this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
59 points (82.4% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
357 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Excellent speech by Canada's most excellent Senator https://mstdn.ca/@Paulatics

all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is the goal to use every letter of the alphabet?

[–] archonet@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'm gay and I support this comment.

We do not need to represent every single minority in the acronym, that's what the rainbow flag is for, that's literally the entire point of the flag because a rainbow includes every color. "LGBT" rolls off the tongue nicely and there are zero repercussions in tacking a + on the end of it. If I have to memorize a new, extended acronym every fucking few months just because Tumblr can't stand not being on their social high horse I am gonna have a fucking aneurysm.

[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I'm bisexual and I get why people keep adding letters, inconvenient as it may be to some.

It's easy to say "this is enough" when you already feel represented. You don't need to use a longer acronym than you are comfortable with, but likewise you should not expect others to shorten their acronym for your convenience.

Some gender and sexual minorities are neither lesbian, gay, bisexual nor trans, yet they want to feel seen: they have been hidden, ignored or ostracized for too long. They don't want an umbrella like + or 'queer' to hide under. They are their own thing, so they want to have their own label to recognize themselves and to be recognized.

Once gender and sexual minorities have been understood and accepted more broadly, people within them will organically become more accepting of umbrella terms. But today is not the day. Not yet. Today let's continue to welcome more people until we are all here.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The answer is to use 'SOGIM': Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Minorities

[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's great that you have found a term you like. Other people may prefer a different one, and that's also okay.

[–] archonet@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Hello, Tumblr. By the time "we are all here", the acronym will include the alphabet, numerals, and quite possibly other glyphs (if someone throws an emoji on there so help me god). Human sexuality is varied and diverse if you haven't noticed. I am not learning an acronym long enough to singlehandedly win a game of Scrabble just so everyone can feel special. Not happening, sport, and most people would agree -- which is why this will never catch on and Tumblrinas need to stop trying to force it to.

[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Hello, fellow human.

I am not learning an acronym long enough to singlehandedly win a game of Scrabble

Nobody is forcing you to use any term you don't like. You can use whatever term you want and other people can also choose whatever they prefer. If you find people choosing their own labels troublesome, imagine how you would feel if people started forcing you to call yourself something different.

Also, being friendly on the internet costs nothing. Yes, even to people with other viewpoints.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca -4 points 1 year ago

We do not need to, but if the cost of doing so is a few grumpy fellas getting aneurysms out there, we're in for a treat. Let's add more!

[–] spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

Paula is a fantastic human being.

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

2SLGBTBBQ? never seen this one before, what is the 2s?

[–] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was going to ask the same question but, you know, in a respectful way instead of an idiot's way.

Thanks for those who replied to this. It would have felt awkward asking after seeing someone asking the same question in bad faith.

[–] FoundTheVegan@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

In that spirit, for anyone wondering and curious. The full acronym, explanation and details can be found here.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Two spirit, it’s a catch all term for First Nations cultural third genders

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought it was a version same-sex attraction or something, or is it sorta like the Anima and Animus?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s a lot of things. There are a lot of cultures thats concepts of gender boundaries and what constitutes someone outside of male and female doesn’t quite line up. We often consider the eastern hemisphere more unified on these concepts than it is, and we’re a lot more likely to recognize how wildly diverse the native cultures of that continent cluster are than we are of the American continents.

So what is two spirit? Could be what we’d consider gay, bi, trans, nonbinary, intersex, or other, but it comes in an explicit choice to frame it in the context of their culture. What you can gather from someone calling themselves two spirit is that they’re queer and First Nations and they see those as tied together.

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Fair enough

[–] flicker@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't like the idea of expanding the acronym to intentionally place someone "first."

Everyone has an equal place at the table and this feels like a great way to start the kind of stupid infighting that I've found exhausting since I first heard a man claim that he didn't have an interest in a community that spent any time and energy fighting for anything but his needs. At a Pride parade in the late nineties ffs.

Additionally, it feels hollow in the same way that corporate pride feels. "You haven't been represented appropriately in this community up until now, but look! You're first!"

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

More allies are needed, not less. It's great to know there is one in the Senate. Haven't you been paying attention to what bigot Moe and his far right government are doing in Saskatchewan?

[–] flicker@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

Adding is absolutely not the issue here. I think I was pretty clear on that. There is room for everyone in our world.

It's the intentional effort to put one group before all others, especially when that group has been vastly under-supported, historically.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

like a great way to start the kind of stupid infighting

How much infighting regarding this have you been seeing? From where I stand, it has been pretty smooth sailing. The LGBTQIA+ community reaction I've seen varies between "meh, whatever" to "yeah that's kinda cool".

[–] flicker@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I specifically referenced an incident but there were others. Did you finish reading that sentence?

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That was in the nineties? I mean infighting specifically due to that 2S change. Also, chill.

[–] flicker@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

I absolutely haven't heard anyone infighting about this thing I'm hearing about for the first time, and also am referencing other times we added things and people engaged in infighting, since last behavior can often help predict future.

I take issue with putting a specific group first, intentionally, and can tell you (now that I've had a day) that the first indigenous person I asked about it said that it was "bullshit" because it feels "placating" to persons historically unrepresented and oppressed. Which does support my concern even if n=1.

For clarity, he is neither cisgender, nor heteronormative in any fashion.