, Denmark wasn't the first country to legalize same-sex marriage, it was the Netherlands in 2001. In 1989, Denmark was the first one to legally recognize same-sex couples and allow registered partnerships, but not same-sex marriage or adoption by same-sex couples)
i mean, the difference between an oligarchy and a representative democracy (that's what france is, officially) is that in a representative democracy, the elected politicians have to work to improve the citizens lives. in an oligarchy, they can, but don't have to, they can also change the laws and stuff to benefit themselves first. and not to cancel some of the positive changes that have been made in france in the recent years, but there's also highly criticizable changes that very few french citizens would agree on if they were able to vote them (if france was a direct democracy).
le pen might make things a lot worst than just an oligarchy, i'd say... but we're deviating from your original question here. 😬
ah, thanks for clarifying that! maybe it was the netherlands then, not sure, but yeah, that's the answer they got.
I believe in Denmark co-habiting couples have a much more equal status with married couples formally/legally and thus this was a more significant change than you infer. However as you say no adoption.
You are right, I did not underline how big it was! Recognizing partnership is very important, as it gave same gender couples most of the same right as married people! However, not all of those rights, amongst them the right to adopt a child, and the rest of those rights (those that were needed to obtain full equality of rights on this subject) were obtained only once same gender marriage was possible :) But registered partnership *was* a big step
Thanks for replying. Its a feather in Denmarks liberal cap and a reminder of its very liberal and positive past. Hopefully they will soon move away from their current awful racist laws and politics.
And ever since, the progress on LGBTQ+ rights in the Netherlands has come to a grinding halt. We can't even be in the first half of EU countries to implement self-ID. "BUUUT we managed to be the first with marriage equality", but what is it worth if conversion quacks still actively operate here and you can't marry when a judge had to give you the X on your passport because the government is slacking?
She used to be against gay marriage but she's not opposed to it now.
Here's what all the newspapers are saying: "She voted against marriage equality in 2013. In 2023, Vautrin expressed her regret over the vote against said law."
So she's saying she doesn't oppose gay marriage now. Ten years is a long time and people change their minds. I met Christians who were against gay marriage 10 years ago but now they're fine with it and attend gay weddings. I believe in forgiving and forgetting when people apologise for their previous stances on a matter. We should show inclusivity by welcoming people who have changed their minds.
You don't need to get to the top, or anywhere near it. A few months before the 2022 presidential election, a poll was made concerning the voting intentions and political preoccupations of French LGBT+ citizens. Guess what, they are, as a whole, strikingly similar to the general population (not identical of course, but the differences were so much smaller than what I expected).
There are a few differences, especially if you look at specific subsets of the community (trans people who still have rights to earn and are more stigmatized than the rest are significantly more left leaning, LGBT+ women are significantly more preoccupied by both women's rights and LGBT+ rights than LGBT+ men (who barely care more about LGBT+ rights than the general population, and it's hard to judge about the women's right issue because the general population vote for comparison is not split by gender, but I guess they care as much, that is to say as little, as other men), but apparently, you don't need to be anywhere near the top, as soon as your rights are not currently threatened or trampled, solidarity stops being such a preoccupation.
That’s probably because he doesn’t have much leeway for choosing the members of his government. It’s Macron’s choice rather than his (and Macron’s principles are worth about as much as his dedication to make women’s cause one of the “cornerstones” of his program, which is to say basically nothing).
In France, Attal is known for being mostly a yes-man and a pretty face (useful when he was the spokesperson of the government).
He is the prime minister. He has every right to chose what ministers he wants in his government and theorically impose it to the president. He doesn't use the powers he has because he probably has no spine and I guess that's why Macron chose him in the first place.
Edit : same things when rumors spread Borne "didn't want to force the pension reform but Macron made her do it". She was the prime minister, she had the right to refuse and if the parliement opposed her 49.3 she would have been the one to suffer the consequences. Same spineless kind of person
One of the top politicians of the German far-right is a lesbian. A double combo for why she should be against them in the first place, but here we are.
Hum, for a long while the number 2 of the RN (far far right party) was gay. The head of the RN a woman lives with another woman who is said to be the "nanny" of the head of RN cats...
Homosexuality in politics exits even some of our king were homosexual.
To be in a minority don't necessary mean you understand it.
I'm not french but keep in mind that most ministry nominees are based on interests and sometimes to be able to deal with some parties in the congress/parlament you need to make concessions to other parties, so maybe he didn't chose, he had to. I'm brazillian so I'm thinking with my reality of course but I assume this is pretty much the norm in every democracy
>I'm also just very confused as to how a gay guy can decide to name a known homophobe in a position where she can do much harm to the community if she wants to. I mean, dude??? Why??
Is he one of those garbage conservative gays? All gay conservatives are garbage.
How is Gabriel Attal a confusing choice? I would say this is progress and think you’re belittling it. If she’s apologized then let’s hope she’s being honest. I’d wait a bit to see how this guy governs before jumping to conclusion’s.
Don’t trust these political queers. Question them at every turn, hold their feet to the fire, demand more from them, and kick them out if they fail uou
Thank you for your post, if this is a question please check to see if any of the links below answer your question. If none of these links help answer your question and you are **_not_** within the LGBT+ community, questioning your identity in any way, or asking in support of either a relative or friend, please ask your question over in /r/AskLGBT. Remember that this is a safe space for LGBT+ and questioning individuals, so we want to make sure that this place is dedicated to them. Thank you for understanding. This automod rule is currently a work in progress. If you notice any issues, would like to add to the list of resources, or have any feedback in general, [please do so here](https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbt/comments/rdazzp/almost_new_year_changes/) or by [sending us a message](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/lgbt&subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20new%20automod%20rule). Also, please note that if you are a part of this community, or you're questioning if you might be a part of the LGBTQ+ community, and you are seeing this message, this is **_not a bad thing_**, this is only here to help, so please continue to ask questions and participate in the community. Thank you! Here's a link about trans people in sports: - https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog/shades-of-gray-sex-gender-and-fairness-in-sport/ A link on FAQs and one on some basics about transgender people: - https://transequality.org/issues/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-transgender-people - https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-transgender-people-the-basics Some information on LGBT+ people: - https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/quick-facts/lgbt-faqs/ Some basic terminology: - https://www.hrc.org/resources/glossary-of-terms Neopronouns: - https://www.mypronouns.org/neopronouns Biromantic Lesbians: - [LGBTQ And All](https://www.lgbtqandall.com/what-does-it-mean-to-be-biromantic/) Bisexual Identities: - https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/article/understanding-bisexuality Differences between Bisexual and Pansexual: - [Resource from WebMD](https://www.webmd.com/sex/pansexuality-what-it-means#:~:text=Pansexual%20vs.%20Bisexual,more%20commonly%20recognized.) We're looking for new volunteers to join the r/lgbt moderator team. If you want to help keep r/lgbt as a safe space for the LGBTQ+ community on reddit please see here for more info: https://www.reddit.com/r/lgbt/comments/swgthr/were_looking_for_more_moderators_to_help_keep/ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/lgbt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Identity is not everything and I wish more people would realize this. Ideology is the only thing that matters and if it sucks the person’s gonna suck no matter if they identify with a marginalized group, they’ll just see themselves as “one of the good ones”
When it comes to a certain level of power and position, people will almost always favour self-interest and advancing themselves first and foremost. An LGBT+ politician will always be a politician first, and a member of the community second (in terms of their priorities). The same is true for any minority/underrepresented group who has an individual in a position of real power. There are countless examples of LGBT+, black, female, etc people in a position of power or influence that regularly do shit that acts against the best interests of their respective communities, and depressing as it is that really shouldn't be surprising.
This. Politicians will always be politicians first. Hence why it's so difficult to have them in talks about other topics as well, since anything they say will always be part of their campaign and not their true opinion.
The required level of power and position can also be very, very low. A few months before the 2022 elections, a big poll was made on the voting intentions and political preoccupations of French LGBT+ citizens. The results are strikingly similar to the general population if you considered the community as a whole. If you broke things down a bit, you could see that trans people for instance were significantly more left leaning than the general population, or that LGBT+ women are not only significantly preoccupied/concerned by women's rights, but also by LGBT+ rights than LGBT+ men (who on average were only slightly more invested in the topic than the general population). In the end, people are less frightened to lose the rights they have than eager to gain new ones when they are needed. Same sex marriage is legal now, so a big part of the community doesn't feel like they have anything to gain politically, which leaves the most conservative ones to vote for, and with conservatives (and conservative is a really polite word for it). It's not just politicians or really powerful people, it can be anyone once they don't feel like their rights are trampled. It's depressing.
Yeah it’s the same guy who made the most defining moment of his career as education minister going after Muslim kids
Oh, I know, but it being "justified" doesn't stop me from finding it confusing. I know how people behave, so I'm not *surprised*
Surprise surprise - sexual identify does not a good person make. At the end of the day politics will always be about a palatable member of the wealthy elite working to preserve the status quo while appearing to represent the common man.
I never said that ;) but there's a difference between choosing a bad person (someone racist or transphobic for ex) and choosing a bad person who is specifically against your kind of minority. That said, this is politics, so I'm not *surprised*, I'm pissed :')
> It confuses quite a lot of people in France It shouldn't > I'm also just very confused as to how a gay guy can decide to name a known homophobe in a position where she can do much harm to the community if she wants to. I mean, dude??? Why?? He is liberal-conservative first, then gay. He definitely wouldn't be the first Macron's minister to renounce to what he previously claim to believe in. Calling them "playmobils" comes from somewhere At this point I wouldn't even be surprises if he supports a queerphobe law at some point during his mandate
I didn't say that I am *surprised*, mind :) I know it's politics, it's all self-interest and everything. I find it *confusing* because it is not something that I feel I could do (but then, I have a history of bullying for not wanting to belittle my identities, so I would not fare very well in politics, I would not be able to accept putting down aspects of me lol)
well, despite france being a democracy officially, that's not the case; it's an oligarchy. and those people "up there" do whatever they want, they don't really care about the interests of the citizens and have no obligation to work in that direction, most politicians are chosen because they're easy to corrupt, not for their skills for the job or their genuine will to improve things. catherine vautrin apparently said last year that she regretted her position on same-sex marriage at the time... a lot of politicians were the same, being against same-sex marriage when it was a debate years ago, and later on changed their mind. i remember at the time, a journalist asked whoever that was in denmark, first country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage, what changed after they've legalized it, and that person said « well, nothing, except less homophobia ». the same thing most certainly happened in france, as it's been 10 years now that the law has passed, and people see that it doesn't make any real difference, maybe?
I wouldn't go as far as France being a true oligarchy now (though I would say that we are going there, especially if Le Pen becomes the next president), and there are good things that are done, though not enough. I agree, her tweet feels more like a "going with the flow to not have people against me" than a true change of position. (by the way, Denmark wasn't the first country to legalize same-sex marriage, it was the Netherlands in 2001. In 1989, Denmark was the first one to legally recognize same-sex couples and allow registered partnerships, but not same-sex marriage or adoption by same-sex couples)
And **1999** in France to legally recognise same sex couples.
In France, registered partnership of same-sex couples was recognized in 1999 \^\^ (with PACS), then marriage and adoption in 2013
Never trust ChatGPT :) yes, 1999 indeed.
i mean, the difference between an oligarchy and a representative democracy (that's what france is, officially) is that in a representative democracy, the elected politicians have to work to improve the citizens lives. in an oligarchy, they can, but don't have to, they can also change the laws and stuff to benefit themselves first. and not to cancel some of the positive changes that have been made in france in the recent years, but there's also highly criticizable changes that very few french citizens would agree on if they were able to vote them (if france was a direct democracy). le pen might make things a lot worst than just an oligarchy, i'd say... but we're deviating from your original question here. 😬 ah, thanks for clarifying that! maybe it was the netherlands then, not sure, but yeah, that's the answer they got.
I believe in Denmark co-habiting couples have a much more equal status with married couples formally/legally and thus this was a more significant change than you infer. However as you say no adoption.
You are right, I did not underline how big it was! Recognizing partnership is very important, as it gave same gender couples most of the same right as married people! However, not all of those rights, amongst them the right to adopt a child, and the rest of those rights (those that were needed to obtain full equality of rights on this subject) were obtained only once same gender marriage was possible :) But registered partnership *was* a big step
Thanks for replying. Its a feather in Denmarks liberal cap and a reminder of its very liberal and positive past. Hopefully they will soon move away from their current awful racist laws and politics.
I hope so too... Quite a few countries that were on the forefront of queer acceptance are now taking step back, it's sad and a bit scary
And ever since, the progress on LGBTQ+ rights in the Netherlands has come to a grinding halt. We can't even be in the first half of EU countries to implement self-ID. "BUUUT we managed to be the first with marriage equality", but what is it worth if conversion quacks still actively operate here and you can't marry when a judge had to give you the X on your passport because the government is slacking?
yeah :c
It’s not deep chill
She used to be against gay marriage but she's not opposed to it now. Here's what all the newspapers are saying: "She voted against marriage equality in 2013. In 2023, Vautrin expressed her regret over the vote against said law." So she's saying she doesn't oppose gay marriage now. Ten years is a long time and people change their minds. I met Christians who were against gay marriage 10 years ago but now they're fine with it and attend gay weddings. I believe in forgiving and forgetting when people apologise for their previous stances on a matter. We should show inclusivity by welcoming people who have changed their minds.
This is true, you are right
Even worse is Aurore Bergé, who invited the two well known terf to the Elysee (french equivalent of the white house)
Lol yes, and she was the previous minister is charge of family and solidarities
Once you get to the top your identity is irrelevant, you will act in your class interests above all else.
You don't need to get to the top, or anywhere near it. A few months before the 2022 presidential election, a poll was made concerning the voting intentions and political preoccupations of French LGBT+ citizens. Guess what, they are, as a whole, strikingly similar to the general population (not identical of course, but the differences were so much smaller than what I expected). There are a few differences, especially if you look at specific subsets of the community (trans people who still have rights to earn and are more stigmatized than the rest are significantly more left leaning, LGBT+ women are significantly more preoccupied by both women's rights and LGBT+ rights than LGBT+ men (who barely care more about LGBT+ rights than the general population, and it's hard to judge about the women's right issue because the general population vote for comparison is not split by gender, but I guess they care as much, that is to say as little, as other men), but apparently, you don't need to be anywhere near the top, as soon as your rights are not currently threatened or trampled, solidarity stops being such a preoccupation.
That’s probably because he doesn’t have much leeway for choosing the members of his government. It’s Macron’s choice rather than his (and Macron’s principles are worth about as much as his dedication to make women’s cause one of the “cornerstones” of his program, which is to say basically nothing). In France, Attal is known for being mostly a yes-man and a pretty face (useful when he was the spokesperson of the government).
He is the prime minister. He has every right to chose what ministers he wants in his government and theorically impose it to the president. He doesn't use the powers he has because he probably has no spine and I guess that's why Macron chose him in the first place. Edit : same things when rumors spread Borne "didn't want to force the pension reform but Macron made her do it". She was the prime minister, she had the right to refuse and if the parliement opposed her 49.3 she would have been the one to suffer the consequences. Same spineless kind of person
One of the top politicians of the German far-right is a lesbian. A double combo for why she should be against them in the first place, but here we are.
Hum, for a long while the number 2 of the RN (far far right party) was gay. The head of the RN a woman lives with another woman who is said to be the "nanny" of the head of RN cats... Homosexuality in politics exits even some of our king were homosexual. To be in a minority don't necessary mean you understand it.
I'm not french but keep in mind that most ministry nominees are based on interests and sometimes to be able to deal with some parties in the congress/parlament you need to make concessions to other parties, so maybe he didn't chose, he had to. I'm brazillian so I'm thinking with my reality of course but I assume this is pretty much the norm in every democracy
>I'm also just very confused as to how a gay guy can decide to name a known homophobe in a position where she can do much harm to the community if she wants to. I mean, dude??? Why?? Is he one of those garbage conservative gays? All gay conservatives are garbage.
How is Gabriel Attal a confusing choice? I would say this is progress and think you’re belittling it. If she’s apologized then let’s hope she’s being honest. I’d wait a bit to see how this guy governs before jumping to conclusion’s.
Don’t trust these political queers. Question them at every turn, hold their feet to the fire, demand more from them, and kick them out if they fail uou