HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » LostOne4Ever » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Confused
Hometown: Somewhere in Texas
Home country: USA
Current location: What part of lost do you not understand?
Member since: Sat Apr 20, 2013, 03:29 AM
Number of posts: 7,487

About Me

Hi I am Lost. In fact, I am pretty sure I made a wrong turn at Albuquerque. Anyone know the way to Cucamonga?

Journal Archives

How to add some color to your posts and annoy a bunch of other DUers at the same time!

[font style="font-family:Georgia,'Brush Script MT','comic sans MS',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]Welcome Noobies!

I am Lost, and today I am going to teach all of you how to add some color to your posts and annoy some other DUers at the same time!

In General what you need to do is put these tags in front of the parts of your post you want to color

[font style="font-family:Georgia,'Brush Script MT','comic sans MS',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal][b]YOUR MESSAGE HERE [/b][/font]

[font style="font-family:Georgia,'Brush Script MT','comic sans MS',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]The font-family part tells your computer what font family to use. In my case Georgia. If the computer reading your script does not support that script it will display [font face='Brush Script MT' size=5 color=black]Brush Script MT [/font]in teal, and if not that the oh so hated [font face='comic sans MS' size=4 color=black]comic sans MS [/font] font. If none of those work it will then use whatever fantasy font family your computer does support.

The size tells it what size to use and color what color to make the font. You can change
[font style="font-family:'Brush Script MT','Lucida handwriting','forte',cursive;" size=5 color=crimson]fonts[/font]multiple times within each other.

If you want to be lazy you could use
[font size=5 color=scarlet face='Brush Script MT']this[/font] instead but the font might not be supported by their computer and will default back to the normal script

I highly suggest if you use a font with spaces in it like
[font color=scarlet size=4 face=comic sans ms] Comic Sans MS [/font] you put apostrophes before and after like this [font size=4 color=scarlet face='comic sans ms']'Comic Sans MS'[/font]

I also suggest reading these links for more information:[/font]


[font style="font-family:georgia,'Brush Script MT','comic sans MS',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal] If done right this should give a little color to your posts and annoy some other DUers at the same time! I hope this [font style="font-family:'Brush Script MT','Lucida handwriting MT','forte',cursive;" size=5 color=crimson]helped!!![/font] [/font]

Edit:[font style="font-family:georgia,'Brush Script MT','comic sans MS',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal] Yes, I know I used two of the most hated fonts on the internet. But I like them!!![/font]

PS: [font style="font-family:georgia,'Brush Script MT','comic sans MS',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal] For anyone interested in trying this; just copying my post below the quote and pasting it into a reply and previewing it to see how it looks on your screen[/font]

[/b][font style="font-family:'Brush Script MT','Lucida handwriting','forte',cursive;" size=7 color=crimson]
See you on the boards![/b][/font]

The Increasing Problem With the Misinformed

Written by Thomas Baekdal on March 7, 2016

When discussing the future of newspapers, we have a tendency to focus only on the publishing side. We talk about the changes in formats, the new reader behaviors, the platforms, the devices, and the strange new world of distributed digital distribution, which are not just forcing us to do things in new ways, but also atomizes the very core of the newspaper.

But while the publishing side of things is undergoing tremendous changes, so is the journalistic and editorial side. The old concept of creating a package of news was designed for a public that we assumed was uninformed by default, but this is no longer the case.

The public is no longer uninformed. They are misinformed, and that requires an entirely different editorial focus. When writing for the uninformed, your focus is to report the news, which is what every newspaper is doing today. But when focusing on the misinformed, just reporting the news doesn't actually solve the public's needs. Now your focus must be on explaining the news instead.

So, in this article, we will talk about the rise of the misinformed using some really interesting data, as well as the threat to freedom of the press. And we will talk about how these two things are directly impacting your ability to succeed as a news company.

More at Link...
Posted by LostOne4Ever | Thu Jun 2, 2016, 02:41 PM (7 replies)

Maybe I am being premature, but I just want to say I Love President Obama!

The Obama administration will tell every U.S. public school district on Friday to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity.

The letter, signed by officials from the Education and Justice departments, does not have the force of law but contains an implicit threat that schools which do not abide by the Obama administration's interpretation of the law could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid.

"There is no room in our schools for discrimination of any kind, including discrimination against transgender students on the basis of their sex," U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said in a statement.

"This guidance gives administrators, teachers, and parents the tools they need to protect transgender students from peer harassment and to identify and address unjust school policies," she said.

Best President in my lifetime!

Transgender rights are Human rights

Anyone who doesn't support transrights has no right to call themselves a liberal, or a civil rights activist, a believer in social justice, or even a humanitarian.

They are just Assholes.

Same goes for their apologists


Your terf biology is full of crap, is denialism, and the real pseudoscience

It has been shown repeatedly that transsexuals do indeed have transgendered brains. The most famous study being Zhou:


Further, studies of intersex children who were surgically forced into one gender as infants confirms this. Most notably, the case of David Reimer.


To claim otherwise is denialism.

As a gay man, I don't accept that "transphobia" is a useful word, or that it's comparable to homophobia. When people say "transphobia" they usually mean simple common sense skepticism. Just because a man says he is a woman doesn't make him one, and doesn't rate comparison with anti-gay hatred.

It is a useful word, and just because you are gay doesn't mean you can't be a transphobe. And your skepticism is on the level of climate change skepticism....in that it is not skepticism at all, but denialism. Yes it does make them one, and not only does it compare perfectly, anti-trans hate is even more extreme. The majority of anti-LGBTQ hate crimes target the transgender.

The fact men and women are pure biological categories implies NOTHING about the way men and women can or should behave. As I said, male and female are simple facts about a person. We SHOULD be fighting stereotypes about what it means to be male and female, and as a gay man, that's intrinsically bound to ending homophobia.

First off, no men and women are not pure biological categories. If you understood biology you would know they make no such claim. Rather, biology breaks things into genotype and phenotype, and knows that one can have a male genotype but a female phenotype and that there are many cases where the phenotype or genotype are abnormal. CAIS women have male genotypes and female phenotypes. De la Chapelle Men are the opposite. Transsexuals have a female phenotype with regards to that portion of their brain.

Further, science does show SLIGHT differences between the genders with regards to behavior. Men tend to have higher sex drives for instance. It only makes sense as there are differences in the brain structure of men and women. Overall, these differences are averages and there are people who vary but overall it is well understood that there are in general differences in behavior between men and women.


Finally, part of breaking the stereotypes against men and women includes fighting for transgender rights and acceptance. Nothing challenges those stereotypes more than men and women who want to be the other gender.

LGB activism is about expanding and re-defining concepts of gender; but transgender activism is about re-asserting and codifying traditional gender.

Bullshit. Only a person who has no understanding of transgenderism thinks that. There are feminine transwomen and then there are transtomboy and butch translesbians, there are manly transmen and then there feminine transmen. For instance:


When you look at what the trans activists are saying online, it's nothing but vitriol and death threats, especially towards women. The word "TERF" is a slur. Online, nothing but thousands of the vilest kind of threats to "TERFS". To women, not to men who actually are violent to transgenders.

Come on now: let’s be real. Who’s the one inciting violence?

Never in the history of social movements has there been such public and casual calls to kill other humans as there is with Trans.

You tell me:


This is neurobabble and non-science. There is no science I'm aware of that proves "gender identity" has an objective existence. I am qualified in science, and I've looked into it. "Gender identity" is a supernatural claim. All the "brain studies" that get trotted out time and again simply do not prove otherwise. The brain is a flexible organ, and differences between men and women can be purely down to socialization. Moreover, gender identity disorder is diagnosed on subjective criteria.

No it is not and I already showed this. You are engaging in denailism and pseudoscience.

We don't have the faintest idea in what way homosexuality, love of music, or preference for chocolate icre cream manifests in the head, and we're supposed to believe we have solid proof that "gender" exists and where it is localized in the brain, separately to biological sex? Come on, that simply isn't credible.

I find it bewildering that women fought so hard against the notion that women and men are somehow inherently different in ways that matter, who now support this claim when transgenders make it! It's just scientific sexism.

Actually we do know it from studies of the brain which you are handwaving away. We also know that both these things are the result of genetics and exposure to hormones in the body during fetal development. But keep up with the RW arguments against both transpeople and gay people...it just reveals you for what you are.

It is not scientific sexism, as acknowledging that there are differences between men and women is not sexist. This is simply the reality of it, and you are trying to distort things to attack transpeople.

The John/Joan case does not prove otherwise; nothing about a single person can prove any general case, let alone a child who was sexually abused by Mengele-like psychiatrists. Mutilating a boy who then says he is not a girl does not prove that boys who claim to be female are ever female, let alone always female.

Actually, there are other cases just like it, and it does prove otherwise. If I said there are no such things as birds, one needs only produce a single bird to prove one wrong. Same here, Reimer did prove that gender goes beyond socialization.

But you don't like that so you want to hand wave it away to justify your bigotry.

We are supposed to believe that Bruce Jenner who is the biological father of 6 children by 3 different wives is magically and mysteriously just like intersex people because of his special “lady brain”. This is bullshit and people know it.

No, it is science. Sorry that science has gotten in the way of your hate fest.

We’re told “gender is not sex” like a mantra bereft of enlightenment. Well, what is gender? They never answer. Where did it come from? They never answer. Reality is that male/female sex dimorphism is how mammals reproduce. Define gender, I ask.


Your welcome!

Where does it come from? The brain.

And no, again your science sucks. There are hermaphrodites who reproduce, there are asexual beings that reproduce, and no matter how much you hate it, the world is not the black and white you want it to be.

Gender is a socially constructed hierarchy of sex based norms imposed onto bodies. There. That wasn’t difficult, was it?

And gender identity is based in the brain. There. That wasn't difficult was it?

Now, it’s pretty obvious that such is absurd immaterialism. “Inner, transcendental gender essence” can’t hold under scrutiny, according to any understanding of self and subjectivity.

Transgenderists well know this.

So, to protect this essentialism, transgenderists bully anyone — women or transsexuals in particular — who know females (women) and male transwomen have differences. So that, recently, an American professor sought to ban the word female from the classroom, since it might hurt male feelings.

I kid you not: Biology is now considered offensive.

Biology isn't considered offensive, your pseudo-scientific transphobia is.

I know this will get me a hide but it is worth it:

  • Fuck Bigots

  • Fuck Transphobes

  • Fuck Terfs

  • Fuck Your Bigoted Apologia for Terfs and Transphobes

  • You should have been MIRT'd long ago.

    EDIT: Keep this my usual teal color instead of the indigo I have been using for Halloween because of all the links.

Asexual Awareness Week 2015 (Oct 19-25'th)

It is that time of year again!

It's Asexual Awareness Week!

So what exactly is asexuality?

Asexuality can be defined as a sexual orientation in which one does not experience sexual attraction or sexual desire directed toward others. In a way, it can be thought of as a lack of an orientation. You could easily say, that we would much rather have cake than sex

But wait, there is more! In addition to being an (lack of) orientation, there are many sexuals who experience sexual attraction/desire so rarely, or only under specific circumstances that they identify with the label as well.

For this reason, in addition to being an orientation, asexuality is also be considered a spectrum of sexual orientations. Imagine it as a gradient going from black to white. The black end of the gradient represents those with no sexual desire what-so-ever. At the other end, represented by "white," are allosexuals. Allosexuals being people who experience normal to high levels of sexual attraction/desire. In the middle grey area are those people we mentioned earlier, the ones who only rarely or under special circumstance experience sexual attraction: Grey-sexuals!

In fact, this diversity in asexuality is basis of our flag. Black on top to represent asexuality, gray for the gray-sexualuality, white for our allosexual allies, and purple to represent the community in its entirety!

So does this mean that asexuals are never attracted to other people and never fall in love?

Not quite. Asexuals do not experience sexual desire for others, but they can experience other types of attractions. You see, there are actually several different types of attractions. For instance, a person can be romantically attracted to someone but not sexually. Here is a graphic explaining some of the different types of attraction:

An asexual does not experience sexual attraction, but they can experience these other types of attraction. Asexuals who are attracted to the other gender romantically, but not sexually can be called heteroromantic asexuals, while those attracted to the same gender could be discribed as homoromantic asexuals.

If an asexual lacks both romantic and sexual attraction they can be called an Aromantic Asexual. Not surprisingly, one doesn't have to be asexual to be aromantic. There are also sexuals who are aromantic as well.

So, asexuals are just people who don't have sex?

No, that not quite right. What you are describing is celibacy.

Asexuality is an orientation much like being homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual. And just like those orientations being asexual is not a choice. Being celibate, on the other hand, is a choice.

Further, one need not be asexual to choose to be celibate. Also, just like all other orientations, one can choose to have intercourse with someone despite not being sexually attracted to that person for various reasons. For instance, an asexual may choose to have sex because they want to become a parent.

But just like a person of any other orientation, there will be difficulties having intercourse with someone you aren't sexually attracted to depending on how repulsed one is to that gender.

There are, in fact, many asexuals who are completely sex-repulsed to the point that even if they want children they would be unable to overcome their aversion to sex. These feelings often can cause major issues in mixed relationships with allosexuals and just one of the issues our community face.

Do Asexuals face Discrimination?

Trigger Warning

Unfortunately, yes, we do.

However, Many people not only think we don't have such issues but they refuse to even accept that asexuality exist. Quite often, asexual people are told that they are suffering from hormonal issues, or mental illness, or that our asexuality is the result of things like abuse.

Now, while it is possible for people to lose their sexual desire for others due to these factors; an asexuals lack of sexual disorder is due to their orientation, and it is important that people realize the difference. Fortunately, the field of psychology has now realized that and they have recently made a distinction between asexuality and Hypoactive sexual desire disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders .

According to one study, we actually face more wide spread discrimination than any other orientation; HOWEVER, this discrimination isn't necessary of a phobic type. What this means is that a person who is homophobic is just as likely to hate asexuals as they are homosexuals, and that is assuming that they don't just assume that we are homosexuals in denial about our orientation.

We are routinely seen as both machine like and uncaring, and yet also as animalistic. Perhaps, the single worst form of discrimination an asexual could face is "corrective rape." There has also been a story of an asexual couple denied the right to adopt a child because of their orientation.

In Conclusion

So, not to end on a downer not I would like to conclude by thanking the LGBT group here at DU for all of your support of DU's asexual posters and thank everyone who took time to read. For those further interested in asexuality here are some links:

Thank you all for reading this long post and please help yourself to the Ace cake~!


Posted on October 2, 2015 by ckratzer

So, you believe homosexuality is a sin, whether it be in practice, orientation, or both. Maybe you have studied the issue, or just assimilated the beliefs heard from others. If you have become familiar with any or all of the six passages in the Bible that seem to specifically address the issue, you interpret them as condemnations against homosexuality and proof that God declares it all as sin.


What if you’re wrong, like Paul in Scripture, who actually believed it was “unnatural” for the Gentiles to accept Christ and be included in the fellowship of believers? By the way, you know who the Gentiles are? You.


If I am wrong, the Holy Spirit will simply pursue me with correction, go around and ahead me to thwart the misleading, and work in the lives of homosexuals to lead them to “repentance.”

However, if you’re wrong…

You have condemned, marginalized, persecuted, and falsely judged an entire group of God-imaged people.

You have labeled as sin, that which is not.

More at Link...

I hope I didn't break the 4 paragraph rule. I am not too sure how I should treat 1 sentence paragraphs, but if I need to edit I will.

Posted by LostOne4Ever | Tue Oct 6, 2015, 02:28 AM (5 replies)

Meet Some Of The LGBT Homeless Youth The Pope Didn't Visit

Meet Some Of The LGBT Homeless Youth The Pope Didn't Visit
A staggering 40% of America's homeless youth are LGBT.

JamesMichael Nichols
Deputy Gay Voices Editor, The Huffington Post
Posted: 09/30/2015 12:57 PM EDT | Edited: 09/30/2015 01:19 PM EDT

Homelessness is, without a doubt, a major issue for the queer community.

Rates of homelessness among queer youth -- those under age 18 in America -- are staggering, with 40 percent of homeless youth reportedly identifying as LGBT.

Religious institutions preaching the evil nature of homosexuality can oftentimes lead to families disowning their queer children or forcing them onto the street. In an effort to bring attention to this heartbreaking reality, Carl Siciliano, Executive Director of the Ali Forney Center, created this video, with Mitchell Gold's vision and support, to eleveate the stories of some LGBT homeless youth who have found themselves on the streets due to extreme religious attitudes from their parents.

In fact, the Ali Forney Center took out an open letter in The New York Times in April 2014 drawing attention to the ways in which the pope and Catholic church have called same-sex attraction "intrinsically disordered," among other things, and encouraged parents to reject their queer children.

More at link...

Of course he had no problem meeting with Kim Davis and then calling her a conscientious objector...

Priorities Pope Francisco, Priorities...
Posted by LostOne4Ever | Thu Oct 1, 2015, 04:03 PM (6 replies)

No he is not, please don't speak on behalf of me or others.

I will never stand with a man who said things like this:

He wrote: “In the coming weeks, the Argentine people will face a situation whose outcome can seriously harm the family. . . .

“At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother, and children. At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”

Cardinal Bergoglio continued: “Let us not be naive: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a ‘move’ of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

The cardinal also noted that “today the country, in this particular situation, needs the special assistance of the Holy Spirit to bring the light of truth on to the darkness of error, it need this advocate to defend us from being enchanted by many fallacies that are tried at all costs to justify this bill and to confuse and deceive the people of good will.”

Or this:

According to the National Catholic Reporter, he said: “Let’s think of the nuclear arms, of the possibility to annihilate in a few instants a very high number of human beings.

“Let’s think also of genetic manipulation, of the manipulation of life, or of the gender theory, that does not recognize the order of creation.”

“With this attitude, man commits a new sin, that against God the Creator.

“The true custody of creation does not have anything to do with the ideologies that consider man like an accident, like a problem to eliminate.

“God has placed man and woman and the summit of creation and has entrusted them with the earth.

“The design of the Creator is written in nature.”

Or this:

Speaking at his weekly general audience on Wednesday, the pope said: "I greet the pilgrims from Slovakia and, through them, I wish to express my appreciation to the entire Slovak church, encouraging everyone to continue their efforts in defense of the family, the vital cell of society."

Or this:

“The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life,” Francis said at a Mass in Manila. “These realities are increasingly under attack from powerful forces, which threaten to disfigure God’s plan for creation.”

Or this from the other day

“I cannot hide my concern for the family, which is threatened, perhaps as never before, from within and without,” Francis said. “Fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family. I can only reiterate the importance and, above all, the richness and the beauty of family life.”

Or his standing up for Kim Davis the other day.

But, I WILL stand up for Women & LGBTQ rights and dignity against people like the Pope; and if that makes me an left wing extremist, then I will wear that badge with pride.

I will be in good company with other left wing extremist of their time like the abolitionists, the suffragettes, the civil rights proponents, and the protesters at the stonewall riots.

Edit: adding a couple more links about the pope and Kim Davis's meeting:



Edit2: Another link I want for the future


Edit3: his who am I to judge comment in full:


When Bible Stories Are Illustrated, They Reveal Some Huge Problems

By Scott Bixby February 24, 2015

"Bears will maul you, this I know, for the Bible tells me so ..."

Christian holy scripture contains more than a foundational template for leading a spiritual life — it also features sex, accidental crotch-touching, the summoning of bears with curses and a host of other topics and prescriptions that seem downright un-Christian.

The gap between more kid-friendly passages and Biblical verses that describe the market price for a rape victim's virginity are the topic of the illustrated book, The Bible Said What!? by Evan Mascagni and illustrated by Nick Sirotich. Mascagni used his decadelong experience as a Catholic school student in Kentucky as a primary resource to highlight the Bible's discrepancies.

"Christianity was not only the right way, but the only way," Mascagni told Mic. "Schoolteachers and priests constantly cherry-picked verses from the Bible to justify whatever lessons were in store for the day, and I developed a very narrow understanding of Christianity. This book explores some of the stories that were overlooked throughout my education and have ultimately led me to take the Bible for what it is."

And what is the Bible, according to Mascagni? "The longest book most Christians have never read." Mascagni may be on to something: Although 88% of American households own at least one Bible, only 37% read it once a week or more, according to a 2014 survey by the American Bible Society. The same survey shows that only 35% of millennials agree with the statement that "the Bible contains everything a person needs to know to lead a meaningful life," and 39% of millennials have never read the Bible at all.


More at link...
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »