The Q thread

[Estro Felino]

But this isn't about society, anymore. It's all about the individual. The individual is now SO important that every nuance of one's sexuality and/or confusion must have big important sounding labels and titles attached, that everyone else must know and use, so we can all recognize and acknowledge the humongous importance of our individual sexual proclivities. God forbid the world NOT KNOW how we feel about our genitals, or about each other's genitals, or what we'd like to do or not do with them.

Right?

I chose the political forum for this thread because I think that juridically, the State has the duty to protect the psychological welfare of a society.
But the LGBT is not something concerning the private sphere. Because the State is not interested in what happens in the privacy of their own citizens' bedroom.
LGBT is an acronym used to indicate people who have minoritarian social interactions...which distinguishes them from the majority.

In my languages nobody has ever used the term queer.
Such word has no equivalent in my language. We say either gay or bisessuale (often bisex).

So you will never find LGBTQ in official documents dealing with this matter. Just LGBT.

 

[Estro Felino]

I thought this was going to be about another use of the letter "Q"

This article says:

The Q can stand for “questioning” -- as in still exploring one’s sexuality -- or “queer,” or sometimes both.

Queer: Once considered a demeaning slur for being gay, “queer” is being reclaimed by some as a self-affirming umbrella term, especially among those who consider other labels restrictive. Some still believe it’s a homophobic slur, so it’s always best to ask or wait for the person whom you’re speaking with to use it.

But that's what bisexuals are. Most of them are questioning about their own sexual preferences.
They do not have sex with both gender simultaneously...

 

[Estro Felino]

You seem to be assuming that there are just two genders - female and male. But if there are more than two, e.g. those who identify as third gender, there can be those who are attracted to not only those who identify as women and men but also those who identify as third gender. Bisexual wouldn't work here but a term like polysexual or pansexual might. Queer is a useful term to capture these and other sexualities.

This is very confusing.
I think the term bisexuals can sum up these shades perfectly.
Pardon my bluntness, but the term bisexual was invented to indicate people who don't mind either male or female genitalia.
I don't see why there has to be a new term.

 

[VoidCat]

But that's what bisexuals are. Most of them are questioning about their own sexual preferences.
They do not have sex with both gender simultaneously...

Ummmm...bisexual is attracted to both men and women. Not who they are screwing...it refers to attraction the mind not behavior. They ain't questioning anything

 

[Estro Felino]

Ummmm...bisexual is attracted to both men and women. Not who they are screwing...it refers to attraction the mind not behavior. They ain't questioning anything

I don't think that bisexuals fall in love with men and women simultaneously.
They fall in love with one person at a time.

 

[VoidCat]

I don't think that bisexuals fall in love with men and women simultaneously.
They fall in love with a person one at a time.

I didn't say they can be attracted to both at the same time tho I guess many can. It just means they able to be sexually attracted to more then one gender. That's not questioning anything. They know they could be attracted to either.

Also some bisexuals are not biromantic. So bisexuality only refers to sexual attraction not romantic attraction. Tho some bi folk are both biromantic and bisexual so they dont clarify that they just use the term bisexual which is fine.

 

[Goldemar]

This is very confusing.
I think the term bisexuals can sum up these shades perfectly.
Pardon my bluntness, but the term bisexual was invented to indicate people who don't mind either male or female genitalia.
I don't see why there has to be a new term.

Okay, so what about people who are intersex, having characteristics of both female and male genitalia? If I am sexually attracted to those who have female genitalia, those who have male genitalia, and those who are intersex, again, bisexual doesn't seem to work.

 

[Estro Felino]

Okay, so what about people who are intersex, having characteristics of both female and male genitalia? If I am sexually attracted to those who have female genitalia, those who have male genitalia, and those who are intersex, again, bisexual doesn't seem to work.

It does work because there is no third genitalia

 

[Goldemar]

It does work because there is no third genitalia

If intersex is in between female and male, then it suggests there are more than the two 'standard' sets of genitalia.

 

[VoidCat]

If intersex is in between female and male, then it suggests there are more than the two 'standard' sets of genitalia.

There is it's called ambiguous genitalia but that dont matter no body sees the genitals of the folk they attracted to. Which is why i confuse "straight" guys as a nonbinary person I cause people to question if im male or female and not know. Ive had folk attracted to me. And not know how to label themselves afterward. Pansexual makes sense to me as a term cuz some folk are attracted to people regardless of gender identity and parts have nothing to do with it. As the way many pan folk put it to me they are often genderblind it's hearts not parts the personality that turns them on not what they got

 

[Goldemar]

There is it's called ambiguous genitalia but that dont matter no body sees the genitals of the folk they attracted to. Which is why i confuse "straight" guys as a nonbinary person I cause people to question if im male or female and not know. Ive had folk attracted to me. And not know how to label themselves afterward. Pansexual makes sense to me as a term cuz some folk are attracted to people regardless of gender identity and parts have nothing to do with it. As the way many pan folk put it to me they are often genderblind it's hearts not parts sometimes personality that turns them on not what they got

I agree, though I think physical attraction is important too and when it comes down to any sexual act, if I am attracted sexually to those with male bits, those with female bits and those in between, that is arguably a challenge to those who think bisexual is the only alternative to 'straight' and gay based on there being only two sets of genitalia.

 

[Estro Felino]

I agree, though I think physical attraction is important too and when it comes down to any sexual act, if I am attracted sexually to those with male bits, those with female bits and those in between, that is arguably a challenge to those who think bisexual is the only alternative to 'straight' and gay based on there being only two sets of genitalia.

I still can't understand the difference between bisexual and queer.

 

[PureX]

I chose the political forum for this thread because I think that juridically, the State has the duty to protect the psychological welfare of a society.
But the LGBT is not something concerning the private sphere. Because the State is not interested in what happens in the privacy of their own citizens' bedroom.
LGBT is an acronym used to indicate people who have minoritarian social interactions...which distinguishes them from the majority.

In my languages nobody has ever used the term queer.
Such word has no equivalent in my language. We say either gay or bisessuale (often bisex).

So you will never find LGBTQ in official documents dealing with this matter. Just LGBT.

I find it strange that announcing ones sexual specifics has become such a thing to do, when just a very short time ago in the U.S. we were struggling to keep the state and the public OUT of our personal sexual business. Yet suddenly, the very people who were so recently fighting for their right to privacy are now intent on exposing themselves, in the greatest detail, to the world.

It seems like one of those social "pendulum swings" people often talk about. Or, and I think this is a significant part of it, sexual orientation has become an identity marker for a lot of people. Particularly young people for whom these identity markers tend to be important.

When I was a teenager we use to be identified with the music we listened to. One of the first questions out of a teens mouth when meeting another teen would be "what kind of music do you like?" Who we were as a member of the 'teen tribe' was being signaled to the rest of the tribe by what bands we listened to. And I honestly think a similar phenomena is happening among young people these days with their chosen sexual orientation.

I'm not saying it's good or bad because it's almost certainly a bit of both. I'm just saying that I see a lot of similarities between this obsession to declare one's sexual orientation, in great detail, among the young, and when my generation used to declare their musical proclivities (also often in great detail) because it identified and signaled who we thought we were as (newly forming and as yet unsure) people.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

This is very confusing.
I think the term bisexuals can sum up these shades perfectly.
Pardon my bluntness, but the term bisexual was invented to indicate people who don't mind either male or female genitalia.
I don't see why there has to be a new term.

I consider myself pansexual because I am more interested in the person rather than genitalia. In fact, I am often attracted to a wide variety of folks, from masculine, feminine, and various mixes or lack of these binary terms. Bisexual doesn't make sense for me, because I would be attracted to someone with various organizations of biological, psychological, and sociological features. ;-)

 

[Goldemar]

I still can't understand the difference between bisexual and queer.

So I was giving an example of a person who might identify as queer based on their sexual attraction to people with female bits, people with male bits and people whose bits fall in between. In this example, there are three categories of sexual bits not two. So bisexual doesn't cut it for such a person. But this scenario is just one scenario, revolving around sexual attraction to others based on what bits they possess (since that's what you chose to focus on). In reality, people might identify as queer because they recognise that gender identity exists on a spectrum with many genders possible and they might be attracted to any number of people on that spectrum. Hence polysexuality or pansexuality might be better terms than bisexuality premised as the latter is on just two genders. But the term queer isn't necessarily about sexual orientation. It can also be about one's gender identity. It's a catch-all term for all who don't identify as one of the alternatives whether in terms of sexual orientation or gender identity.

 

[Goldemar]

I don't think that bisexuals fall in love with men and women simultaneously.
They fall in love with one person at a time.

People can fall in love/be in love with more than one person at the same time..

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I find it strange that announcing ones sexual specifics has become such a thing to do, when just a very short time ago in the U.S. we were struggling to keep the state and the public OUT of our personal sexual business. Yet suddenly, the very people who were so recently fighting for their right to privacy are now intent on exposing themselves, in the greatest detail, to the world.

It seems like one of those social "pendulum swings" people often talk about. Or, and I think this is a significant part of it, sexual orientation has become an identity marker for a lot of people. Particularly young people for whom these identity markers tend to be important.

When I was a teenager we use to be identified with the music we listened to. One of the first questions out of a teens mouth when meeting another teen would be "what kind of music do you like? Who we were as a member of the 'teen tribe' was being signaled to the rest of the tribe by what bands we listened to. And I honestly think a similar phenomena is happening among young people these days with their chosen sexual orientation.

I'm not saying it's good or bad because it's almost certainly a bit of both. I'm just saying that I see a lot of similarities between this obsession to declare one's sexual orientation, in great detail among the young, and when my generation used to declare their musical proclivities (also often in great detail) because it identified and signaled who we thought we were as (newly forming and as yet unsure) people.

I saw a lot of truth in this post. I'd never really compared it to music, but as a child of the nineties I also could see what you meant. It was an explicit and communicated part of our identity, and spoke (somewhat) to our relationship with 'normal' society.

I have a 14 year old daughter, who is a little alternative in several ways. My wife thinks shes shy, but I actually think she's legitimately introverted. But sexual identity is a very important concept in her quite diverse friendship group.

Being straight is completely acceptable, but it somewhat appears to be the vanilla of flavours. One of her friends has transitioned from bisexual to pansexual...which to my way of reading means she is probably crushing on someone who is non-binary. (This is largely a very 'nice' group of kids, somewhat endearingly naive...which won't last, of course)

Long story short, I don't try to keep up too much. I liked when I could play my music around my parents, but I sure as heck didn't want them coming to concerts with me.

I just keep pushing the message that I'll be judging all her friends based on how they treat her and each other, and not at all by which 'boy/girl/non-binary/anime character/inanimate object' they are attracted to. Meh, okay, so the last one would be a stretch for me. I might judge a little on that. I figure I'm doing okay for an old guy though.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But this isn't about society, anymore. It's all about the individual. The individual is now SO important that every nuance of one's sexuality and/or confusion must have big important sounding labels and titles attached, that everyone else must know and use, so we can all recognize and acknowledge the humongous importance of our individual sexual proclivities. God forbid the world NOT KNOW how we feel about our genitals, or about each other's genitals, or what we'd like to do or not do with them.

Right?

I actually agree with you.
Personally I get a bit of a 70s fundamentalist irrational feminist vibe from this whole movement.
At bottom a just cause, but its manifestation is just.... it's so in your face that it actually tends to accomplish the opposite of its goal.

I treat everybody the same. Man, woman, trans, alien,... I don't care.
But don't ask me to wear gloves when talking to a certain person because I might offend their personal sensitivities by using the word "mankind" instead of "humankind".

Personally, I get sick to the stomach about the whole woke nonsense.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I thought this was going to be about another use of the letter "Q"

This article says:

The Q can stand for “questioning” -- as in still exploring one’s sexuality -- or “queer,” or sometimes both.

Queer: Once considered a demeaning slur for being gay, “queer” is being reclaimed by some as a self-affirming umbrella term, especially among those who consider other labels restrictive. Some still believe it’s a homophobic slur, so it’s always best to ask or wait for the person whom you’re speaking with to use it.

I thought the thread was going to be about the web poster Q who keeps feeding Trumpians with over the top absurd conspiracy theories.

 

[PureX]

I actually agree with you.
Personally I get a bit of a 70s fundamentalist irrational feminist vibe from this whole movement.
At bottom a just cause, but its manifestation is just.... it's so in your face that it actually tends to accomplish the opposite of its goal.

I treat everybody the same. Man, woman, trans, alien,... I don't care.
But don't ask me to wear gloves when talking to a certain person because I might offend their personal sensitivities by using the word "mankind" instead of "humankind".

Personally, I get sick to the stomach about the whole woke nonsense.

No reason to get bothered by it. It's just humans being human. Especially the young, trying to assert themselves into the adult world. We were young once, too.

And as you say there is a good cause involved, which is why we need and should respect the idealism and energy of our young people. Even if they do tend to be a bit "in our face" about their latest cause celeb.