Does "LGBT" reflect a kind of social pecking order within "the gay community"?

[livingwordunity]

The acronym has since began moving up to six letters: LGBTQA (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual, Questioning, Ally), and I’m convinced that it is either going to get longer, or its going to stop being used as an acronym because of the long list included within it. ‘P’ is the next letter going on the list.

The acronym getting longer is the “gay” lobby’s recruiting attempt to puff up the numbers.

 

[frobert]

Then why didn’t they use alphabetical order? Plus, the way they are defining so-called “marriage equality” shows a preference for the first two letters of “LGBT” and doesn’t, at the moment, accommodate bisexual interest in both sexes.

I was told that they put the letters in a hat and L came out first.

 

[frobert]

I think the order of the letters is just coincidental, but I have a couple of friends who are heavily involved in the LGBT community and they’ve told me there is a definite bias against bisexuals, and transgendered people are often seen as being on the fringe because it’s sort of a different issue.

I believe your friends are wrong or they may be reflecting their own desires. It would be kind of stupid to alienate natural allies in your fight for civil rights, don’t you think it would be?

 

[livingwordunity]

I was told that they put the letters in a hat and L came out first.

That sounds rather dubious. What’s the source for that? But, if that’s true shouldn’t they redraw the letters from a hat again if they are going to extend it to “LGBTQ”? Actually, I think the best way for them to do it is alphabetically since this way there is no way for anyone to ensure that their letter gets to be first.

 

[SMGS127]

I believe your friends are wrong or they may be reflecting their own desires. It would be kind of stupid to alienate natural allies in your fight for civil rights, don’t you think it would be?

No, there is a bias against the B’s and T’s in the community. It’s small @ B’s and moderate-sized @ T’s, but it’s not a majority by any means. Many LGBs consider Ts to be ENTIRELY separate and think they should be a completely different movement. Bisexual women usually have no problems, but bisexual men can be seen as lacking in the confidence to come out as fully gay (as there’s a myth in society that men can only like one sex physically, period). This myth is heavily perpetuated in both straight culture (“you had sex with a guy once twenty years ago? Ew get away from me!”) and gay culture (“ah he just hasn’t come out fully yet.”)

 

[SMGS127]

That sounds rather dubious. What’s the source for that? But, if that’s true shouldn’t they redraw the letters from a hat again if they are going to extend it to “LGBTQ”? Actually, I think the best way for them to do it is alphabetically since this way there is no way to cheat and show preference for one over the other.

frobert is being sarcastic LVU…

 

[LongingSoul]

The acronym getting longer is the “gay” lobby’s recruiting attempt to puff up the numbers.

Why are you doing this? This is nothing but subtle persecution of sinners when we are specifically called to love sinners - hate the sin. These tabloid pot stirring banners are devious and very un-Catholic. When Pope John Paul tackled communist regimes head on he didn’t have a subtle campaign of persecution or stir good people to discuss communists with covert mockery… he talked openly and directly about neighbourliness and the common good of all, drawing them through the soft core of their hearts.

I really believe you are doing a sinful thing in this unnecessary campaign of persecution when you could be using your time and knowledge in a non-destructive way.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Why are you doing this? This is nothing but subtle persecution of sinners when we are specifically called to love sinners - hate the sin. These tabloid pot stirring banners are devious and very un-Catholic. When Pope John Paul tackled communist regimes head on he didn’t have a subtle campaign of persecution or stir good people to discuss communists with covert mockery… he talked openly and directly about neighbourliness and the common good of all, drawing them through the soft core of their hearts.

I really believe you are doing a sinful thing in this unnecessary campaign of persecution when you could be using your time and knowledge in a non-destructive way.

Noting on my calendar the moment I agreed with LongingSoul.

 

[livingwordunity]

Why are you doing this? This is nothing but subtle persecution of sinners when we are specifically called to love sinners - hate the sin. These tabloid pot stirring banners are devious and very un-Catholic. When Pope John Paul tackled communist regimes head on he didn’t have a subtle campaign of persecution or stir good people to discuss communists with covert mockery… he talked openly and directly about neighbourliness and the common good of all, drawing them through the soft core of their hearts.

I really believe you are doing a sinful thing in this unnecessary campaign of persecution when you could be using your time and knowledge in a non-destructive way.

Ad hominem. I think that calling me “devious”, “un-Catholic”, and a destructive persecutor is a bit much just for criticizing the “gay” lobby and the redefinition of marriage.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Does “marriage is between one man and one woman” reflect a kind of social pecking order within the “Christian community”?

I don’t know, but I’ll tell ya what: it is kind of interesting that woman comes in last again.

 

[livingwordunity]

Does “marriage is between one man and one woman” reflect a kind of social pecking order within the “Christian community”?

I don’t know, but I’ll tell ya what: it is kind of interesting that woman comes in last again.

In Catholic/Christian theology, marriage between one man and one woman is a foreshadowing of the mystical relationship between Jesus Christ and His bride the Church. So, with this in mind, so-called same-sex “marriage” symbolizes a permanent separation between Jesus and the Church.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

In Catholic/Christian theology, marriage between one man and one woman is a foreshadowing of the mystical relationship between Jesus Christ and His bride the Church.

OK, so men above women then? Then why bother criticizing the “gay community” for the LGBT acronym?

To answer your question more directly: based on what I’ve observed, it often goes LG (in either order), then B and then a huge step down to T.

 

[livingwordunity]

OK, so men above women then? Then why bother criticizing the “gay community” for the LGBT acronym?

The “LGBT” letter arrangement is an arbitrary invention of men. Marriage and the design of our bodies, the reason why there are two sexes, is an invention of God.

 

[LongingSoul]

Ad hominem. I think that calling me “devious”, “un-Catholic”, and a destructive persecutor is a bit much just for criticizing the “gay” lobby and the redefinition of marriage.

But really think about what you’re doing. I don’t know if you’ve had a sibling or an offspring that got pleasure out of poking someone or something relentlessly with little digs. It’s like nip, nip, nip to cause distress. It doesn’t wash that you are doing Gods righteous work by using that type of tactic. It’s just inflaming everyone to making it personal and create resentment and defensiveness rather than being a beacon of truth to look to for guidance. The English did it to the Irish last century and its a tactic that they use in the middle East that makes war just always looming around the corner. It’s frustrating as heck to watch someone do it. I feel like thumping them in the head and I’m a very serene person normally.

Noting on my calendar the moment I agreed with LongingSoul.

Ha. I’ll savour this rare moment as well.

 

[livingwordunity]

But really think about what you’re doing. I don’t know if you’ve had a sibling or an offspring that got pleasure out of poking someone or something relentlessly with little digs. It’s like nip, nip, nip to cause distress. It doesn’t wash that you are doing Gods righteous work by using that type of tactic. It’s just inflaming everyone to making it personal and create resentment and defensiveness rather than being a beacon of truth to look to for guidance. The English did it to the Irish last century and its a tactic that they use in the middle East that makes war just always looming around the corner. It’s frustrating as heck to watch someone do it. I feel like thumping them in the head and I’m a very serene person normally.

Can you offer an example of something specific that I said that you believe is so terrible? Because every time I ask a question about the “gay” lobby the people on here who are in support of it always turn it into something personal against me. Do you realize that you basically called me evil? I don’t think that a challenging question or two asked merits being called that.

 

[LongingSoul]

Can you offer an example of something specific that I said that you believe is so terrible? Because every time I ask a question about the “gay” lobby the people on here who are in support of it always turn it into something personal against me. Do you realize that you basically called me evil? I don’t think that a challenging question or two asked merits being called that.

Aha. That’s where to trick lies. Not being specific but making a relentless series of digs that technically seem innocuous, like when one child comes to you distressed and the little poke-er says ‘what do you mean. I bearly touched you’. It’s the old Tokyo Rose trick. Break the spirit little chink by little chink. I know you know what I mean. :tsktsk:

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Aha. That’s where to trick lies. Not being specific but making a relentless series of digs that technically seem innocuous, like when one child comes to you distressed and the little poke-er says ‘what do you mean. I bearly touched you’. It’s the old Tokyo Rose trick. Break the spirit little chink by little chink. I know you know what I mean. :tsktsk:

Don’t be racist.

 

[LongingSoul]

Don’t be racist.

Why am I racist?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Does “marriage is between one man and one woman” reflect a kind of social pecking order within the “Christian community”?

I don’t know, but I’ll tell ya what: it is kind of interesting that woman comes in last again.

I’ve come across some Christian communities in which women are considered less than men over many dimensions. But in general a lot of the world is patriarchal (whether Christian or not). When writing instructions and examples I sometimes write “she” instead of the more often used “he” and at times have gotten back small but surprising reactions to it.

 

[Kamaduck]

The “LGBT” letter arrangement is an arbitrary invention of men. Marriage and the design of our bodies, the reason why there are two sexes, is an invention of God.

You’re missing the point. We always say “one man and one woman” rather than “one woman and one man”, but this doesn’t mean we consider women to actually be lesser (though the may sometimes be treated as though they are).This is the same thing. This acronym isn’t even official in any sense- there are lots of permutations, including GLBT, LGBTQ, LGBTQ+, and LGBTQIA. Sometimes they make it even longer, but I don’t know the groups being represented past that far. I think they’re mostly added in the order that people become aware of them- gay and lesbian at the same time to start, which is why you see both permutations. Then bi, then trans added on to the end. Then queer/questioning. Then intersex and asexual as people become aware of their issues. Then other things. It’s not a plot, it’s just people adding more groups on to the end of the acronym.