Serious LGBTQ

[ryan]

As an innocent bystander in this debacle, let me offer my perspective on what I just read.

Oglemi didn't try to explain what it's like to be trans or non-binary. He brought up an experience he had with one such person who identified as a gender other than the sex that was assigned to them at birth and used that as a base to start a discussion on people getting offended by somebody making an educated assumption. jumpluff brought up a very great point about why someone in that scenario might get offended, even if they understood that being referred to by a gender with which they do not identify is not going to be uncommon. This was very enlightening, by the way, as somebody who lacked the perspective to understand why people prefer to be referred to by pronouns other than he, she, they.

From then on, to me it feels like it's a lot of misunderstanding. I seriously doubt that Oglemi genuinely feels that experiencing dysphoria has little to do with someone feeling depressed and/or suicidal. Objectively speaking, gender dysphoria is feeling different from the gender assigned to you at birth. I'm certain that having dysphoria can accompany depression. I don't think making the distinction that dysphoria does not inherently cause depression is at all pedantic, but I understand why it appears that way and why all the strong emotions came after the argument was made. I'm sure there are a number of people who are perfectly comfortable with their dysphoria, do not struggle with it, and are not depressed because of or in spite of it. I won't pretend to know any, but it's not purely pedantry to specify this because I'm also sure there are a number of people who are questioning their gender identity who would not react well to hearing that experiencing dysphoria is an impending doom. That these feelings are normal doesn't surprise me either, and it's something that should definitely be addressed; while I'd hate for someone to think that their feelings of dysphoria would lead to a purely negative outcome, letting those people know that a negative outcome is not strange and that they are not alone in their feelings is also very important.

Having said all this, I'm really sorry to hear that some of you have had bad experiences related to your dysphoria. I also won't pretend to understand those feelings because I couldn't even imagine it, and the last thing that I would want is to strike a raw nerve or dismiss another person's feelings with my own words.

I don't think that anyone here has a problem complying with a person's preferred pronouns or that anyone here would willingly ignore another person's suicidal thoughts whether they are queer or not. Suicide hits close to home for a lot of people in the community. Even though our experiences may differ, I'm sure all of us here who identify as LGBTQ+ have had to deal with the same core issues: a lack of acceptance and willingness to learn and understand, bigotry in the face of non-conformity, oppression in many ways in our everyday lives—the list goes on. We shouldn't make light of it, and from my perspective, there is a willingness to learn in this thread, even if it's not always with mouths shut.

 

[Oglemi]

I'm sure there are a number of people who are perfectly comfortable with their dysphoria, do not struggle with it, and are not depressed because of or in spite of it. I won't pretend to know any, but it's not purely pedantry to specify this because I'm also sure there are a number of people who are questioning their gender identity who would not react well to hearing that experiencing dysphoria is an impending doom. That these feelings are normal doesn't surprise me either, and it's something that should definitely be addressed; while I'd hate for someone to think that their feelings of dysphoria would lead to a purely negative outcome, letting those people know that a negative outcome is not strange and that they are not alone in their feelings is also very important.

Was about to make a similar post, but this is better worded than where i was going to go with it, so thanks for clarifying it for me

 

[Wretched Waltz]

anyway, so hi guys. I'm Adiane, and I'm just coming to grips with my sexuality now. I've been thinking I was straight for most of my life - hell, even most of my time here playing Smogon - but now I really don't know. I've been sexually attracted to men and women, although I've refused to acknowledge it on several occasions. Plus, my experience with previous communities

I played DPPt OU and BW UU. I stopped when B2W2 was released and resumed once ORAS came out. Now I figured that I was just bad at OU and started playing LC, where I attained a decent (though not great) amount of skill.

Whew, and that's me! (I'm a guy, btw, despite Asuka)

 

[Cresselia~~]

There was a long time I thought I might be bisexual.
But now, I read that romantic attraction is different from sexual attraction. So now I think it's quite complicated.
The lack of non-English resources on LGBTQ topics is also making it difficult for me to find information.

Anyway, I'm not interested in porn at all. I'm well over 18, but I still find porn disgusting, and I don't enjoy any of it.
However, I get my satisfaction in ecchi harem anime that are for 13 ~15 year olds. No dicks, no nipples, no vagina.

I'm not attracted to any genitals at all. But when watching ecchi anime, I think I get turned on by the anime girls more.

Does anyone know what orientation I am?

 

[Outlaw]

There was a long time I thought I might be bisexual.
But now, I read that romantic attraction is different from sexual attraction. So now I think it's quite complicated.
The lack of non-English resources on LGBTQ topics is also making it difficult for me to find information.

Anyway, I'm not interested in porn at all. I'm well over 18, but I still find porn disgusting, and I don't enjoy any of it.
However, I get my satisfaction in ecchi harem anime that are for 13 ~15 year olds. No dicks, no nipples, no vagina.

I'm not attracted to any genitals at all. But when watching ecchi anime, I think I get turned on by the anime girls more.

Does anyone know what orientation I am?

You could just simply have a fetish for keeping clothes on despite suggestive poses.

 

[Arhops]

As someone with many queer friends, something has always bugged me about the acronym LGBT. It's not the fact that certain sexualities aren't represented, though that's a problem too.

I feel like "LGBT" is unfair: it leads in with the more "normalized," "accepted," and honestly plain old privileged sexualities of lesbian and gay, while sticking the bisexuals and transgenders at the back where they will be paid less mind. This clearly mirrors itself in actual LGBT events, where even in a community where bisexuals and transgenders are supposedly accepted, most people don't actually care about their issues or actively shame them. The attempts to make the acronym more inclusive honestly only even make this worse, how do you think asexuals feel about being tacked on as an afterthought?

In interest of fairness to those sexualities that have been sent to the "back of the bus," I think we should rearrange the title of this thread to be backwards. Everyone can be given their time at the forefront of queer issues. Let the lesbians and gays see how it feels to be the afterthought, so they understand what other communities are going through every day.

 

[cookie]

I have as much right to feel hostile as you do to intentionally abdicate empathy for convenience, possibly more, and I think it's sad you chose to focus on a throwaway one liner where I expressed dry frustration with the rudeness in the thread over the rest of my conciliatory post. The tone wasn't over the line at all

honestly part of that reaction is knowing your history for soapboxing: and credit where it's due the rest of your post was quite balanced.

The reason I mentioned that person was to say that I've known people with identities like that in good faith, because Oglemi's post seemed to imply bad faith. If my explanation was unclear I apologise. The reason is the difference between masculinity, which someone of any gender may strongly identify or present with, and being a man

no need to apologise - I took your post as an anecdote that highlighted the complexity of gender identity, which in turn showed to me how complex the issue is.

And there's no reason a cis person can't understand anything a trans person can, even if they don't innately

sure, but the crux of the issue is that there is a certain level of knowledge required to wrap your head around genders beyond the standard male/female that most cisgendered people do not have, because it's rarely necessary. I've never had to ask myself which gender I am, nor ask the question of anyone else's. One thing that is clear is that you are far more knowledgeable in this area, and I suppose that's because it's an issue close to you. What is immediately obvious to you is less obvious to most others.

 

[Agender Nerd]

There are a lot of inter-community issues surrounding the acronym, and the alternatives have their fare share of issues as well. I mainly use LGBTQIA+ here because it's the one most likely to be recognized. GSRM (gender/sexual/romantic minorities) has by far the most issues, mainly to do with its history and origin that I'd rather not go into here. Queer is a solid option but with it being a reclaimed slur, many are uncomfortable using the word. MOGAI (Marginalized orientations, gender alignments, + intersex) is my personal favorite, but it hasn't really caught on and it's the one most likely to be immediately dismissed as "Tumblr" (which isn't really an argument against it, but still).

I don't think we should discuss whether gay and lesbian people are more or less privileged that bi, pan, trans, ace, intersex, or similar groups of people. The issues they face are actually quite different and trying to quantify how bad they are relative to each other is time that could be better spent discussing what makes those experiences unique and how to improve them.

 

[Adamant Zoroark]

I do think there is a certain case to be made for the GSRM acronym. As a romantic minority (aromantic) I find that you could add as many letters as you wanted to LGBTQ+ and it would still be exclusionary. Furthermore, GSRM makes it clear that sexual and romantic identities aren't interchangeable, something even John Oliver got wrong ("... Sexual orientation is who you love"). It's important to note that sexual and romantic orientations as being separate because a mismatch is a very possible scenario; aros are not necessarily asexual, bisexuals are not necessarily biromantic, etc.

Maybe the exclusion of romantic minorities in the LGBTQIA+ acronym is an oversight, but oversight or not, it is bad for aros/mismatched individuals. I have personally experienced amatonormativity both here and in real life. One user here said something to me along the lines of "it's a phase," which would have been rightly interpreted as being extremely homophobic had you replaced "aro" with "gay." Regarding irl, I've experienced a form of amatonormativity from my mother with her continual expectation that I eventually get married, which shows that people are simply expected to get married as if that's the ideal for all relationships to be held to.

Bottom line, visibility and awareness of romantic minorities is important as the more people understand something, the more accepting they are of it. Things are much better for aros now than they were not too long ago, with casual sex being considerably more socially accepted today than it was at the turn of the century. However, while casual sex is increasingly tolerated, aros themselves aren't, nor do people really understand sexual/romantic mismatch. If we increase awareness of romantic minorities, not only would people maybe be more willing to accept nonromantic sexual relationships (which benefits aros), but also nonsexual romantic relationships (which benefits romantic asexuals & others with mismatched sexual and romantic orientations.)

 

[Agender Nerd]

I agree that people need to be taught more about the different types of attraction and the term GSRM demonstrates that better than most, but as I mentioned its the history of that particular term that really condemns it. I'm putting it in hide tags just to be safe.

GSRM History

The first notable time it was seen was in "The Erotic Minorities: A Swedish View" by Lars Ullerstram, where it was used to defend necrophilia and pedophilia. The term has also been popular among swingers, BDSM communities, poly-amorous people and other groups of heterosexual, heteromantic, and cisgender people (for the sake of clarity I'm referring to groups of people that are all three of heterosexual, heteromantic, and cisgender, not just one or two).

On a related note, the term SGA (same gender attraction) has been used most prominently in conversion therapy. I've also been seeing it used a lot recently by people trying to exclude cis heteromantic asexual people, and cis aromantic heterosexual people from the community. I don't think I've seen it brought up yet this thread, but it's relevant if we're discussing appropriate acronyms.

 

[elcheeso]

Problem is that short of excessively long and specific acronyms, every alternative can and has been co-opted by people who really shouldn't be included in them because it gains them (perceived) legitimacy. I've seen straight cis BDSM enthusiasts swear up and down that they're queer because of their kinks and saying otherwise is discrimination, and I've seen paedophiles claim that they're totally a marginalised orientation and yada yada discrimination. I really don't feel like this is a solvable problem.

I'll never be over mogai-archive though. What an intense clusterfuck of stupidity that was, god damn.

 

[vonFiedler]

You're saying that like BDSM is a bad thing (it definitely has nothing to do with gender identity or sexual orientation, if that was your only point).

 

[Agender Nerd]

You're saying that like BDSM is a bad thing (its definitely has nothing to do with gender identity or sexual orientation, if that was your only point).

So long as there's consent and nothing abusive, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the vast majority of kinks. They're just not what these particular umbrella terms are meant to describe.

 

[Adamant Zoroark]

There is a certain interpretation of "sexual minority" which would include kinks like BDSM, but it should be noted that sexual kinks and sexual orientations are entirely different concepts and that LGBTQ and GSRM aren't intended to cover kinks. However, speaking as someone into BDSM, I can comfortably say that the vast majority of cisgender heterosexual people who are into BDSM don't think their kink qualifies them as being considered queer. Regardless of if we adopt a more inclusive acronym like GSRM (despite the history surrounding it) or keep adding more and more letters to LGBTQ (which would eventually become a clusterfuck people would have a hard time remembering) there's always going to be some fringe group attempting to claim to be covered under the term when they're not.

That being said, kink shaming is a very real problem that needs to be talked about more, but it's not an LGBTQ issue. If anything, it should be mentioned in the same conversation in which we discuss slut shaming.

 

[vonFiedler]

I'd say both fall under general sexual stigma, which is a HUGE problem that probably also negatively effects LGBT people (for instance, constant claims of homosexuality as sexual depravity, or claims of trans using bathrooms as being masked perversion). But this is certainly venturing off topic.

 

[HailFall]

So I'm not looking to start up The Discourse like in that other thread so I'm just making this one post and likely not responding further. I've seen some troubling things being said so I'm just going to address a couple things I see as an issue.

I've noticed a lot of people using the word "qu*er" in this thread. Qu*er is a slur, there's really no arguing otherwise. It's not as common as it used to be, but in the past this word was flung around and used against LGBT people, similarly to some other slurs more common right now like "f*g". Because of this you shouldn't be talking about "qu*er people" or the "qu*er community" (especially if you're a cishet). Do not coercively assign a slur as a label to a group of marginalized people. Say LGBT instead. If you yourself are an LGBT person you are free to reclaim that slur for yourself but again, do not force it onto others who are not comfortable with it. Many people have reclaimed this slur, but again, many have not. Be sensitive to the needs of all of us and use the correct term please.

Someone brought up ace and aro people... I really cant get behind the idea that ace or aro are particularly opppressed identities. Where are the examples of children being kicked out of their house for being aro or ace? Having hate crimes commited against them? Being denied jobs? Anything else really? I suppose there are people who will invalidate ace and aro identities but that is not on the same level as the oppression LGBT people face. Theres no systematic element to it. You may be able to find specific instances of people receiving poor treatment for being aro or ace but that's really not enough to prove an overarching hierarchy of oppression is in place. At least as of right now I don't really feel ace/aro people belong in the LGBT community. I am by no means advocating for their mistreatment, but I don't think they should be grouped in with LGBT people and considered an oppressed group just by the justification that "they're different". Instead I feel they should form their own communities to discuss ace/aro related issues. (Just so there's no misconceptions, I'm not saying that I think they should be completely barred from the lgbt community, but that being ace/aro isnt inherently something that should make you part of it and you should be gay/bi/trans/pan/whatever to be included)

disclaimer: I am aro so please don't act like I'm speaking from a position of privilege or anything. I am entitled to an opinion on this matter so don't try to pull the "allo privilege" gotcha! on me.

 

[dhelmise]

So I'm not looking to start up The Discourse like in that other thread so I'm just making this one post and likely not responding further. I've seen some troubling things being said so I'm just going to address a couple things I see as an issue.

I've noticed a lot of people using the word "qu*er" in this thread. Qu*er is a slur, there's really no arguing otherwise. It's not as common as it used to be, but in the past this word was flung around and used against LGBT people, similarly to some other slurs more common right now like "f*g". Because of this you shouldn't be talking about "qu*er people" or the "qu*er community" (especially if you're a cishet). Do not coercively assign a slur as a label to a group of marginalized people. Say LGBT instead. If you yourself are an LGBT person you are free to reclaim that slur for yourself but again, do not force it onto others who are not comfortable with it. Many people have reclaimed this slur, but again, many have not. Be sensitive to the needs of all of us and use the correct term please.

Someone brought up ace and aro people... I really cant get behind the idea that ace or aro are particularly opppressed identities. Where are the examples of children being kicked out of their house for being aro or ace? Having hate crimes commited against them? Being denied jobs? Anything else really? I suppose there are people who will invalidate ace and aro identities but that is not on the same level as the oppression LGBT people face. Theres no systematic element to it. You may be able to find specific instances of people receiving poor treatment for being aro or ace but that's really not enough to prove an overarching hierarchy of oppression is in place. At least as of right now I don't really feel ace/aro people belong in the LGBT community. I am by no means advocating for their mistreatment, but I don't think they should be grouped in with LGBT people and considered an oppressed group just by the justification that "they're different". Instead I feel they should form their own communities to discuss ace/aro related issues. (Just so there's no misconceptions, I'm not saying that I think they should be completely barred from the lgbt community, but that being ace/aro isnt inherently something that should make you part of it and you should be gay/bi/trans/pan/whatever to be included)

disclaimer: I am aro so please don't act like I'm speaking from a position of privilege or anything. I am entitled to an opinion on this matter so don't try to pull the "allo privilege" gotcha! on me.

Queer is an umbrella term that refers to all parts of the LGBT community. For example, "15-year-old queer boy" can refer to a gay boy, transgender male, etc. Queer people refers to all members of the lgbt community, etc. or as a general term for people with sexualities or genders that are somewhere between the two spectrums. The only way that it can be referred to as offensive is because of the negative light that media has shined upon the word that gave it a negative connotation.

Yes, ace/aro people aren't commonly abandoned and what you listed, that doesn't mean they aren't a part of the LGBT+ community. Asexual is still a sexuality that is different from heterosexual, as aromatic is different from heteroromantic. When it comes down to it, the LGBT community is about people who are genders, sexualities, and romantic attractions that differ from cis-gendered, heterosexual, and/or heteroromantic. And for what it's worth, the A in LGBTQIA+ doesn't just stand for asexual/romantic, there are two As. The second one means ally, as in a person who may not be a part of the community by sexuality/gender but supports and is heavily incorporated with it.

 

[Agender Nerd]

Marriage Consummation Laws, being classified as a mental disorder (“hypoactive sexual desire disorder”), constant erasure thanks to heteronormativity. There's a case to be made for prejudice against asexual and aromantic people being Systemic

Trigger Warning

Also they do face corrective r*pe and conversion therapy

There's a reason I said the acronym delved into inter-community issues, and "Ace Discourse" is one of the big ones. Of course it's essentially re-purposing old gatekeeping tactics (eg. "Bi people shouldn't be in pride if they're in a het relationship") of calling people "basically straight". It's why I advocate for the simple metric of "If you aren't heterosexual, heteromantic, or cisgender then you belong" and even that has the exception of Intersex people.

 

[Adamant Zoroark]

So I'm not looking to start up The Discourse like in that other thread so I'm just making this one post and likely not responding further. I've seen some troubling things being said so I'm just going to address a couple things I see as an issue.

I've noticed a lot of people using the word "qu*er" in this thread. Qu*er is a slur, there's really no arguing otherwise. It's not as common as it used to be, but in the past this word was flung around and used against LGBT people, similarly to some other slurs more common right now like "f*g". Because of this you shouldn't be talking about "qu*er people" or the "qu*er community" (especially if you're a cishet). Do not coercively assign a slur as a label to a group of marginalized people. Say LGBT instead. If you yourself are an LGBT person you are free to reclaim that slur for yourself but again, do not force it onto others who are not comfortable with it. Many people have reclaimed this slur, but again, many have not. Be sensitive to the needs of all of us and use the correct term please.

Someone brought up ace and aro people... I really cant get behind the idea that ace or aro are particularly opppressed identities. Where are the examples of children being kicked out of their house for being aro or ace? Having hate crimes commited against them? Being denied jobs? Anything else really? I suppose there are people who will invalidate ace and aro identities but that is not on the same level as the oppression LGBT people face. Theres no systematic element to it. You may be able to find specific instances of people receiving poor treatment for being aro or ace but that's really not enough to prove an overarching hierarchy of oppression is in place. At least as of right now I don't really feel ace/aro people belong in the LGBT community. I am by no means advocating for their mistreatment, but I don't think they should be grouped in with LGBT people and considered an oppressed group just by the justification that "they're different". Instead I feel they should form their own communities to discuss ace/aro related issues. (Just so there's no misconceptions, I'm not saying that I think they should be completely barred from the lgbt community, but that being ace/aro isnt inherently something that should make you part of it and you should be gay/bi/trans/pan/whatever to be included)

disclaimer: I am aro so please don't act like I'm speaking from a position of privilege or anything. I am entitled to an opinion on this matter so don't try to pull the "allo privilege" gotcha! on me.

I don't recall ever mentioning ace/aro people getting kicked out of their homes for their identities, but there is still considerable stigma surrounding them (like asexuals being grouped under a mental disorder / aromantics stereotyped as sociopaths, which I've heard before, or in general people treating these identities like they're "just phases"). You could probably find examples of hate crimes against these groups if you tried hard enough, but that's still pushing it. Regardless, I think setting aside the discussion on the mistreatment of ace/aro individuals on the grounds of "LGBT individuals have it worse" is akin to setting aside the discussions on male circumcision and intersex genital surgeries on the grounds of "FGM is worse." The existence of worse issues doesn't make lesser issues unworthy of discussion. It's not a competition.

 

[HailFall]

Queer is an umbrella term that refers to all parts of the LGBT community. For example, "15-year-old queer boy" can refer to a gay boy, transgender male, etc. Queer people refers to all members of the lgbt community, etc. or as a general term for people with sexualities or genders that are somewhere between the two spectrums. The only way that it can be referred to as offensive is because of the negative light that media has shined upon the word that gave it a negative connotation.

Sorry, but this is really uninformed. I don't think you know the history behind that word. As I said in my previous post, that word used to be like the equivalent of modern day slurs like "f*g". The original meaning of "qu*er" was "strange", and it started to be applied negatively to LGBT people. At one point, some members of the LGBT community took that slur and reclaimed it for themselves. Reclaiming slurs can be very empowering for some people, but for others its just not something they currently do or even will feel comfortable with, and thats okay. Eventually some ridiculous movement eventually stared where people claimed that it was a blanket term to describe the entire LGBT community, but forcing a slur onto other people is simply just not an okay thing to do. The slur is still used against LGBT people even nowadays, albeit not as often, and we shouldnt force it on people who have been negatively affected by it. As I said if you are LGBT feel free to reclaim it for yourself but don't force it on others. I encourage you to do some google searches on the word if you want further explanation. Im sure there are resources you can find that discuss this in more detail.

Yes, ace/aro people aren't commonly abandoned and what you listed, that doesn't mean they aren't a part of the LGBT+ community. Asexual is still a sexuality that is different from heterosexual, as aromatic is different from heteroromantic. When it comes down to it, the LGBT community is about people who are genders, sexualities, and romantic attractions that differ from cis-gendered, heterosexual, and/or heteroromantic. And for what it's worth, the A in LGBTQIA+ doesn't just stand for asexual/romantic, there are two As. The second one means ally, as in a person who may not be a part of the community by sexuality/gender but supports and is heavily incorporated with it.

The LGBT community was formed to give LGBT people a safe space to be with each other away from the oppression from cishets and be themselves. Its not a fun exclusive club everyone should want access to. Its not just "about everyone who's not cishet" its about people who have faced oppressive forces as a result of their orientation or being trans. The A for allies isnt intended to show "solidarity" with straight people who support LGBT people, it was added to allow closeted LGBT people access to the community's resources without outing themselves, similarly to things like gay-straight alliances or whatever. Ace and aro people do not truly face oppression I am aware of and the "not het, must be oppressed" viewpoint is frankly speaking just poor logic and lazy analysis of oppression dynamics.

was just responding to that post because a lot of it was just false but might as well adress the next one.

Agender Nerd if you have any evidence to back up what you put in the hide tags I would appreciate it because I've heard the same things but never found a scrap of evidence actually backing it up outside those things happening to people who were already part of groups that face those kind of terrible things and just happened to be ace/aro. Even if you could find one or two that doesn't really show any trends unfortunately, you really need evidence that this happens at an elevated rate (more than just in incredibly rare cases i mean). I'm not trying to say this happening even a little is acceptable, but can we really just accept that this is the result of actual trends of growing bigotry? It is likely that ace or aro people face some level of stigma that strictly heterosexual heteroromantic people don't simply because they're different, but I don't think its happening at a systematic level. As for the other points you mentioned, general lack of public knowledge about these identities is a very major contributor to these issues. I think its a bit of a stretch to say they're being erased when most people just genuinely don't know these groups exist. I hardly see how you can interpret lack of representation of people hardly anyone knows about as a result of bigotry. This is also likely a contributor to it being labeled as a mental disorder. I realize this is just my two cents on the matter, but this is how I interpret this

Aaand someone else posted while I was typing that.

Adamant Zoroark I never said issues aro and ace people face are not deserving of discussion, but I just don't agree that there is an overarching system of oppression causing these less severe issues in the first place. At least from how I've interpreted ace and aro issues that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Scyther NO Swiping]

Sorry, but this is really uninformed. I don't think you know the history behind that word. As I said in my previous post, that word used to be like the equivalent of modern day slurs like "f*g". The original meaning of "qu*er" was "strange", and it started to be applied negatively to LGBT people. At one point, some members of the LGBT community took that slur and reclaimed it for themselves. Reclaiming slurs can be very empowering for some people, but for others its just not something they currently do or even will feel comfortable with, and thats okay. Eventually some ridiculous movement eventually stared where people claimed that it was a blanket term to describe the entire LGBT community, but forcing a slur onto other people is simply just not an okay thing to do. The slur is still used against LGBT people even nowadays, albeit not as often, and we shouldnt force it on people who have been negatively affected by it. As I said if you are LGBT feel free to reclaim it for yourself but don't force it on others. I encourage you to do some google searches on the word if you want further explanation. Im sure there are resources you can find that discuss this in more detail.

I think everyone here knows the history of the word. However I think you are misinformed as to what it is used for now. Hell, the first time I heard the word "queer" being used in a good way I was hesitant, and I thought it was just one person trying to take back the term. As I learned more, I realized that it just doesn't mean that anymore. It is just used as a neutral term for LGBT+ people because nobody wants to say that damn acronym all the time. If it truly bothers you maybe tell your friends to not say it around you, but 90% of the time the word is not being used in a negative way. You just have to use context.

The LGBT community was formed to give LGBT people a safe space to be with each other away from the oppression from cishets and be themselves. Its not a fun exclusive club everyone should want access to. Its not just "about everyone who's not cishet" its about people who have faced oppressive forces as a result of their orientation or being trans. The A for allies isnt intended to show "solidarity" with straight people who support LGBT people, it was added to allow closeted LGBT people access to the community's resources without outing themselves, similarly to things like gay-straight alliances or whatever. Ace and aro people do not truly face oppression I am aware of and the "not het, must be oppressed" viewpoint is frankly speaking just poor logic and lazy analysis of oppression dynamics.

How do ace/aro people NOT face discrimination? From the time we are kids we are all taught that we will meet someone and fall in love with them one day, that we will be attracted to several people based on looks. When people who are ace/aro come out many times they are told "it's just a phase" or that they "haven't met the right person yet." The point that they don't face discrimination is quite frankly untrue and hurtful to these people.

I apologize if this post is all over the place and formatted badly, I'm in an airport waiting on my flight I will edit later if need be.

 

[HailFall]

sigh looks like ive been dragged back into it again.

What I'm hearing is "I don't care how many LGBT people have been hurt by this slur, I'm going to say it regardless because the suffering of LGBT people face because of it is less important than the three extra syllables it takes to say the letters in the acronym". Good grief its not even that difficult its a tiny little habit you need to get out of but somehow this is a tall order? One would hope saying "please don't use slurs" is a noncontroversial statement but I suppose that's not the case. LGBT people have been violently murdered with that word being the last thing they hear but a simple request to say LGBT over qu*er and make some LGBT people more comfortable is just too much effort? It costs $0.00 to Not Be Like That. It's clear I'm not going to change your mind but I hope at least someone reading this sees this and changes their own mind because this is really not okay regardless of the intent with which you think it's usually used.

How is being told that you will fall in love someday discrimination? As I said before the vast majority of people simply aren't aware ace and aro people exist. Its not like thats being said with ace and aro people in mind with some plot to discriminate against them or something. Being told "its just a phase" is frustrating and definitely sucks but if thats the case spread awareness. Advocate for yourselves. Make it known that you really do exist. I'd also like to point out that I never said aros and aces dont face discrimination, but i will say that they dont face it on anywhere near the same scale of what LGBT people do. Its also not to the extent of being classified as oppression either. I elaborated more on this in my first post.

Edit @ below: i specifically stated multiple times that it is okay to reclaim the term but the way many people in this thread force it on other people (saying "the qu*er community" for example) is what i detest. You seem to want to continue off the assumption that the LGBT umbrella automatically includes ace people as if its totally obvious, but based on what? I've brought up numerous very valid points that have gone unanswered. What im getting is "ace/aro people are lgbt because i said so now stop talking about this and ruining this thread". I thought this thread was for discussion on lgbt matters, no? Well regardless I wont continue posting but I hope ive made my points at the very least.

 

[vonFiedler]

HailFall

Some people in the LGBT community use the word and like the idea of retaking it. You're not one of them, but you're not the arbiter on all things LGBT that you seem to act like. It seems like everything but your specific experiences and inclinations doesn't matter to you, for instance that you're demanding of other LGBT people to not use a specific word that affects them equally, but you're also being dismissive of ace/aro people. This thread was established as a safe place for everyone under the umbrella, so please refrain from the hypocritical infighting. Nobody is dragging you into comment on anything.

 

[Myzozoa]

HailFall Saying that 'queer' is a slur is functions to discredit many valid and substantial 'political' movements out of hand and is not significant and is not a central part of the oppression of trans people, which btw, you seem to have forgotten, includes persons of several orientations which may be familiar as falling into 'ace' or 'aromantic' labels (there are aromantic trans people). nor does it contribute to an intersectional or historical analysis at this moment, 2016. this is because queerness is by definition a not-fitting, a label that is not a label, intended to be capacious, capable of expanding. The acronym, with or without a q for queer, is directly a gesture at the idea of queerness, especially in it's frequent expansion.

I advocate for the hard changes not the easy ones, and it's easy to make a show about queer being a slur, but it's hard to go to a protest. Much harder to organize one, and a lot of 'queer' protests have happened... I guess the lgbtq collectives that just continue using that term to organize may somehow be worse informed than a person on the internet...

Inclusivity and scope
Because of the context in which it was reclaimed, queer has sociopolitical connotations and is often preferred by those who are activists—namely, by those who strongly reject traditional gender identities; reject distinct sexual identities such as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or straight; or see themselves as oppressed by the homonormativity of the politics of the broader "gay" or "LGBT" community. In this usage, queer retains its historical connotation of "outside the bounds of normal society" and can be construed as "breaking the rules for sex and gender". It can be preferred because of its ambiguity, which allows queer-identifying people to avoid the sometimes rigid boundaries that are associated with labels such as "gay", "lesbian", or even "transgender".

While initially used only to refer to radical homosexuals, opinions on the range of what queer includes can vary. For some people, the non-specificity of the term is liberating. Queerness thus becomes a path of political resistance against heteronormativity as well as homonormativity while simultaneously refusing to engage in traditional essentialist identity politics.[13]

And so who's historical experience is centralized in saying queer is a slur? I assert that an intersectional analysis might point out the historically well-off, white male aspects of it. Where as, many organizations, collectives, and people use the term queer as a label to organize around, while also resisting labels, and taking up anti-racist and feminist stances:

"
Queer as a pejorative
By the time "The Adventure of the Second Stain" was published, the term was starting to gain a connotation of sexual deviance, referring to feminine men or men who would engage in same-sex relationships. An early recorded usage of the word in this sense was in an 1894 letter by John Sholto Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry.[5] Usage of queer as a derogatory term for effeminate men become prominent in the 20th century.[1] In the early-20th century, individuals with non-normative sexual or gender identities, including English poet and author Radcliffe Hall, preferred the identity of invert. In the mid-20th century, the invert identity lost ground and shifted toward the homophile identity. In the 1960s and 1970s, the homophile identity was displaced by a more radicalized gay identity, which at the time included trans and gender-nonconforming people.

During the endonymic shifts from invert to homophile to gay, queer was pejoratively applied to men who were believed to engage in receptive or passive anal or oral sexwith other men[6] as well as those who exhibited non-normative gender expressions.[7]"

versus:

"Reclamation
Beginning in the late-1980s, the label queer began to be reclaimed from its pejorative use as a neutral or positive self-identifier by LGBT people.[1] An early example of this usage by the LGBT community was by an organisation called Queer Nation, which was formed in March 1990 and circulated an anonymous flier at the New York Gay Pride Parade in June 1990 titled "Queers Read This".[8] The flier included a passage explaining their adoption of the label queer:

Ah, do we really have to use that word? It's trouble. Every gay person has his or her own take on it. For some it means strange and eccentric and kind of mysterious [...] And for others "queer" conjures up those awful memories of adolescent suffering [...] Well, yes, "gay" is great. It has its place. But when a lot of lesbians and gay men wake up in the morning we feel angry and disgusted, not gay. So we've chosen to call ourselves queer. Using "queer" is a way of reminding us how we are perceived by the rest of the world.

Queer people, particularly queer people of color, began to reclaim queer in response to a perceived shift in the gay community toward liberal conservatism, catalyzed byAndrew Sullivan's 1989 piece in The New Republic, titled Here Comes the Groom: The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage.[9] The queer movement rejected causes viewed as assimilationist, such as marriage, military inclusion and adoption.[10]

The term may be capitalized when referring to an identity or community, rather than as an objective fact describing a person's desires, in a construction similar to the capitalized use of Deaf.[11]

The "hip and iconic abbreviation 'Q'" has developed from common usage of queer, particularly in the United States."

source: wikipedia.

HailFall, imo you decided not to consider things from an intersectional perspective and generalized in a way that (I thought) was often offensive and even quite dangerous. These assertions obfuscate the actual complexities of the situations lgbtq people face and can draw attention away from the most marginalized members of the communities. Note, how in a lgbtq justice project about marriage rights in the USA, an aromantic trans person is pretty marginalized. Their oppression is thus compounded upon within the mainstream discourse of gay rights. I find it hard to recognize your conception of justice for 'lgbt' people, mainly because while you say you want justice for trans people or marginalized people your post derides the people and organizations that have fought against lgbt's oppression historically, specifically the oppression of women and nonwhite persons, using the term 'queer' to facilitate organizing.

also way to universalize falling in love. sorry babes, once again to reiterate: you gets none of this, i married myself. im not gonna fall in love with you. Is that oppression?

-a queer, lesbian, feminist killjoy

ps: this thread is for discussing lgbtq matters, hence the title says lgbtq...

 

[Icing On Da Cake]

I'm guessing the word "queer" got the same treatment as the word "nigga" or something similar to it?

Edit @ below

Meant it as more of an offensive word that got turned around to mean something neutral than more negative but I gotcha