LGBDropTheT

So basically same goes for queer.

Oh yeah for sure. I just hate that people in woke cubculture are trying to do this for the word "gay," too. It's harmful to LGB people.

To be fair I prefer to look the opposite way to queer lol.

Yeah same lol. I used to think I would not fit in at all with other LGB people because I thought that the subculture of dyed hair, awful haircut, language censoring and identity hierarchy was what most other LGB people believed in. But now I am aware that people from that subculture are overwhelmingly straight identity tourists, and that many (most?) LGB people don't participate in that subculture at all :)

That reminds me how some kweers cry about the idea of not being seen as "queer enough." What the fuck does it even mean?

They seem desperate to be seen as fitting the aesthetic, is how I have come to understand that phrase, in order to be accepted by other people who believe in their ideology, the "queer theory" flavor of postmodernism. (Maybe you were asking rhetorically but I am tired, sorry lol.) I am not in goth subculture but to draw an example, I would compare it to someone asking if they were "goth enough." Or better yet, a Christian asking if they were "righteous enough" or some shit. If you apply it to sexual orientation, it makes even less sense: logically, there's no such thing as "gay enough" or "bi enough"; you are either gay or not, bi or not, etc. Homophobic liberals who buy into "queer theory" don't seem to view LGB people as simply people living their lives who happen to date the same sex; they view "gay" and "queer" as pronouncements of beliefs and adherence to the postmodernist ideology of "queer theory". And there is no winning acceptance in postmodernist "queer theory".

Fixating on being perceived as "queer enough" is therefore a fruitless goal because 1) the goalposts keep moving in in this ideology and 2) more generally, basing your self-esteem on how others perceive you is not really a recipe for success...