My boss and I have decided to finish our direct involvement and support of LGBTs in our organisation.
Partly because we have to use our resources on other types of support for the good of the whole organisation.
But mainly because we see LGBT as being lifestyle choices that do not need to be in the workplace or have any affect on how the employees carry out their duties.
We don't see LGBT staff or clients parading round the premises although our industry has been shown to have statictically higher numbers of LGBT in its ranks and in some departments that need a uniform we have a dress code that covers all shade of male and female.
This weekend I should have been at a conference with them but the more of these conferences I attended the more I saw how irrelevant LGBT issues are to our organisation's core job.
The Gs saw conferences as an excuse for a freebie cruising the gay bars and the Ls saw them as a freebie weekend with their girlfriends. 
I never identified a B or a TG during the conference meetings but at night a lot of CDs were in evidence and from their morning-after talk it was obvious that CD=GB.
I may have been the only TS which meant that while the G went cruising and the Ls took their girlfiends their rooms I was free to find a theatre or cinema and then get into chatting over drinks with foreigners about the city and history of the area the conferences were held in.  It is really surprising how many Americans visit Britain but cannot somehow hold a basic map of the country in their heads.
So from now on LGBT matters will be relegated to whatever directions trickle down from head office.  My department works with HR and the induction for new starters includes information about our LGBT policy and our contacts point but in 3.5 years we have never had a call with any LGBT issues.

Quote from: lilacwoman on September 11, 2010, 07:52:29 AM

But mainly because we see LGBT as being lifestyle choices

I never identified a B or a TG during the conference meetings but at night a lot of CDs were in evidence and from their morning-after talk it was obvious that CD=GB.

That is unfortunate :-/

Incredible how you are a part of this community yet you totally don't get it. Lifestyle choice? Are you serious?

I too am curious lilacwoman.

Can you say a little more about your outlook, perhaps also, your viewpoints?

It will be interesting to get a different perspective.

Would also be interesting to learn a bit more about your environment.

I guess the thing that's always struck me, is that LGB is about sexual orientation, whereas T is something else altogether, and a T can be either L,G or B (or straight, of course).  So sticking the T on the end I guess is a political thing, so that we have some voice somewhere, but it doesn't seem to be a really great fit, and lots of room for potential misunderstandings on both sides...

Hey, Lilacwoman, when did you make the lifestyle choice to be TS?

Just because some rainbow people are idiots doesn't mean that all of them are. Bad apples ruin the entire barrell, and so on and so forth.

Also, I'm using the term rainbow people because LGBT is an acronym which puts things that are fundamentally different together. The T has nothing at all to do with the L, G or B. Here in Sweden, we use the acronym HBT. Homosexual, bisexual, and transpersons. It's also bad, because that T has nothing at all to do with the H or B.

Lifestlye choice is not the right expression I think that too. But maybe she used the term because while they're certainly not "choices" but they usually have some kind of recognizable lifestyle associated with them.

g

Quote from: ggina on September 11, 2010, 10:08:23 AM
Lifestlye choice is not the right expression I think that too. But maybe she used the term because while they're certainly not "choices" but they usually have some kind of recognizable lifestyle associated with them.

g

I guess maybe LGB's have the "choice" whether to let anyone know about them or not, whereas us T's have to be pretty public about it, at least during and immediately after transition, because you can't really change gender surreptitiously...

Hi lilacwoman,
.
Unfortunately, you seem to have fallen into the trap of thinking that the actions these people partake in during their daily lives have anything to do with being LGBT.
.
Being LGBT is not a "lifestyle choice."  People don't choose to be attracted to the same sex, just as people don't choose to be attracted to the opposite sex.  They just are.  Trans people don't choose to feel out of place in their own bodies.  They just do.  Many fight being LGBT when they first discover it, and often for many years after, because it means being different, and society isn't particularly accepting of difference.
.
Now...as to your coworkers:
.
I don't know what business you're in, but from my own experience, what you're describing is not uncommon of *ALL* people whether they be straight or LGBT.  I had a manager that commonly took long 2 hour lunches and saw it as a time to socialize with her closest girlfriend.  I've known several young professionals who claim to have a close relationship with someone of the opposite sex, but when they go out of town on a business trip, the SO is 'out of state, out of mind' as it were.  I've found it common for younger individuals to view conferences and business trips as also a time to party and be with friends...and this is strictly among heterosexuals.  Immaturity is a lifestyle choice.  However, immaturity is not guaranteed in any set of the population.  Stereotyping the entire LGBT population based on the narrow experiences you've had with a subset of that population is rather poor professional practice.
.
Now, in my opinion, what you and your boss choose to support is entirely irrelevant here.  Business decisions need to be made with the best interests of that business in mind.  Though, if you think that supporting LGBT means supporting immaturity and unprofessionalism though...it doesn't.  If an LGBT person displays those negative behaviors on the job, they should be disciplined accordingly just as any hetero individual would be.  Though, a word of caution here:  There is a difference between a person's professional life, and their private life.  I know a few people who party hard when off work, but are all business when at work.   If you're basing your professional decisions on the personal not-at-work lives of a certain set of people, I'd say that 's extremely unprofessional of you...unless of course those immature actions spill over into the work world...in which case, they should be dealt with accordingly...not based on an entire group...but based upon the specific offending individual involved.

I think it is admirable that your organization is so accepting that there have never been LGBT issues.  I also know a number of Gs and Ls who are woodworking - they aren't trying to be stealth but they just are so like the hetero people they associate with that it isn't obvious that they are homosexual.

And I, too, will object to the term 'lifestyle choice'.  I didn't choose to be trans.  (Actually, I would have chosen to be gay, but that didn't work out. )  And it certainly is not a lifestyle.  I am a normal woman of my age and station, except one with a background that is a bit different from the other normal women I associate with (e.g., I was never pregnant).

But I'm glad that your organization has gone beyond the need to work to integrate LGBT folk into the workplace.

- Kate

I would agree that being gay or bisexual isn't a choice....more a case of core programming....

I saw a very interesting science doc a couple of years back.... that used NMR to try and figure human bean sexuality....

And interestingly with males sexuality is highly polarised.... very hetero or very gay little in-betweeness in fact...

Where as us chix's when shown any form or variation, adult style coupling stimulation man-man, man-woman, woman-woman and multiple variations of....at a subconscious level we switch on regardless..

And key is if you show a hetero man gay imagery he quickly can 'naturally' switch on his hostility centres....

They claimed the selfish-gene is to blame from our neanderthal, stone-ageish past... young rearing was tough, dangerous and oft ended in failure...therefore when the men were away looking for the protein....in hunting packs which would see them away for days....

Women would/could to help 'up' the chances of their own offspring making it through did bi-bond with other alpha females in the pack... hence our sexuality still being more naturally fluid....

Though still predominantly hetero too....

I suspect this is why in the lesbian community so many of them claim to hate the - I'm a straight woman but bi-curios types - whom claim they have a hubby that would not be involved...but would like to watch.....lol

Interesting......eh?

Yay, a post full of the ignorant stereotypes and deceitful buzzwords favored by homophobic activists.  Being gay wasn't a choice for me, and it isn't a lifestyle.  Neither is being trans.  But being rude and slurring people with stupid remarks like yours is a choice, and some people like to make it a lifestyle.

I try to be understanding with non-LGBT people who say stuff like this, because some of them really don't know better.  But an LGBT person saying it?  It pretty much has to be malicious.

I'm sorry, but in reading your post (OP) I now have a negative opinion about you, especially in the fact that you claim to be Transgender, YET you say it's a lifestyle choice.
Transsexuals are born with a psychiatric condition, which has been officially made, a mental illness called Gender Dysphoria. True Transsexual people, do NOT choose to change their life. They are forced into it because living their life in the opposite gender to what they really are, is unbearable. THAT is why 1 in 2 Transsexuals end up ending their life.

Watch what you say here. If it's a lifestyle choice for you, then DON'T assume that it's a lifestyle choice for everyone else!

Quote from: sarahm on September 12, 2010, 01:07:01 AM
THAT is why 1 in 2 Transsexuals end up ending their life.

Is the official statistic still 36% or has it increased since the last time I checked? :O

Quote from: lilacwoman on September 11, 2010, 07:52:29 AM
My boss and I have decided to finish our direct involvement and support of LGBTs in our organisation.
Partly because we have to use our resources on other types of support for the good of the whole organisation.
But mainly because we see LGBT as being lifestyle choices that do not need to be in the workplace or have any affect on how the employees carry out their duties.
We don't see LGBT staff or clients parading round the premises although our industry has been shown to have statictically higher numbers of LGBT in its ranks and in some departments that need a uniform we have a dress code that covers all shade of male and female.
This weekend I should have been at a conference with them but the more of these conferences I attended the more I saw how irrelevant LGBT issues are to our organisation's core job.
The Gs saw conferences as an excuse for a freebie cruising the gay bars and the Ls saw them as a freebie weekend with their girlfriends. 
I never identified a B or a TG during the conference meetings but at night a lot of CDs were in evidence and from their morning-after talk it was obvious that CD=GB.
I may have been the only TS which meant that while the G went cruising and the Ls took their girlfiends their rooms I was free to find a theatre or cinema and then get into chatting over drinks with foreigners about the city and history of the area the conferences were held in.  It is really surprising how many Americans visit Britain but cannot somehow hold a basic map of the country in their heads.
So from now on LGBT matters will be relegated to whatever directions trickle down from head office.  My department works with HR and the induction for new starters includes information about our LGBT policy and our contacts point but in 3.5 years we have never had a call with any LGBT issues.

I am not sure what to make of this, but after reading many of your previous posts Lilacwoman, I have to say I am not in the least surprised by your admissions. 

Quotewe have never had a call with any LGBT issues

Umm, not till now. 

I think the initial post while possible not being against TOS, is sufficiently inflammatory to the people who use this site, to cause offense.

I am locking the topic

Cindy