I usually only hear LGBTQIA+ which has the I for intersex and the A Aro/Ace spectrum. The Q is just queer which is a an umbrella term for everything. I don’t really see the issue with others though, I also wouldn’t know how to make it less complicated in any language. Describing oneself as straight is just comparatively easy as it one thing rather than every other sexuality + also gender stuff. Being homosexual is also just one word and no more difficult.
Similarly, I’m not 100% sure about this but afaik the + got commonly added before the IA, and I really dislike adding anything specific after a generalized “everyone who feels part of it” because doing that delegitimizes that the + actually means everyone. Though it also does suck if people feel excluded otherwise.
I’ve seen queer used to refer to the whole community though, but I think LGBT(+whichever addendums) has just been around for so long it’s most people’s goto, plus “queer” used to be a slur.
In my head it’s just “people not conforming to the majority group for sex or gender related reasons” and then I write whatever my brain decides is the term in that moment. Usually LGBTQ+.
Similarly, the whole point of the original rainbow pride flag was that it was all-encompassing, i.e. representing the entire spectrum of human gender and sexuality. But that keeps getting added to as well.
I suppose you could argue that new technologies and ways of seeing ourselves have added genuinely new dimensions to it, but if you dont get the thing about maps not being territory, you almost certainly havent engaged with or heard of any of those.
As a way to simplify, I’ve always like GSM: Gender and Sexual Minorities. Seems to encompass everything without prioritizing any of the letters, and doesn’t require choosing an arbitrary stop point for which letters to list or not list.
Interesting that Q essntially fills up for every other character in the initialism, incluing the + which essenially acts as an etc. to said initialism. One can pretty much choose and pick which letters to use when crafting their usage of an initialism, and which letters to hide in the +. One could call it the LBT+ community, or the L+, or T+. Or B+. Or just call it + for maximum efficiency. Or you could just call it the Q community, as Q encompasses everything else. What some otherwise call the Queer community
Edit: I am no expert. Let the gays correct me if needed be
A big downside to that is that queer was originally insult and some people have negative associations with it and therefore avoid it and might not want to be categorized as such I have heard the “queer community” be used especially in spoken language. The letters LGBT have also been around for a while so it would be weird to get rid of them now.
The thing about the initialism I find weird is there’s plenty of variation, and people can almost sorta pick and choose, build their own initialism. Sure, some are used more than others, but no apparent standard per se. So which ones get included in the initialism, vs. which ones are hidden behind the + or behind the Q, or perhaps neither the + or the Q gets used. Kinda like the flag. You have the classic, popular one. The colours have their meaning, but not specific to certain “letters” (groups of people). But then you have some with black and brown, for people of colour. Some add trans colours. Some have that purple with ring thing I can’t remember if it’s non-binary or what. Nothing against these variations, though I wonder the need, when the originals were not specific or exclusive. The original colours weren’t about identity, far as I know. Now they make updates with identity-based meaning. If I am someone with less knowledge or something, and I’m gonna make use of an initialism or flag, which one would I choose? Would I just say LGBT and use the traditional six-colour flag? Would that be exclusive? Do I add the QIA+? Do I need black, brown, pink, blue on the flag? Shit, I didn’t add the Pi symbol. Is that a flag variant? Sure seen a flag with Pi on it
Acts of consentuality. I feel I want to be informed and so I try to keep up, but no one should have the burden of having to keep up with any changes in verbage. I think it would be nice to have it voiced as simply as consentual. There really is no other information anyone should care about. Sex/gender/number of people, none of it matters.
Whether they marry monogamously, date openly, love however the person chooses to. It isn’t for me to cast my opinion on their acts, so it may cause harm to put detailed labels, as then they are easier to be weaponized.
That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t or couldn’t openly discuss their choices, just that when you make the boxes and ask people to put themselves in them, then the boxes divide the people, which is easier to “conquer”
I usually only hear LGBTQIA+ which has the I for intersex and the A Aro/Ace spectrum. The Q is just queer which is a an umbrella term for everything. I don’t really see the issue with others though, I also wouldn’t know how to make it less complicated in any language. Describing oneself as straight is just comparatively easy as it one thing rather than every other sexuality + also gender stuff. Being homosexual is also just one word and no more difficult.
If “queer” is an umbrella term then why wouldn’t the whole community just be referred to as such?
Similarly, I’m not 100% sure about this but afaik the + got commonly added before the IA, and I really dislike adding anything specific after a generalized “everyone who feels part of it” because doing that delegitimizes that the + actually means everyone. Though it also does suck if people feel excluded otherwise.
I’ve seen queer used to refer to the whole community though, but I think LGBT(+whichever addendums) has just been around for so long it’s most people’s goto, plus “queer” used to be a slur.
In my head it’s just “people not conforming to the majority group for sex or gender related reasons” and then I write whatever my brain decides is the term in that moment. Usually LGBTQ+.
I tried to explain the main reason that I’m aware of in this comment: https://lemmy.world/comment/17894502
I think the point is that the classification into discrete categories is kind of contrary to the point of queerness.
I don’t really see how you got that from the comment but that would be a good point.
Yeah im probably reading too much into it.
Similarly, the whole point of the original rainbow pride flag was that it was all-encompassing, i.e. representing the entire spectrum of human gender and sexuality. But that keeps getting added to as well.
No. People just keep subdividing pantone numbers.
I suppose you could argue that new technologies and ways of seeing ourselves have added genuinely new dimensions to it, but if you dont get the thing about maps not being territory, you almost certainly havent engaged with or heard of any of those.
As a way to simplify, I’ve always like GSM: Gender and Sexual Minorities. Seems to encompass everything without prioritizing any of the letters, and doesn’t require choosing an arbitrary stop point for which letters to list or not list.
My nerdy ass brain was like “how in the Windows environment can someone like GSM” and then I continued reading…
What’s wrong with gsm?
Interesting that Q essntially fills up for every other character in the initialism, incluing the + which essenially acts as an etc. to said initialism. One can pretty much choose and pick which letters to use when crafting their usage of an initialism, and which letters to hide in the +. One could call it the LBT+ community, or the L+, or T+. Or B+. Or just call it + for maximum efficiency. Or you could just call it the Q community, as Q encompasses everything else. What some otherwise call the Queer community
Edit: I am no expert. Let the gays correct me if needed be
A big downside to that is that queer was originally insult and some people have negative associations with it and therefore avoid it and might not want to be categorized as such I have heard the “queer community” be used especially in spoken language. The letters LGBT have also been around for a while so it would be weird to get rid of them now.
The thing about the initialism I find weird is there’s plenty of variation, and people can almost sorta pick and choose, build their own initialism. Sure, some are used more than others, but no apparent standard per se. So which ones get included in the initialism, vs. which ones are hidden behind the + or behind the Q, or perhaps neither the + or the Q gets used. Kinda like the flag. You have the classic, popular one. The colours have their meaning, but not specific to certain “letters” (groups of people). But then you have some with black and brown, for people of colour. Some add trans colours. Some have that purple with ring thing I can’t remember if it’s non-binary or what. Nothing against these variations, though I wonder the need, when the originals were not specific or exclusive. The original colours weren’t about identity, far as I know. Now they make updates with identity-based meaning. If I am someone with less knowledge or something, and I’m gonna make use of an initialism or flag, which one would I choose? Would I just say LGBT and use the traditional six-colour flag? Would that be exclusive? Do I add the QIA+? Do I need black, brown, pink, blue on the flag? Shit, I didn’t add the Pi symbol. Is that a flag variant? Sure seen a flag with Pi on it
Acts of consentuality. I feel I want to be informed and so I try to keep up, but no one should have the burden of having to keep up with any changes in verbage. I think it would be nice to have it voiced as simply as consentual. There really is no other information anyone should care about. Sex/gender/number of people, none of it matters.
Whether they marry monogamously, date openly, love however the person chooses to. It isn’t for me to cast my opinion on their acts, so it may cause harm to put detailed labels, as then they are easier to be weaponized.
That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t or couldn’t openly discuss their choices, just that when you make the boxes and ask people to put themselves in them, then the boxes divide the people, which is easier to “conquer”