I generally try to use terms people/groups wish to to be used to describe them, but I admit I likely do not make great ongoing effort to stay up to date with some changing language preferences. The initialism LGBTQ has long rolled easily off my tongue, though it is not infrequent that some other cis-person will ask, “What does the Q” stand for?", and I have to admit that I’m not sure - either queer or questioning.
Last week I was surprised to see the term written as LGBTQIA+. So my simple question is, is there a generally preferred variant of this initialism which will not raise eyebrows or draw criticism? Am I OK to just stick with LGBTQ? Or would it be better to simply say non heterosexual/non cisgender?
This old dog generally tries to learn new tricks, but when possible, I prefer just nailing one down.
Just FYI, the I is for Intersex, the A for asexual (as well as aromantic and agender), and the + (Plus) for people who don’t feel the other specific terms accurately describe them, or that there is not yet a specific term for people like themselves.
As far as which to use…I could use some guidance, myself.
Minority orientation, gender identity, and intersex.
No need to shoehorn another five in when new people give voice to new identities. At least not unless they are utterly other than gender identity, sexual orientation, or actual variations from the binary sexual morphology like intersex.
I’ve heard GRSM (gender/romantic/sexual minorities) used a few times, but I don’t know if it’s widespread enough that most people would know what you mean by it.
I don’t quite agree about “whatever initials you want” – I presume it’s hyperbole – but if you continue to use the familiar LGBTQ, or use LGBTQ+, and you come across as an ally, it will be OK in most circumstances.
Does that guarantee that no one would ever criticize you for leaving out some letters? No, of course not. But it’ll be OK for most of us, probably.
Maybe I’m biased b/c my work recently adopted a system with an initialism that cannot be stated as a 1-2 syllable word. Instead, you have to say the 5 letters. When I saw the + at the end, I thought, “Well, hell! Why not just say L+? Or just revert to Gay+?” In my ignorance I always thought “gay” referred to both males AND females.
But saying 5 syllables on the infrequent occasions I perceive a need to is certainly not too much if it makes someone feel correctly referred to.
MOGII.
Minority orientation, gender identity, and intersex.
THAT ONE will require CONSIDERABLE more traction before I make ANY effort to adopt it. I don’t even understand the explanation. Who is it supposed to apply to? Just sex/gender minorities, or otherwise. Hell, as a Capital A Atheist in this largely Christian nation, I feel like a minority plenty of the time…
I could imagine SGM for sex and gender minorities.
Surprised I didn’t catch that, as that was the word I was publicly called out for using some 12-15 years ago. These days, my guard goes up if I hear someone say they have to orient themself… I figure I can never be too safe, since the standard seems to be avoiding someone getting hurt through their ignorance (i.e. niggardly.)
Read a terribly sad article in the Atlantic about equity language. But I oughtn’t expand my narrow OP.
I’m pretty sure it used to but word usage has shifted.
I think it’s okay to use LGBT+ commonly, and bigger acronyms in LGBT+ specific spaces. I think using LGBTQIA+ all the time would confuse the straights.
Back in the '60s, around when Stonewall kicked off the modern gay rights movement, “gay” was a synonym for “homosexual.” This usage still hangs around in, for example, the phrase “gay rights,” and it wouldn’t be considered unusual for a lesbian to describe herself as gay. One of the problems with the early gay rights movement, however, was that it tended to hyper-focus on issues specific to gay men. particularly when the AIDS crisis hit. A lot of gay men at the time were pretty misogynist, and a lot of lesbians didn’t feel welcome in the movement. To counter this, people started talking specifically about gay and lesbian rights, to indicate that they were equally open to the needs and concerns of gay women. The same thing happened in later years with bisexual people and trans people, which led to the current standard “LGBT” acronym.
The same dynamic continues to play out with other groups, but as noted, the acronym starts getting unwieldy after a point. LGBTQ or LGBT+ are attempts at creating a more usable umbrella term, but that sort of undercuts the point of specifically noting which identities are being recognized. If an asexual person is wondering if they’ll be welcomed in a queer space, LGBTQIA, while awkward, does specifically let them know that they’re included, while LGBT+ is ambiguous.
In casual usage, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone actually say, “LGBTQIA” as a part of speech. Most people just use “LGBT,” “queer,” or even “gay.” It’s mostly used in formal announcements, advertising, or academia. The odds of anyone giving you static for not using the full acronym are pretty minimal. The exception, as @Chingon noted above, is that some anti-trans groups have started using “LGB” as a dog whistle. That’s a bit insider baseball, though - it’s not a distinction I’d expect someone to know about unless they’re particularly invested in following gay rights dialogues.
Yeah, you don’t really hear “sexual orientation” that much any more - “sexuality” is the more common term. I’m not sure if that’s specifically because of concerns over the etymology of “orient,” but if you’re at the level of language sensitivity that you’re promoting MOGII as an alternate acronym to LGBT, I think pointing out the issue with orientalism is a valid criticism.
Plus, it sounds like something you need to avoid getting wet, or feeding after midnight.
I’m mostly hearing “queer” in casual speach. But my queer friends are mostly younger. There are some older gay men who have told me they find “queer” hurtful.
I agree that the long acronyms are mostly spelled, and in speech, “queer” or just “gay” are more common. I’m planning to go to a gay square dance convention this summer. That’s what everyone calls it. But the umbrella group that sponsors it uses a lot more letters in describing their purpose.
Yeah, queer is my preferred term, as well. I’m middle aged, but still young enough that growing up, “queer” was an archaism - something they used to use back in the '30s, but everyone had since moved on to more modern slurs. The only people I heard using it in a modern context were gay rights orgs who were reclaiming it, so it never had a visceral association with bigotry for me.
Speaking of “gay” as a generic word… I saw a young adult today wearing a shirt that said, “sounds gay… I’m in!” When i first met them they identified as female and were interested in men. They now identify as non-binary and…i don’t actually know their current sexual orientation. Maybe that shirt was meant to tell me something. But they certainly aren’t a man interested in men.