🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@timorl

> I think I’ve spotted the confusion here. All the terms under the LGBTQ+ umbrella are mostly about personal identity, so what people call themselves and want to be called. This is the context in which “queer” very much makes sense, either for people who haven’t yet figured out the details, but know they don’t fit the cisheteronormative default, or for those who did not end up fitting into any of the other boxes fully (plus some political meaning, but that’s kinda separate).

As I said earlier I really dont care what language someone else wants to use. I see no use in my lexicon to have a term that encompases all forms of identity across wildly different categories of gender, sex, sexual orientation, and sexual cardinality. If someone has use for such a word salad of terms and finds it useful they are welcomet o use it.

I on the other hand do have a use for terms with utility for me. Having a term fo sexual orientations that are inclusive, and another for gender expressions has use in conversation, so i will make that distinction, i dont need or expect anyone to emulate me.

> If you want to be specific and precise when referring to a group then there are almost always better terms – at least in medical, law, and social contexts, I cannot think of any other relevant ones. The specific division you advocate for here is extremely rarely appropriate anyway – you almost always want to refer to a strict subgroup of one of the groups you described, or to a group that encompasses people from both groups.

If you know a better word that coverts LGBP (all sexual orientations), or one that covers TINC then by all means let me know.

Yes there are more specific terms but all medical and technical terms I can think of are highly specific and do not cover the umbrella my own terms intend to, again happy to hear alternatives.

> The specific division you advocate for here is extremely rarely appropriate anyway

I literally cant think of **any** situation where it is inappropriate, at least not one where the use of the term itself is what is inappropriate (obviously someone can say an inappropriate thing that has that in it)

> you almost always want to refer to a strict subgroup of one of the groups you described

Obviously we do have specific terms for when we are talking about a specific subgroup... but it seems quite bizare to me that you would think talking about all sexual orientations collectively is somehow inappropriate, that makes no sense but maybe im missing something here.

> or to a group that encompasses people from both groups.

As described earlier combining the groups is to be expected when appropriate.

> You seem to be somewhat confused about the gender/sex distinction. In this context “sex” does not refer to just genes

No not confused, I know very well how sex is often misused and misunderstood. I am using sex in its appropriate way here and distinct from gender,this is how scientists, medical professions, and anyone trying to be precise will use it. Yes in casual language we tends to use sex to also mean gender (or some aspects of it) but that has lead to many problems and language I specifically try to avoid due to its problematic nature.

Sex strictly refers to genes. then gender is broken down into primary and secondar where we talk about genitals, breaast, facial hair, etc.. then we have gender **expression** which also includes behavioral and physical aspects.

In short, no doubt some people use sex to include gender, though we have clear distinctions and need to use them even in casual conversation as it will resolve most of the conflicts I see and go a long way to helping the LGBP+NICT community.

> Thus being intersex is purely about sex, regardless of the specific syndrome.

You are just making a semantic distinction here. Yes if you use a version of the word sex that is less descript you can of course come to that conslusion. Since I am using more technically accurate terminology then no, it doesnt work out that way.

@mammoth Not a fan of the AGPL choice, but open-source is better than nothing, so congrats and thank you.

@freepeoplesfreepress I have little concern for anyone adopting my language or liking it. I only care about if it has more utility, and therefore worth me adopting, and if there are any **legitimate** concerns about inclusion or prejudice that may be worth considering.

I do not have enough faith in humans to spend even a second trying to convince them of anything.

@lonelyowl13

> with no real definition or meaning
>
> It actually has a real definition, and when you say it, people understand what you meant: it simply means "any non-straight and/or non-cis folks". Did you meant "it have no dictionary definition"?

No I mean that advocacy groups for Queer themselves sstate in no uncertain terms that ther eis no universal definition and that people who use it define it differently and use it to mean wildly different things. What i myself am also saying is that it provides no functionally new information compared to the other definitions even if we were to try to define it. The other letters in the acronym already cover every possible orientations.

Anyway for reference here is the definition from a Queer advocacy group:

> This can include, but is not limited to, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, intersex and asexual people. **This term has different meanings to different people**. Some still find it offensive, while others reclaim it to encompass the broader sense of history of the gay rights movement. Can also be used as an umbrella term like LGBT, as in "the queer community."

So as is clearly seen from above while some use it as an umbrella term like you describe others people use it in completely different ways with different meanings. Regardless as i stated it has no place in the acronym as far as I can tell as it isnt providing anything useful or descriptive.

> It's not much about will you loose sleep or not, it's about a value of conversation and being able to get your point across correctly. If you don't care about it then you might as well reply with markov chain output or have no conversations at all 🤷‍♀️

As long as it gets across im talking about throse three groups specifically, then im happy. Now if someone is going to assume im transphobe with no basis and not bother to ask, then they are probably someone i dont want to engage with and care very little about the quality of the conversationa s it is a lost cause fromt he get go. In my mind its a feature not a bug as it ensures people who dont try to understand what is being said, but rather assume and inject toxicity, wont actually interact with me (as I prefer it).

> Well, you can definitely try it, i even wonder if people will accept and understand such logic :thonk: You could then publish a mini-report 😀

As per the above i care very little of how they react or accept it. As long as they understand what I mean or ask if they dont then thats all I need. If they are offended by it then im happy to have them filtered out of the convo.

@grrlscientist If she sincerely thought that she wouldnt be a rich person, she would have given it away long ago.

@lonelyowl13

> It's a reclaimed slur if i remember it correctly, was similar to "fag"

Mostly yea. I also have no issue with people using it for themselves. But being a non-descript term with no real definition or meaning of use just dont expect me to use it since I dont find it useful.

> It's widely used by transphobes, and i predict that people will at minimum feel uncomfortable with it, at most block you.

If that is the case youa re probably right. I dont mind being blocked though and not being a transphobe (And in fact an ally) I really wouldnt loose sleep over that. That said im leanign towards "LGBP" anyway.

@szczur

LGBP is a more complete version so I think ill go with that anyway.

@m

Hahah ferll fair I guess.

@darth

@timorl

> Ooof, you should be careful with that, LGB is mostly used by transphobes who want to divide the movement.

I think you know by now I judge an idea by its own merit, not its association with any one group or not.

> non-insignificant way a descriptor of a political movement/group that has shared political interests,

I have no problem combining the acronyms when the context makes sense to do so . If I am speaking of something that actually has combined relevance to both I can always say LGBP+TICN and then otherwise leave them seperate when i am talking specifically about orientation vs gender.

> Other than the political connection there is also the fact that gender and sexual attraction are pretty strongly connected for most people, so it even makes sense to lump them together from a purely categorization perspective.

Sure, plenty of times the two groups make sense to talk about collectively, just as often it makes sense to talk about one or the other. Ultimately which of the two, or both, that might be used will depend on context. As it should.

> If you dislike the acronym then “gender and sexual minorities” is a pretty neutral way of referring to the group,

Its not that I dislike the acronym per se. Itis that it 1) includes terms which have no useful meaning (queer) and really have no relevance in most context and 2) it is so generalized as to be less useful than being able to have the means properly categorized in a semantic way.

So the quote you offer simply doesnt address number 2 and defeats the purpose.

> Oh, and being intersex isn’t in any way about gender expression

Absolutely is for **much** of intersexed conditions, though you are right sometimes it is sex and not gender.

For example Androgen Insensitivity Syndrom is an intersex condition that directly effects your bodies expression of gender. By contrast Klinefelter syndrom effects both how your gender is expressed (effects yoru genitals, body, body hair, height, etc) and yoru sex (dna).

The only real difference is that intersex is clearly not a choice WRT to gender expression whereas the other ones are choices in gender expersssion.

> and being trans and being a crossdresser are about gender expression in quite different ways.

Very different for sure, but still gender expression all the same. Obviously again we go back to context, if we are talking about gender in such a way that the distinction between these groups is needed, then that can be expressed on a case by case basis, as it should be.

@freepatriot Dont worry if the brits are any indiciation they would be more than happy to take the cops guns too.

@darth I did not, and that sounds like a management nightmare.

@darth Thats because they bothered to teach you a less useful language first, they should have just started you out on english and left it there :)

::ducks harder::