Lesbian Gay Bisexual AND TRANSGENDER

Rev Hellfire

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Depends what is meant by gender variant, if we are talking about drag then clearly most of the LGB venues would be

I'll have to admit I don't get this.
Surely the LGB community are not defined by their venues, to me it seems an attitude which only reinforces sterotypes.

Aard

The loud minority.

Nevyn

Yes some people who are lgb are gender queer as well.
How much varies and it's not just the effeminate men and butch women, and no it's not just the 'loud' ones.

Then again I think how gender is defines and how femininity and masculinity are 'defined' in our culture to be daft. Sexuality and gender is not a binary as some people seem to think.

I do think that there is an increase of homo-normative attitudes is not a good thing.

Rev Hellfire

Thaedydal wrote: »

I do think that there is an increase of homo-normative attitudes is not a good thing.

Que?

Nevyn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heteronormativity#Homonormativity

Homonormativity

Homonormativity is the assimilation of heteronormative ideals and constructs into LGBTQ culture and individual identity. Homonormativity upholds neoliberalism rather than critiquing monogamy, procreation and binary gender roles as heterosexist and racist.[24] Homonormativity fragments LGBTQ communities into hierarchies of worthiness. LGBTQ people that come the closest to mimicking heteronormative standards of gender identity are deemed most worthy of receiving rights. LGBTQ individuals at the bottom of the hierarchy (transsexuals, transvestites, intersex, bisexuals, non-gender identified) are seen as an impediment to this elite class of homonormative individuals receiving their rights.

Rev Hellfire

tbh I had looked at that when I saw your first post, reads like greek.
Whats it in laymans terms.

Nevyn

The more 'normal' a gay person is, that is the more they conform to hertosexual behaviour including heterosexual gender sterotypes the more acceptble they are.

Those who are not as acceptable who are more 'queer' are looked down on as making life harder on themselves and others with thier not normal behaviour.

Rev Hellfire

That’s quite interesting.

I would have thought this illustrated how far the lgb community has become accepted within society. Now the aberrant behaviour is seen as just that, just as it would be in society as whole.

And the extreme stereotypes used to illustrate the community are now seen by society as just that, extremes which don’t really represent the majority.

But I’m willing to admit that perhaps that’s just a view from the outside looking in.

Rick_

May I add something?

Why is it called "Lesbian & Gay & Bisexual"? That's such poor use of grammar.

Surely it should be "Lesbian, Gay & Bisexual"? Use a comma properly, not an '&' symbol! :rolleyes:

And why are gays listed AFTER lesbians? Are they more important/better than us?

Annasopra

Eternal Wonderer wrote: »

May I add something?

Why is it called "Lesbian & Gay & Bisexual"? That's such poor use of grammar.

Surely it should be "Lesbian, Gay & Bisexual"? Use a comma properly, not an '&' symbol! :rolleyes:

And why are gays listed AFTER lesbians? Are they more important/better than us?

Yes you can add something

Does the grammar matter - no?

Does it matter Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual or Bisexual, Lesbian and Gay etc? no - but it's more common - there used to be an acronym GLB but then this changed to GLBT but then over time it changed to LGBT as you can see from this graph

http://www.google.com/trends?q=glbt,+lgbt&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=1

Freiheit

By gender variant I mean crossing conventional gender boundaries, it's arguable that same sex relationships is a transgression of traditional oligarchical gender norms. Of course same sex relationships always existed but they were hidden to a large extent...and not part of the conditioned gender norms... I believe in a continuum and an overlap between t/q and lgb. That's just my humble fallible opinion. Not everyone will share this identification and that's ok too.:)

Rick_

My post was just a bit of a joke, I didn't mean anything serious about it...

Chuchoter

Aard wrote: »

LGBTQ isn't really standard. LGBT is. I wouldn't mind the latter, but the former is stretching it for me.

I know you were joking about the sexual deviants thing, but adding the 'Q' may cause upset, as queer is often considered insulting. Personally, I don't like it much.

I was joking and as far as I'm concerned I thought we'd reclaimed queer to some degree as not fitting in to any label...ie. I am genderqueer, I fit into neither male nor female genders. Someone who does not want to identify as any sexuality in particular is also queer. Its only offensive when its actually used as an insult, I'm pretty sure its a term now.

hare05

Quick question.

Why does this matter AT ALL?

Transgenderism and transsexuality have nothing to do with sexual preference, which I would argue is the basis of the Lesbian, Gay and Bi status.

Obviously someone in transition will be having questions about their own sexuality, but it would be a grave mistake to think of sexual preference as the basis of their transition, which is what would become common perception if transpeople had to share a forum with gay people.

I have nothing against either, I just think that both situations should be considered separately.

This is coming from one seriously gender-confused SoB. Who might also be bi. But I'll deal with the latter later.

Peace :cool:

Freiheit

You are right in a sense Bob.....it's just that lgb (whether T or Q are officialy included or not) venues do tend to have evolved into 'Gender Queer' and artistic venues as well. A lot more goes on in Outhouse than discussion of sexual preference, a whole series of minority groups tend to meet or be advertised and there is quite an artistic feel and prominent gender queer strand to the library........ I'm not arguing either way though, it's up to the powers that be to do as they feel.

Aard

Just saw this thread again and got thinking. How about ditching the whole LGB(T)(Q) thing altogether, and renaming it entirely? This forum mostly deals with things like homosexuality, bisexuality, and gender issues - why not something like "Gender & Sexual Orientation"? Yes it's long-winded, but it covers all bases, as well as "allowing" the discussion of other things relating to LGBT issues - maybe more "theoretical" topics. It also might discourage a "ghettoisation" of the gays on boards, as such a forum-title would not necessarily indicate that the posters there are gay etc.

It would probably mean a revamp of the charter, and an eventual change in moderation rules. However I do think that there would be benefit in changing the name to something less polarising than the loaded "LGBT".

What do people think?

Boston

LGB is easily identifiable as dealing with Lesbian Gay and Bisexual issues though. It's clearly a safe place designated for us. That's still needed for all the posters he come here for advice who aren't really looking for PI style judgement or ridicule.

If the title was changed to "Sexual orientation" then the scope of the forum would have to be widened to include Heterosexuality. I don't see topics relating to heterosexuality co-existing beside topics relating to other sexualities. This is based on my experience of the Sex and Sexuality forum.

There's a nice balance here at the moment. It's clear what the forum is about and the role it plays. Over time an ethos of what is acceptable and what isn't has emerged and a core group of people contribute to the forum.

Aard

Yes, I had wondered about Sex & Sexuality - I've never been a subscriber/mod so I wasn't sure.

Boston

Theres nothing stopping someone posting LGB topics on S&S, just that they'll be very much the minority with the vast majority of threads geared towards a heterosexual mindset. Which is the problem, we don't want to become the minority on our own forum.

Nevyn

Actually the most prolific male posters in the S&S forum aren't heterosexuals
And anyone is starting a thread PI/RI, and any crap would be stomped on.

Nevyn

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

That’s quite interesting.

I would have thought this illustrated how far the lgb community has become accepted within society. Now the aberrant behaviour is seen as just that, just as it would be in society as whole.

I disagree, society as a whole will now tolerate those who are gay but straight acting, I don't see that as acceptance.

Boston

Thaedydal wrote: »

Actually the most prolific male posters in the S&S forum aren't heterosexuals

They don't post anymore though

Rev Hellfire

Thaedydal wrote: »

I disagree, society as a whole will now tolerate those who are gay but straight acting, I don't see that as acceptance.

Is your point is basically people who act conventionally are accepted, but those who don't aren't ?

If thats the case then its no longer really a gay/straight issue.
Or perhaps you see "straight acting" as some else and if so what.

Tricity Bendix

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Is your point is basically people who act conventionally are accepted, but those who don't aren't ?

If thats the case then its no longer really a gay/straight issue.
Or perhaps you see "straight acting" as some else and if so what.

I agree with this.

The pressure to conform with societal norms is felt by all groups. If it has become the case that a "straight acting" homosexual is accepted for who he is then sexuality is no longer an issue. If the flaming queen gets hassled its because of his behaviour, not because of who he sleeps with.

Boston

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

I agree with this.

The pressure to conform with societal norms is felt by all groups. If it has become the case that a "straight acting" homosexual is accepted for who he is then sexuality is no longer an issue. If the flaming queen gets hassled its because of his behaviour, not because of who he sleeps with.

And what of the effeminate gay guy? Does he have it coming also?

Rev Hellfire

Boston wrote: »

And what of the effeminate gay guy? Does he have it coming also?

The point is the effeminate guy gets hassled because they're effeminate, not because they're gay. Or do you think it would be different for a effeminate straight guy ?

Nevyn

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

The point is the effeminate guy gets hassled because they're effeminate, not because they're gay. Or do you think it would be different for a effeminate straight guy ?

I think it is, I have seen people's reactions change to an effeminate guy when they see he is with his wife.

Being gay is still consider by the majority to be an aberration and they dislike being made aware of it, or as some but it having it shoved in their face :rolleyes:

Rev Hellfire

Thaedydal wrote: »

Being gay is still consider by the majority to be an aberration

By the majority? I would have thought it would be more accepted by now, but I'm willing to accept I might be wrong.

Boston

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

The point is the effeminate guy gets hassled because they're effeminate, not because they're gay. Or do you think it would be different for a effeminate straight guy ?

It's moronic regardless of sexuality.

Nevyn

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

By the majority? I would have thought it would be more accepted by now, but I'm willing to accept I might be wrong.

if that were the case there would not be a need for forums like this, or gay bars or gay sites and there would be full and proper marriage for people.