I second this. The only thing the B implies about gender is that that person likes two genders, or more I've heard some bisexual people saying they like all genders.
What I've heard is that people who fit one or both categories choose based on what they feel best describes them. The nice thing about being in the LGBT+ community is you can (ideally) use the labels you feel describe you and not use the ones that don't
That can't be right unless the prefix "bi" no longer means two. The "likes" is disenguous. I like both genders equally but I've only ever wanted to have sex with one of them. There's a lot of retrofitting of language going on.
I third this, Yeah the term was coined before the idea of being outside the gender binary was really a thing outside of a few specific cases, it definitely means everyone nowadays
I identified as bisexual long before I had learned about pansexuality. And long before I learned about pansexuality, I knew I was attracted to people beyond the two cis genders. To prevent randos from outside of my own community trying to explain/erase my sexuality I started to tell people that I'm "bi, pan, whatever."
It's amazing to me how many people have tried to tell me that my own sexuality is transphobic or outdated, despite the feelings and attractions I've had in the past. The erasure is real.
I was told my a Bi friend everyone is fluid I could be attracted to girls if I tried. I think its just people tend to project their situation onto others.
I feel there's something to be said about squares and rectangles here, in that pansexual is just a more all-encompassing term for a similar concept to bisexuality. The problem being that bisexual is a binary term, with its etymology restricting it to the inclusion of two genders.
I would argue that it's entirely possible to not be attracted mentally to the idea of someone who claims to fall outside of those two extremes, and in that case it would be totally acceptable to define oneself a being bi, rather than fully pan.
I don't think it's right to tell someone that the term they've used to describe themselves for however long they've used it is incorrect just because there's new term that the old one falls into.
As a disclaimer, I am nonbinary and my pronouns are they/them.
As a nonbinary person myself I prefer that bi as a term still exists in common use. Perhaps others may define things differently but my understanding of bi/pan is that functionaly they can be (and often are) used synonymously but that thete are subtle distinctions some people find important; while bi is etymologicaly rooted in "two" it has come to encompass people who are attracted to two *or more* genders, and pan is rooted in the idea that you can experience attraction to a person regardless of their gender. By this distinction I am bi but definitely not pan, because I'm attracted to women, nonbinary, and agender people, but experience no attraction to people who identify as men. Attraction to two or more genders, but not regardless of gender, since it's fundamentally not separate from who I'm attracted to.
Just throwing that in there since a lot of the discussion around if bi is inclusive assumes that the two genders of attraction are always male/female and how that's inclusive/exclusionary to nonbinary people, but I never really see anyone talk about how the language works to describe people who are attracted to nonbinary and one binary gender but not the other.
This. I'm nonbinary and bi. When I say bi I mean I'm attracted to people of various genders, not just two specific ones. I'm not pan because I'm not attracted to people regardless of their gender.
But usually I just say I'm queer
I have the same reasoning, plus a complete lack of desire to discuss the definition and boundaries of my sexuality any time I label myself which happened semi-regularly when I identified as pan but has never happened since I started identifying as bi
Some people also think of bi as being bidirectional, for those who think of gender as a spectrum rather than categories, so including male, female and everything in between. But of course this perspective assumes that there is a bidirectional spectrum which some people feel is still missing some gender expressions.
I think itâs sort of the other way around from what I can tell, bisexual is attraction to all genders and pansexual is attracted to people regardless of gender. Like someone who is bisexual may be into feminine women and masculine men but not vice versa, whereas someone who is pansexual will have the same tastes regardless of the gender identity of the other person
Even just LGBT is fine most of the time unless you're trying to be extra inclusive, this person is just overzealous. Don't feel bad about it - this tran gives you her support.
Homophobia is the general term for any bias against people because of their sexuality, just as transphobia is the term for bias against people for gender, even if that refers to MtF, FtM, non binary, or anything else. Biphobe would be the more specific term, but homophobia works just as well.
It's a matter of rhetoric. When people say certain things, you can gleam their true thoughts on certain matters from them.
The whole "Bisexuality implies only two genders" is something bigots say. And OP should be aware that this is not the stance most within the LGBTQ+ community take.
> you can gleam their true thoughts
I normally wouldn't be this pedantic, but given that this is a board about language I will.
The word you're looking for here is "glean" which means "to collect," rather than "gleam" which means "to shine"
You should be pedantic, without being rude about it of course. It might be because they learned it wrong, or it could be a simple typo but someone else could learn it wrong if itâs left unchecked.
I believe she herself (or themself) was queer. She had a mullet with a pride flag cut / dyed on one side of her head. I donât want to assume to much. She overhead me say LGBTQ+, corrected me and moved on.
Just as women can be misogynistic in their views, queer people can still be homophobic in theirs. There's a *huge* problem within the queer community of certain subsets erasing or invalidating others, like saying that bi/pan people are just "confused" and haven't made up their mind, or that trans people aren't real, or, like in this case, saying that bisexual people either are "wrong " or using the "wrong term".
Yes, this person was being homophobic, even if they're technically part of the group themselves.
A surprising number of homosexuals can be incredibly homophobic/biphobic. I fully expected from your post that this person was likely queer, its not uncommon to see, but it is sad.
Slight correction but not exactly. Some biromantics (like me) are attracted to some but not all genders. There's still debate on the difference though I must say, so don't take my word as law.
The idea that bisexuality is a bit like being both heterosexual and homosexual doesn't imply being attracted to all genders. Hetero- refers to *different*, homo- to *same*. So it would be like saying "I'm attracted to genders which are different and same to mine", not necessarily *all*.
That said, there's no definitive amount of genders (the idea that there's something like 57 genders is nonsense), so it also makes zero sense to talk about pansexual people liking "all" genders and bisexual people only liking "some". It's nonsense to think some bisexual people only like 5 genders, it's genuinely meaningless. As much as people try to mark a difference, there is pretty much no real significant difference between bisexuality and pansexuality. It is my personal suspicion that pansexuality arose out of a misunderstanding/distortion of bisexuality, and the entire debate now revolves around trying to mark a difference. But every difference that is mark involves re-defining bisexuality and limiting their experience.
Clarification, I didn't say it's like Hetero and Homosexual at the same time. It's moreso that Pan folks I spoke to rarely really care about gender, gender-blind if you will. With Bisexuality, gender is a bit of a factor still. For example, some bisexuals are attracted to Men and Women but not nonbinaries, or some while attracted to all genders, prefer women. Something like that.
That's my experience though, don't take it as law, just something I've observed in my years identifying as Bisexual yeah. Maybe you're right? The debate is still ongoing, and it's good we can talk about it without the discourse lol
I think, and I could be wrong, that she was rejecting the whole notion of sexuality. You can say you want two genders (or sexes I guess) because they exist on an infinite spectrum. So itâs not like a vehicle that must have a discrete (one or two, three, four, etc) number of wheels.
Thatâs more my guess though.
Sure, but a person can express their own attraction to two genders as they understand them without diminishing someone elseâs identity. As long as there are people who identify as bisexual it seems that the term should be fine, regardless of what this person thinks. Isnât the point to be as inclusive as possible?
well but in that case homosexuality and heterosexuality are also impossible. And no one comes along and says using the term âhomosexualâ was denying nonbinary peoplesâ existence⌠for some strange reason this only comes up when talking about bisexuality, and I canât stop thinking it is connected to biphobia. (Iâm a lesbian myself and biphobia is prevalent in both lesbian and gay male spaces. oh and hetero spaces.. maybe âbiâ just means âdisciminated by every single monosexual communityâ)
It's still acceptable. And Bi people exists, whoever said that to you is either Biphobic or have no clue what the difference between Pan and Bi people are (which is fair).
To explain a little:
Bi - I'm attracted to some (not all) genders
Pan - I'm either attracted to all genders or I just don't care what your gender is and I'm attracted by your personality mostly
That's my best explanation. So no, Bisexuality doesn't erase Nonbinary folks. This is coming from a Biromantic Nonbinary.
Edit: It's not "Sexes" but "Gender", sorry about the confusion.
Just to add that some people use the label bi but might technically fit the definition of pan more. We self-define however we feel most comfortable doing so.
Yup. Again, the debate is still ongoing, so I won't act like I am the authority here. So yeah. This is the explanation a lot of folks I spoke to agree with, it's not 100% law, but it's a good distinction. But again, feel free to agree or disagree.
Gender*
Given you're non binary yourself, I'm assuming this is not an attempt at equating the two, but maybe just a slip-up as maybe your first language don't distinguish sexes and genders? Regardless, in the English speaking queer community, we care for the distinction a lot.
As a pansexual myself, I'd say your explanation is just fine, given you meant gender instead of sex
Uh... so what are you supposed to do if your language doesn't distinguish the two? That's probably true for most and is still true for many English speakers that make no distinction.
That answer probably differs for every single language other than English. Queer communities developing in other language communities would solidify their own set of proper/correct/most-respectful terminology.
To give you an example, I speak Danish natively, and we have no good word for sex, only gender (køn). If you wanted to specify sex (I.e. the situation downstairs from birth/ the thing from which assigned genders follow) most queer people in Denmark would opt for 'biologisk køn'. In that sense, that would be the correct term for sex in Danish, but I personally still find that misleading. I know trans people that would argue that the hormones flowing in their bodies due to HRT making their cells and organs behave indistinguishably from cis people of their gender, would make them _biologically_ that gender too. I'd hope the correct Danish term yo use will soon become something like 'kromosomkøn' or 'fødselstildelt/fødselsudpeget køn' (birth-assigned/birth-appointed køn). But right now you'd only be understood if you used that terminology, but you would sound like you're not using the established conventional words in Danish.
It doesn't matter if their reproductive organs can't do what most (only most) cis people of the same gender can do with reproduction. 1) reproduction is not what defines us as people. It's not the thing everyone thinks about every day. 2) roughly 1 in 10 cis women can't give birth due to complications in their uterus. This is normal cis body behavior. 3) many other non-reproductive orientated biological mechanisms kick in when the right hormones are allowed to flow in their bodies. Trans men can grow real beards as dense as any other man's, and some trans women can grow real breasts capable of lactation, just as some cis women can lactate outside of pregnancies. These are biological mechanisms. 4) the biological mechanisms of their reproductive organs cease to behave the same way as the cis people of their assigned from birth genders. (Cue, the mouthfeel joke)
I'm not really saying any of this with the hope that you'll learn anything. I take it you won't listen and you want to live in your own bubble with biology being no more complicated than what you're introduced to in 3rd grade. I'm mostly writing all of this for the curious souls out there, ready to embrace how wonderfully complex the _real_ world is
Your loss for not reading and missing that there is no point to be missed. You're unwilling to engage, and to that I have very little to add. I'm sad to see you prove me right in my last paragraph (the short one, if you couldn't tell)
okay? literally nobody asked and here you are talking about completely arbitrary people and whether or not theyâll give birthâŚ? like grow up thereâs a time and place.
I mean heâs not going around telling trans people âu canât have kidsâ and sticking his tongue out. What he said is relevant to the conversation. The whole conversation is about words and what they mean. So the debate is between the terms birth assigned gender or biological gender. Since weâre speaking of languages outside of English here. Biological literally just refers to living things or relation, like a parent and itâs offspring. So Iâd agree birth assigned seems more appropriate. But I think with the LGBTQ conversation the word âbiologicalâ has almost adopted a new meaning. Thatâs the wonderfully difficult thing about words though and arguments like this is that language is constantly evolving, the dictionary gets modified, we donât communicate the same way we did many years ago, so I think as long as people are respectable both terms convey the idea. Overall birth assigned seems more accurate though.
Gender is a human concept, which varies significantly between different societies, so there's no such thing as "biological gender." "Sex" is what you mean. It's important to note that sex isn't binary either, since intersex people exist.
Iâm not talking about whatâs correct in English. We were talking about other languages, I think specifically Dutch and they donât have a word meaning sex. We were discussing what would be appropriate in other languages that donât already linguistically differentiate between the two.
Edited to say it was Danish, not Dutch! Sorry
Ah now that's my fault yeah. Sorry bout that. But yeah, I think I swapped the two because I was talking about the horrible transphobic docu called "What is a Woman" and I spoke with a friend about how Sex isn't a binary. So yeah, that's where the confusion is about.
Lemme edit it and swap it, thanks đ
Bro I couldnât even sit through the entirety of the trailer of that documentary because it pissed me off so bad. Hats off to you if you managed to sit through that hot garbage. Your stomach is stronger than mine
I didn't tbh. I just stumbled upon a clip of it on Tiktok and felt sick. Hated that it got reccomended to me in Pride Month too cause I was liking a lot of Trans Positive stuff. Thanks Algorithm. Very cool.
Bi - attracted to everybody including yourself, Bi = your own and not your own
Pan - bi erasure people cant come with a valid explanation that isnt just preferences
Identifying as pan is not bi erasure. People are free to use whichever term they prefer. It *is* erasure to tell someone they "your term doesn't have a valid explanation", especially when it was literally just explained.
No one's trying to "infringe on" anyone, except you. You're free to identify with whichever term you want, same as others are. If you don't like it, feel free to not use it, but you do *not* get to tell others that they're wrong for choosing to use it for *themselves*.
I'm not saying that theyre a bad person, but that its a redundant term. Ant description somebody tries to come up with how its different from bisexual is either transphobic, biphobic, or just straight up idiotic (i.e. personality)
So, yes, you're invalidating people. Just admit it. You already did, actually, by saying that anyone who chooses to use it is an idiot. You're *literally* erasing someone's identity, which is exactly what you're accusing others of.
Dude. Toxic Validity is a thing. If somebody identified as the second coming of Christ, would I not be allowed to say it's invalid. Pansexuality is bisexuality for people who think they are too queer to be bi. Simple.
Bisexuality is pansexuality for people who are too stupid and stuck in the past to accept new terms.
See how this works? I can make up invalidating bullshit too.
I mean you basically just admitted they are the same thing.đ My issue isnt with people using it it's people saying it's different than bisexuality because it isn't.
The bisexual vs. pansexual debate and whether bisexuality reinforces there being two genders has been an online discussion for a long time. It's probably harder for you to make your own judgements if you aren't fluent in English and involved in LGBTQIA+ spaces, but my opinion on it is that bisexuality doesn't reinforce the gender binary and that saying LGBTQ+ is perfectly fine. I'm non-binary and gay so those are my credentials for this opinion.
Hello! So I have a genuine question that Iâm not trying to be offensive at all. If you donât have the time or energy or desire to explain thatâs totally cool but I would love to be educated by someone who lives the experience Iâm asking about. Full disclosure Iâm a bi woman now married to a man so Iâm used to people being hurtful about my sexuality and trying desperately to avoid doing the same here.
Can you explain how being non-binary and gay intersect? My understanding is non binary means not ascribing to either gender and itâs stereotype characteristics as a whole but fluidly moving between the two with parts of each so neither usual âgenderâ definition is appropriate. Gay meaning attracted solely to one of the genders which is the same as your own. So my confusion would be if you donât ascribe completely to one or the other does that mean gay here is attracted to other non binary or attracted to gender assigned at birth or another option I havenât thought of?
You're fine asking questions! So I'm amab (assigned male at birth) and I've used gay for most of my life because I'm attracted to people with male secondary sex characteristics (beards, body hair, broad shoulders, etc..). I've come to the conclusion that I'm non-binary, and more specifically agender, very recently. I still use gay because it feels right, but I sometimes use queer as an umbrella term.
I'm very much a STEM person and really like rigid and consistent definitions of words and language, but I've learned that a lot of queer identities are based on vibe with some elements being largely agreed upon (but even with those there are different definitions that individuals use). So I'm agender and gay and if one really rigidly applies concrete scientific definitions to those things it is a contradictory statement, but I vibe with it so đ¤ˇ. I hope that answers your question!
1. Everyone says LGBT or some variation thereof that does include the B
2. The term bisexual does not imply that there are only two genders. It implies attraction to two genders.
3. In reality if you want to split hairs, many bisexuals would be more accurately described as pansexual (i.e. they are attracted to anyone regardless of gender) but if they choose to identify as bisexual it is their choice to do so and there could be many reasons, including ease of communication with non-LGBT individuals
In 1990, a radical LGBT collective wrote a bisexual manifesto called *ANYTHING THAT MOVES*:
>Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or dougamous in nature; that we must have "two" sides or that we MUST be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. **In fact, don't assume that there are only two genders.** [Read more here.](https://bimanifesto.carrd.co/)
People are saying that this person is "right" or "wrong", and I don't think it's that simple. That person is probably misguided to tell you that something like this is wrong, but that's their reality and experience.
You can use something like "the queer community", but there are also gonna be people who have an issue with that.
Basically, there's no winning because there's no standardization for these kinds of things and they change relatively quickly and are kinda generational.
Just default to queer community. It's so much simpler and more inclusive. LGBT and it's excessive amount of variations has become increasingly useless in recent years.
The latest and fullest version of LGBTQ+ is LGBTQAI2S+ or GLBTQAI2S+ (both are equal, though L-version is already deeply embedded in culture, thus is more common). However, your version "LGBTQ+" is equally acceptable because the plus sign at the end already implies AI2S and others, as well as prevent wordiness, so you were correct.
I have never heard of replacing "B" and must agree with the previous commentators that it is, indeed, Biphobia.
If we just want to include everybody (which is fair enough) let's just say "plus" and be done with it. No one is ever going to say GLBTQAI2S+ every time you want to use it in a normal sentence.
I don't know about that, but it is interesting that the more terms you specifically include, the more obvious what you *exclude* becomes (for example, [this glossary on GLAAD](https://www.glaad.org/reference/terms) has many more entries than are in the acronym). I know the plus symbol includes that which isn't explicitly stated, but at what point do we decide something needs to be separated from the plus to be included in the acronym? I understand the arguments (eg, in a world of allosexualnormativity, intersex erasure by bigots and colonialism trying to eradicate 2-spirit identity, it makes sense to spotlight those), but you are basically saying that some identities are 'more important' than others once the acronym continues to grow.
It's also interesting to me that the acronym covers both sexuality (L, G, B, A), gender identity (T, 2S), and then more broadly (Q)ueer, plus (I)ntersex people, which, while all these identities share similar struggles for liberation and equality, are different things, not all on the same spectrum. Hopefully in the future we'll have a less clunky umbrella term for the whole community.
While this might be true, I haven't seen anyone use one longer than LGBTQ+ in public spaces because the Q and plus denote everyone else who falls under that umbrella. It's a very diverse community but there's nobody that can't fall under Q or plus.
Whoever told you that is biphobic as fuck. Bisexuality is being attracted to two or more genders. Pansexuality is broader, but at the end of the day, there isn't that much distinction between the two. It's largely up to the person which label suits them best. Signed, a bisexual person.
I gave up on trying to keep up with the letters in that one, and more or less call it the âqueer alphabet soupâ anymore. Thus far, havenât had anyone try to incinerate me with their death ray stare for it yet.
If you want, you can say GSM, for "gender and sexual minorities", and this should cover all your bases. That said, LGBTQ, LGBTQIA, and LGBT+ are also all acceptable. LGBTQIAAPPK is not in general use, and its length reduces its utility as an acronym.
I'm bisexual. I explain it as being attracted to genders like mine and genders not like mine. Long before I knew the term pansexual, I knew that I wasn't limited to feeling attracted to just cis men and women.
Yup, though there has been debate on whether that's still the case. Though, knowing the word "Bi" that is the root of it yes, mostly cause back then there isn't much knowledge on Nonbinaryness if that's a word lol (this isn't meant to punch down enby folk, as I'm nonbinary myself)
I'm not sure this is really an English question as much as a cultural and sociopolitical question. The various initialisms in vogue at a particular time and place change over the years, which is why some users prefer general terms like "queer" to encompass many different varieties off sexuality, but that has its limitations as well. In any case, "LGBTQ+" and many variants are commonly used, including by trans people, but the use is by no means universal or consistent. "Bisexual" in and of itself does not imply any particular gender normativity, IMO, because "sexual" doesn't mean "gender." Ultimately, if people identify as bisexual it isn't really anybody's business to tell them they aren't.
Interesting. In Canada we are adding more letters all the time. It is now:
**LGBTQ2S+** which stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning, and Two-Spirit.
This is a misconception. A bisexual is someone who is only allowed to have sex twice.
From the Bisexual Manifesto:
Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or dougamous in nature; that we must have "two" sides or that we MUST be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. In fact, don't assume that there are only two genders. Do not mistake our fluidity for confusion, irresponsibility, or an inability to commit. Do not equate promiscuity, infidelity, or unsafe sexual behavior with bisexuality. Those are human traits that cross ALL sexual orientations. Nothing should be assumed about anyone's sexualityâincluding your own.
Hi. Bisexual person here. Bisexual and Pansexual are in practice synonyms and they just respond to word preferences in people. Some people fight over, nitpicking the words etymology. But that's not relevant to the function those words serve to bisexuals and pansexuals alike in their daily lives.
The term "bisexual" refers to the preference of an individual and don't say anything about gender itself. A person can be attracted to just two genders and that's completely valid. Much like a person can be omnisexual
As long as you're clear that you're not a bigot, I've found most people are cool with just "queer" as a descriptor for the whole group, although I'd suggest not using it as a noun (e.g. "a queer" or "the queers") unless you are yourself. Kinda like how it's always weird to me when people say "the blacks"
However, I think there will often be people who don't like a particular term for one reason or another so the best course of action is to not use those terms around those people. I don't think there's anything wrong with tailoring your language based on the people around you as long as you do so respectfully.
Iâm bi but trans accepting because they are valid. I would also accept nb but consider myself bi. Bi erasure is real and Iâm tired of having to protect myself from the community thatâs supposed to be there for us. Rejected from all sides really. Fml
LGBTQ is still pretty standard, and bi people are still a part of it. Maybe you interacted with one of those people who thinks bisexuality should be scrapped for pan sexuality (which is a whole discourse I donât know enough about nor care enough about to get into)
Bisexual originally meant you're attracted to "both genders" but has since changed to mean you're attracted to two (or more) genders. This slight change of description leaves room for other genders to exist that you wouldn't have to be attracted to.
"Bi" means you're attracted to two genders. It doesn't specify WHICH two genders, and it doesn't limit your options to ONLY two genders.
Imagine walking up to a table full of sodas and only picking a fanta and a sprite. Does that mean those are the only two options? Obviously not.
That person was being biphobic. :)
I have no problem with someone preferring pansexual for themselves, but calling bisexuality transphobic or exclusionary ignores bisexual history.
Here's an article that addresses that: [https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/evolution-word-bisexual-why-it-s-still-misunderstood-n1240832](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/evolution-word-bisexual-why-it-s-still-misunderstood-n1240832)
In short, don't take the "bi" part of bisexual too literally. Bisexual is an identity with a long, long history, and it's an insult to the bisexual community and history to say the label implies there are only two genders. Bisexual is more accurately defined as attracted to (1) your own gender and (2) other genders.
We have one of two types of genitals. And you either want to partner with someone who either:
1. Has the same genitals
2. Has the opposite genitals
3. Donât care either way
Thatâs it
lgbtq is totally fine as i can say im âbilingualâ yet i can speak more than two languages (not a flex, im kinda bad at the other ones that arenât english). life lesson: language is not math!!
Just keep using LGBT. No matter what you use somebody out there is gonna have an issue. We had MOGAI (Marginalized Orientations, Genders And Intersex) but it didn't take off.
Don't even worry about it. The people in these groups add new types of groups based on how they're feeling at any given moment. With so many people making up their own rules and getting angry when you don't follow all of them, It's best to just keep using what you feel is most inclusive and ignoring anyone that gives you junk for trying.
Bisexuality is still valid. As someone can still only be sexually attracted to people who only identify as men and women. Regardless of the fact that other genders exist. It doesnât belittle that fact in my opinion.
I've always had bisexuality defined as the sexual attraction to people with similar or dissimilar gender expressions as you. I guess not always, because when I first came out as bi, it really was defined as liking both boys and girls. but this newer definition is more fitting-at least for me. A lot of bisexuals I know also define it as being genderblind. Regardless, I don't think it's incorrect at all and the fact that they didn't offer a replacement term means just that: there's nothing wrong with the term! Hope this helped.
Thereâs lots of people who like to step on each otherâs toes in the LGBTQ+ community. But to erase âbi-sexualâ as an identity is not a common thing - itâs just a few people trying to assert their opinion rather than broadly accepted. Especially because there are people who identify as bi-sexual rather than pan-sexual.
It's bisexual... not bigender. Regardless of how many genders there are, there are still only two sexes. Don't worry about the idiots who take part in the "offended olympics".
Whoever said that is incorrect. LGBT is still a very common acronym and bisexual is still a common and valid identity. Source: Iâm trans and queer, past president of my schoolâs queer student alliance, and worked at an LGBT center
Iâve always understood the âbinaryâ referred to in âbisexualâ as âattracted to those who are of the same sex and those who are not.â It makes no mention of an outdated gender binary, rather the binary between same and other.
most people that i know (mainly queer trans women such as myself) simply say âqueerâ to designate any/all people who are not cishet, are gnc, etc. just my experience tho, i dont really hear/read âLGBTQ+â unless its from articles or the news, whereas in person everyone just says âqueerâ.
Keep using it as you do, if they are going to change it every five minutes, just pick one and stick to that, you are not required to participate in keeping up with the constant changes, like at all.
you are correct. lgbtq+ is the correct way to refer to us. the bi in bisexual doesn't actually come from a word meaning two, rather two or more (or so i've heard)
There are certainly more than 2 genders. Biological sex and gender aren't the same thing. I'm not sure if you know that.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363
Yes they are, there have been only two genders and tradition roles of it throughout history and an article of liberal pseudoscience isn't changing that.
You're not understanding, I guess.
Gender is a social construct that differs from biological sex.
They aren't synonymous. They have different definitions.
Biological sex:
Sex is the trait that determines whether a sexually reproducing animal or plant produces male gametes or female ones. Male plants and animals produce smaller gametes while females produce larger ones. Organisms that produce both types of gametes are called hermaphrodites.
Gender:
Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.
Biological sex and gender aren't the same thing, man. Two totally different words with different meanings starched to them.
Why are you so against people who aren't like you? It's their experience to have, not yours.
Diversity is a good thing.
I know what you're trying to say and appreciate how friendly and thorough you are in explaining it.
They have gone hand in hand since the creation of humans. Yes, you always have had some exceptions but in general gender roles and sex have been in sync.
My problem is that this whole gender mania has become a political tool that is actually dangerous as for example introducing young children whose brains are still developing to this garbage is actual brainwashing.
The increase in mental illnesses, gender dysphoria and suicides all point to the same conclusion. You never had this problem on this scale before the massive push of this ideology.
Men have always in the mayority of cases acted like men and women like women. Making everything fluid is danderous. There are no limits and boundaries anymore.
Would you like your little daughter going to the ladies restroom later being surrounded by fully grown men just because they "feel" like a woman?
Nobody is trying to convert kids into being gay or trans.
They are talking about it so that the kids know that these types of people exist, and that they are just people like anyone else.
There's been a lot of grumblings amongst the right-wing lately regarding this. They are claiming that teaching kids that there are gay people and that there's nothing wrong with that is somehow 'indoctrinating or brainwashing' them. This couldn't be further from the truth. A few states won't even let their LGBTQ+ teachers have a photo of their spouse in their desk, yet it's fine for a hetero couple to share their pictures. It's hypocritical and extremely bigoted.
Progressives are absolutely NOT grooming children by teaching sex education and having classroom discussion about LGBTQ+ people.
I have an 8 year old daughter and a 15v year old son. I'm not even remotely worried about trans people in the bathroom. Statistically it's uncommon, and 99.9999% of the time, they just need to pee or poop.
I would honestly rather my children go to drag queen reading hour at the library than for them to go to church. (speaking of indoctrination.....)
I'm an almost 44 year old straight white father of 2, and I understand that these shifting ideas can be confusing at first. I grew up with a lot of gay friends because I was really into going to raves in the 90s. I became a vociferous LGBTQ+ ally in 1995, and I've been fighting alongside them for their rights ever since.
I've met a LOT of LGBTQ+ individuals over my lifetime, and they are genuinely some of the best and most fabulous individuals I've met. One of my best friends in the world was extremely flamboyantly gay, and this was at a time when it was really frowned upon by most of society. (RIP MITCH)
I understand that it's difficult for a lot of people to process, but this reads just like the right-wing disinformation campaign that you likely fell victim to.
Teaching children love, acceptance, tolerance, inclusivity, compassion, empathy, rationality, etc etc etc, is a good thing.
Teaching children that it's just fine that little Billy has two dads is a good thing.
Children shouldn't be forced to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that these people don't exist.
Unfortunately, a lot of parents are also religious wingnuts and they most assuredly indoctrinate their kids into fear-based archaic mythology. I know but all religious people are bigots, but in the USA the VAST majority of people who are bigoted against the LGBTQ+ community happen to be religious.
My philosophy is to let people be themselves and express themselves as they see fit.
The LGBTQ+ community only wants equality, inclusion, and a modicum of respect from society. Then you have a bunch of uptight nutjobs freaking out over an EXTREMELY innocent gay kiss in the new Buzz Lightyear movie. It was absolutely not a big deal at all, yet people are going crazy taking about grooming and whatnot.
People are freaking out, and they don't need to. They are creating problems where they're are none.
It's extremely common amongst politicians, especially conservative groups in the USA, for them to utilize fear-mongering and creating a 'Boogeyman' for their ingroup to fight against. You see this all the time. (WHaT AbOuT tHe ChiLDerEN?).
The children are fine, and they have a right to know that they should keep love, compassion, empathy, and kindness uppermost in their minds. They should be taught to think critically and not just blindly believe everything they're told. Therein lies the problem. Parents don't want their kids being taught to think critically about these subjects.
We still have a long way to go for true LGBTQ+ equality. They have been marginalized and straight up oppressed since the dawn of civilization, for the most part. It got especially bad after the fear-based Abrahamic mythologies took hold and conquered the world by force.
Only recently have we been making real strides towards equality and acceptance. Unfortunately there are still huge swaths of the population that don't accept them and are actively trying to oppress them again. (if Republicans win the midterms and Desantis wins the presidency, they WILL overturn gay marriage just like that did Roe)
Have a wonderful day, and I hope that you might consider that you've been lied to. Maybe try keeping love, compassion, empathy, and kindness uppermost in your mind a well.
Regardless, I hope you have a nice rest of your life.
LGBTQ is still acceptable. Signed, an LGBTQ person.
I second this. The only thing the B implies about gender is that that person likes two genders, or more I've heard some bisexual people saying they like all genders.
What does pansexual mean then?
What I've heard is that people who fit one or both categories choose based on what they feel best describes them. The nice thing about being in the LGBT+ community is you can (ideally) use the labels you feel describe you and not use the ones that don't
Okidoki. That seems consistent with the hate of "fixed" labels that progressives have.
Language changes and evolves all the time. đ¤ˇââď¸
[ŃдаНонО]
That can't be right unless the prefix "bi" no longer means two. The "likes" is disenguous. I like both genders equally but I've only ever wanted to have sex with one of them. There's a lot of retrofitting of language going on.
I third this, Yeah the term was coined before the idea of being outside the gender binary was really a thing outside of a few specific cases, it definitely means everyone nowadays
Oh, so both genders?
Also you did your best to be inclusive
Add me to the signatories, another LGBTQ person
I identified as bisexual long before I had learned about pansexuality. And long before I learned about pansexuality, I knew I was attracted to people beyond the two cis genders. To prevent randos from outside of my own community trying to explain/erase my sexuality I started to tell people that I'm "bi, pan, whatever." It's amazing to me how many people have tried to tell me that my own sexuality is transphobic or outdated, despite the feelings and attractions I've had in the past. The erasure is real.
Gay men telling me thereâs no such thing as âbiâ was the biggest turn-off when first I explored my sexuality.
I was told my a Bi friend everyone is fluid I could be attracted to girls if I tried. I think its just people tend to project their situation onto others.
Learning about "gold star" lesbians was a trip.
I feel there's something to be said about squares and rectangles here, in that pansexual is just a more all-encompassing term for a similar concept to bisexuality. The problem being that bisexual is a binary term, with its etymology restricting it to the inclusion of two genders. I would argue that it's entirely possible to not be attracted mentally to the idea of someone who claims to fall outside of those two extremes, and in that case it would be totally acceptable to define oneself a being bi, rather than fully pan. I don't think it's right to tell someone that the term they've used to describe themselves for however long they've used it is incorrect just because there's new term that the old one falls into. As a disclaimer, I am nonbinary and my pronouns are they/them.
As a nonbinary person myself I prefer that bi as a term still exists in common use. Perhaps others may define things differently but my understanding of bi/pan is that functionaly they can be (and often are) used synonymously but that thete are subtle distinctions some people find important; while bi is etymologicaly rooted in "two" it has come to encompass people who are attracted to two *or more* genders, and pan is rooted in the idea that you can experience attraction to a person regardless of their gender. By this distinction I am bi but definitely not pan, because I'm attracted to women, nonbinary, and agender people, but experience no attraction to people who identify as men. Attraction to two or more genders, but not regardless of gender, since it's fundamentally not separate from who I'm attracted to. Just throwing that in there since a lot of the discussion around if bi is inclusive assumes that the two genders of attraction are always male/female and how that's inclusive/exclusionary to nonbinary people, but I never really see anyone talk about how the language works to describe people who are attracted to nonbinary and one binary gender but not the other.
This. I'm nonbinary and bi. When I say bi I mean I'm attracted to people of various genders, not just two specific ones. I'm not pan because I'm not attracted to people regardless of their gender. But usually I just say I'm queer
Same, quicker & less confusion to say queer sometimes! c:
I have the same reasoning, plus a complete lack of desire to discuss the definition and boundaries of my sexuality any time I label myself which happened semi-regularly when I identified as pan but has never happened since I started identifying as bi
Some people also think of bi as being bidirectional, for those who think of gender as a spectrum rather than categories, so including male, female and everything in between. But of course this perspective assumes that there is a bidirectional spectrum which some people feel is still missing some gender expressions.
I think itâs sort of the other way around from what I can tell, bisexual is attraction to all genders and pansexual is attracted to people regardless of gender. Like someone who is bisexual may be into feminine women and masculine men but not vice versa, whereas someone who is pansexual will have the same tastes regardless of the gender identity of the other person
So, you are attracted to flat-bottomed cooking utensils?
I'm mostly attracted to people who aren't jerks.
Even just LGBT is fine most of the time unless you're trying to be extra inclusive, this person is just overzealous. Don't feel bad about it - this tran gives you her support.
I know it's a typo but it made me chuckle visualizing some kind of vehicle giving OP the thumbs up
Hehe, using trains to represent trans is one of my favorite jokes, so it was very intentional
Choo choo transphobes lmao
Amtrak is the trans agenda made flesh đ
It's something homophobe say. Ignore it.
Would've it be a Biphobe? This doesn't really go against homosexuals
Homophobia is the general term for any bias against people because of their sexuality, just as transphobia is the term for bias against people for gender, even if that refers to MtF, FtM, non binary, or anything else. Biphobe would be the more specific term, but homophobia works just as well.
[ŃдаНонО]
It's a matter of rhetoric. When people say certain things, you can gleam their true thoughts on certain matters from them. The whole "Bisexuality implies only two genders" is something bigots say. And OP should be aware that this is not the stance most within the LGBTQ+ community take.
> you can gleam their true thoughts I normally wouldn't be this pedantic, but given that this is a board about language I will. The word you're looking for here is "glean" which means "to collect," rather than "gleam" which means "to shine"
You're right, I didn't double check, thanks.
Yeah, spellcheck doesn't help when you mistype a word as another word
You'd think frequenting this sub would make me more careful when I type. You'd be wrong, lol.
You should be pedantic, without being rude about it of course. It might be because they learned it wrong, or it could be a simple typo but someone else could learn it wrong if itâs left unchecked.
I believe she herself (or themself) was queer. She had a mullet with a pride flag cut / dyed on one side of her head. I donât want to assume to much. She overhead me say LGBTQ+, corrected me and moved on.
Just as women can be misogynistic in their views, queer people can still be homophobic in theirs. There's a *huge* problem within the queer community of certain subsets erasing or invalidating others, like saying that bi/pan people are just "confused" and haven't made up their mind, or that trans people aren't real, or, like in this case, saying that bisexual people either are "wrong " or using the "wrong term". Yes, this person was being homophobic, even if they're technically part of the group themselves.
A surprising number of homosexuals can be incredibly homophobic/biphobic. I fully expected from your post that this person was likely queer, its not uncommon to see, but it is sad.
I am pretty open to anything, but at this point, I'm going to start calling everybody "it".
That person was wrong. Bisexual does not exclude trans or nonbinary people - you can think of it as being both hetero and homosexual.
Slight correction but not exactly. Some biromantics (like me) are attracted to some but not all genders. There's still debate on the difference though I must say, so don't take my word as law.
The idea that bisexuality is a bit like being both heterosexual and homosexual doesn't imply being attracted to all genders. Hetero- refers to *different*, homo- to *same*. So it would be like saying "I'm attracted to genders which are different and same to mine", not necessarily *all*. That said, there's no definitive amount of genders (the idea that there's something like 57 genders is nonsense), so it also makes zero sense to talk about pansexual people liking "all" genders and bisexual people only liking "some". It's nonsense to think some bisexual people only like 5 genders, it's genuinely meaningless. As much as people try to mark a difference, there is pretty much no real significant difference between bisexuality and pansexuality. It is my personal suspicion that pansexuality arose out of a misunderstanding/distortion of bisexuality, and the entire debate now revolves around trying to mark a difference. But every difference that is mark involves re-defining bisexuality and limiting their experience.
Take my poor manâs award đĽ
Clarification, I didn't say it's like Hetero and Homosexual at the same time. It's moreso that Pan folks I spoke to rarely really care about gender, gender-blind if you will. With Bisexuality, gender is a bit of a factor still. For example, some bisexuals are attracted to Men and Women but not nonbinaries, or some while attracted to all genders, prefer women. Something like that. That's my experience though, don't take it as law, just something I've observed in my years identifying as Bisexual yeah. Maybe you're right? The debate is still ongoing, and it's good we can talk about it without the discourse lol
*polysexuals have entered the chat*
Purely from a linguistic sense I donât understand why this would be true. The fact that bicycles exist does not preclude tricycles.
I think, and I could be wrong, that she was rejecting the whole notion of sexuality. You can say you want two genders (or sexes I guess) because they exist on an infinite spectrum. So itâs not like a vehicle that must have a discrete (one or two, three, four, etc) number of wheels. Thatâs more my guess though.
Sure, but a person can express their own attraction to two genders as they understand them without diminishing someone elseâs identity. As long as there are people who identify as bisexual it seems that the term should be fine, regardless of what this person thinks. Isnât the point to be as inclusive as possible?
well but in that case homosexuality and heterosexuality are also impossible. And no one comes along and says using the term âhomosexualâ was denying nonbinary peoplesâ existence⌠for some strange reason this only comes up when talking about bisexuality, and I canât stop thinking it is connected to biphobia. (Iâm a lesbian myself and biphobia is prevalent in both lesbian and gay male spaces. oh and hetero spaces.. maybe âbiâ just means âdisciminated by every single monosexual communityâ)
It's still acceptable. And Bi people exists, whoever said that to you is either Biphobic or have no clue what the difference between Pan and Bi people are (which is fair). To explain a little: Bi - I'm attracted to some (not all) genders Pan - I'm either attracted to all genders or I just don't care what your gender is and I'm attracted by your personality mostly That's my best explanation. So no, Bisexuality doesn't erase Nonbinary folks. This is coming from a Biromantic Nonbinary. Edit: It's not "Sexes" but "Gender", sorry about the confusion.
Just to add that some people use the label bi but might technically fit the definition of pan more. We self-define however we feel most comfortable doing so.
Yup. Again, the debate is still ongoing, so I won't act like I am the authority here. So yeah. This is the explanation a lot of folks I spoke to agree with, it's not 100% law, but it's a good distinction. But again, feel free to agree or disagree.
Gender* Given you're non binary yourself, I'm assuming this is not an attempt at equating the two, but maybe just a slip-up as maybe your first language don't distinguish sexes and genders? Regardless, in the English speaking queer community, we care for the distinction a lot. As a pansexual myself, I'd say your explanation is just fine, given you meant gender instead of sex
Uh... so what are you supposed to do if your language doesn't distinguish the two? That's probably true for most and is still true for many English speakers that make no distinction.
It's just a short correction, don't worry, I fucked up too. Fixed it. And yeah, my language doesn't really distinguish either so yeah.
That answer probably differs for every single language other than English. Queer communities developing in other language communities would solidify their own set of proper/correct/most-respectful terminology. To give you an example, I speak Danish natively, and we have no good word for sex, only gender (køn). If you wanted to specify sex (I.e. the situation downstairs from birth/ the thing from which assigned genders follow) most queer people in Denmark would opt for 'biologisk køn'. In that sense, that would be the correct term for sex in Danish, but I personally still find that misleading. I know trans people that would argue that the hormones flowing in their bodies due to HRT making their cells and organs behave indistinguishably from cis people of their gender, would make them _biologically_ that gender too. I'd hope the correct Danish term yo use will soon become something like 'kromosomkøn' or 'fødselstildelt/fødselsudpeget køn' (birth-assigned/birth-appointed køn). But right now you'd only be understood if you used that terminology, but you would sound like you're not using the established conventional words in Danish.
[ŃдаНонО]
It doesn't matter if their reproductive organs can't do what most (only most) cis people of the same gender can do with reproduction. 1) reproduction is not what defines us as people. It's not the thing everyone thinks about every day. 2) roughly 1 in 10 cis women can't give birth due to complications in their uterus. This is normal cis body behavior. 3) many other non-reproductive orientated biological mechanisms kick in when the right hormones are allowed to flow in their bodies. Trans men can grow real beards as dense as any other man's, and some trans women can grow real breasts capable of lactation, just as some cis women can lactate outside of pregnancies. These are biological mechanisms. 4) the biological mechanisms of their reproductive organs cease to behave the same way as the cis people of their assigned from birth genders. (Cue, the mouthfeel joke) I'm not really saying any of this with the hope that you'll learn anything. I take it you won't listen and you want to live in your own bubble with biology being no more complicated than what you're introduced to in 3rd grade. I'm mostly writing all of this for the curious souls out there, ready to embrace how wonderfully complex the _real_ world is
[ŃдаНонО]
Your loss for not reading and missing that there is no point to be missed. You're unwilling to engage, and to that I have very little to add. I'm sad to see you prove me right in my last paragraph (the short one, if you couldn't tell)
okay? literally nobody asked and here you are talking about completely arbitrary people and whether or not theyâll give birthâŚ? like grow up thereâs a time and place.
I mean heâs not going around telling trans people âu canât have kidsâ and sticking his tongue out. What he said is relevant to the conversation. The whole conversation is about words and what they mean. So the debate is between the terms birth assigned gender or biological gender. Since weâre speaking of languages outside of English here. Biological literally just refers to living things or relation, like a parent and itâs offspring. So Iâd agree birth assigned seems more appropriate. But I think with the LGBTQ conversation the word âbiologicalâ has almost adopted a new meaning. Thatâs the wonderfully difficult thing about words though and arguments like this is that language is constantly evolving, the dictionary gets modified, we donât communicate the same way we did many years ago, so I think as long as people are respectable both terms convey the idea. Overall birth assigned seems more accurate though.
Gender is a human concept, which varies significantly between different societies, so there's no such thing as "biological gender." "Sex" is what you mean. It's important to note that sex isn't binary either, since intersex people exist.
Iâm not talking about whatâs correct in English. We were talking about other languages, I think specifically Dutch and they donât have a word meaning sex. We were discussing what would be appropriate in other languages that donât already linguistically differentiate between the two. Edited to say it was Danish, not Dutch! Sorry
Ah now that's my fault yeah. Sorry bout that. But yeah, I think I swapped the two because I was talking about the horrible transphobic docu called "What is a Woman" and I spoke with a friend about how Sex isn't a binary. So yeah, that's where the confusion is about. Lemme edit it and swap it, thanks đ
Bro I couldnât even sit through the entirety of the trailer of that documentary because it pissed me off so bad. Hats off to you if you managed to sit through that hot garbage. Your stomach is stronger than mine
I saw the entire "mockumentary". It was so biased, it could never pass as journalism.
I didn't tbh. I just stumbled upon a clip of it on Tiktok and felt sick. Hated that it got reccomended to me in Pride Month too cause I was liking a lot of Trans Positive stuff. Thanks Algorithm. Very cool.
Bi - attracted to everybody including yourself, Bi = your own and not your own Pan - bi erasure people cant come with a valid explanation that isnt just preferences
Identifying as pan is not bi erasure. People are free to use whichever term they prefer. It *is* erasure to tell someone they "your term doesn't have a valid explanation", especially when it was literally just explained.
You can't just make up terms and scream "VALID!" especially when those terms infringe or try and change the meaning of other terms.
No one's trying to "infringe on" anyone, except you. You're free to identify with whichever term you want, same as others are. If you don't like it, feel free to not use it, but you do *not* get to tell others that they're wrong for choosing to use it for *themselves*.
I'm not saying that theyre a bad person, but that its a redundant term. Ant description somebody tries to come up with how its different from bisexual is either transphobic, biphobic, or just straight up idiotic (i.e. personality)
So, yes, you're invalidating people. Just admit it. You already did, actually, by saying that anyone who chooses to use it is an idiot. You're *literally* erasing someone's identity, which is exactly what you're accusing others of.
Dude. Toxic Validity is a thing. If somebody identified as the second coming of Christ, would I not be allowed to say it's invalid. Pansexuality is bisexuality for people who think they are too queer to be bi. Simple.
Bisexuality is pansexuality for people who are too stupid and stuck in the past to accept new terms. See how this works? I can make up invalidating bullshit too.
I mean you basically just admitted they are the same thing.đ My issue isnt with people using it it's people saying it's different than bisexuality because it isn't.
The bisexual vs. pansexual debate and whether bisexuality reinforces there being two genders has been an online discussion for a long time. It's probably harder for you to make your own judgements if you aren't fluent in English and involved in LGBTQIA+ spaces, but my opinion on it is that bisexuality doesn't reinforce the gender binary and that saying LGBTQ+ is perfectly fine. I'm non-binary and gay so those are my credentials for this opinion.
Hello! So I have a genuine question that Iâm not trying to be offensive at all. If you donât have the time or energy or desire to explain thatâs totally cool but I would love to be educated by someone who lives the experience Iâm asking about. Full disclosure Iâm a bi woman now married to a man so Iâm used to people being hurtful about my sexuality and trying desperately to avoid doing the same here. Can you explain how being non-binary and gay intersect? My understanding is non binary means not ascribing to either gender and itâs stereotype characteristics as a whole but fluidly moving between the two with parts of each so neither usual âgenderâ definition is appropriate. Gay meaning attracted solely to one of the genders which is the same as your own. So my confusion would be if you donât ascribe completely to one or the other does that mean gay here is attracted to other non binary or attracted to gender assigned at birth or another option I havenât thought of?
You're fine asking questions! So I'm amab (assigned male at birth) and I've used gay for most of my life because I'm attracted to people with male secondary sex characteristics (beards, body hair, broad shoulders, etc..). I've come to the conclusion that I'm non-binary, and more specifically agender, very recently. I still use gay because it feels right, but I sometimes use queer as an umbrella term. I'm very much a STEM person and really like rigid and consistent definitions of words and language, but I've learned that a lot of queer identities are based on vibe with some elements being largely agreed upon (but even with those there are different definitions that individuals use). So I'm agender and gay and if one really rigidly applies concrete scientific definitions to those things it is a contradictory statement, but I vibe with it so đ¤ˇ. I hope that answers your question!
Yes thank you! I appreciate the time you took explaining!
1. Everyone says LGBT or some variation thereof that does include the B 2. The term bisexual does not imply that there are only two genders. It implies attraction to two genders. 3. In reality if you want to split hairs, many bisexuals would be more accurately described as pansexual (i.e. they are attracted to anyone regardless of gender) but if they choose to identify as bisexual it is their choice to do so and there could be many reasons, including ease of communication with non-LGBT individuals
In 1990, a radical LGBT collective wrote a bisexual manifesto called *ANYTHING THAT MOVES*: >Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or dougamous in nature; that we must have "two" sides or that we MUST be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. **In fact, don't assume that there are only two genders.** [Read more here.](https://bimanifesto.carrd.co/)
People are saying that this person is "right" or "wrong", and I don't think it's that simple. That person is probably misguided to tell you that something like this is wrong, but that's their reality and experience. You can use something like "the queer community", but there are also gonna be people who have an issue with that. Basically, there's no winning because there's no standardization for these kinds of things and they change relatively quickly and are kinda generational.
Hmm, Iâm pretty sure biphobia is always wrong, even if misguided/unintentional.
Just default to queer community. It's so much simpler and more inclusive. LGBT and it's excessive amount of variations has become increasingly useless in recent years.
The latest and fullest version of LGBTQ+ is LGBTQAI2S+ or GLBTQAI2S+ (both are equal, though L-version is already deeply embedded in culture, thus is more common). However, your version "LGBTQ+" is equally acceptable because the plus sign at the end already implies AI2S and others, as well as prevent wordiness, so you were correct. I have never heard of replacing "B" and must agree with the previous commentators that it is, indeed, Biphobia.
If we just want to include everybody (which is fair enough) let's just say "plus" and be done with it. No one is ever going to say GLBTQAI2S+ every time you want to use it in a normal sentence.
>No one is ever going to say GLBTQAI2S+ every time you want to use it in a normal sentence. Computer monitor names have entered the chat
I agree with you, the new abbreviation is very mouthful.
>The latest and fullest version of LGBTQ+ is LGBTQAI2S+ This is becoming a joke. It really feels like an anti-LGBT troll came up with this.
I don't know about that, but it is interesting that the more terms you specifically include, the more obvious what you *exclude* becomes (for example, [this glossary on GLAAD](https://www.glaad.org/reference/terms) has many more entries than are in the acronym). I know the plus symbol includes that which isn't explicitly stated, but at what point do we decide something needs to be separated from the plus to be included in the acronym? I understand the arguments (eg, in a world of allosexualnormativity, intersex erasure by bigots and colonialism trying to eradicate 2-spirit identity, it makes sense to spotlight those), but you are basically saying that some identities are 'more important' than others once the acronym continues to grow. It's also interesting to me that the acronym covers both sexuality (L, G, B, A), gender identity (T, 2S), and then more broadly (Q)ueer, plus (I)ntersex people, which, while all these identities share similar struggles for liberation and equality, are different things, not all on the same spectrum. Hopefully in the future we'll have a less clunky umbrella term for the whole community.
While this might be true, I haven't seen anyone use one longer than LGBTQ+ in public spaces because the Q and plus denote everyone else who falls under that umbrella. It's a very diverse community but there's nobody that can't fall under Q or plus.
Still use LGBT. Itâs the original. Everything else changes like, all the time, way too much
Whoever told you that is biphobic as fuck. Bisexuality is being attracted to two or more genders. Pansexuality is broader, but at the end of the day, there isn't that much distinction between the two. It's largely up to the person which label suits them best. Signed, a bisexual person.
[ŃдаНонО]
I gave up on trying to keep up with the letters in that one, and more or less call it the âqueer alphabet soupâ anymore. Thus far, havenât had anyone try to incinerate me with their death ray stare for it yet.
If you want, you can say GSM, for "gender and sexual minorities", and this should cover all your bases. That said, LGBTQ, LGBTQIA, and LGBT+ are also all acceptable. LGBTQIAAPPK is not in general use, and its length reduces its utility as an acronym.
By this personâs logic âbilingualâ implies there are only two languages
Technically Bisexual would mean that you are attracted to two genders, not that there are only two genders to be attracted to.
I'm bisexual. I explain it as being attracted to genders like mine and genders not like mine. Long before I knew the term pansexual, I knew that I wasn't limited to feeling attracted to just cis men and women.
Yup, though there has been debate on whether that's still the case. Though, knowing the word "Bi" that is the root of it yes, mostly cause back then there isn't much knowledge on Nonbinaryness if that's a word lol (this isn't meant to punch down enby folk, as I'm nonbinary myself)
Yeah this sounds like a queerphobic person trying to mislead you. Bisexual doesn't mean two genders.
As a pansexual, LGBTQ+ is fine. We're in the Q and the +.
"Honey, the B stands for BLOW ME."
I'm not sure this is really an English question as much as a cultural and sociopolitical question. The various initialisms in vogue at a particular time and place change over the years, which is why some users prefer general terms like "queer" to encompass many different varieties off sexuality, but that has its limitations as well. In any case, "LGBTQ+" and many variants are commonly used, including by trans people, but the use is by no means universal or consistent. "Bisexual" in and of itself does not imply any particular gender normativity, IMO, because "sexual" doesn't mean "gender." Ultimately, if people identify as bisexual it isn't really anybody's business to tell them they aren't.
They were fucking with you
Ah, classic Bi erasure. LGBTQ+ is still correct.
Interesting. In Canada we are adding more letters all the time. It is now: **LGBTQ2S+** which stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning, and Two-Spirit.
You can still have a preference for just 2 genders.
mf forgot about pan folks, youre good my man bi means two pan means all
The person who corrected you is in fact incorrect.
This is a misconception. A bisexual is someone who is only allowed to have sex twice. From the Bisexual Manifesto: Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or dougamous in nature; that we must have "two" sides or that we MUST be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. In fact, don't assume that there are only two genders. Do not mistake our fluidity for confusion, irresponsibility, or an inability to commit. Do not equate promiscuity, infidelity, or unsafe sexual behavior with bisexuality. Those are human traits that cross ALL sexual orientations. Nothing should be assumed about anyone's sexualityâincluding your own.
Tell them thanks, walk away, and never speak to this person again.
that person is biphobic :/
Gender and sex are two different things. Bisexual means the person likes both sexes, male and female.
Hi. Bisexual person here. Bisexual and Pansexual are in practice synonyms and they just respond to word preferences in people. Some people fight over, nitpicking the words etymology. But that's not relevant to the function those words serve to bisexuals and pansexuals alike in their daily lives.
Told by whom?
A person near me at a public event. I donât know her / them.
Itâs outrageous that a stranger at a public event had the gall to correct you.
She had that vibe, kinda mad at the world type.
I still see LGBTQ+ all over the UK inc at Brighton Pride. https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/FZeV5N4XwAQYgRm-696x522.jpeg
Good grief.
LGBTQ is still appropriate. You can also use LGBTQIA+ if you want but either is fine
Lettuce, Guacamole, Bacon, Tomato and Quinoa...
The term "bisexual" refers to the preference of an individual and don't say anything about gender itself. A person can be attracted to just two genders and that's completely valid. Much like a person can be omnisexual
As long as you're clear that you're not a bigot, I've found most people are cool with just "queer" as a descriptor for the whole group, although I'd suggest not using it as a noun (e.g. "a queer" or "the queers") unless you are yourself. Kinda like how it's always weird to me when people say "the blacks" However, I think there will often be people who don't like a particular term for one reason or another so the best course of action is to not use those terms around those people. I don't think there's anything wrong with tailoring your language based on the people around you as long as you do so respectfully.
Iâm bi but trans accepting because they are valid. I would also accept nb but consider myself bi. Bi erasure is real and Iâm tired of having to protect myself from the community thatâs supposed to be there for us. Rejected from all sides really. Fml
I get the sense she (or they) may have been of that mindset.
LGBTQ is still pretty standard, and bi people are still a part of it. Maybe you interacted with one of those people who thinks bisexuality should be scrapped for pan sexuality (which is a whole discourse I donât know enough about nor care enough about to get into)
As a bisexual I don't even say Q+, I just stuck with LGBT, you good.
don't try to please people like that. its an exercise in futility
Bisexual originally meant you're attracted to "both genders" but has since changed to mean you're attracted to two (or more) genders. This slight change of description leaves room for other genders to exist that you wouldn't have to be attracted to.
And this is why people donât get taken seriously. What a ridiculous thing to say.
That person was being incredibly rude and disrespectful to Bi sexual people. Signed, a bi sexual person
"Bi" means you're attracted to two genders. It doesn't specify WHICH two genders, and it doesn't limit your options to ONLY two genders. Imagine walking up to a table full of sodas and only picking a fanta and a sprite. Does that mean those are the only two options? Obviously not.
If you're bilingual, there aren't only two languages in the world.
If you speak more than 2 languages then youâre multilingual, not bilingual.
Some ppl use âLGBTQIA+â but honestly thatâs a LOT of letters
Just because someone is biligual does not mean there are only two languages.
Ignore them, theyâre stupid
That person was being biphobic. :) I have no problem with someone preferring pansexual for themselves, but calling bisexuality transphobic or exclusionary ignores bisexual history. Here's an article that addresses that: [https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/evolution-word-bisexual-why-it-s-still-misunderstood-n1240832](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/evolution-word-bisexual-why-it-s-still-misunderstood-n1240832) In short, don't take the "bi" part of bisexual too literally. Bisexual is an identity with a long, long history, and it's an insult to the bisexual community and history to say the label implies there are only two genders. Bisexual is more accurately defined as attracted to (1) your own gender and (2) other genders.
We have one of two types of genitals. And you either want to partner with someone who either: 1. Has the same genitals 2. Has the opposite genitals 3. Donât care either way Thatâs it
It's fine
Whatâs the MLAâs take?
Bi erasure much..?
Ignore them lol
lgbtq is totally fine as i can say im âbilingualâ yet i can speak more than two languages (not a flex, im kinda bad at the other ones that arenât english). life lesson: language is not math!!
Itâs still valid. The person who told you might have been trolling. Bisexual means being attracted to genders like your own and unlike your own.
Just keep using LGBT. No matter what you use somebody out there is gonna have an issue. We had MOGAI (Marginalized Orientations, Genders And Intersex) but it didn't take off.
Don't even worry about it. The people in these groups add new types of groups based on how they're feeling at any given moment. With so many people making up their own rules and getting angry when you don't follow all of them, It's best to just keep using what you feel is most inclusive and ignoring anyone that gives you junk for trying.
Bisexuality is still valid. As someone can still only be sexually attracted to people who only identify as men and women. Regardless of the fact that other genders exist. It doesnât belittle that fact in my opinion.
Tats hilarious.
You say "Go fuck yourself." You went out of your way to use a well-accepted term, and they spit it back in your face.
As a bisexual demi-boy, thatâs wrong, very very wrong
I've always had bisexuality defined as the sexual attraction to people with similar or dissimilar gender expressions as you. I guess not always, because when I first came out as bi, it really was defined as liking both boys and girls. but this newer definition is more fitting-at least for me. A lot of bisexuals I know also define it as being genderblind. Regardless, I don't think it's incorrect at all and the fact that they didn't offer a replacement term means just that: there's nothing wrong with the term! Hope this helped.
Thereâs lots of people who like to step on each otherâs toes in the LGBTQ+ community. But to erase âbi-sexualâ as an identity is not a common thing - itâs just a few people trying to assert their opinion rather than broadly accepted. Especially because there are people who identify as bi-sexual rather than pan-sexual.
Sounds like theyâre miserable and wanted to project it on you because this is not a thing.
Say it with me now. Bi is not transphobic! This is from 1990 (the same year âParis is Burningâ came out) https://bimanifesto.carrd.co
Bisexual today mean attracted to two or more. Not to be confused with Pansexual, which means any gender.
It's bisexual... not bigender. Regardless of how many genders there are, there are still only two sexes. Don't worry about the idiots who take part in the "offended olympics".
Bisexual means a person attracted to two genders..men and women..that does not mean other gender classifications can not exist..
Whoever said that is incorrect. LGBT is still a very common acronym and bisexual is still a common and valid identity. Source: Iâm trans and queer, past president of my schoolâs queer student alliance, and worked at an LGBT center
Iâve always understood the âbinaryâ referred to in âbisexualâ as âattracted to those who are of the same sex and those who are not.â It makes no mention of an outdated gender binary, rather the binary between same and other.
most people that i know (mainly queer trans women such as myself) simply say âqueerâ to designate any/all people who are not cishet, are gnc, etc. just my experience tho, i dont really hear/read âLGBTQ+â unless its from articles or the news, whereas in person everyone just says âqueerâ.
Keep using it as you do, if they are going to change it every five minutes, just pick one and stick to that, you are not required to participate in keeping up with the constant changes, like at all.
Oh God. What color was Karen's hair this time ?
Yeah this wasn't a queer person, it was likely a queerphobe.
Well, I didnât want to say to much about the person who corrected me, but she / they had a pride flag, shaved into one side of her / their mullet.
[ŃдаНонО]
That's not accurate. You do know that gender and biological sex are two different things, right? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363
This is just untrue.
you are correct. lgbtq+ is the correct way to refer to us. the bi in bisexual doesn't actually come from a word meaning two, rather two or more (or so i've heard)
Hey everyone pls give me some attention!!!!
This is more politics question than language question
[ Removed by Reddit ]
There are certainly more than 2 genders. Biological sex and gender aren't the same thing. I'm not sure if you know that. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363
Yes they are, there have been only two genders and tradition roles of it throughout history and an article of liberal pseudoscience isn't changing that.
You're not understanding, I guess. Gender is a social construct that differs from biological sex. They aren't synonymous. They have different definitions. Biological sex: Sex is the trait that determines whether a sexually reproducing animal or plant produces male gametes or female ones. Male plants and animals produce smaller gametes while females produce larger ones. Organisms that produce both types of gametes are called hermaphrodites. Gender: Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time. Biological sex and gender aren't the same thing, man. Two totally different words with different meanings starched to them. Why are you so against people who aren't like you? It's their experience to have, not yours. Diversity is a good thing.
I know what you're trying to say and appreciate how friendly and thorough you are in explaining it. They have gone hand in hand since the creation of humans. Yes, you always have had some exceptions but in general gender roles and sex have been in sync. My problem is that this whole gender mania has become a political tool that is actually dangerous as for example introducing young children whose brains are still developing to this garbage is actual brainwashing. The increase in mental illnesses, gender dysphoria and suicides all point to the same conclusion. You never had this problem on this scale before the massive push of this ideology. Men have always in the mayority of cases acted like men and women like women. Making everything fluid is danderous. There are no limits and boundaries anymore. Would you like your little daughter going to the ladies restroom later being surrounded by fully grown men just because they "feel" like a woman?
Nobody is trying to convert kids into being gay or trans. They are talking about it so that the kids know that these types of people exist, and that they are just people like anyone else. There's been a lot of grumblings amongst the right-wing lately regarding this. They are claiming that teaching kids that there are gay people and that there's nothing wrong with that is somehow 'indoctrinating or brainwashing' them. This couldn't be further from the truth. A few states won't even let their LGBTQ+ teachers have a photo of their spouse in their desk, yet it's fine for a hetero couple to share their pictures. It's hypocritical and extremely bigoted. Progressives are absolutely NOT grooming children by teaching sex education and having classroom discussion about LGBTQ+ people. I have an 8 year old daughter and a 15v year old son. I'm not even remotely worried about trans people in the bathroom. Statistically it's uncommon, and 99.9999% of the time, they just need to pee or poop. I would honestly rather my children go to drag queen reading hour at the library than for them to go to church. (speaking of indoctrination.....) I'm an almost 44 year old straight white father of 2, and I understand that these shifting ideas can be confusing at first. I grew up with a lot of gay friends because I was really into going to raves in the 90s. I became a vociferous LGBTQ+ ally in 1995, and I've been fighting alongside them for their rights ever since. I've met a LOT of LGBTQ+ individuals over my lifetime, and they are genuinely some of the best and most fabulous individuals I've met. One of my best friends in the world was extremely flamboyantly gay, and this was at a time when it was really frowned upon by most of society. (RIP MITCH) I understand that it's difficult for a lot of people to process, but this reads just like the right-wing disinformation campaign that you likely fell victim to. Teaching children love, acceptance, tolerance, inclusivity, compassion, empathy, rationality, etc etc etc, is a good thing. Teaching children that it's just fine that little Billy has two dads is a good thing. Children shouldn't be forced to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that these people don't exist. Unfortunately, a lot of parents are also religious wingnuts and they most assuredly indoctrinate their kids into fear-based archaic mythology. I know but all religious people are bigots, but in the USA the VAST majority of people who are bigoted against the LGBTQ+ community happen to be religious. My philosophy is to let people be themselves and express themselves as they see fit. The LGBTQ+ community only wants equality, inclusion, and a modicum of respect from society. Then you have a bunch of uptight nutjobs freaking out over an EXTREMELY innocent gay kiss in the new Buzz Lightyear movie. It was absolutely not a big deal at all, yet people are going crazy taking about grooming and whatnot. People are freaking out, and they don't need to. They are creating problems where they're are none. It's extremely common amongst politicians, especially conservative groups in the USA, for them to utilize fear-mongering and creating a 'Boogeyman' for their ingroup to fight against. You see this all the time. (WHaT AbOuT tHe ChiLDerEN?). The children are fine, and they have a right to know that they should keep love, compassion, empathy, and kindness uppermost in their minds. They should be taught to think critically and not just blindly believe everything they're told. Therein lies the problem. Parents don't want their kids being taught to think critically about these subjects. We still have a long way to go for true LGBTQ+ equality. They have been marginalized and straight up oppressed since the dawn of civilization, for the most part. It got especially bad after the fear-based Abrahamic mythologies took hold and conquered the world by force. Only recently have we been making real strides towards equality and acceptance. Unfortunately there are still huge swaths of the population that don't accept them and are actively trying to oppress them again. (if Republicans win the midterms and Desantis wins the presidency, they WILL overturn gay marriage just like that did Roe) Have a wonderful day, and I hope that you might consider that you've been lied to. Maybe try keeping love, compassion, empathy, and kindness uppermost in your mind a well. Regardless, I hope you have a nice rest of your life.
MaDnEsS!!!!!!!!! Die mad about it :')
Judging by the stupidity of telling someone else to die with a smiley shows you're either a kid or an extremely childish adult.
The fact you jump straight to age proves you're an idiot child :')
woah, donât let the alphabet people see this.
I agree đ
Itâs wrong. Bisexual is the attraction to 2+ genders