LGB ErasureJust Say No to Umbrella-Terming ("LGBTQ+" and "Queer")

submitted by KCStuffedAnimal from self.LGBDropTheT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 23 insightful - 1 fun23 insightful - 0 fun24 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Originally T was added for transsexual homosexuals. And LGBT was still ONLY about sexuality. Now T was hijacked by "transgenders" who are not even transsexuals with "born in wrong body" but some people called "transgenders" (previously transgender and transsexual were synonims, as gender was equal to sex, but not anymore) with "I feel like other sex" or "being other sex is my kink", and QIAANB+ part added was not about sexuality either. Almost everything that is after LGB nowaydas is about either sexual kinks or "how you feel yourself" or "what stereotype you will like to follow", not about sexuality at all. Plus if LGB is mostly about acceptance and "we are normal, just like everyone else, let us live. Being homosexual is same as being with brown or white hair, nothing special", the TQ+ is about "we are different, we need more rights than other people, make sure to remember that we are different and use special pronounses, change the world". And in general TQ+ has a lot more in common with movements like Feminism or Men Rights Activism.

And this is main issue with TQ+ under umbrella term - they want absolutely different things than we (LGB) are, they have absolutely different problems than we have, and even whole core reason of those problems is different. If Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals have something in common - romantic and/or sexual attraction to same sex people, if all LGB people have same reason for being oppressed and it is shown in same way to all of them, then TQ+ have nothing in common both with LGB part and even within themselves.

[–]Ko-hi 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

That first A still about sexuality! Asexuality is what rounds out the spectrum of sexualities, same/opposite/both/neither.

[–]KCStuffedAnimal[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

"Asexual" is similar to the label "queer" in that an exact definition is impossible to arrive at. If I want to get thoroughly confused, all I have to do is try and sort out all the contradictory claims made about asexuality! Because it's so nebulous, I can't accept asexual persons as part of that spectrum you refer to. Nor do I believe they suffer oppression that's comparable to what Lesbians, Gay men and Bisexual folk suffer. But as I said before, there's no reason for you to worry because the LGBTQ+ leadership believes differently. You're definitely part of the Incredibly Expanding Acronym. What more do you want?

[–]Ko-hi 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Asexuality is easy to define and conceptualise, it's what a lesbian feels towards a man. No sexual attraction. It's a sexuality. But there are many who think it's about whether or not you want sexual contact, that is what muddles it.

You could say we're extremely low attraction bisexuals, since we feel equal attraction to both genders, if you prefer that.

[–]KCStuffedAnimal[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Men turning Lesbians into asexual women? Asexuality, a subcategory of bisexuality? You remind me of an amateur comedian, grabbing desperately for punchlines before he crashes and burns! Tell me another one; maybe next time I'll laugh!

No doubt it's best to let Lesbians and Bisexual persons speak for themselves; methinks there are a few who disagree with you. Maybe even more than a few. At best, your claims are wishful thinking and at worst, they're an attempt at gaslighting!

That annoying habit of trying to blur sexual orientation definitions is one reason why folks are starting to turn away from "queer" activists and activism. Re-defining someone else's identity to suit your own socio-political agenda, that's just plain rude. I could easily use rougher language, but let's keep things family-friendly.

[–]Ko-hi 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Oh my god are you being intentionally obtuse. You're twisting my words into something I never said.

Asexual = equal attraction to both genders, namely zero. It's a separate sexuality but it's most similar to bisexuality, due to the equal attraction aspect. 0=0. I am 30, I literally thought I was bisexual all my life until a year ago.

A lesbian feels 0 attraction towards a man. I used this comparison to point out what it feels like, to contrast that other person who said it's about not wanting sex. I did not say men make lesbians asexual WTF

[–]KCStuffedAnimal[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Why should I twist your words when you do such a great job twisting them yourself? You don't need my help. If twisted analyses bother you so much, then stop drawing parallels with people whose life experiences you don't understand! But do they really bother you? I doubt it. The so-called "LGBTQ+ community" that you claim membership in encourages blurring identity distinctions and creating false equivalence. That's one reason why "G" is the only letter I identify with!

[–]Ko-hi 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Considering I identified as bi for longer than some members of the community have been alive and dated/had sex with both genders, sure kiddo, I don't understand their life experience at all and there's no point in drawing any parallels out of experience. Keep being that abrasive and you'll alienate everyone sympathetic to the LGB without other letters cause.

[–]KCStuffedAnimal[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So you're not Bisexual but you identified as Bi for awhile and that qualifies you to speak for them? You keep coming with the jokes, but I'm still not laughing! It isn't funny to witness someone so intent on self-delusion, twisting and turning every which way in order to be part of something while simultaneously trying to set himself apart from it. It looks like someone is going to hurt himself sooner or later.

If pointing out absurdities makes me abrasive, I'm OK with that. Just think of me as your handy kitchen Brillo pad! I scrub away the gunk so that what's underneath can be seen clearly. The question is, do you have the will to see clearly? If you don't, we're just going around in circles and wasting each other's time.

[–]Ko-hi 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

  1. "Awhile" sure.

  2. I wasn't speaking "for" bisexuals.

  3. Asexuality doesn't exist, I'm straight and was faking it for 15 years. Got it.

My god you are an expert at twisting things people say into pretzels. Do you run around irl screaming at people to check their privilege and crying against microaggresions? Because you're one step away from doing just that in this discussion.

But sure, have it the way you want: I'll stop supporting LGB. as a quasi-outsider. Congrats, this was your goal right?

[–]indeepshadowsBi woman 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You're on TRA levels of willfully misunderstanding your opponent. Congrats.

[–]KCStuffedAnimal[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You're the one who doesn't understand. I have no opponents here. We're just talking and disagreeing. At ease, soldier, go back to your barracks.