LGBT Symbols on Pedestrian Crossings.

[exiled]

]Quite right. One's personal sexual preference has absolutely nothing to do with road safety. I don't flaunt the fact that I'm heterosexual, nor am I offended by anyone who isn't, providing whatever they do is lawful. There's a time and place for sexuality but the highway environment isn't it, it's completely irrelevant.

Do you put your arms around your opposite loved one when sharing a laugh, comforting them if upset, reminicing about that film your saw, music you heard? And do you do it without thinking about the reaction of passers by to you doing it?

If you do, you are flaunting your heterosexuality, especially if two women or two men doing the same makes you 'uncomfortable'.

[Ruperts Trooper]

]Quite right. One's personal sexual preference has absolutely nothing to do with road safety. I don't flaunt the fact that I'm heterosexual, nor am I offended by anyone who isn't, providing whatever they do is lawful. There's a time and place for sexuality but the highway environment isn't it, it's completely irrelevant.

Do you put your arms around your opposite loved one when sharing a laugh, comforting them if upset, reminicing about that film your saw, music you heard? And do you do it without thinking about the reaction of passers by to you doing it?

If you do, you are flaunting your heterosexuality, especially if two women or two men doing the same makes you 'uncomfortable'.

I do all that with my son and close friends so they simply aren't gender-specific actions. "Flaunting" is the issue, regardless of the genders.

[exiled]

]Quite right. One's personal sexual preference has absolutely nothing to do with road safety. I don't flaunt the fact that I'm heterosexual, nor am I offended by anyone who isn't, providing whatever they do is lawful. There's a time and place for sexuality but the highway environment isn't it, it's completely irrelevant.

Do you put your arms around your opposite loved one when sharing a laugh, comforting them if upset, reminicing about that film your saw, music you heard? And do you do it without thinking about the reaction of passers by to you doing it?

If you do, you are flaunting your heterosexuality, especially if two women or two men doing the same makes you 'uncomfortable'.

I do all that with my son and close friends so they simply aren't gender-specific actions. "Flaunting" is the issue, regardless of the genders.

The Crown,m'lud, rests. It is not an issue because you don't see it as an issue. That actually is a definition of privilege. The crime stats, the hospital admission stats, disagree. Kissing his husband, hugging her wife at the end of the day. Enough flaunting to put one, other or both in hospital.

[Conekicker]

]Quite right. One's personal sexual preference has absolutely nothing to do with road safety. I don't flaunt the fact that I'm heterosexual, nor am I offended by anyone who isn't, providing whatever they do is lawful. There's a time and place for sexuality but the highway environment isn't it, it's completely irrelevant.

Do you put your arms around your opposite loved one when sharing a laugh, comforting them if upset, reminicing about that film your saw, music you heard? And do you do it without thinking about the reaction of passers by to you doing it?

If you do, you are flaunting your heterosexuality, especially if two women or two men doing the same makes you 'uncomfortable'.

Of course I do, it's just normal human behaviour - but it has absolutely nothing to do with me crossing a road. Two women or men doing it does not make me uncomfortable in the slightest.

I wouldn't expect to see an image of a red man and woman cuddling on a signal head as it is not the prescribed and lawful symbol. Nor would I expect to see a pink background STOP sign during a pride event nor a green background one should there be some sort of environmental event. "Political" agendas have no place in a road safety situation.

[Arcuarius]

I've not advocated anything that might threaten your existence - lets have less identification and labelling, we're all just people.

"I do not need to be labelled, so no one should."

Easy to say and think that when you are someone who is as as they appear to others, who has no idea of how difficult it is having to live with people seeing and treating them as they assume then to be and now who they really are. Someone who does not need to be labelled or identified for other people to acknowledge and accept who they are.

You are literally saying who Arcuarius is and how they feel does not matter, but all that matters is how they are seen by you. You may not mean it to be that way, but that is how comments like yours come across, and the actual effect they have. How is saying there should be less identification not denying someone their identification as who they are? Their own existence rather than the one you perceive for them?

Which is why things like how crossings are signed can be either inclusive or exclusive. And why for some people they are an important issue. Yet it is those to who such changes have no effect and does not impact who are the most outspoken and dismissive of any attempt to consider people different to them.

Exactly. I'm quite happy with the idea of there being labels for the use of the person to whom they're relevant. I think people should have the right to identify how they wish, and others should just leave them to it rather than trying to deny them the label they wish to use because it's not convenient. Labels are bloody useful if you're searching for affirmation and other people who also use that label.

Nobody has the right to put anyone else in a box marked "male" or "female" if they don't identify that way. However if that person feels that they fit in that particular box, that's up to them. Normal doesn't exist and the sooner people recognise that and just let people be, the better.