• stevieb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, I don’t identify as queer and plenty of my friends don’t. One of my exes did and great for him but this just seems like the wrong argument. There likely just needs to be a technical, non-inflammatory term.

    I’m glad you like it though.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The most all-encompassing term I’ve seen is sexual minority. Basically non-cis or non-straight

        • trigonated@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I like it, even tho usually I include a “R” there for romantic minorities(eg people who might not be a sexual minority but are a romantic one) when discussing this with other people, but I guess it could be argued that they still fit into “sexual”.

          R or not, I like that it includes everyone without any identity being shoved into a letter or a “+” along with lots of others as if they’re an afterthought, not as important as the ones that get to show up as their own letters.