Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

boobs wrote

this is starting to sound like that idpol in-group / out-group talk now...

−1

TheMadCodger wrote

If everyone is like everyone else and no one has anything specific to them since we're all the same... why have any forums at all?

5

gamergirl OP wrote

people who share experiences talking about said experiences is not identity politics.

5

boobs wrote

of course it isn't.

you know what is? using terms like non-lgbt or non-white. that shit doesn't help anyone.

1

gamergirl OP wrote

how would you describe people that are not lgbt then?

4

boobs wrote

straight?

2

Rose wrote (edited )

That just covers the sexuality part.

3

boobs wrote

is there any other parts? does it also come with an economic, political and religious component or something? what am i missing here?

1

Rose wrote (edited )

Gender. Straight is usually just to reference sexuality. There is the word "cis" for that but I don't tend to see it used that often outside of specific spaces. Saying non-lgbt was just quicker. Admittedly I was just talking about sexuality there, but you can apply a similar idea to gender.

2

boobs wrote

pretty sure gender is understood to mean sexuality by everyone and their dog?

−1

Rose wrote

No? Sexuality is the gender you are attracted to. Gender is more of a sense of self thing.

2

boobs wrote

isn't sexuality a sense of self thing?

3

Rose wrote

I guess, but gender is a lot more about the self, rather than others.

2

Rose wrote (edited )

You did ask for something exclusive to lgbt people.

4

boobs wrote

where?

1

Rose wrote

is that really exclusive to lgbt?

3

boobs wrote

read that post again please.

i am not asking for something that is exclusive to lgbt people. i asked if people experiencing sexuality differently is exclusive to lgbt.

2

Rose wrote

Hmm. Misread the view on that then. But you did ask earlier:

shit that's specific to lgbt people.

which is what?

3

boobs wrote

having poor reading comprehension is regrettable indeed.

−2

Rose wrote

No need for personal attacks.

4