LGB Alliance: 'Dont Call Me Queer' & Separate LGB and TQ+

[SoupDragonsFriend]

The LGB Alliance has just posted a short film on Youtube, launching their 'Don't Call Me Queer' report and, in parallel, are launching their campaign to separate LGB and TQ+ in law and policymaking. Links and info are here: https://lgballiance.org.uk/dont-call-me-queer/

I think I said that I was one of them. Not sure if you think you're telling me something I don't know, or if you think that counters anything in my post.

So it can be gay men, lesbian women, bisexual people, heterosexuals, trans people, including heterosexual transvestites, and people who are exploring their sexuality?

There aren't any parameters. And you can't actually give me a definition other than Q for questioning? But that's not the same as queer, is it?

You seemed.to not understand why LGBA didn't want the word 'queer ' used to refer to them and are asking for it not to be included in official terminology?

In terms of queer theory it's anything that subverts or undermines 'heteronormativity'. Any kind of sex other than het sex, I suppose, which includes paraphilias etc too.

The best explanation I can see is that it describes people who don't want to define their relationships based on biological sex, even though that is exactly what they are based on.

Because it interferes with the gender ideology mangling of definitions.

Eg, When a woman is having a relationship with a man who identifies non-binary, it has to be queer, because it can't be heterosexual, as he's non-binary.

Yes, that's queer theory.

Is that the same as describing yourself as queer, though?

Yes, I suppose 'queer' can include het sex too. So any sexuality that is positioned as oppositional or transgressive?

I think it depends who one asks.

🤣

People appear to want to call themselves queer in order to obscure that sexual orientation is based on biological sex.

Which is all on a par with gender ideology, of course. And some people are clearly feeling a bit left out. For the moment, anyway, I see that all changing in the not too distant.

https://www.gaytimes.co.uk/life/jameela-jamil-further-clarifies-sexuality-i-fancy-everyone/

Clarity?

Oh okay. So it also means someone who fancies everyone.

Got it.

I'll leave you to your conversation. I'm sure the LGB Alliance will reach who they want to reach. Whether disingenuous framing about those who use queer is going to do anything to assist those who are homosexual or bisexual in a landscape where everyone is shouting groomer at us and Kelly J Keen is celebrating lesbians losing parental rights remains to be seen. But I guess there'll be a handful of events where the riff-raff who use the wrong words can be kept out, oh the irony.
Go well, as they say.

I was at secondary school two decades ago. It was a nasty homophobic environment all round. But whilst "gay" could at least in principle be a neutral descriptor, "queer" was only ever an insult.

Calling Jameela Jamil riff-raff!

What a classist thing to say.

Queer appears to be just 'spicy straight' in the few times I've seen it used sincerely as a self-descriptor. Anyone homosexual in my circles simply says 'gay.' However, that is anecdotal and I would be interested to see what a wider survey would come up with.

The majority of the founders of the LGB Alliance were the original founders of Stonewall, they've always gone against the grain but have always been very clear in their aims.

Some people here are taking exception at LGB Alliance because it's still going against the grain and very much focused on gay rights. Whereas Stonewall now focus on trans and queer rights (which both really revolve around heterosexual people).

LGB Alliance is what Stonewall used to be.

Just to give me UK mumsnetters a head's up. "Gay Bashing" was and is frequently used in the USA. And yes, as tiresome as it was, 14 year old boys went around claiming anything they thought was lame, as being just so gay. However, while we were going out in the company of several friends (around the same time) that was NOT was what shouted at us, nor why we sometimes ran for it. Generally here it was being called a cigarette, but there that would be slightly less likely. Oh and yeah, "bull dyke" was all the rage.

So long as the TQ+ hold to the notion that I am not same-sex attracted, but same-gender (how can it be the same when it's a damn spectrum?) attracted, we are at an impasse. How we can talk about mutual respect when I'm being told, once again, that I am an awful person for not considering men as date worthy options is beyond me.

Considering the community pressure to conform, it doesn't surprise me in the least if those LGB people still there shy away from labels such as gay, or lesbian.

I was genuinely hoping you were going to give an explanation of what you mean by 'queer'.

It's the same old story, this expansion of a categorisation to include more people.

"Woman" has been expanded to mean anyone that identifies as a woman (even if you are not female).
"Queer" has been expanded to mean anyone that identifies as "Queer" (even if you do not experience same-sex attraction).

And the only reason people want to identify as either of those groups when they are not, is to gain certain advantages (whether winning medals in women's sport or getting yourself to be a diversity hire by being "queer" etc).

And unfortunately we live in a world where language does seem to affect reality.

This is exactly the queer theory project;
to blur and remove all boundaries and societal norms
I have no idea why the elites are in thrall to this dangerous nonsense as it's removing women's rights, destroyed my lesbian community and ruining children's lives.

I loathe Queer theory and the word with a passion.

It's the same old story, this expansion of a categorisation to include more people.

And repeatedly we've seen a pattern:

The category is selected for its attraction (labelled 'woman' for example) and/or it's power
It is captured and refocused away from its original intents to provide a vehicle to further the TQ+ agenda, using the original purpose, image and population as tools and PR support to this affect and exploiting the public history of sympathy for it
The refocusing involves changing the core concepts and language to better fit the TQ+ agenda and members without conscience and regardless of damage done to the population the resource was created by and for
The category is expanded as widely as possible for power and weight, and to enable as much TQ+ use as possible
The original core purpose of the resource is entirely lost
The original members (and often founders) of the resource are bounced out, and excluded, and often derided and disempowered by the new TQ+ owned resource, who will claim that they are wrong/minority/old and will die soon/other mildly sociopathic and infantile bullshit.

See: Womanhood. The Green Party. Stonewall. yada yada yada.

We have women bounced out of women's resources so that men can be women. We have homosexuals bounced out of LGB even as a phrase so that men can be women.

The TQ+ agenda is a highly destructive one, and that pattern consistently demonstrates a lack of capacity to care about anyone or anything but its own immediate wants.

Totally agree I see the same with the WI and Guides