Just for good measure, non-binary folks often abbreviate that at “NB” or even refer in text to “enbies”, meaning non-binary people.
I think part of the confusion is we’re really talking about two distinct issues here - gender identity and sexual orientation - and treating them as a single issue.
I would say they have overlapping issues.
Also, the whole “homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual” descriptive spectrum doesn’t work very well for non-binary people, and is awkward for a lot of transgender people, whose sexual preferences may not have changed when they changed their gender presentation.
A gay friend of mine, who is about 50, calls himself queer. There was a bit of back and forth with another gay man about whether that was “acceptable”.
These are the sort of people the term brings to mind for me, though they’re probably not the only ones who use it. Blue hair is optional.
If you take out sex and romance, what does being in a relationship mean?
It’s similar to the distinction I make between “gay” and “homosexual.” Homosexual refers simply to the attraction to someone of one’s own sex. Gay, on the other hand, includes cultural and political areas that go way beyond sex.
Shared expenses (they all live together) in the way you do in a committed relationship - where if one of them isn’t working the others pick up the slack; emotional support; a long term commitment to a friendship - even when its work; a lot of time spent together. A commitment to continue this - one is planning on grad school, they all intend to move. Hopefully you have the same when you take away the sex and the Valentines Day box of chocolates.
Thanks for explaining. Yes, we have the same, although I was thinking of romance as a lot more than a box of chocolates.
I don’t know for sure what you mean when you call yourself queer. Do you mean “I am LGBT, therefore I’m queer, because the terms are synonyms”? Respectfully, I disagree that they are. I’m a member of the LGBTQ group too, but I don’t use “queer” for myself – though if you call me queer in that sense, I wouldn’t be offended. But I think of the acronym as indicating various memberships in a coalition. I’m part of that coalition, and I claim the letter “g” – I’m gay. But to myself, I’m no more “queer” than I am a lesbian. Just as I’m an American, but I’m not a Kansan.
That said, I definitely get where you’re coming from in that “queer” has an implication of being an overarching term that encompasses all the others. Some people use the word for a catch-all – it’s convenient, and I certainly don’t mind. However, if the word were truly a catch-all, we could drop every other letter in the acronym and be done with the debate of which letters the acronym should include. (Maybe we should!) But for now, not all LGBTQ people call themselves queer, so we’re still going to need other designations which will mean different things than “queer.” Everybody gets to self-identify however they like, which is why the acronym keeps getting longer.
@Chronos, you’ve hit upon something important, I think – “queer” may be used as shorthand for “genderqueer.” I think that’s a potential association or implication of use of the word “queer.” Rightly or wrongly, it’s something I think I hear people saying when they use “queer” for themselves with no other qualifier. That’s another reason I don’t use the term for myself – I’m not genderqueer; therefore, if queer=genderqueer, I’m not queer.
Plus, of course, as discussed there’s the whole former insult aspect of the word “queer.” I’m old enough to remember how hateful it was, and unlike some others, I haven’t reclaimed it. More power to those who have.
I’ve never studied Queer Theory or anything, I’m just an old dude who likes other old dudes. The term I think applies best to my specific situation is “gay.” I have no more authority than anyone else, but I appreciate anyone who asks me what I like to be called, if it comes up.
Romance is more than a box of chocolates. But it isn’t necessary to a committed relationship.
I had understood that asexual = not interested in sex, aromantic = not interested in love, and these can occur in various combinations. Is that not correct?
Well, I wouldn’t say not interested in love. My youngest loves their partners and their partners love them - and the three of them say it to each other all the time. Its not interested in romantic love.
Hmm. I guess I’m not sure what “romantic love” means, if it’s neither about sex nor about commitment. Maybe that makes me aromantic without ever having realized it?
@puzzlegal: Spit-ballin’ here, but IMO …
Non-romantic love is how you feel about your siblings. At least in a successful non-dysfunctional family. It’s mutual trust and commitment and caring for and about their welfare.
But it isn’t roses and teddy bears and candlelit dinners and long walks on the beach and “
… gaze into your eyes. Cherish is the word … ”. Romantic love is more like those other things.
We normies typically assume romantic love is connected to an interest in sex with whoever. So we seldom consider them as separate ideas.
We (at least male we) can certainly understand interest in sex absent romantic love. So why not the opposite combination: romantic love without the sex interest?
Back to the thread topic:
I gave my ignorant 2 cents a while ago, but going through the thread it now sounds like the emerging consensus is that “queer” is becoming the consensus non-pejorative term for everything that’s not “traditional” cis hetero binary (hoping I covered all the bases accurately and non-controversially there).
But this consensus is far from universal on both sides, and the word is still very baggage ridden-for many who do accept the emerging meaning. Much less for the many who explicitly still use it as the slur it has traditionally been.
The oddity (which applies to all language changes) is that it’s only through continued use in the new sense that the word can move / change / drift to carrying the new meaning for all. But now and for the foreseeable future, using the word is fraught with the old meaning(s) and baggage. What’s a well-meaning person to do?
Perhaps the best one can hope for is to use it gingerly only (mostly?) among an audience who you know (mostly?) “gets it” already?
I would have thought that “romance” was basically a combination of love (commitment, care for the other, etc.) and sexual attraction. One can have either love or sexual attraction by itself and not have romance, but I’m hard-pressed to think of any situation where you have both without romance.
As for “genderqueer”, it occurs to me that a transgender person might not consider themself to be genderqueer: A transwoman, for instance, might say that her gender is fully and completely female, and that there’s nothing queer about a person being fully female. Such a person might, if anything, consider herself sexqueer: That is, that it’s her physical sex that’s the queer part.
The only person I know who has self-identified to me as genderqueer is gender-fluid. That is, sometimes, she uses a female name a female pronouns, and other times he goes by a male name. My son had a not-quite-relationship with her. That is, everyone looking at them thought they were in a relationship, but they both denied it, and I don’t think they were lying to us. (Although it’s possible. He was 17, and she was in her 20s.) Anyway, he left that ‘relationship’ convinced that gender was meaningless.
w word?
Waldorf?
I stumble using the word queer, I don’t use it casually. Now I do remember when nerd was a slur, now it’s a badge of honor imo.
wop
wop [/wäp/]
noun offensive
noun: wop ; plural noun: wops
- an Italian or other southern European.
Hah, never crossed my mind! I was racking my brainz, caprese, gardiniere, No W’s. Lol. But for real? A respectable Italian restaurant calls it Wop salad? Wonder what makes it so. Guess that’s the Texas lingo.
@chela: The backstory is upthread here in post #7: