GSRM or LGBT+ seem good enough. Guessing its a result of people trying to be exclusionary and people feeling the need to explicitly include those groups, but still think GSRM still would be clearly inclusive of most of those groups anyway?
2SLGBTQIA+ is a result of being more inclusionary, and it is the standard for the Canadian government. The 2S at the front represents two-spirit people, which is a term that Indigenous people use (also why it was placed at the front, as a sign of respect since they were here before everyone else). The QIA+ are literally additions to include queer (which is a catchall), intersex (who were previously medicalized and excluded), and agender/asexual/aromantic people (who have historically been excluded/ignored), and the + obviously is to include anyone who doesnt feel reflected by the other letters. This is literally the least exclusionary way to do it.
GSRM has been attempted many times but framing people as minorities when providing allegedly inclusive terminology is generally out of fashion.
I propose we just all adopt the “+” sign. If we’re going for ultimate inclusiveness, why not just get rid of the individual letters entirely? Otherwise we’ll just keep having new groups that want to tack on another letter since new sexual-orientation/gender identity categories seem to drop as regularly as the NOW That’s What I Call Music! CD series - many of which are indistinguishable from each other.
The acronym system is anti queer philosophically relies on strict taxonomies and fundamentally hierarchal exclusionary while not telling us why these people are lumped together their issues have so much in common its really liberally stupid and as as queer I take offense
I’m aware of what it stands for. But using ‘A’ as a catchall for several identities means aro-spec identities are still frequently neglected, allies try to claim it just stands for them instead of ace, aro, and/or agender people, so its still ends up being exclusive in practice while just being unnecessarily long given its failure to achieve the intended goal.
GSRM or LGBT+ seem good enough. Guessing its a result of people trying to be exclusionary and people feeling the need to explicitly include those groups, but still think GSRM still would be clearly inclusive of most of those groups anyway?
2SLGBTQIA+ is a result of being more inclusionary, and it is the standard for the Canadian government. The 2S at the front represents two-spirit people, which is a term that Indigenous people use (also why it was placed at the front, as a sign of respect since they were here before everyone else). The QIA+ are literally additions to include queer (which is a catchall), intersex (who were previously medicalized and excluded), and agender/asexual/aromantic people (who have historically been excluded/ignored), and the + obviously is to include anyone who doesnt feel reflected by the other letters. This is literally the least exclusionary way to do it.
GSRM has been attempted many times but framing people as minorities when providing allegedly inclusive terminology is generally out of fashion.
I propose we just all adopt the “+” sign. If we’re going for ultimate inclusiveness, why not just get rid of the individual letters entirely? Otherwise we’ll just keep having new groups that want to tack on another letter since new sexual-orientation/gender identity categories seem to drop as regularly as the NOW That’s What I Call Music! CD series - many of which are indistinguishable from each other.
Lk tho just the + sign would be dope. Can we keep the rainbow colours?
The acronym system is anti queer philosophically relies on strict taxonomies and fundamentally hierarchal exclusionary while not telling us why these people are lumped together their issues have so much in common its really liberally stupid and as as queer I take offense
I used to be uncomfortable with using queer as a self-descriptor, but TBH I’m getting to be in agreement with you these days.
Now I’m wondering about getting a T-shirt with it on, for pride (or any other day I don’t mind stirring the pot)
Gsm/grsm works too but people might think you’re too slow to do more than text on
Nobodies going to understand acronyms where I live anway, lol (words regarding all the labels feel pretty awkward to me in Spanish)
I’m aware of what it stands for. But using ‘A’ as a catchall for several identities means aro-spec identities are still frequently neglected, allies try to claim it just stands for them instead of ace, aro, and/or agender people, so its still ends up being exclusive in practice while just being unnecessarily long given its failure to achieve the intended goal.
The plus sign being where it is probably contributes to it being seen as a catch-all, even though it’s not supposed to be; the acronym goes LGBTQIAA…
Idk, as an ace person, I personally appreciate it. I don’t really care if allies try to claim it because they are wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don’t mean to suggestion others shouldn’t like it. Just how it makes me feel personally as someone who is aroace (and perhaps agender?).
I’ve never even heard of GSRM, so that’s another new one for me.
Its what phones used to use before 3g came along.
The first time I heard of it, it was just GSM, but I guess then romantic minorities got added?
No I think gsrm was the standard in Europe I still have an old gsm phone I think
This is how I know I’m getting old. Can’t understand what the dang kids are saying anymore!
Its easily been over 10 years since I heard of GSM, after I was done with high school at least. No clue when I first saw GSRM used tho.
I graduated high school 20 years ago. I think we barely had better than LGBT. I’m aware of it now at least. Better late than never!