So now there is a K (for Kink) in the LGBTQIACHKP+

[AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth]

www.thegayuk.com/there-is-now-a-k-in-lgbtqqicapf2k/

And the commenters in this mag not too pleased about it

Why would people who don't want to have sex need to organise in any way?

I don't get it either. What human rights do they feel they are being denied? How would anyone actually know they were asexual unless they told people?

How about 'murderer', necrophiliac, cannibal? They are all just 'orientations' aren't they? And don't judge others for how they get off. If it brings boners or kills them - it's an identity and you can be proud and add those letters to your profile...

I think more young people are defining as asexual - as a reaction to hypersexualised, sadistic pornified culture. Young people who find it disgusting and unappealing assume they are asexual.
Keep it in - I reckon it protects people from coercion.

That's the thing, if you're a fetishist many other people may think you're weird, but what does that have to do with being gay? It takes a certain lack of understanding of why gay men and lesbians felt like they needed a movement in the first place and what they were fighting for to think that fetishes should be part of the same "umbrella". Randoms not wanting you to do your puppy play at the dog park/DDLG stuff on the swing set in the park where their kids play isn't really the same kind of problem as not being able to be with your partner in the hotel when they're dying of AIDS in either kind or scale.

Hotel=hospital, though probably not hotel either I suppose.

Oh, for heaven's sake. This is getting ridiculous.

Hairbod-
Since religion has been largely removed from society things will continue to go downhill- all types of things will now creep in because there's nothing to stop it.
i would say that religion promotes sex in a monogamous respectful relationship- but this has been thrown out in favour of a sexual free for all- with new additions all the time being normalised and celebrated- polyamorous, trans, kink- what next?
These are not conducive to human flourishing. They harm society, look at the harms of porn, trans agenda on children etc, they are harmful, but hey anything goes now.

Religion has been replaced with hednonism- if it feels good, why not and with this attitude, -that individualistic pleasure is the most important thing, - where do you think we're heading?

Guardianlions- your post sums it up, why not add these things and celebrate them too... where is this going to stop now?
Where's the protection..

True. If we could all just be properly religious, like King Solomon or Newt Gingrich, there would be none of this newfangled modern messing around with more than one partner.

Yes we'll see how it's going, how wonderful all this sexuality without restraint is going...

Aah yes those monogamous biblical kings....

Interesting how neatly religious homophobia dovetails with the "we're all deviants together, but like, in a cool way" attitude that's led to the ever expanding acronym.

And then let's protect "kink" as a sexual orientation and promote it, teach it in schools.
yes christianity was so bad, how dare a religion try and impose some sort of morality- this way is much better

Angrykittens-
What are you implying- that religion caused or is responsible for this? Do you actually think that?

The people "expanding" the acronym do seem to agree with you that being gay is a form of sexual deviancy, though I doubt they agree with you about much else. Your way of seeing the world has most likely had some impact on their attitude to homosexuality, given how often you scratch a super mega queer identified sex-positive blah blah person and find a conservative upbringing.

I think the lgbtq ++ movement is now more about groups seizing the moment of acceptance, as was said piggy backing", to push through all forms of sexuality in an attempt to normalise them and cause society to accept them, even to celebrate them.

There's definitely some piggy backing happening too, but a person who thinks that being gay is in the same category of thing as wanting to dress up as a pony and have someone lead you around with a bit in your mouth has some rather odd ideas about what being gay is. As the responses to the original article demonstrate, gay people generally don't appreciate their orientation being framed as a fetish or having a category that's been useful for them in that it conveys actual meaning expanded to mean "anyone who has sex in any way other than in the missionary position in the dark with the lights out with someone they're married to, or who's OK with people who have sex in ways other than that".

At this rate I'm not sure I know anyone who doesn't belong in the expanded acronym. Who's left? And thus it becomes useful in terms of conveying meaning or as a framework for political organizing.

Useless, rather.

I would be interested to know, since people find religion so unacceptable-
Do you think that we should accept all forms of sexuality?
Porn ok? Sex robots? All forms of sexual fetish?
If not, why not, and what, if any control should society have to protect them from the harmful consequences?
I would suggest in the the ever accepting, "tolerant" society we live in... there is now no protection.. society is becoming increasingly vulnerable to the damages. There is nothing that can be done to stop it, if you object your a bigot or a prude.

Tbh I wish people would stfu about what they do or don’t do in bed. Why do we need to know? And yes it’s absolutely ridiculous to add K to LGB. It makes a mockery of people who actually face oppression and discrimination. Just straight people (and I am straight) trying to be edgy 🤮

I think the lgbtq ++ movement is now more about groups seizing the moment of acceptance

I disagree. For me, it's about identity politics, the atomisation of society and the potential for crying 'victim', eg transideology.

Tbh I wish people would stfu about what they do or don’t do in bed.

I agree. Provided it's safe, sane and consensual, I don't want to know. What I do in bed is nobody else's business but my own and I don't want to know about what other people do.

I don't mind the intent of being more inclusive and tolerant of fellow human beings who previously may have felt peripheral. I worry more about the divisions and internecine conflict between various minorities.

The "thin end of the wedge" argument was used throughout time by the right wing whenever a minority was given rights and recognition ...."Whatever next? Peadophiles?".

It is interesting how many on the liberal left seem to be using the same argument.

If one minority deserves recognition - why not another?

Schrodingers-
Yes I agree with that also,
I think there is some political ideology behind this-
It's not the first time either- i.e. promotion of "free love" in Russia to advance a political ideology. It's ultimately leading to exploitation. Although I feel it's a political movement I also think people, or the trans activists are going to jump on the back of it without realising