GLBT .... why "T"?
 

I was reading the article in the Stevie Forum about the Salvation Army donations, etc.

Reading this brought up something that I've been wondering for a long time. My intention is not to slam or hurt or offend anyone or anything with this question. I think I just need to be educated.

The article talks about the GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) population. I have seen this "GLBT" acronym used all over the place.

My question is, why is the "T" (transgender) included in this grouping? I can understand how it would make sense to group the G, the L, and the B together, as this is basically saying "non-straights". But isn't Transgender something completely different than sexual orientation/preference? Is it not true that Transgender does not necessarily mean "non-straight"? Doesn't transgender have to do with a person trying to correct a mismatch between body and mind? Am I totally way off in my understanding? Would someone educate me with whatever knowledge I am missing so that I can understand this? Thank you. Because with my current perception, grouping the T with the GLB is kind of like grouping "dog/cat/bird/computer" or something like that. Help!

Thank you!

it LGBTQ the Q is Questioning

maybe this will help

http://www.salon.com/2007/10/08/lgbt/

a) Because all four groups are stigmatized via sexual norms and b) Because they share a common culture (historically)

http://pamshouseblend.firedoglake.co...gbt-community/

This explains it better than I could. Basically, we're all "transgender" to one degree or another.

I think lumping T with GLB is basically done for the sake of simplicity- these acronyms stand for the subset of the population for whom discrimination in the 21st century is still condoned legally almost everywhere, including the U.S. I really can't think of an instance where ______ group is against the rights of GLB but fully support the rights of T, and vice-versa. The common thread here is gender, the right to be the person you want to be, and the right to be with the person of your choice. You can see the howls of protest that accompanied Chaz Bono's appearance on Dancing with the Stars, even though he is now "heterosexual" in a sense.

The finest howl of protest being Steven Beatty's (born Kathleen).

THANKS for taking the time to ask.

I'm sorry, you are very much correct; I should not have used the word "preference". I do understand that it is not a choice. But that was hardly the point or focus of my question. But I do apologize and understand that it was not a correct word to use.

I'm also sorry that it caused a distraction from my actual question. So if I hadn't written "sexual orientation/preference", but had instead written just "sexual orientation", how would you have responded?

no worries!

Thank you. Now that you and everyone else has explained it, it seems obvious. But I never would have come up with that explanation on my own. Now I understand. Thanks for your help.

Some people also use it for "Queer." Which I assumed would be considered offensive until I was told otherwise by the head of our campus's LGBTQ group.

it would be nice if someday if we could ditch the labels and that we might be known as just people.

My question is not why Transgender people are included in GLBT but why Intersexuals don't generally rate a mention? Is it because the GLBT community is seen more as a lifestyle choice and the intersex community more of a medical condition?

Interesting statistic I just read on the net (and whether you believe it or not is up to you) that 17 out of every 1000 babies born have some level of intersex condition.

So just why do we only have two choices of gender when you fill in a form?

Right now in Australia we have a "gay" marriage debate (yep hate that term) going on. I kind of feel the whole thing is like hitting your head against a brick wall. One day people will realise that gay, straight, black, white, Jewish, Christian, Muslim or whatever, we are all just people breathing the same oxygen and living on the same planet.

What the hell in an Intersexual? I've never heard that term. Took me forever, to figure out what Metrosexual meant!:o:wavey::laugh:

I can't put it any better then that.Come on world .Get along..

Well it isn't someone who is really "in-to-sex" :lol:

Without getting too technical (and hey I never said I was an expert), it is pretty much what is often termed "hermaphrodite" or where you have sex organs of both sexes or display characteristics of both sexes. I guess it isn't as simple as that though but you get the idea.

In the broadest sense it is those who can not be classified as either male or female.

There is at least one case I know of where someone born as a man but who felt he was in the wrong body/gender had his sex organs automatically begin to turn him into a woman when he hit his 40's. That really messes with your head if it's true :lol:

So it's the same thing as "hermaphrodite"?(of course I knew what that was). I hear Jamie Lee Curtis is a hell of a lay? (talk about a bad joke!)

So this "case study"'s genitals....turned themselves into the opposite gender? Well, sweetbabyjebus, I need pictures of THAT!:lol: May we term that "inverted genitology?":confused:

I don't mean that to be mean, at all....but why does the terminology have to constantly change?:confused::woohoo::lol:

Well the term intersex (according to Wikipedia) has been around since the 40's.

A true hermaphrodite has both male and female genitalia, but I think there are a whole lot of other conditions that come under the term "intersex".

Maybe, maybe not. In my experience, it's usually straight white people who say this. It's a nice sentiment, but in practice what happens is that it becomes an excuse for the majority to ignore the minority. We and our unique contributions become invisiblized and marginalized.

Intersex is often included. None of it has anything to do with "lifestyle choices."

Because terms are constantly turned into derogatory slurs. "Idiot" and "moron" were originally medical terms, for example.

[QUOTE=markolas;1035794]Maybe, maybe not. In my experience, it's usually straight white people who say this. It's a nice sentiment, but in practice what happens is that it becomes an excuse for the majority to ignore the minority. We and our unique contributions become invisiblized and marginalized.

in my experience as a gay man ... gay are their own worst enimies when it comes to labels , I don't understand the need to ""IDENTIFY AS " I cringe when someone tries to stick one on me


drag/leather queen
master/slave
top/bottom
club kid
twinkie
twunk
bear/chub
chaser
muscle bear
daddy
wolf
otter
cub
rice queen
tea room queen
gym bunnie
circuit queen
theater queen
auntie

Pick a fetish and add a life style .

It could be argued that intersex is a physical deformity though, as much as being born with no arms or no legs, or indeed two heads.

I'm yet to see proof whether GLBT is genetic or "lifestyle choice/nurture". You know what though, I don't care which it is, I'm not making that statement as a criticism. People should be allowed to live just as they damn wish.

For example, friends of my wife always wanted to have a boy, and when they had a girl (their only child) they basically treated her more like a son than a daughter. She was given boy toys to play with because the Dad wanted to do boy stuff with his "son". They were horrified and shocked when their daughter grew up and revealed that she was a lesbian.

Sadly though society discriminates against the majority as much as the minority. You can march in a gay pride parade and people will line the streets to watch. If I marched in a straight pride parade it would be seen as terribly homophobic and outdated.

Two terms. Black Power, White Power. One is seen as the underdog fighting for rights, one brings back memories of Nazi Germany.

So yes, everyone should just be people, without the labels and their contributions as individuals being what we judge them by, not the colour of their skin or their gender or sexual preference.

Damn, I had to go and learn.:mad:

http://www.isna.org/faq/hermaphrodite

This is just so unbelievably ignorant that I don't know where to start. Maybe somebody else has the patience to explain why, but I simply do not. I have to leave this thread.

Really? Because I'd definitely not describe myself as ignorant. I'm one of the most pro-equality people you'll meet (and I don't just mean on GLBT issues). Yes I fully understand why minorities need to bring attention to the way they are treated by society, to make changes to the way they are treated/perceived, etc etc.

My point being though, and yes I was being a bit of a devil's advocate, is that no-one should be treated differently because of the person they are (colour, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc). Everyone should have exactly the same rights because we are all equal in terms of being human beings. The little things like who we sleep with, who we pray to, or whatever should never make a difference.

The problem I find and what I don't agree with is that too many people seek to define themselves (or perhaps have forced to define themselves) by their sexual preference. Being gay, straight, bisexual or otherwise is a small part of what makes us human, it is not, nor should not need to be that with which we define who we are.

EDIT: I'm not trying to dismiss the fact that coming out or deciding you were born the wrong gender is an easy process. The suicide rate amongs the homosexual community is testament to that. I don't understand why parents and society make an issue out of whether someone is gay or not. If my son comes to me when he is older and says he is gay, it won't change anything about him will it? He will still be my son and still have all the qualities he had the day before.

I was given no end of girl toys, pink dresses etc when I was little and I'm a lesbian. I really don't think it's a lifestyle choice/nurture thing. However, with that said, I was shocked to the core when about 3 months after he'd figured me out, my oldest friend whom I've lived next door to and seen almost every day since we were 3 years old, came out to me. Perhaps it is chance, perhaps not. I doubt I'll ever know but it certainly intrigues me.

I used to work with a guy who had been happily married and had a couple of kids. He then went through a very nasty divorce and hated all women and I mean ALL women. He "turned" gay, and became the campest, bitchiest gay man I have ever known. Perhaps he had just always repressed that side of him? :shrug:

I don't understand why we must define ourselves by labels either. Tis a sad truth though. I've been lucky......my wife and family were unbelievable supportive of me when I came out as bi. they see me as Mick. It's about time to drop the labels. it makes me sad that we have not moved beyond that.

Mick

"He "turned" gay"
really ? so if he did you can too!

See that is the thing isn't it. Is there even such a thing as gay, straight and bi? Or is human sexuality just fluid. Given the right circumstances, who knows who any of us might be attracted to.

My father worked at the prison for many years and a lot of "straight" men would have sex with other (often gay) men. One of them once said "I'm not gay, I just like sex". Given he was in for a long time, I guess maybe that makes sense.

Sure a lot of sex in prison is about power and control, but I wasn't talking about rape, more about consensual relationships between a straight guy and a gay guy.

people don't turn .

Surely people can change though as they progress through life? I guess it isn't about "turning" as just sexuality not being a fixed thing. As Elton John once said, he used to think he was bisexual when he was married to a woman, he had a great sex life with his wife, and then he began to realise he was gay (and his ex-wife still doesn't speak to him as far as I know).

I'm not sure I believe we are all born gay or straight, or bisexual or what not. Sure, some people may be, but some people can change as they get older. Surely those people who change their mind are not all repressing their true sexuality?

All I can say though, is that whoever you are attracted to, as long as it is consensual, who cares, and hopefully you enjoy yourself. Life is too short to hate or judge someone based on their sexual preference. I have enough to do in my own life without worrying what other people do between the sheets...

What if they do it in the woods?:lol::woohoo:

The bi-to-gay thing seems to be a product of internalized homophobia or confusion rather than "turning gay." I think in some cases, people weren't really aware of their true sexuality - denial, anyone?

But in the initial phases of coming out, some people may want to cling onto some semblance of heterosexuality, which turns into the bi-to-gay thing as they later realize it's okay to be gay. Some people may think being bi isn't as "bad" as being gay. Some people may want to please their families by acknowledging their gayness while pretending there's a chance they will marry someone of the opposite gender (or sex). Some people may think they're bisexual when they aren't. I don't think that's very far-fetched, what with same-sex attractions often being brushed off as phases and heterosexuality being hammered into our brains from childhood. You're straight until proven otherwise, right?

That paragraph is really strange. I do think bisexuality is real; some people just use it (or the label) as a stepping stone, as awful as that may sound to real bisexuals.

Lol. I was the opposite. I originally thought i liked just guys. Then i realized no i think ladies are attractive too.....weird me.:D;)

Mick

Funnily enough there is a nudist beach near where I live, and people are complaining that it is frequented by gay men who have sex in the sand dunes. I always think it is quite funny because I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of hetrosexual people having sex in the sand dunes just a few metres away in the clothed beach.

Although I do have to say that in six years of living here I am yet to see a woman on the nudist beach (not that I go to it, but you walk down the path to the beach and immediately on the left is the nudist beach and on the right is the regular beach.).

While we're on the topic of sex in public that is one of the things I don't understand about gay men. The whole cottaging thing (for the non-British, having sex with an anoymous person in a public toilet).

Public toilets near where I used to live were a known meeting spot, and they were amongst the most dirty, disgusting public toilets that I have seen. They were so dirty, dark and horrible that I never wanted to use them to urinate in, so why anyone would want to have sex in them is still beyond me.

I know plenty of hetrosexual people have sex with anoymous people, but they tend to do it in more clean comfortable surroundings. Sure, some people like to do it in a back alley, but that tends to be more an alcohol related thing than anything else.

Is it because homosexuality wasn't acceptable and thus was pushed underground or what?

Found this on msnbc... Cynthia Nixon providing more fuel for the fire on the "choice or not" debate...

http://entertainment.msnbc.msn.com/_...-gay-by-choice

Oh, I'm sure there has never been a single case of heterosexuals having sex in public. :rolleyes: There are two things to consider. 1) Whenever you hear anything negative about any minority, it tends to cause the majority to assume that this is something endemic among minorities. Your assumption here is quite myopic and I would dare say a bit bigoted (e.g., the assumption that gay men are filthy, unclean whores whilst heterosexuals require clean, comfy surroundings) 2) Some gay men congregate in public bathrooms because, um, they can. There are very, very few pansexual bathrooms in the U.S. I would imagine that there would be lots of straight encounters in public bathrooms if all bathrooms were non-gender-specific. Your assumptions here are as far off-base as assuming all gay men are pedophiles because of a few highly publicized/sensationalized cases.

I have never or will understand toilet sex ?

I fail to see the bit where I said "ALL GAY MEN" but never mind. There are a percentage of gay men (and it might be 0.5% for all I know) that do have sex in public toilets. There are internet sites/forums that are dedicated to the locations of the best toilets, the best times, etc. So yes it does happen.

Your assumption that I'm suggesting that all gay men are dirty whores, is ridiculous. I was curious as to the input from the gay men on here as to why they thought that some gay men did that. I wasn't being judgemental, I wasn't criticising.

As for having sex in clean surroundings, I have met plenty of people, both gay and straight, who like to have sex in a reasonably clean surrounding (bedroom, car, beach, etc). I have never met (and perhaps this is just my limited exposure to people) an hetrosexual person who goes to a public toilet looking for sex with random strangers. Sure, two people might meet in a club and go into the toilet to have sex, but straight people do not (in my experience) arrange to meet anonymous people in public toilets. It is something (as far as I know) limited to A SECTION (maybe a very small miniscule section) of the male gay community.

As for all of this crap surrounding Cynthia Nixon "choosing to be gay", and the backlash from the gay community, what right does anyone have to criticise her if she chooses to be a lesbian. Why does she not have the right to choose? Sure, maybe lots of people believe that they are born with one gender preference or another, but that is unfair to push that onto those who believe it is their choice.