And This Is The Kind Of Sex I Like To Have
Or, Please Don’t Bore Our Staff And Customers With Your Weird Compulsions.
In which Madam applauds herself for her own feats of self-preoccupation:
Woman refuses to be professional at work and it’s your fault for being uncomfortable, conservatives. You made her turn down this job. pic.twitter.com/qW4vBsfSkr
— Σ𝕏ulansic 🦎 (@TTExulansic) July 15, 2025
Madam apparently needs us to know that she is “part of the LGBT+ community,” as if we should not only care but be endlessly fascinated, and insists that she needs “to find a workplace that is LGBT+ community friendly.” Quite what this might mean, practically, is not altogether clear, though the implications that come to mind are somewhat limited in their appeal.
As there are only so many ways in which tales of one’s sex life can be shoehorned into workplace conversation, I’m assuming Madam expects those around her to continually acknowledge some boutique complications of her all-important “identity” – fabulist pronouns, an imaginary themness, or something similar. Something very much about her, rather the task at hand.
We’ve been here before, of course:
And that’s before we get to potential employees who announce with triumph how their “gender changes depending on the day, or week, or even depending on the hour,” necessitating the wearing of, and frequent changing of, colour-coded bracelets. Because they’re so complicated and fascinating, you see. At least compared to you. And which would oblige anyone within range of the Level-Nine Narcissism Field to use the fabulist pronouns chosen or invented for that particular day, week, or hour:
And a happy, utopian workplace would surely follow.
Madam, featured above, also boasts on TikTok of lying to the people offering her a job – specifically, regarding whether she’ll be willing to work at weekends, the employer’s busiest time – as if they, and other potential employers, couldn’t possibly stumble across such boasts of deception and register the implications.
Oh, and if this cake needs icing, Madam’s chosen slogans – the ones she shares on social media, where potential employers might see – include, and I quote, “I DON’T WANT TO WORK.”
In block capitals, naturally. Lest there be doubt.
Update, via the comments:
Chow Bag adds,
Do they ever grow up?
Ah, but… but… Madam insists, quite emphatically, that she needs to “talk about my personal life.” At length and in detail. On work time. Apparently, it’s fundamental to her “queer” identity. And yet, shockingly, employers – people trying to run a business – don’t regard that as a priority.
How very dare they.
Via Dicentra.
*choking*
Well, I’m struggling to imagine a scenario in which such declarations signal good things ahead.
A lucky escape for one firm.
She makes herself unemployable (“I DON’T WANT TO WORK”) and then blames “conservatives and moderates” for her being unemployed.
Do they ever grow up?
I think she needs to hit the books as she’s using a way outdated acronym. LGBT+? There are so many groups missing, and they will be offended. Inclusion is everything, and if their letters aren’t included, well, there will be diversity training.
Personally, I go with GBLTUVWXYZ.
There are many fine (LOL) cities she could relocate to where she could find employment with a company where she could amaze her coworkers, and in turn, be amazed by them. These activist types are so tiring. What does it say about her that she is compelled to share her sexual proclivities with people who just don’t give a F?
Barkeep, pass the peanuts, and a (you’ll pardon the term) stiff drink.
Ah, but… but… Madam insists, quite emphatically, that she needs to “talk about my personal life.” At length and in detail. On work time. Apparently, it’s fundamental to her “queer” identity.
And yet, shockingly, employers – people trying to run a business – don’t regard that as a priority.
How very dare they.
Answers on a postcard, please.
Oh, and let’s not forget this racial variant on the above.
Different frock, same dance.
[ Post updated. ]
The kiss of death for her are those two words: queer identity. Even if used together or apart.
Queer is not gay or homosexual – it belies a veritable smorgasbord of, well . . . whatever you want to be at any given moment, the only requirement is that it is not “normie,” and thus associated with conservatives and/or moderates. The more out of left field, the better. And always, always oppressed.
Identity is self-imposed and quite often uncommunicated – or all too often overcommunicated. And usually with no tether to reality.
“I’m XYZ.”
“But you don’t act like XYZ.”
“Fascist!”
Anything less than someone offering complete fealty to these people’s definition of their reality creates for them an unsafe space and that is just too much of a compromise for her to do her filing, update her spreadsheet, or stock the shelves, whatever this job entailed.
BTW, is that her returning from the interview? Is a neat, button down shirt to much to ask?
Oddly, I found my attention returning to her crappily applied nail polish. Whether it’s disorganisation or some kind of statement, I couldn’t say.
I love having to give extra attention to people I don’t actually know.
What exactly is ”LBGT+ Friendly” nowadays, how does that differ from just “friendly”, at some point in the distant past there was discrimination against people, and that is where the term comes from, but now, it seems some want it to mean much more than that.
Probably, they really actually want ”LBGT+ dominant”, because some people are more equal than others.
It’s funny that she interprets the uneasiness of the interviewer as a sign that the workplace isn’t acronym friendly, instead of the much more likely explanation that even knowing the sexual orientation of an interviewee makes the process a legal nightmare, under every discrimination law.
That smile dropping from the interviewers face wasn’t “oh no, they’re an acronym”; it was “oh no, I’m going to have to report this to HR”.
“My identity”, I suppose that is easier to say than “I am totally bereft of anything resembling an actual personality”.
No need for passing, they will get to you on their own. N.B, make sure they are actually peanuts first.
From the comments in that thread:
Would that it really were no employer. There are some who will, for instance, bring politics into the workplace, holding meetings for the sole purpose of discussing the most hot button topics.
And the more abnormal the better.
That’s very interesting, Madam.
My pronouns?
I only have one. DILLIGAF
She hasn’t noticed that normal people find neutral topics to talk about. Because they want to get along.
Revolutionaries (Marxists, queers, Islamofascists,etc.) think that the workplace should be revolutionary.
I had to look that one up.
“I get it,” says she.
She did not, in fact, get it.
I’ve mentioned before a colleague in my first workplace, back when I was a callow youth. He was apparently determined to remove any doubt as to the fact that he was immensely homosexual. Imagine all the gayness in the world – every twinkle, every rainbow, every particle of glitter – condensed into one person.
Almost any conversation, any humdrum exchange about stock or invoices, could be derailed by sexual innuendo and incongruous, camp squealing. It was every bit as wearying as you might imagine.
All day, every day, everyone within earshot had to be reminded of what would now be called his identity. His “whole self.” At least three other people in the building were gay, albeit unobtrusively, and no-one cared. There was no-one to scandalise. And so, the reason for this unending display, complete with showbiz gestures, was a bit of mystery. And yet the pantomime went on with exhausting shrillness.
It was practically impossible to have a normal conversation with the chap. Everything took longer because of all the shrieking and winking and hand-flapping.
Whenever LGBTQwerty activists complain that their rights are being taken away, they’re never quite able to explain which rights those are, or give any examples.
They always talk about how frightened people are, usually “terrified” or “horrified“, as if that translates into proof of oppression.
Occam’s Razor would suggest that a more realistic explanation is that their rights are not being oppressed. A much more likely explanation is they are simply narcissists and exhibitionists whose demands for special attention attention aren’t being met, and they see that as being oppressed.
Madam’s tirade does nothing to counter that argument.
Well, you do get what you pay for, or – to be more precise – what you reward. It’s hard not to imagine he was consistently indulged in these theatrics as a kid.
This. No rational employer. But there’s a lot of ruin in a nation. And before it comes to that, a corporation.