Are LGBT people too strict about terminology sometimes?

I think some can be, but I do understand why it is important to them. Especially when it comes to pronouns and what not.

 

Once I posted a thread back in December and I showed the picture of the text and my friend though pansexual meant you would have sex with anything and she referred to the guy having sex with a lambs shit. Then I told her what it really meant and she's like ohhh lol.

 

Yeah I would have to agree that there are a lot of LGBT people who police the community. The biggest thing I get confused about is depending where you grow up, the meanings of the terms change. The time frame changes it also, like from the 30's to now for instance. There is no fast and hard rules about it, so it's best to just ask.

 

Yes, definitely. In the words of the great gay actor Nathan Lane:

"I'm one of those old-fashioned homosexuals, not one of the newfangled ones who are born joining parades."

 

It means you have sex with pans.

 

I inform people about correct label usage, but I don't really police them. I can't expect everyone to understand so I don't bother to correct people who I am not out to.

 

I think I would only be strict about such things only when it is hindering communication. I would have a really hard time to help a person who call themselves gay but is actually transgender, due to misconception of sex and gender, for example. And it would be helpful for both of us if we have a common set of words to talk about, preferably the set that a large number of people already use, so everyone else can understand too.

Otherwise, I don't really mind how a person define themselves, it is not my place to police how they want to be. And I would prefer people not doing that to me either.

 

Lol no.

 

Since practically everyone perfectly understands mine, I don't find myself having problems with terminology, but I can't criticise those who are frustrated by never being understood.

People with less common sexualities shouldn't be expected to be walking queer information and resource centres - it's not as hard to educate yourself as it is to educate every second person you come across. I can't blame them for losing patience from time to time; it's too much to expect people to actively make their own lives into shining examples of calm advocacy when they just want to live normally, with acceptance and understanding.

 

I wouldn't say lgbt people are too strict about terminology. Its to avoid confusion and misconceptions. I'm aware of every term along the lgbtq+ spectrum and I can fully explain it. If someone does get it wrong out of confusion then I'll kindly correct them. If they're being rude I'll still have the same courtesy like with the first time and patiently explain it to them, telling them that they're being rude. Afterwards, if that person still is using the term incorrectly I'll just let them be. I've tried to explain it to them and that's all that matters.

 

Whaaaaaaaaaatttttttt?

 

Lol no, it means someone that is sexually and romantically attracted to all genders.

Oh haha, I get it now

---------- Post added 3rd Apr 2015 at 08:29 AM ----------

It's the heterosexual misconception about pansexuality.

 

Now you're gonna tell me bisexuals don't have sex with bicycles. :icon_roll

 

You're right Austin they don't :eusa_clap

 

Yes, mostly because there is a range of terms people refer to themselves as and a range of opinions on those terms, so it's impossible for anyone to be everyone's idea of 'correct'.

If there's something said that's fairly commonly not welcome in a certain LGBTQIA+ group, I'll speak up and explain, "[insert group here] often don't like being referred to like that because..." But I'll let it slip if it's a quick conversation. If a person is more aware of LGBTQIA+ terminology or wants to be, I'll be slightly nitpickier but probably not as much as I am with my own language.

EX: "Queer". I won't refer to the whole community as queer, ever. If it's a quick conversation, I let it slip. If I know the person attempts to be knowledgeable on LGBTQIA+ terminology, I'll explain how it's a slur.

But if someone says lesbianism is "attraction to vaginas", I will explain how that's inaccurate, to anyone.

 

I can agree with this. I do use the queer community sometimes to make it easier, but I don't like how It's used sometimes by the community. It's mostly negative, and a lot of people assume multisexuality when It's used as well.

As for this though, this statement absolutely can be true, although not all lesbians feel that way. Some lesbians are attracted to women regardless of genitals, others are only attracted to vaginas regardless of gender, and some are only attracted to people who both identify as a woman and also have a vagina. It's important to not generalize sexuality and allow everyone to have their own feelings and experiences; exclusive attraction to female gender identity and exclusive attraction to female biological sex (genitals) are both valid forms of lesbian identity.

 

I only correct them in a quiet voice that they cannot hear.

 

all of those are valid sexualities, but lesbian-identifying women who are attracted to all genders make me hesitate, because there are already communities and discourse for bisexuals. bisexuality/polysexuality does not mean you have to be attracted to all types of genitals, i think this is a common misconception. i suppose if she was not intent on claiming that women with penises cannot be lesbians, it would be better. i'm already lax when it comes to bisexual women preferring women calling themselves lesbians, i guess. she should at least understand that she is not affected by stigma against exclusive attraction to women, and so she should know her place in lesbian discussions. i haven't met a lesbian who describes her sexuality that way who wasn't transphobic, so that's part of my hesitation.

but most people i know use "women" and "people with vaginas" interchangeably, and that is what i was referring to in my post. lesbians who do that clearly have cissexist issues to work through.

---------- Post added 4th Apr 2015 at 06:51 PM ----------

The worst is when you explain that people have been called the slur during homophobic/transphobic bullying and they don't care. "But it's a term for everyone now! It's been fully reclaimed!" No it hasn't.

---------- Post added 4th Apr 2015 at 06:54 PM ----------

Oh, here's one time I will never correct people: the acronym. Reading about the upsides/downsides, I have chosen to use LGBT or LGBTQIA+, but that's all I'll do about the acronym.

But there are people who will no longer take anything you say about orientation/gender seriously if you use an acronym they don't like.

 

Oh, I definitely agree. I absolutely think that women with penises are real women and real lesbians, and people who do confuse women = vagina are definitely cissexist and transphobic. And I definitely think that lesbians dating trans men is problematic as well.

So it really depends on how you describe your sexuality. I know I personally prefer women with vaginas (this includes post-op trans women too) but saying this doesn't mean I don't think that having a penis makes you less woman or lesbian. It's more of a sexual compatibility issue, and to be fair, I also extend this to cis women, as I will reject them if they are interested in dildos and strap-ons. Just not something that interests me sexually either way.

However, I think people who call pre-op trans women "men" or say that lesbians who date them are less lesbian or "gold star" (ugh hate that term) are so gross and bigoted. Definitely agree there!!

 

I would correct someone, but I wouldn't reprimand them unless they said it malice tone, then I would take issue. I personally try to keep out of it, the reason being is that I don't know the complete, and very extensive terminology that is used now of days.