LGBTQQIAAP... is the acronym getting a little ridiculous?

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

Since it can't be pronounced, it's still by-definition an intialism and not an acronym. NASA, LIDAR, Scuba and RAM are all acronyms.

 

If you ask me, it's still not long enough. Eventually you'll be able to order it.

Edited January 9, 2014 by Blue

[Winterbass 763]

I like LGBT actually, it should be kept as it is, if other people want to make more ridiculous words or terms, that's fine by me but I'm still going to say LGBT. Even though I'm pansexual, I don't feel left out when someone says LGBT, I actually feel included, because it's easier to say and we have used this abbreviation for a fairly long time, making it more standardized for anything non-hetersexual.

 

So yeah, keep it at LGBT, people who feel left out, make up your own term but I'd rather keep it the way it is, it's fine now, so who reinvent the wheel?

 

Besides, can't people just see LGBT as an abbreviation of its longer, more silly brother?

Edited January 9, 2014 by Winterbass

[Freewave 1,145]

It is getting a bit long and ridiuclous sadly. I am incredibly glad that gay and transgenders are making some real headway in social changes and getting respect but it seems all other types of gender and sexuality groups are adding their names to the movement to gain respect and feel a part of it. That's not a bad thing per se but it waters down the message and goes from a clear cut definition (X likes X (gay), and X becomes/identifies with Y(trans),) where a legal right is demanded and necessary and to more a mental affinity with a new group that's undetectable by everyone else. Certainly people are complicated, but it seems that everyone like special treatment now, to be a part of a special group identity, and that they can post on tumblr informing everyone of who they choose to identify with. Everyone is unique and different but identifying as something unusual doesn't make you special or give you special protections i guess. You should be equal along with everyone else.

 

I'm just waiting for astrological signs to get popular again and become the hip new thing to describe yourself all over again.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

There seems to be increasing evidence that pedophilia may not be a choice, in the same way as homosexuality or w/e. There was a recent study done with evidence for this, and a bunch of articles were published about it, such as this one: http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4285469-is-pedophilia-a-sexual-orientation-/

 

I'm not trying to say that sexually abusing children is OK! I think child sex abuse is one of the worst things in the world, and it needs to come to a complete stop! But it seems that there are people who are attracted to children but choose not to act on their urges, hence the difference between a pedophile and a child abuser.

 

I'm not at all attracted to children, but if more studies are done and it turns out that pedophilia is akin to homosexuality then I think we should start accepting those who have those sexual urges, but do not act on them. Anyway, the article explains this better than me.

 

Maybe so, but that doesn't mean it's something you should defend or have "pride" for. It should be treated as a mental heath issue the same way something like nymphomania or sex addiction (as in, spending so much time looking for sex and such it's damaging you your life and you're not even doing it out of real feeling anymore) is. 

 

The other issue that it's really questionable if you could call being attracted to a certain age an orientation anymore than you could call being attracted to blondes one. It would be like someone saying their geriatricsexual.

Edited January 10, 2014 by Shoboni

[BeautyLee 6]

I attended a college conference some-odd years ago, and it was just LGBTQA (Q- Questioning/Queer, A-Ally). They called it 'Alphabet Soup', which is basically all it is now with even more letters being added. Personally, if there's going to be a string of letters identifying the gay community, I prefer LGBTQ. In the long run, I don't care too much. I identify as pansexual. That's who I am, not a bunch of letters.

[Sabrinie 392]

While the acronym should include everyone in the community, it's almost impossible. But adding letters, still doesn't really involve everyone anyway. Even when it's just LGBT a lot of people forget the "T" which is terrible, but it tends to happen a lot. Adding the other letters does, in a sense include more people in a very obvious way, but it's not going to change the way people think or help include them in the actual community any better. It's important to remember everyone in the community whether their letter is represented or not, but unfortunately that doesn't always happen and I don't think adding to the acronym is really going to help. 

 

To me it seems like a front. A mask. Like the community is saying "look you're included...but y'know we're not really going to include you in everything." Minds need to be changed, not acronyms. 

[hawkflame 3,310]

From a mostly outsiders perspective- I'm straight but like transwomen as well, so where does that put me?-  this all seems a bit unwieldy and hard to catch up with.  LGBTQ I get, but I?  A?  P?  What are those?

[Appetite4Democracy 452]

Why do people suddenly change their attractions, then? and why can't they realize it right away? 

 

Well, remember when you were 4 and all the boys though girls were icky and had cooties? At a young age, you're not really attracted to anyone. When you start getting attracted to people, you realize what your orientation is. The problem is that if you're (for example) a guy who's attracted to guys, that doesn't necessarily make you gay. You might be bi or pan or something. It takes a bit to figure out exactly who you're attracted to.

Edited January 9, 2014 by Appetite4Democracy

[Scootalove 10,689]

The acronym is probably going to confuse some people who wonder what their sexuality is, it's better to remember everyone in the community but the acronym isn't exactly going to guarantee that everyone will remember who they are. Letters don't have to identify who you are, you are who you are and who you choose to be, an acronym doesn't have to identify who you are.

[Appetite4Democracy 452]

Just call it "Equal Rights" group or something and move on. This is really sad, I don't even see much of a reason for this to even exist really. Who somebody is attracted to is nobody's business and isn't special, if we really want to stand up to the hate these groups get, why not just do it in the name of equal rights?

 

I knew somebody who went from straight, bi, to gay within the time span of 5 years, he had previously liked women but later had no attraction and is now only interested in men. I hate talking about this person but I feel like he's a good example for my point. 

 

We can't just leave it at equal rights, because that's too general. That would have to include (for example) feminism, racial equality, religious equality, etc. It's just too much for one group. This is specifically about sexual orientation and gender identity.

 

And what probably happened to that person was that he thought he liked women, being surrounded by guys who liked women, but then realized that he liked men. For a while, he thought he liked both, then he realized he only really liked men. It happens. Realizing one's sexual orientation takes a while, especially since many people aren't even exposed to the idea of other sexual orientations until later in life. 

From a mostly outsiders perspective- I'm straight but like transwomen as well, so where does that put me?-  this all seems a bit unwieldy and hard to catch up with.  LGBTQ I get, but I?  A?  P?  What are those?

 

I- Intersex. I personally find it especially sad that nobody knows what this means. It should be taught in school very early on. I was always taught that everyone is either male or female. Untrue. Part of the population is, and has always been, intersex. Basically, for one of many reasons, you are neither male nor female. For example, you may be XXY or XYY or something like that. Being taught that everyone is either male or female and disregarding the existence of intersex is really shitty. 

 

A- the first A in LGBTQQIAAP stands for Asexual. Asexuals aren't sexually attracted to anyone. Note that this is not the same as being celibate, as asexuals may still enjoy having sex. Asexuals also may still be romantically attracted to people, but not always. 

 

The second A stands for Ally. Allies are heterosexual cisgender people who support equal rights for all sexual orientations and gender identities.

 

P- Pansexual. Pansexuals can be attracted to anyone, regardless of gender. This does NOT mean that they are attracted to everyone, it just means that they like who they like regardless of their gender. It differs from bisexuality in the sense that bisexuality is attraction to both men and women, while pansexuality applies to men, women, intersex, genderfluid, and pretty much anything else. Note that both pansexuals and bisexuals may have preferences.

 

If you are attracted to transwomen, I'd still call you straight because I still consider transwomen to be women. 

There seems to be increasing evidence that pedophilia may not be a choice, in the same way as homosexuality or w/e. There was a recent study done with evidence for this, and a bunch of articles were published about it, such as this one: http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4285469-is-pedophilia-a-sexual-orientation-/

 

I'm not trying to say that sexually abusing children is OK! I think child sex abuse is one of the worst things in the world, and it needs to come to a complete stop! But it seems that there are people who are attracted to children but choose not to act on their urges, hence the difference between a pedophile and a child abuser.

 

I'm not at all attracted to children, but if more studies are done and it turns out that pedophilia is akin to homosexuality then I think we should start accepting those who have those sexual urges, but do not act on them. Anyway, the article explains this better than me.

 

But, as I stated, calling something like pedophilia a sexual orientation makes no sense. Sexual orientation is about what gender(s) you are attracted to, if any. 

 

Not only that, but all sexual orientations are primarily about relationships and consensual sex between two adults. That's very different from non-consensual sex and abuse to children from an adult. Even the pedophiles in the article acknowledge that child molestation is wrong. I'm fine with the idea that they're pedophiles because of their genetics, but I'm not going to start supporting pedophilia and child molestation, especially since even some pedophiles don't support it. 

[Clover Heart 978]

Maybe we could just make it NSNC: Non-straight, non-cis. That seems to cover everyone. Instead of trying to include what everyone is, what we clearly are not seems much more clear and unifying. 'Cept it looks too much like N'Sync. That's a bummer...

[Nerdy Luigi 2,065]

I'd keep it without repeats of the same letters, though. There isn't a need for them.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

Ju

If we're going to go by evidence that says these people can't help it, we'll soon be accepting pedophiles, zoophilias, and incest. I'm not saying we're going to advocate for child abuse or anything but this is what it's leading to. I, myself, support incest but if there were evidence that shows those into that can't help it, would everybody just change their mind? Probably not but come on. 

 

The issue is "can't help it" doesn't mean it's good. Pedophillia and Zoophillia are bad because they could like to child abuse and animal abuse respectively. You have to learn where to start drawing lines in the sand.  

[ChoroChii 284]

Well, remember when you were 4 and all the boys though girls were icky and had cooties? At a young age, you're not really attracted to anyone. When you start getting attracted to people, you realize what your orientation is. The problem is that if you're (for example) a guy who's attracted to guys, that doesn't necessarily make you gay. You might be bi or pan or something. It takes a bit to figure out exactly who you're attracted to.

 

So, why would a gay guy be attracted to a female as a teenager? I've already been convinced that it is genes but this still baffles me. 

 

 

We can't just leave it at equal rights, because that's too general. That would have to include (for example) feminism, racial equality, religious equality, etc. It's just too much for one group. This is specifically about sexual orientation and gender identity.

 

I suppose that would be a bit much, though I'd kind of like to see a group like that. They could always just make it sexual orientation and gender identity support group or something and shorten the name somehow.

 

 

And what probably happened to that person was that he thought he liked women, being surrounded by guys who liked women, but then realized that he liked men. For a while, he thought he liked both, then he realized he only really liked men. It happens. Realizing one's sexual orientation takes a while, especially since many people aren't even exposed to the idea of other sexual orientations until later in life. 

 

He's been exposed and he did like a women for a while, despite being gay. 

 

The issue is "can't help it" doesn't mean it's good. Pedophillia and Zoophillia are bad because they could like to child abuse and animal abuse respectively. You have to learn where to start drawing lines in the sand.  

 

Yes, I agree.

[Discovery Dream 592]

I like the acronym "LGBTQ"--Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans*, Queer. I think lesbian/gay could be condensed into one, since most lesbians don't mind being called just "gay", and then it's be GBTQ.

As for pan/omni-sexuality, those can both be under the blanket term "bisexual", which has recently fallen out of its original definition of liking the two binary genders. "Queer" can refer to demisexuals, intersex people, and most anything else that doesn't fit in the other three, since "queer" is also used as a blanket term for the whole community.

 

Just my view on things. As it stands, LGBTQ works fine in my eyes.

 

EDIT: On the issues above:

 

Non-monosexuality is a thing, and sexuality is fluid. People change, so sexuality can change as well. Sometimes it takes a while to figure out who you are attracted to; maybe you thought you were more attracted to women than you presently are, maybe you realize you're attracted to both, many, or neither. And that's how one can have a "different" sexuality when younger. Plus, hormones are kicking in during adolescence, and as it stands heterosexuality is the norm. It makes sense that one might believe and even feel that they're attracted to the opposite sex, before paying more attention to how they feel and the signs they're given.

Edited January 10, 2014 by Discovery Dream

[Jadefire 2,797]

I've never head of an acronym longer than LGBT being widely considered with any degree of seriousness.

[Appetite4Democracy 452]

So, why would a gay guy be attracted to a female as a teenager? I've already been convinced that it is genes but this still baffles me. 

 

 

 

I suppose that would be a bit much, though I'd kind of like to see a group like that. They could always just make it sexual orientation and gender identity support group or something and shorten the name somehow.

 

 

 

He's been exposed and he did like a women for a while, despite being gay. 

 

Discovery Dream (below) explains it better than I could.

 

I like the acronym "LGBTQ"--Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans*, Queer. I think lesbian/gay could be condensed into one, since most lesbians don't mind being called just "gay", and then it's be GBTQ.

As for pan/omni-sexuality, those can both be under the blanket term "bisexual", which has recently fallen out of its original definition of liking the two binary genders. "Queer" can refer to demisexuals, intersex people, and most anything else that doesn't fit in the other three, since "queer" is also used as a blanket term for the whole community.

 

Just my view on things. As it stands, LGBTQ works fine in my eyes.

 

EDIT: On the issues above:

 

Non-monosexuality is a thing, and sexuality is fluid. People change, so sexuality can change as well. Sometimes it takes a while to figure out who you are attracted to; maybe you thought you were more attracted to women than you presently are, maybe you realize you're attracted to both, many, or neither. And that's how one can have a "different" sexuality when younger. Plus, hormones are kicking in during adolescence, and as it stands heterosexuality is the norm. It makes sense that one might believe and even feel that they're attracted to the opposite sex, before paying more attention to how they feel and the signs they're given.

 

I agree with the first part but feel the need to add in A for Asexual. Asexual doesn't really fit well for any of these letters.

 

Also, I'd say that LG should be changed to H for Homosexual. 

 

And thank you for explaining the sexuality change. I'm not the best at explaining things, and you explained it really well. 

[Static Electricity 729]

They should've left it at LGBTQ. That way you anyone who isn't in one of the prescribed groups groups can just be "queer".

I agree with the first part but feel the need to add in A for Asexual. Asexual doesn't really fit well for any of these letters.

Woah woah woah. Since when are asexuals part of the LGBT community?

[crazitaco 596]

I love how "i like tacos" has the most votes.

 

Anyway, my opinion?

Begone with the whole term in general. Its just a big fat label people apply to themselves; one which creates this artificial distance between "the straight people" and everyone else. This is the wrong approach for a group of people who are trying to get others to accept them. If you really want people to not make a big stink about you, the best way might be to just really nonchalant about it. Instead of walking around proclaiming you are of the LGTBQQIAAP, treat your sexuality as a non issue, the way it should be. People are people and that's all that matters.

Edited January 10, 2014 by crazitaco

[Deesinn 393]

I don't really care, have sex with whoever you wana have sex with, but tacos are specifically listed in my intrests, so tacos win again baby, OH YEAH!

[Appetite4Democracy 452]

They should've left it at LGBTQ. That way you anyone who isn't in one of the prescribed groups groups can just be "queer".

Woah woah woah. Since when are asexuals part of the LGBT community?

Why would they not be? Isn't the LGBTQQIAAP (The first A means Asexual, btw) supposed to be a community that accepts all sexual orientations and gender identities?

[Static Electricity 729]

Why would they not be? Isn't the LGBTQQIAAP (The first A means Asexual, btw) supposed to be a community that accepts all sexual orientations and gender identities?

1: All? Let that sink in for a minute

 

2: So heteros are part of the LGBT community too?

[ChoroChii 284]

Non-monosexuality is a thing, and sexuality is fluid. People change, so sexuality can change as well. Sometimes it takes a while to figure out who you are attracted to; maybe you thought you were more attracted to women than you presently are, maybe you realize you're attracted to both, many, or neither. And that's how one can have a "different" sexuality when younger. Plus, hormones are kicking in during adolescence, and as it stands heterosexuality is the norm. It makes sense that one might believe and even feel that they're attracted to the opposite sex, before paying more attention to how they feel and the signs they're given.

 

Oh, I see. Thank you for that clarification. 

[The Dandy 73]

Perhaps I may only fall under the "G" in the acronym, but the way I see it is, that if we are able to make people feel not only accepted but also part of a broader community simply by remembering a few more letters, then it would be selfish for us to not do so. Nothing would be worse for someone which is asexual, intersex or so on, than to not feel accepted in a the "LGBT" (just to shorten it) community. We may very well completely accept them, but by not acknowledging them in the title, then we are realistically excluding them. So if a little can do a lot, then we might as well do it.

[Sunny Fox 5,950]

What's wrong with NSS, Non-Standard Sexuality? Or if you object to "standard", how about NTS, non-traditional sexuality?

 

Or perhaps we should focus on the issues rather than the terminology?

Edited January 10, 2014 by SolarFox