Colorado baker sued again, this time for "gender transition cake"

submitted by WrongToy from self.GenderCritical

https://www.kron4.com/news/national/colorado-baker-once-sued-over-wedding-cake-for-gay-couple-now-sued-over-gender-transition-cake/

Basically, I don't see why anyone is going to him for a cake he's uncomfortable with producing unless that's to put him out of business.

Personally, I hope he produces the cake. Add too much sugar, no butter, lots of frosting, whatever. Stick it in the microwave. What, are these TRAs going to take the cake in for forensic cake-autopsy? Lots of ways to mess up a cake that are super legal. Let them eat sawdust and cry bad yelp reviews.

all 30 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Finnegan7921 22 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 0 fun23 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's exactly why they continually go to him. After the first one, it has just been harassment. They know he'll refuse yet they go there, ask for something they know he won't do, then sue him for discrimination. It is so pathetic and illustrates the mentality the hardcore activists in the "LGBTQIA2+@%&*" movement have. "Bow down to us or we will ruin you."

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, this is exactly what it is, and there is almost always some maladjusted childhood Freudian shit driving it. Unfortunately a loud probably majority of gays continue to froth at the mouth, insisting that this is "muh right side of history"

[–]BEB 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Sometimes I wonder if there are people within the gender ideology movement trying to destroy it from within, because so many prominent TiMs especially (& Chase Strangio!) seem borderline deranged or flat out deranged IMO. (if you don't get offended easily, see Kiwifarms.net where they track the antics of the more amusing TiMs)

At this point, 90% of people who aren't Queer Theory majors are going to roll their eyes, including many LGBs. So what will this accomplish? A backlash against LGB, I think, which is a real shame.

[–]WildApples 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You and I inhabit such different worlds. The people I know will just see this as further proof that trans issues are an extension of LGB issues and that trans people are facing overwhelming discrimination that needs to be solved ASAP.

They know what they are doing. They are trying to get the halo of gay rights sympathy to extend to trans issues just like they try to get the halo of black civil rights sympathy extended to them. And from what I can see, it is working.

[–]BEB 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I see many of the women at Ovarit are also surrounded by trans & supporters. I think I have two friends who believe this garbage, but not really, by which I mean if I sat them down in person and presented the evidence, they would get how crazy and dangerous gender ideology is.

[–]usehername 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I encourage you to bring it up with them.

[–]BEB 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I will; I bring it up with everyone. I'm a loudmouth. It's just these two are some distance away - so I will have to wait until I feel comfortable flying again.

Like way too many women, they're still believers that TiMs are all harmless, funny, women-admiring gay men who've been castrated and just wanna pee.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I've thought this too, i.e. that there's some fifth-column ploy out there to weaken LGBT acceptance just because of how off-putting some of the TRAs are (they are certainly not sending their "best" to the activist lines).

But then I came across the KiwiFarms thread on Stephan Robert Loehr / FerociouslySteph - and it is a doozy - and I noticed that one of the commenters made an excellent observation that explained the heretofore-puzzling phenomenon of huge corporate buy-ins on the trans and other controversial issues, and why huge internet companies hire people like Loehr - who their audience/customers and content producers alike hate with a soul-staining vengeance.

If you ever look closely at the woke side-projects and codes of conduct, etc. that these "diversity/inclusion" jobs are hired for, it appears that corporations are simply using them as lightning rods to capture and contain consumer dissent as they implement objectionable changes to the rules and content policies of their platforms, essentially literally and figuratively employing them as a shield while they do rent-seeking things that economically fuck over their contributors.

https://www.change.org/p/twitch-remove-ferociouslysteph-from-twitch-s-safety-advisory-council

Coraline Ada Ehmke's tenure at GitHub also comes to mind, where he tried to enforce code-of-conduct covenants on open source projects, essentially arguing that someone's proposed change might be beneficial, but "mean bad contributor misgendered me, so we need rules that force us to reject their code/contributions!" (pointless in the type of open source distributed projects that use git for change management).

Really kind of brilliant move from the corporate boardrooms, somehow pulling a lose-win out of it.

[–]BEB 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Please don't try to encourage me to visit KiwiFarms, because I can spend hours on there laughing my head off. With all the crazy facts posters collect about individual TiMs, KiwiFarms would Peak Trans the whole population. Too bad it's considered a fringe site, especially given that so much of what's posted is accurate.

BTW: you're a great writer!

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

BTW: you're a great writer!

Thank ye, have had the past year of soul-crushing solitude to hone the craft.

w/r/t KiwiFarms, Null (the site operator) hosts his own servers and has gone to very, very great lengths to ensure he will not be censored.

[–]WrongToy[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well ya, at this point I'd just take the passive aggressive approach.

You want this cake? Well here's the standard price for it. I'm gonna go along, say I really tried, use their organic ingredients, get paid early. It's pretty goddamn easy and un-sueable to fuck it up. I'd fuck it up, go over there and grey rock it. Go ahead assholes, give me bad yelp reviews.

You can't make ppl work for you for your intimate party shit. Get your own people. I'd say that about everyone.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

BTW, just in case anyone is interested, back in 2012 when the two gay newlyweds had their request for a wedding cake turned down by the Masterpiece Bake Shop in Colorado, there were already quite a few bakeries - most of them "LGBTQ" friendly - in the US that would make up custom cakes to clients' specifications and deliver them anywhere in the lower 48 by courier boxed up in special packaging. I've been using such vendors to send birthday cakes & cakes for other occasions to my children since the first one went away to university in 2010.

Today, lots of pictures of trans- themed cakes can be found online. (Yes, I looked.) Which means there are plenty of people already in the business of making the kind of cake that the trans person now suing Masterpiece desires. In fact, a lot of the cakes used for those tacky "gender reveal" parties that expectant parents have nowadays can easily be adapted to serve as a cake celebrating transition.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

If you supported him being sued for the gay wedding cake, hopefully you understand better how he feels now.

[–]WrongToy[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I didn't support the gays either.

They get married in civil court, that's fine. If they want a ceremony or whatever that extends into people's rights just like any other deal.

I wouldn't expect every person who's 100 percent Muslim or Orthodox Jewish to be down for what I want for my wedding. Nor when I could have an abortion, would i expect a Catholic hospital to handle it. There are multiple other lanes available that have no problem w/working with you. Pick them.

[–]Omina_Sentenziosa 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If the baker had been Muslim and had refused to bake that cake because of his religion, I am convinced those gay men wouldn' t have sued him to begin with, or if they had, they wouldn' t have had the support from the "progressive" community they had.

I too had no problems with him turning those gay men down, and I was 100% opposed to the suing. Forcing him to do it or to consider him guilty of discrimination for this specific case infringe on artistic and speech freedom more than the "right" of those gay men to have a stupid cake for their wedding.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

My guess is that a majority of posters here would not have supported the two gay guys suing this baker, either. Not because we are not supporters and advocates of gay rights, but because of the particulars of that case and the conflicts between what the two gay men wanted & the baker's religious views. The baker didn't refuse the men service. He said he's happily bake them a cake, but couldn't in good conscience bake them a wedding cake coz of his religion.

I see what they did as akin to hiring a Kosher or Muslim chef/cooking company to cater a dinner party, then getting outraged when they say "no can do" to making roast pork. It's like getting pissed off - and taking it personally - over the fact that Indian restaurants don't serve any beef dishes coz of the Hindu belief that cows are sacred.

Most of the longtime LGB activists I know think that the way the two gay guys - and Colorado's heavy-handed "equality" authority - treated the Christian baker in the wedding cake case actually did more damage than good to the cause of gay rights and acceptance. Just as this trans person is now doing to the trans cause in the new case.

[–]WrongToy[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Actually, the baker said he would sell them a premade cake, but would not make them a custom one, nor was he comfortable going to the gay guys' reception as a paid cake-cutter, giving the groom the cake to feed the groom and such.

And when he said no, said baker got harassed by self-described Satanists who wanted a dildo cake wedding or something.

Not every lane has to be for everyone. I would never go to someone strictly Orthodox and demand that he work on holy day and on top of it his staff turn on/turn off lights and all this shit, even though personally I think their customs are ridiculous! While I think much of religion is ridiculous, it is still a fundamental US Right. Not every single case is a religious person turning off the gas pump when you come or declining you water or a trip to the bathroom! Get over yourselves progressives!

[–]Omina_Sentenziosa 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

For me it wasn' t really about respecting his religion, it was all about artistic and speech freedom: bakery is not just cooking, a wedding cake requires artistic skills, and if the creator didn' t want to use his skills for this specific message and celebration, it was absolutely his right to refuse doing it. Not to mention eventual writing on the cake itself that would have been, for all intents, a person being paid and forced to say/write something he didn' t want to say.

It' s like if I were a singer, an organization contacts my agency to hire me for singing their "we are awesome" anthem and I refuse because I oppose what that organization stands for.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, I think it was all these issues at once.

But in the scenario you raise, I think the issue would not be whether individual singers represented by the agency refuse to take a gig on grounds of artistic license and freedom of expression. The issue would be whether the agency says from the get-go that no, since we the agency don't agree with the message/meaning of the song, we won't ask any of our artists to consider singing it.

In the Masterpiece Bake Shop cases, the guy being sued is both the owner of a retail business - the bake shop - and the artist who creates what the retail business sells. That's very different to being an independent artist who relies on an agency for bookings. And it's very different to being an agency that serves as an intermediary between independent creators and artists and those who want to hire artists and creators for particular gigs/tasks.

[–]Omina_Sentenziosa 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Take out the agency then: I am a singer who is contacted by an organization and I refuse.

Point is, the art in question, be it singing/writing songs or baking a cake, is supposed to deliver a message. If I am against delivering that message, for whatever reason, forcing me to do it or making me pay for refusing to do it is a much serious thing that a gay couple having to find another baker or an organization having to find another singer.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree that one of the issues in the Masterpiece case is compelled speech and artistic expression. But they went after this guy coz he has a retail store that's open to all the public and is therefore subject to anti-discrimination laws that say it must serve all the public on equal terms.

Independent contractors and freelancers can turn down any job they want for any reason, and without being obliged to say what the reason is.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

nooooooo, noooooo Twitter is a private business they don't have to make their platform available for speech they disagree with, noooooo

Charlie Craig and David Mullins are cowardly, abusive, scumbags, and their actions perpetuated and exacerbated homophobic sentiments across the world. Have actually had a few dates walk out on me now after pointing that out.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I dunno about the cowardly, abusive scumbag part, but your view of the impact that their actions had is shared by many gay men I know who came of age in the USA in the 60s & 70s, were involved in gay liberation, active in GMHC & ACT UP during the AIDS crisis, and have worked their whole lives for social acceptance and legal changes for gay people. They think Craig & Mullins gave the world the unfortunate impression that gay men are selfish, narcissistic, entitled bullies who reject the idea of "live and let live" in favor of "do as we say, or else." Like shakedown thugs from the rainbow Mafia. As you say, this just made a lot of homophobic people feel even more homophobic - and worse, it helped many feel justified for being homophobic too.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

As you say, this just made a lot of homophobic people feel even more homophobic - and worse, it helped many feel justified for being homophobic too.

Yes, this is my most salient criticism of it. As for my characterization of other gays ("the community"), much of my impression therein stems from the fact that so many do not seem to understand this point, i.e. that forcing your ideology down anyone's throat will never foster acceptance and only encourages them to hate you.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I agree. So many people seem unaware of the basics of human psychology and how greater social acceptance is usually achieved. Bullying and being domineering are not very good methods of persuading people to take kindly to you and see your point of view.

So many activists today and in recent years also don't seem to get that different battles require different strategies and tactics. For example, angry shouting, extreme measures and lawsuits are appropriate in some circumstances. Such as when going up against major institutions doing evil things - like Big Pharma and the US government during the AIDS crisis. But when a local small business owner with churchy views won't make a wedding cake that's clearly labelled a "gay wedding cake," but he will make you any other kind of cake, including one you can put the writing and decorations on yourself, making "a federal case" over the horrible injustice he's supposedly done you seems a tad OTT.

BTW, I was one of the many protestors participating in the ACT UP demo outside St Patrick's Cathedral in NYC in 1989 outraged about the assholes in the demo who decided to go into the church and disrupt the service. Over many meetings beforehand, ACT UP had come to a consensus that the protest should stay entirely on the street coz going onto the church property or - god forbid - inside the cathedral would only get us a very bad press. Which is exactly what happened. I've heard that the current show Pose presents the guys who went into the cathedral and caused disruptive drama there as heroes. But honestly, that's not at all how it was. They were assholes who got ACT UP a whole lot of bad press and turned off many people who otherwise were sympathetic, or leaning towards being sympathetic.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

the assholes in the demo who decided to go into the church and disrupt the service

I'd heard of that incident referenced when BLM activists did something similar at a church last summer. That's interesting. Did ACT UP take a roster of names beforehand? Was there any way to distinguish whether those who did were part of ACT UP vs. oppos?

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There was no formal ACT UP membership and thus no list. The only lists were of people who signed up voluntarily to perform certain tasks. Also there was no way to confine demonstrations in public places only to people who had attended ACT UP meetings, gone through trainings & strategy sessions & agreed with the approach(es) decided on by the larger community who had attended meetings beforehand.

I haven't watched Pose but my impression is that it portrays the guys who went into the cathedral & made a huge scene as "trans" - which back then would've meant transvestites. But in NYC in 1989, transvestites didn't play a role in Manhattan-based AIDS activism, though many had AIDS. They were very much on the periphery. Just as they were in the era of the Stonewall Inn riots.

The guys behind ACT UP & GMHC were gay men who dressed and presented as "normal" men, not female impersonators. Even the "swishy" ones (excuse the term, but that's what was used) wore business suits to work and blue jeans & T shirts on the weekends, not mini-skirts, wigs and high heels. The men behind/in such orgs as GHMC & ACT UP were well-educated, middle-class mostly white guys with good jobs and successful careers. Lots of clever people in the arts. Those gay men lived in an entirely different milieu from the ball scene gay guys depicted in the 1991 film Is Paris Burning? and Pose today - who were mainly black and Latino, poor, from disadvantaged backgrounds and who made their livings from criminal activities like prostitution, drug dealing, shoplifting and other thefts, muggings and blackmail.

But I don't recall exactly who the guys who went into the cathedral were, though it's a pretty sure bet they weren't transvestites. There were a lot of "regular" gay guys in ACT UP who were given to acting rashly and rather crazily - for good reason. They were sick with a fatal disease or at high risk of it - and their lovers, friends, colleagues, neighbors were literally dropping like flies all around them. It was really a tragic time.

BTW, I've enjoyed exchanging posts with you.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

BTW, I've enjoyed exchanging posts with you.

Ha, thanks! Not that the original r/GC wasn't excellent, but I've found the Saidit version of this sub to be more willing to admit a male into the conversation (as opposed to at best politely redirecting to r/GCGuys, which is quiet even on its best days).

It's really refreshing to jump in here to get opinions and especially first-person perspectives like you're able to give, because none of these are remotely available from any mainstream news sources/media. I particularly appreciate the way that lesbians'/L-allies' voices are able to be heard in GC spaces, which might be the only place left where they're even allowed to anymore - gay men don't get to hear their female counterparts' inputs on much anymore these days, given how balkanized the acronym has become.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I like this forum for the same reasons. In the short time since r/GC was shut down, I've argued for persons of both sexes being allowed to post here. Please keep posting. IMO, the main way society advances is through different types of people with varying views and life experiences getting to know one another

BTW, back in the 70s and 80s, het (or mostly het) women like me sometimes were a bridge between lesbians and gay men. Back then, I was often the "token het" woman at lesbian and gay social events and in political circles. But a number of gay men and lesbians who were friends of mine met one another and began alliances after meeting at cocktail and dinner parties at my place.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

IMO, the main way society advances is through different types of people with varying views and life experiences getting to know one another

100%

And AFAIC, you hets are a-okay in my book. Literally anyone who understands that empathy, not violent activism, is what cultivates acceptance, is a-okay in my book.