• Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I think one of the key points in fighting bigotry is to understand what it stems from. If we tell people that it’s not inclusive to say “LGBT”, what we’re doing is cutting off the people who are trying.

    But the now-removed top post was stating ‘I didn’t want to try, it’s too long’.

    Pandering to those who actually don’t want to try is not supportive, it is destructive.

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      Pandering to those who actually don’t want to try is not supportive, it is destructive.

      I get what you’re saying, I just disagree that that’s what this is.

      I believe that what you’re hearing from OP is “I don’t need to be fully inclusive, we don’t need to recognize people that fit into my worldview of what LGBT is”. I think that’s too harsh of an interpretation.

      I think the comment was more along the lines of “It’s a lot to remember all the letters, and forcing others to memorize and understand all the letters (least be accused of bigotry) is harmful to the cause”.

      And to reiterate my position, I don’t think the original comment was bigotry, nor do I think I’m bigoted by referring to the diverse group of people as LGBT or just queer. It’s about efficiency in communication for me, and I understand the argument about optics as well.