Hmm I’m gonna reply to this against my better judgement.

I think you’re absolutely right that inclusivity is important. You’re still skirting around two issues:

1. Queer is plenty inclusive (see my original comment). Is queer insufficient? I would love to know as well, as a queer person.
2. Being antagonistic might allow you to express your thoughts, sure. But I doubt it will allow the other person to internalise anything meaningfully.

You’re also right that it’s no one’s job to police how you use terminology. I think the rest here are taking issue with how you are communicating this (and ironically enough, policing others on terminology).

Either way, I think it might be worth examining why the response to someone’s ignorance felt so visceral and rage-fuelled. Not saying it’s a bad thing, we could all use more inclusivity in our lives! But hopefully we could take a step back and ask ourselves why do we react a certain way? It’s a good exercise to understand ourselves a bit better.

Have a nice day, yea. And have an upvote too! Sick of the downvotes in this thread.

I’m a queer person in a same sex relationship for the longest time. Honestly even hearing the term LGBT (without the plus, without anything else) makes me kinda happy. Granted I’m in a place where acceptance is barely normalised.

I’m not even aware of the longer variants myself; I personally just use “queer” in describing myself (see above) and my friends. Even the aces I know seem to just call themselves queer and don’t really seem bothered by the lack of explicit asexual inclusion in LGBT or LGBT+ or LGBTQ+.

I don’t think we should get really stuck on terminology, to the point where we get into arguments with strangers online. I believe labels are important for helping us understand ourselves, but only to a certain point. Either way, queerness to me is quite all-encompassing, so representation here is not an issue? Maybe you could educate me on this.

The flipside being: I am aware that I would like to be more specific in describing myself to people, but it’s difficult to explain bisexuality to others (even queer folk!). I use queer as a shortcut. I don’t really fault them for not knowing the ins and outs of my sexuality though. I’m just queer at first glance. Wanna know more? Fantastic. Lemme tell you about the bicycle.

I get it’s upsetting to kinda “dilute” who we are at times. But being antagonistic about it isn’t really effective in educating, imo. These people are trying. Let them try, fuck up a little, and then gently nudge them in the correct direction.

Bro I’m bisexual but I just tell people I’m queer. It’s all encompassing and I’m lazy and it’s only one syllable.

I tried behind the bastards, and really liked the first few (older?) episodes. But it soon felt too shallow, especially when the main host isn’t speaking – imo the other guests were only there to provide quips. Personal opinion, of course. Maybe this got better?

I switched over to QAA to scratch this itch for laughing at conspiracy theorists.

Seconded! They often invite guests over as well, who are pretty well versed in their own field. Funny British humour with 4 facts in an hour? Sign me up

The bullshit about XY chromosomes is pretty stupid, which is why the other replier provided an article and a few key points in refutation.

The OP’s comment didn’t read to me as particularly incendiary, but thanks for labelling them as transphobic and mouth breathing with no precedent! Really appreciate good contributions to discourse like yours.

EDIT: not sure what the downvotes are for. XY chromosomes are not exactly valid for determining sex, much less gender. Women might have Y chromosomes, or even three copies of X. Gender has nothing to do with this at all, in fact.

Using XY as an argument is therefore bullshit.

Even if it’s bullshit, there’s no need to call someone a mouth breather unprovoked. The other thread seems to be a shitshow anyway, so I’m glad the replier is being called out.

Bro’s just upset they forgot the gender of a table in Duolingo French. Let them have it.

This is exactly what Rowling is afraid of

Go greendale!

Yea what kinda response is this? Did the OP reply to the wrong thread?

Good lord this gave me a fucking stroke

The other replies are much more reactive, which I totally get given the discourse. I’d recommend a book called “Right Wing Women” by Dworkin to further explore this idea.

These MAGA women are likely trapped in their own belief, because their sense of self comes from the man that constantly dehumanizes them. If you escape, you are left with nothing (since that’s what you have been indoctrinated to believe in). The only “out” is to be a good trad girl, and hope that the men praise you – this is the only possible source of self-worth.

Not saying that this excuses their behaviour, but I hope this provides an additional layer of complexity rather than “MAGA women bad”.

Excuse me, I see a fellow IDM enjoyer. Any recommendations for me?

Patiently waiting for the massive download to complete while I read the patch notes!

Can I just say thank fuck I found someone else who doesn’t like three body problem.

It’s not just the heavy handed politics. It’s literally everything about the book. Narrative devices used are absolutely garbage. Oh there’s a video game for some reason, and people LARP as Newton and Qin Shih Huang down to their exact personalities. Why the fuck?

In the second book there’s an entire section dedicated to the protag’s fantasies. A woman should have at most a Bachelor’s so she’s smart but not smart enough (paraphrased). What the fuck? And don’t get me started on the suicide bomb strat that immediately saw the Muslims and Japanese roped in.

The characters are incredibly dull. They just do one thing, but they don’t even do that well. Oh here’s Mr. Army guy; personality: army salute-y pragmatic unfeeling. The only character that has an added dimension would be Da Shi the policeman, but adding one more dimension to a point simply results in a plane.

People claim he had innovative ideas for sci-fi. They do realise that the Dark Forest Hypothesis was proposed by someone other than cixin, right?

This turned out to be a rant – could you tell I hate-read this book cause it pissed me off to no end?

You hate animals thus avoid them at all costs?

You’re right, and an upvote for you. I’ve seen colleagues who encounter a 90% drop in efficacy when making the leap to Phase 1 trials (and this is excluding safety concerns!).

It is rigorous and thank everything the Process is put in place. But I specifically used Oxycontin as an example for a pertinent reason. Rigour isn’t applied to everyone equally, and I think that itself underscores a need to think critically.

I agree, we should probably trust the doctors more than the crazies on Facebook or wherever they get their nonsense. But I think it’s also dangerous to place blind faith in doctors, who themselves are susceptible to misinformation and advertising. Oxycontin adverts appeared in NEJM, doctors went “wow I should prescribe that”, and that didn’t go well.

I think trusting Science is most important. Read peer reviewed articles and read them critically.

TLOU does have an amazing soundtrack but come on it was released eons ago. Justice for Chai

I’m upset that HiFi Rush didn’t win anything at all