• etherphon@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    I just don’t get this kind of behavior in the 21st century when we now have all the science, it’s not like something that will just go away like a fad. When people deny their true feelings or selves, real bad things can happen, something I’m sure the church has a lot of experience with. Go ahead and bury your head in the sand Malaysia, but LGBTQIA+ is normal, ignoring reality is NOT

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      LGBTQIA+

      Is there not a term we can use before this thing grows too long to remember? (It’s already too long for me.)

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Queer has been recommended and then researched by me, so I’ll use that as that seems acceptable.

          Explicit inclusion is implicit exclusion.

          Could you explain this mind bender?

          • cecinestpasunecommunication@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            So if we say who is included (lesbians gays bisexuals and trans people) everyone not one of those things is excluded, only by keeping close to those things can you be included even if you’re otherwise queer.

            The logic of exclusion persists in cultural and institutional memory as well as being personally a piece of shit, as we see with modern groups dropping the T from lgbt, or the ‘acronym too long’ types who aren’t concerned so much with the acronym itself

            • Victor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              12 hours ago

              That’s a verbose way of calling me a piece of shit. 🙄

              I was just trying to find a term that was easy to remember, as well as inclusive.

              People suggested “queer”, I will adopt “queer”. 👍

              Have a great day.

                • Victor@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  Jesus Christ.

                  Have a good day. I’ve already been helped to be inclusive by other, nice people. Please take your unwarranted and unwanted hostility elsewhere.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Yeah the Queer part seems to be the umbrella term, which includes both people who are not included in the other letters, but also those which are included. So that kind of makes LGBTQ a recursive initialism, and the + also seems redundant, as well as the LGBT part when you think about it. 😅️

          But anyway, I think queer is a great word for it. It’s almost “queen”, just with the thing cut off at the end there.

      • etherphon@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s a fair point I think, it’s getting pretty verbose and frankly muddles the issues a little bit. I suppose gender diversity would be a good one but the word diversity has been witch hunted. Human sexual spectrum is still a bit of a mouthful too.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          gender diversity

          Human sexual spectrum

          Still easier to remember than that letter soup 😅👍