- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
I skimmed the article and noticed that women are more likely to identify as LGBTQ+, and I wonder if that’s related to the fact that more and more men are becoming conservative, and women are becoming more liberal.
I know I wouldn’t have thought about queerness and my identity if I was conservative, I probably would have thought something silly like “Oh, it’s perfectly normal to be romantically attracted to some men, you eventually grow out of it” instead of asking myself “Am I bi?”
I probably would have also associated my discomfort with my own masculinity with something weird, or over-compensated to account for it.
Nah, it’s just women are more likely to admit same sex attraction even if it’s occasional.
For men regardless of political orientation, most men wouldn’t act on it, and if they do they keep it a secret.
Women get less judgement for it.
So it makes sense men would be underrepresented in surveys.
I think it has to do with judgement mostly. I bet all those “straight” guys I’ve met off Grindr don’t identify as LGBT, even though they… did gay things.
not gay if you’re just pitching
also have to say no homo afterwards
not gay if you’re just pitching
Wow they really did retvrn to tradition - this is how the Romans approached it too!
Maybe that explains why they’re always thinking about the Roman Empire?
Ugh, I had finally managed to get Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon out of my head and now you’ve managed to put images of Pompeii’s bustling sex economy in my mind. 🙄
retvrn
I see what you did there
You see it in professional sport. Lots of openly lesbian women in pro soccer teams. Only one or two notably out of the closet gay active pro soccer players in the world.
I think that’s a selection, bias, though. I’d bet more gay women tend to play sports like soccer or softball than gay men go to play football or baseball.
“Oh, it’s perfectly normal to be romantically attracted to some men, you eventually grow out of it”
Why do you think so many conservatives believe it’s a choice? They think that everyone has to repress it like they do.
and supposedly they are everywhere in society taking over lol
The gay agenda™️
How many gays are out there? No one knows. 10000? 20000? 30000 since obama is in office
I wish we could stop focusing so much on the labels people give themselves. Pretty much any label you could give a person only describes a tiny fraction of what their experience of life is like and yet it feels like that kind of thing is the focus of most reporting on just about any subject as well as the primary way a lot of people identify themselves. I think it contributes significantly to the division we see in all aspects of society. We seem to have a natural tendency to use those labels in a negative way instead of as the helpful descriptor that they are largely intended to be. Let’s try to focus on the fact that we’re all humans for a while and maybe we’ll feel a bit better for it.
I feel where you’re coming from, and on the other side of that I think labels can do a lot of good. There’s a lot of relief and comfort that comes when someone who might otherwise have thought themself broken discovering that there are more out there like them. Finding a label that resonates can get them there. I’m speaking from firsthand experience.
Like you’re saying, it’s not that we’re labeling ourselves, but that we’re spreading awareness on multiple levels: LGBTQIA+ folks are sprinkled in our population. If someone goes their life without knowing any, or seeing any, they might feel alone and outcast.
I’m an Asexual male and I represent in my day to day with just a themed baseball hat.
Also an asexual male - thank you for representing, it really is appreciated
I identify as a hot mess and represent by flirting with almost anyone to bolster what’s left of my broken fragile ego.
Labels can be useful for quickly explaining an aspect about yourself. It’s what words are for! It’s when people are all judgy about it that problems arise.
Most queer people I know and have talked to agree with you. I certainly do, labels can be useful but as a society we clearly focus way too much on them.
Where queer people might take issue with your comment (I’m definitely lightly irked) is that cishet people never say “I wish we would stop focusing on labels” unless the discussion is about queer labels.
People will straight up say “omg we need to chill out about labels, we’re all the same” then turn around and say shit like “men are from Mars, women are from Venus” or “boys will be boys”.
I don’t think the same person is saying both of those things. Or at least saying and meaning it.
Where queer people might take issue with your comment (I’m definitely lightly irked) is that cishet people never say “I wish we would stop focusing on labels” unless the discussion is about queer labels.
That’s exactly what I’m saying though. Labels (for the purposes of the point I’m trying to make) aren’t generally helpful except as a generic indicator of the prevalence of a particular group in society. Even then they tend to get in the way of the discussion that those labels and percentages are trying to promote.
Any group trends towards latching on to their label in an unhelpful way. Often saying that anyone who isn’t making the advancement of the group described by their favorite label a priority in their life is an enemy of the cause and therefore is against them personally.
It doesn’t really matter what the label is. LGB and T are some common labels you see this happening with, from both angles I’ll add, but they are far from the only ones. You see it with large groups like countries and political parties all the way down to mundane stuff like being right handed or which band you prefer in some hyper-obscure music genre. It’s all the same mostly unnecessary categorization of people that generally serves no useful purpose beyond making one group of people feel superior to another. That just seems so pointless to me. It reminds me of hunter gatherers protecting their tribe by ensuring no outsiders are allowed in.
I will concede that there are instances in which in can be useful to speak in such terms but the vast majority of the time it seems archaic and shallow and needlessly exclusionary.
The queer version of “I don’t see color.”
I know you’re at least partially talking about labels in general, but since this is in reply to a poll about queer identities, I am taking your comment to be related to LGBTQ+ labels.
I don’t think most individuals with an LGBTQ+ identity think of themselves as only that identity. Race, class, religion, ability, and other dimensions of identity ultimately combine to create the whole person. In fact, most discourse surrounding identities involves some analysis of intersectionality, as coined by Kimberle Crenshaw. In essence, she illustrated how being both black and a woman brings different experiences and struggles than being a white woman or black man. As an extension, the queer identity a person has and the other identities a person has interact to inform their experiences in ways that are different than having any one of those identities alone.
If some people externally equate a queer person’s whole self and their queer identity, that isn’t the fault of the queer person. In fact, this is another reason why having a label (as inadequate as it might objectively be) can be useful. Queer people need those labels so they can maneuver in society to build coalition and obtain equal rights. If we squabbled over the differences between subjective experiences of queerness, our groups would be smaller and have less bargaining power.
I might be way off about what you meant in your statement, but i figured it was worth throwing this out here anyway!
I wasn’t referring exclusively to queer people with my comment but I get why it might have seemed that way. I do appreciate your perspective either way. It’s interesting to hear other people’s thoughts on a topic like this.
Are you familiar with erasure as a concept?
