LGBTI?

[Relish in Chaos]

I was just wondering...why isn't there an "I" for "intersex" at the end of "LGBT"? I don't think there seems to be any kind of strong advocacy, nor do I feel strongly for it, for adding another letter to an acronym that people are already making into an alphabet soup clusterfuck (e.g. "A" for "Allies" being people that aren't gay, bi or trans - they just support LGBT rights), but this one always seemed to be one that deserved to be plonked at the end there, to make "LGBTI". And it's not as if there aren't other acronyms that are longer, and many people can still remember them just fine.

Intersex people are a distinctly separate group from transgender people, just like gay men are distinctly different from lesbians, or gay women. The acronym is meant to tackle things concerning gender identity, sexuality, free expression of those things, and the issues that people can suffer as a result - which, presumably, is why gay and lesbian is distinguished with "G" and "L" (even though some would argue that they still share the same sexuality of "homosexuality"; the only difference is the gender of the attractee). But let's not add a "P" on there for "pansexual" because - and no offence to anyone that does identify as pansexual - I think it's a mildly pretentious way of saying "bisexual, but with a greater focus on love", since pansexuals likely will be dating both males and females either way, so there's no real need to make another technical term; otherwise, we'll have to start counting "bicurious", and potentially even more vague/ambiguous terms, despite the fact that sexuality is a sliding scale anyway and we could (and probably have) made up about a million necessary and/or unnecessary labels for these things.

So what do you think? Should "I" be added into the "LGBT" acronym, to shine more light on the intersexual minority?

 

[Darken12]

A is for Asexuals, which are non-straight.

I've seen the term QUILTBAG thrown around (it's easy to remember, as far as mnemonics go). Queer/Questioning, I always forget what the U stands for, Intersex, Lesbian, Transexual, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay.

 

[The Night Angel]

As a member of the community, and of my university's LGBT society's committee, I honestly wouldn't care one way or another. If enough people came to our committee asking to change it, I'm sure we would, and the same for the LGBT community at large. I don't know how big an issue it is, as no one has ever approached me about it.
As for the other stuff, I actually find it quite annoying that so many terms need be invented, and think that a lot of the people I meet who use the more rare terms to identify themselves come across like they are just trying to be contrary and special, rather than really identifying as whatever it happens to be.

 

[Angelowl]

It is easy to get mixed up with all the different letters, I think you are supposed to have a Q in there somewhere for instance. I'm not sure how well they fit in to begin with, us transsexuals have it awkward enough around all the pink and sparkles. In sweden they have their own organisation, but do kind of swim along regarding trans issues when it comes to surgery, hormones etc.

Perhaps they should revamp the whole acronym thing so it doesn't have to explain every single thing, otherwise it can get pretty long.

Honestly it seems to be the same discussion as with transsexuality, a medical diagnosis often requiring treatment being lumped together alternative preferences. In my own opinion I certainly don't complain as they are basically the only ones who care enough to make a difference in sweden.

The one thing that one should research first is wether they actually want to be included. Especially if we talk about organisations were trans are the lowest in the hierarchy because some of us are straight, or were bisexuals get crap about faking it and not actually existing and so on.

 

[Glasgow]

Can we just call it "non-Hetero" and be done with this? I know that some people like to be different, but for some reason you're grouping all of them together.

 

[Atrocious Joystick]

LGBTI? What are you? Some kind of conservative dickbag racist?

Everybody knows the real progressives support LGTBIAGPPITT.

 

[Psykoma]

A is for Asexuals, which are non-straight.

I've seen the term QUILTBAG thrown around (it's easy to remember, as far as mnemonics go). Queer/Questioning, I always forget what the U stands for, Intersex, Lesbian, Transexual, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay.

I think the U was for Undecided.

OP:
I see people using any combination of the above they want. Sometimes they'll also omit the T, or make it LGB-T.
It all depends on the person talking and the group they're talking about.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

A is for Asexuals, which are non-straight.

I heard that there are two "A"s, one being for "Asexual" and the other being for "Allies".

Can we just call it "non-Hetero" and be done with this? I know that some people like to be different, but for some reason you're grouping all of them together.

Because ?non-hetero? doesn?t consider those with gender identity issues, as not all transgendered people are non-straight and not all non-straight people are transgendered.

People use labels because of society having a penchant for putting people in and making them conform into their own confined little boxes. But also, presumably because it?s easier to say ?gay? than ?a man who?s into other men, but not women? in a conversation, whether it be in dating, politics, or something else.

 

[Darken12]

A is for Asexuals, which are non-straight.

I've seen the term QUILTBAG thrown around (it's easy to remember, as far as mnemonics go). Queer/Questioning, I always forget what the U stands for, Intersex, Lesbian, Transexual, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay.

I think the U was for Undecided.

Wasn't that Questioning? Or have we dropped that and reserved the Q for Queer? Man, I am so out of touch with the LGBT blogosphere these days.

A is for Asexuals, which are non-straight.

I heard that there are two "A"s, one being for "Asexual" and the other being for "Allies".

So it would be QUILTBAAG? Or QUILTBAGA? The latter makes me giggle, a little, but is otherwise easier to remember.

 

[Psykoma]

A is for Asexuals, which are non-straight.

I've seen the term QUILTBAG thrown around (it's easy to remember, as far as mnemonics go). Queer/Questioning, I always forget what the U stands for, Intersex, Lesbian, Transexual, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay.

I think the U was for Undecided.

Wasn't that Questioning? Or have we dropped that and reserved the Q for Queer? Man, I am so out of touch with the LGBT blogosphere these days.

A is for Asexuals, which are non-straight.

I heard that there are two "A"s, one being for "Asexual" and the other being for "Allies".

So it would be QUILTBAAG? Or QUILTBAGA? The latter makes me giggle, a little, but is otherwise easier to remember.

I think the Q was reserved exclusively for Queer.
Even though I don't think "Allies" really belongs, I must say QUILTBAGA is pretty awesome.

 

[Darken12]

I think the Q was reserved exclusively for Queer.
Even though I don't think "Allies" really belongs, I must say QUILTBAGA is pretty awesome.

It totally evokes an Avengers-like (or Justice League-like) bunch of badass people posing superhero-style.

 

[thiosk]

We might be going a little overboard here with the acronyms and mnemonic devices.

Everybody knows the real progressives support LGTBIAGPPITT.

Nevermind. This is what I'm using forever.

 

[Musette]

To be honest, I find that the alphabet soup will only grow until it becomes too cumbersome for most people to remember, which is why I see "LGBTQ" the most often. The latest acronym I saw though was something along the lines of "QUILTBAGPIPE" or "Queer/Questioning, Undecided, Intersex, Lesbian, Trans*, Bisexual, Asexual/Allies, Gay/Genderqueer, Pansexual, Intersex (can't remember if it was listed twice or if I'm forgetting a term), Polyamorous, and Everybody else."

I personally prefer the acronym GSM, or Gender/Sexual Minorities since it can refer to a much wider spectrum of people without needing to become too large in order to be inclusive. I've also heard the term "queer identified" thrown around, but I guess it's a matter of personal preference.

But let's not add a "P" on there for "pansexual" because - and no offence to anyone that does identify as pansexual - I think it's a mildly pretentious way of saying "bisexual, but with a greater focus on love", since pansexuals likely will be dating both males and females either way, so there's no real need to make another technical term; otherwise, we'll have to start counting "bicurious", and potentially even more vague/ambiguous terms, despite the fact that sexuality is a sliding scale anyway and we could (and probably have) made up about a million necessary and/or unnecessary labels for these things.

Actually, pansexuality is distinct from bisexuality not because it is presumed to be "bisexual with a greater focus on love", pansexuality as a term exists because of the growing number of gender identities available. You yourself are promoted the greater awareness of Intersex people, who have a completely different biological sex from people considered male or female, and some of them will not identify with an identify in the male/female binary. Pansexuality is the explicit inclusion of sexual attraction people of any biological sex or gender, not just males and females.

There are some people who consider themselves bisexual because they feel distinct attraction to two genders, but no more (Not all bisexuals are explicitly interested in males/females; some may be attracted to males and a single non-binary identity, though I don't think that is particularly common). Just because some people use pansexuality as a more pretentious way of calling themselves bisexual does not mean that all pansexuals feel this way.

I have seen distinctions where some say that bisexuals feels attraction to men differently to how they feel attraction to women, but pansexuals feel "genderblind" in their attractions, but I am neither bisexual or pansexual, so I couldn't really confirm this on a personal level. I think the biggest indicator of sexuality is who you are (and are not) attracted to though.

 

[Spinozaad]

Personally, I think this is going completely overboard. Nevertheless, which letter is designated for those individuals who identify themselves as lesbian/gay/transgender/etc. etc. ad infinitum, but don't identify with the "community"?

That's my main problem with this constant and increased differentiation: it only strengthens the inclusion/exclusion dynamic. It only leads to the "Dutch" political phenomenon of pillarization (voluntary, though nearly complete segregration of social groups within society), which I don't think is a good thing.

 

[LongAndShort]

I think LGBT is just now a recognised label and most people know what it stands for (except funnily enough by a gay guy I met last week). Anyway, not a huge fan of labels - far to often misused despite their usefulness - and I'd be interested to know whether or not many Intersex people want to be rolled in with the LGBT crowd. I remember a bloke from a gay rights lobby group saying that a lot of transgenders aren't keen on the idea.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I honestly think there doesn't even need to be a T. It's like playing which one of these doesn't belong - 3 are sexual preferences and one is a gender preference. As far as I'm conerned, being an insensitive bastard and none of the positions described by this acronym, adding any more letters is missing the point. If you want to include people, stop defining them into little groups. if I'm not mistaken, there's a certain solidarity. All sexualities and genders contained under the LGBT umbrella just want acceptance and for their practises to not be condemned or illegal. I think you'd be better off with a term like GSM, rather than having to tack on all the subcategories after LGBT.

 

[Jayemsal]

I was just wondering...why isn't there an "I" for "intersex" at the end of "LGBT"? I don't think there seems to be any kind of strong advocacy, nor do I feel strongly for it, for adding another letter to an acronym that people are already making into an alphabet soup clusterfuck (e.g. "A" for "Allies" being people that aren't gay, bi or trans - they just support LGBT rights), but this one always seemed to be one that deserved to be plonked at the end there, to make "LGBTI". And it's not as if there aren't other acronyms that are longer, and many people can still remember them just fine.

Intersex people are a distinctly separate group from transgender people, just like gay men are distinctly different from lesbians, or gay women. The acronym is meant to tackle things concerning gender identity, sexuality, free expression of those things, and the issues that people can suffer as a result - which, presumably, is why gay and lesbian is distinguished with "G" and "L" (even though some would argue that they still share the same sexuality of "homosexuality"; the only difference is the gender of the attractee). But let's not add a "P" on there for "pansexual" because - and no offence to anyone that does identify as pansexual - I think it's a mildly pretentious way of saying "bisexual, but with a greater focus on love", since pansexuals likely will be dating both males and females either way, so there's no real need to make another technical term; otherwise, we'll have to start counting "bicurious", and potentially even more vague/ambiguous terms, despite the fact that sexuality is a sliding scale anyway and we could (and probably have) made up about a million necessary and/or unnecessary labels for these things.

So what do you think? Should "I" be added into the "LGBT" acronym, to shine more light on the intersexual minority?

Its a gradual process, eventually you'll see LGBTI as the generally accepted acronym.

 

[Stu35]

As for the other stuff, I actually find it quite annoying that so many terms need be invented, and think that a lot of the people I meet who use the more rare terms to identify themselves come across like they are just trying to be contrary and special, rather than really identifying as whatever it happens to be.

This.

I believe pretty strongly that everyone deserves to be treated as a human being, to me that generally means trying to break down this culture of everybody labelling each other, so I honestly find it astonishing that some people go out of their way to tag themselves with obscure labels, and honestly it does just feel like some people are trying to be attention seeking for the hell of it.

'Pansexual' is an example of this to me - someone decided that 'Bisexual' didn't cover all the genders and everything in between, so decided that a new word was needed - instead of just taking the currently existing one (which, in my opinion is quite sufficient), some people will argue til they're blue in the face at how different they are from Bisexuals - Further segregation which seems unnecessary in my opinion.

That said, however, I'm not in any LGBT communities, so at the end of the day it doesn't really make a difference to me if these organisations do choose to keep adding letters to their acronym to try and be more all encompassing - As I say, if it was me I'd go the other way and start taking labels away to allow people to truly be integrated into the community, instead of trying to decide what exact label it is they are, in an already confusing world.

 

[Robot Number V]

I think we can all agree that the most progressive acronym is obviously QUILTBAGSAVITORIFRIBULOUS.

(That's "Quilt-Bagsa-Vitori-Fribulous)

Which stands for:

Queer/Questioning, Undecided,Intersex, Lesbian, Transexual, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay, Straight, Amorphous[footnote]Those who are amorphous blobs and are not strictly either gender. Or necessarily human.[/footnote], Vicarious[footnote]Those who only have sex vicariously, through other people. Not the same as voyeurism.[/footnote], Isotopic[footnote]Those who reproduce through the exchange of molecular particles[/footnote], Transexuormers[footnote]People who can change their sex back and forth at will[/footnote], Orwellian[footnote]Those whose true love is crushed by a totalitarian regime that allows for no emotion[/footnote], Reproachful[footnote]Those who are having sex, but aren't happy about it.[/footnote], Igneous[footnote]Refers to a small group of rocks that have gained the ability to reproduce sexually.[/footnote], Fictitious[footnote]Those who do not actually exist, and thus have no gender.[/footnote], Romantic[footnote]Those who have an overly-idealistic and nieve view of sex and relationships.[/footnote], Idiots[footnote]Those who are too stupid to reproduce without measurably damaging the human race, and thus cannot legally have sex with anyone[/footnote], Bears[footnote]Self-explanatory[/footnote], Ursine[footnote]Also self-explanatory. Not the same as Bears.[/footnote], Liquids[footnote]Refers to beings made of liquid that can reproduce sexually[/footnote], Omnipotent[footnote]Refers to all gods and god-like beings how have grown beyond the need for sexual desires.[/footnote], Unknowable[footnote]Refers to beings of unknowable horror that nonetheless have sexual desires, even if nobody is sure exactly what they are.[/footnote], Spider-Monsters[footnote]Refers to horrible monsters that reproduce by laying eggs inside their helpless, screaming victims.[/footnote]

You guys are all bigots. ALL groups should be equally represented.