Jump to content

LGBTQ+ 6 -- It's a Rainbow of Flavors


Xray the Enforcer
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 12/22/2020 at 12:10 AM, HelenaExMachina said:

I’m trying to consume more LGBTQIA+ media at the moment, by which i mean both media produced by queer artists/actors/writers/producers etc. And media which gives the community a platform and tells their stories. Looking for any recommendations people may have - fiction or non-fiction, books, films, tv, podcasts, anything really. I have been having a lot of discussions lately with my therapist and i would like to rectify my ignorance of so much of LGBTQIA+ history and culture and i hope i’m not being intrusive asking for recommendations here. I can repost in the entertainment and/or lit threads if need be

In case you don't know them yet (they're decades old), I highly recommend "Fingersmith" and "Tipping the Velvet" by Sarah Waters for entertainment. The former in particular. (It was made into the movie "The handmaid's tale" a couple of ys ago.) There are also BBC adaptations for both. Author is queer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

If you’re still looking I stumbled upon a great Manga that I highly recommend about an enby working at a maid cafe in Japan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Me_for_Who_I_Am

On 12/21/2020 at 3:10 PM, HelenaExMachina said:

I’m trying to consume more LGBTQIA+ media at the moment, by which i mean both media produced by queer artists/actors/writers/producers etc. And media which gives the community a platform and tells their stories. Looking for any recommendations people may have - fiction or non-fiction, books, films, tv, podcasts, anything really. I have been having a lot of discussions lately with my therapist and i would like to rectify my ignorance of so much of LGBTQIA+ history and culture and i hope i’m not being intrusive asking for recommendations here. I can repost in the entertainment and/or lit threads if need be

It goes into depth on the various contemporary issues surrounding gender and sexuality in a really nuanced way.

Oh and it also briefly calls out the fetishization cis straight males do to transwomen, and girls in a really classy and brief way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Some good news: in the U.S., House Democrats introduced the Equality Act, a bill that guarantees protects for LGBTQ+ people in much the same way that Biden's Executive Order did, and that was affirmed in the SCOTUS case from last June. If passed, it'll basically cement those protections into law and will make it much harder to be subjected to the whims of whatever rando ends up in the Presidency or SCOTUS. The House votes on the bill next week, after which it will go to the Senate. Who knows what will happen there, but I would hope it would pass with a tie-breaker vote from Harris (if one cannot get a single R to vote for granting queer people some actual human rights protections). 

Edited by Xray the Enforcer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

The House votes on the bill next week, after which it will go to the Senate. Who knows what will happen there, but I would hope it would pass with a tie-breaker vote from Harris (if one cannot get a single R to vote for granting queer people some actual human rights protections). 

It is good news!  In 2019 it passed the House with 8 GOP votes but died in the Senate without even holding a vote.  It'll pass the House again, presumably, but I'm..very cynical of it reaching cloture.  Still, Schumer can at least force it to the floor now, so hopefully all 50 Dems and maybe a few GOP members will vote for cloture.  Regardless, it's imperative to keep pushing it in the legislative arena so one day, as you said, presidents are unable to axe it via unilateral action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gallup has done their first poll on LGBTQ self-identification in the US since 2017, and its got some interesting resulting. https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx

Overall 5.6% of adults identify as LGBTQ, up from 4.5% in 2017 (with another 7.6% answering "no opinion", up from 5%). That's a big jump in just 4 years, and it primarily comes from Gen Z; where 15.9% self-identify, compared to 9.1% of millennials, and 3.8% or less for every older age group.

And digging into the data, while all identifications jumped up among Gen Z compared to millennials (and millennials saw a jump among every identification compared to Gen X), the biggest driver by far is the number of people identifying as bisexual. 

What the study can't identify is whether this is because younger adults, particularly Gen Z, are more comfortable in stating their identifications or whether there is something affecting how younger adults identify. Regardless though, it seems like another indication that even if the courts attempt to rollback any rights, it at least won't last very long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Fez said:

Gallup has done their first poll on LGBTQ self-identification in the US since 2017, and its got some interesting resulting. https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx

Overall 5.6% of adults identify as LGBTQ, up from 4.5% in 2017 (with another 7.6% answering "no opinion", up from 5%). That's a big jump in just 4 years, and it primarily comes from Gen Z; where 15.9% self-identify, compared to 9.1% of millennials, and 3.8% or less for every older age group.

And digging into the data, while all identifications jumped up among Gen Z compared to millennials (and millennials saw a jump among every identification compared to Gen X), the biggest driver by far is the number of people identifying as bisexual. 

What the study can't identify is whether this is because younger adults, particularly Gen Z, are more comfortable in stating their identifications or whether there is something affecting how younger adults identify. Regardless though, it seems like another indication that even if the courts attempt to rollback any rights, it at least won't last very long.

I don't think this should be a surprise, and in particular I think it should have been expected that as prejudice against minority sexual orientations lessened that the number of people identifying as bisexual would substantially increase.

When I was in my 20s it seemed that the majority of men who identified as "bisexual" had at least 50% of their attractions to other men, usually more. It was also quite common for men who were "coming out" as gay to go through a phase where they were more comfortable labeling themselves as bisexual. This was common enough that a lot of gay men 40 years ago didn't believe bisexuality was "real" because they knew so many guys (often including themselves) who had eventually switched their self-identification to "gay" after calling themselves "bi" for a while.

A man admitting to being attracted to other men was so culturally frowned on back then that those who often had attractions to other men but who had at least 50% of their attractions to women would never think of labeling themselves as "bi". It would have been too risky in many ways.

Today with young people not caring about the sexual orientation of their friends, those who have even 10% of their sexual and romantic attractions to the same sex can label themselves "bi" and not have negative consequences in their social group or for their self-concept. So the % of people claiming that label would of course have increased in Gen Z. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ormond said:

I don't think this should be a surprise, and in particular I think it should have been expected that as prejudice against minority sexual orientations lessened that the number of people identifying as bisexual would substantially increase.

It is interesting though how little the numbers have moved for older adults though. I suppose after so many years they've either internalized how they identified in the past, or they just don't see it as worthwhile to change at this point.

It's also worth noting that this isn't asking "How do you identify to other people?" it's just "How do you identify?" So presumably there would be some people, particularly in earlier iterations of this survey, who were in the closet but willing to come out in an anonymous survey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fez said:

It is interesting though how little the numbers have moved for older adults though. I suppose after so many years they've either internalized how they identified in the past, or they just don't see it as worthwhile to change at this point.

It's also worth noting that this isn't asking "How do you identify to other people?" it's just "How do you identify?" So presumably there would be some people, particularly in earlier iterations of this survey, who were in the closet but willing to come out in an anonymous survey.

By the time one gets to be 50, anyone who's been denying that say 25% of their sexual/romantic attractions are to the same gender has been doing it so well for so long that they are probably not likely to be able to recognize it in themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with @Ormond on this. Years of habit and socialization and stigma can explain why the numbers haven't budged much in older individuals. Our society is much more accepting of LGBTQIA+ folk now than it was when I was growing up, and there isn't the same level of stigma that would affect how young people self-identify. It's simply safer (not safe! just safer) to be openly queer these days. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I've been trying to keep up with news from across the pond and it seems that a wave of anti-trans legislation is currently making the rounds in a number of States (I think the number I read was 28). My understanding is that the legislation falls into two categories: 1) Banning trans women from participating in "female" sports, and 2) restricting access to gender affirming treatment for trans/non-binary youth.

I'm finding this very concerning, particularly the latter. It seems these laws (restricting access to gender affirming treatment) have also been widely condemned by medical professionals. As I'm not from the U.S, could anyone explain the likelihood of these bills being codified into law, and if there is any way allies not from the U.S can support attempts to block them? I'm kind of watching things unfold in a state of shock, sadness and disgust..

 

On a happier note, I had to go into the office to check some originals last week. We are still mostly WFH with a skeleton office staff to monitor post etc. I ended up having a conversation with my manager and another colleague and I had a little moment of joy when my manager used my preferred pronouns* in conversation. I added that to my email signature last year along with many others in the firm, and people have been very good about using them correctly in emails, buts there was something oddly comforting and gratifying about someone using my preferred pronouns in a face-to-face (or mask-to-mask?) conversation. This all sounds like a lot of emotion for nothing but it really did make me feel great.

 

*they/them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That work interaction is great. I had a similar emotional response to something that wasn't even targeted at me - one of the main app support people for our student records system is someone I'd always thought seemed nice, but she's added her pronouns to her email signature as well. She's (as far as I know) cis and the pronouns are she/her, but it's just someone walking the walk in a place where it's not common or normalized. It made me feel warm and fuzzy.

On the subject of the onslaught of legislation and hate... I'm finding it hard to be on social media lately, it just seems one hit after another. And the Australian media is eagerly trying to import the fight here despite it not having been a thing we've had much issue with. Even if the legislations all get shot down it moves the conversation and it's centering us as the primary battleground in this culture war the bigots claim to be tired of while spreading it with every chance they get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@HelenaExMachina -- thank you for letting us know your pronouns. :love:   And yeah I know exactly the gender euphoria you're talking about.

One thing I want to note for the people reading this thread who are not trans: despite the framing HelenaExMachina used above, if a person tells you their pronouns, they are not "preferred" -- those are their pronouns and you need to use them. It's not a choice for you. (or, well, it's not a choice if you do not wish to be a piece of shit bigot.)

Nuance: many trans and/or non-binary people use different pronouns in different settings, because cisgender people make being trans so goddamned dangerous. So trans people and allies will ask someone (especially people who use mixed pronouns like she/they) which pronouns they prefer in a given circumstance. I know a few people who use gendered pronouns (he/him, she/her) at work, but gender-neutral pronouns (they/them, zie/zir, etc.) with people they trust. So yes, some pronouns are preferred in a particular context. But that doesn't give cisgender folk a pass for not using the pronouns provided by the person.

As for the anti-trans bills and laws. It's actually worse than even what has been mentioned. In Arkansas it is now legal for ANY medical practitioner to refuse to treat ANY LGBTQIA+ person. Doctor, paramedic, pharmacist, nurse, ANYONE can say "You're gay? Well, tough shit. I refuse to treat you." And yes, they can do that because sexual orientation and gender identity are NOT protected classes under the Civil Rights Act. (the only exception is employment -- that's what the Bostock SCOTUS ruling covered.)

But yes also the anti-trans laws strip life-saving medical care from trans kids. Lifesaving medical care that many of them had already been on for YEARS. Imagine being the kind of shitpile that decides "well all of these treatments have been used safely for literally decades on cisgender kids, but trans kids make me nervous so I'm going to tell a bunch of lies and make sure that they can't access any of this care." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve noticed a couple of people at my work putting their pronouns in e-mail signatures recently, so I added mine as well.

On the general anti-trans stuff, you may remember the lawsuit in the English courts that ruled children under 16 couldn’t consent to puberty blockers. The latest update is that they can now be prescribed with parental consent without needing a court order. Also, the Court of Appeal is hearing the full case in June.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/puberty-blockers-children-high-court-ruling-b1823009.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

Thank you Malt for helping normalize pronouns!! :cheers:

I'm glad they stripped the "court order" requirement. That was absolute bullshit. 

I think it’s part of the bank’s latest diversity and inclusion initiative that they have suggested adding pronouns in your e-mail - my boss’s boss who is part of the LGBTQ employee network and quite involved with the D&I stuff was the first person I saw with it.

To be clear, a court order is still needed if the kid doesn’t have parental consent, at least until the appeal happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, karaddin said:

On the subject of the onslaught of legislation and hate... I'm finding it hard to be on social media lately, it just seems one hit after another. And the Australian media is eagerly trying to import the fight here despite it not having been a thing we've had much issue with. Even if the legislations all get shot down it moves the conversation and it's centering us as the primary battleground in this culture war the bigots claim to be tired of while spreading it with every chance they get.

Bigots: Identity politics is a scourge that only seeks to divide us.

Also bigots: We want to be more bigoted and discriminatory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2021 at 3:31 PM, Xray the Enforcer said:

@HelenaExMachina -- thank you for letting us know your pronouns. :love:   And yeah I know exactly the gender euphoria you're talking about.

One thing I want to note for the people reading this thread who are not trans: despite the framing HelenaExMachina used above, if a person tells you their pronouns, they are not "preferred" -- those are their pronouns and you need to use them. It's not a choice for you. (or, well, it's not a choice if you do not wish to be a piece of shit bigot.)

Nuance: many trans and/or non-binary people use different pronouns in different settings, because cisgender people make being trans so goddamned dangerous. So trans people and allies will ask someone (especially people who use mixed pronouns like she/they) which pronouns they prefer in a given circumstance. I know a few people who use gendered pronouns (he/him, she/her) at work, but gender-neutral pronouns (they/them, zie/zir, etc.) with people they trust. So yes, some pronouns are preferred in a particular context. But that doesn't give cisgender folk a pass for not using the pronouns provided by the person.

As for the anti-trans bills and laws. It's actually worse than even what has been mentioned. In Arkansas it is now legal for ANY medical practitioner to refuse to treat ANY LGBTQIA+ person. Doctor, paramedic, pharmacist, nurse, ANYONE can say "You're gay? Well, tough shit. I refuse to treat you." And yes, they can do that because sexual orientation and gender identity are NOT protected classes under the Civil Rights Act. (the only exception is employment -- that's what the Bostock SCOTUS ruling covered.)

But yes also the anti-trans laws strip life-saving medical care from trans kids. Lifesaving medical care that many of them had already been on for YEARS. Imagine being the kind of shitpile that decides "well all of these treatments have been used safely for literally decades on cisgender kids, but trans kids make me nervous so I'm going to tell a bunch of lies and make sure that they can't access any of this care." 

Thank you, and on the bolded absolutely correct. Thanks for flagging and sorry for framing it that way. I'm not sure where I licked the terminology/framing up (maybe the media? Its not how we refer to it at work) but I've certainly used it before and I know its not a particularly helpful or accurate way of framing it.

My workplace has been really supportive for LGBTQIA+ persons over this past year, with "lunch and learn" video talks, regular updates from our Inclusion team on initiatives within the firm (and with clients) and helpful links to further support if required. Its really been a lifeline for me during some difficult times as I've come to understand myself/who i am.

 

The stuff on the legislation is even worse than I had thought. I assume it will be challenged in the courts where possible? Although the SC is Republican stacked at the moment so not really helpful I realise. 

Its all a lot to take in and makes me want to Bury my head in the sand but I know that isn't going to change things. I don't know what I can do to help in the U.S but I am definitely going to be watching things in the UK closely. Where the U.S leads its only a matter of time until we follow :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/2/2021 at 5:07 PM, HelenaExMachina said:

I've been trying to keep up with news from across the pond and it seems that a wave of anti-trans legislation is currently making the rounds in a number of States (I think the number I read was 28). My understanding is that the legislation falls into two categories: 1) Banning trans women from participating in "female" sports, and 2) restricting access to gender affirming treatment for trans/non-binary youth.

I'm finding this very concerning, particularly the latter. It seems these laws (restricting access to gender affirming treatment) have also been widely condemned by medical professionals. As I'm not from the U.S, could anyone explain the likelihood of these bills being codified into law, and if there is any way allies not from the U.S can support attempts to block them? I'm kind of watching things unfold in a state of shock, sadness and disgust..

 

On a happier note, I had to go into the office to check some originals last week. We are still mostly WFH with a skeleton office staff to monitor post etc. I ended up having a conversation with my manager and another colleague and I had a little moment of joy when my manager used my preferred pronouns* in conversation. I added that to my email signature last year along with many others in the firm, and people have been very good about using them correctly in emails, buts there was something oddly comforting and gratifying about someone using my preferred pronouns in a face-to-face (or mask-to-mask?) conversation. This all sounds like a lot of emotion for nothing but it really did make me feel great.

 

*they/them

Thank you for sharing this.


Though it makes me worry about some of my fellow American Southerners. The region is pretty backward/racist/bigoted/religious.

People shouldn’t have to live a lie just to exist. 

Edited by A True Kaniggit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question about how these pronouns actually work in coversation that H mentioned. I understand one would want to be referred to as what they identify as, but ... would not one just use the pronoun "you" when talking directly to that person? I know sometimes one refers to people as she/he/they etc. when talking about them in the 3rd person, but I am wondering how often it comes up in a face-to-face conversation instead of a 2nd person "you" ... unless it is meant that the specific pronouns should in this case, when a person specifically tells their pronouns, be used instead of the 2nd person, and "you" not being used at all when talking to them?

I want to talk respectfully to everybody, but I am not sure how that works in English in this case. (My first language works completely differently when it comes to identifying gender and I've never seen anything like that in anybody's email signature either, and I've never seen a discussion about this topic in my first language.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Buckwheat said:

I have a question about how these pronouns actually work in coversation that H mentioned. I understand one would want to be referred to as what they identify as, but ... would not one just use the pronoun "you" when talking directly to that person?

Yes, that's right. Gendered pronouns are only used when talking about someone - but if you're talking to someone, it's quite likely that you'll also be talking about them at some point, and you need to know the correct pronouns then. And even if pronouns aren't used directly, they indicate the gender identity of the person you're talking to, which can be useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...