▲ 677 ▼ Canada advises LGBTQ2 travellers to be aware of U.S. state laws (globalnews.ca) submitted 2 years ago by DoctorTYVM@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world 210 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] iopq@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) The most all-encompassing term I've seen is sexual minority. Basically non-cis or non-straight permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Ryantific_theory@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) There's some argument over adopting the term GSM (Gender and Sexual Minorities) as an inoffensive general term. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] trigonated@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ryantific_theory@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) There's some argument over adopting the term GSM (Gender and Sexual Minorities) as an inoffensive general term. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] trigonated@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] trigonated@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent