… 2?
It represents various indigenous beliefs.
Also sometimes in front of the acronym like this: 2SLGBTQI+
Jesus Christ.
I’ve enjoyed my fair share of penis, as a man, and this is getting a bit mad to keep up with. I mean I of course agree with the meanings and reasons for the additional inclusions, but surely there can be a better way to acknowledge folks without needing to Google it every few years? Surely?!
On the one hand yes, that’s why at some point people started using the + to make up for every missing letter. An easy way out would to be to say non-hetero-non-cis-folk but then you still miss some groups. You could just say gay people, or queer people, most people will still feel represented. But I like the long string of letters which is a true abomination because of all those letters, exactly because each letter represents someone (a bunch of them even) and it allows for conversation going. The number 2 for example got a lot of people who read this post informed about two-spirited people who maybe never heard those poeple exist before. That matters a lot. If you see for example now republican politicians talking about biological sex even though they never seem to have heard about intersex people it shows how much of the hate comes from not knowing and not understanding. If you’ve read all this, I hope you’ve not read it as an attack because it is not. You going on google is exactly the point. But if you don’t like doing that, please know (most) gays dont believe you have to, people know they are a minority and often don’t mind just telling you about their sexuality or gender when you ask.
Didn’t take it as an attack at all, that was very polite and informative.
You raise a very good point, that despite the slight annoyance over the expanding string of letters there is great opportunity for representation of marginalised groups. Sometimes I tend to forget that just because I know about these groups, does not mean anyone else has had the same education and these opportunities seem beneficial to keep in that regard.
Definitely swayed my opinion, thanks.
Gesundheit
Should wait until at least 2.3, there’s always a pile of bugs in the major version updates cause they want to get the update released on a marketing schedule.
Removed by mod
When you think about it, a transition is kinda a patch to update object definitions
Removed by mod
This is why I just go with “queer” if I’m being general. One syllable, and I don’t have to remember as much or stay on top of new additions.
Or all of the variations across countries… I mainly use “queer” also
New LGBTQ just dropped
In a lot of ways Canada is a better America than America.
Always has been.
But won’t always be if we aren’t vigilant.
We narrowly dodged a MAGA bullet with Poilievre, but the alternative Carney still replaced our disability minister with an AI minister, then his first bill gives powers for mass deportations… So yes, we must hold power to account and not use the USA as a meter stick.
Yes, I’m rather disappointed in the ‘better of two options’ that was chosen. I just wish we could get away from first passed the post. Maybe one day.
Regarding the deportations though, Canada really does have a problem with people abusing the immigration process. IMO fixing the corporate side of that would be a better start but we do also need to deal with people who fail to leave after their visas/appeals expire
We have LGBTQ2 before GTA6
That’s awesome. Now, when are you gonna remove the law barring US LGBT refugees?
Are we really that far gone yet? No, but we’re headed there.
That would require accepting anyone as a refugee from the US, and that is extremely unlikely to happen, ever.
I mean, iirc Canada already accepts some LGBT refugees from other parts of the world. So unless you’re saying that everyone in the US is queer, it seems like the obvious thing to do would be to apply the same standards to US LGBT refugees as LGBT refugees from other parts of the world.
Don’t know about Canada specifically but as far as i know asylum laws are about having a valid reason, so being from a specific place is less often a valid reason than being from a minority (can also be religious or ethnical) or having certain political views. They would likely sooner accept for example Amish , indigenous or democratic people only before just accepting anyone from the US. I think you’re wrong in believing that is unlikely to happen if you see how anyone with a Hispanic demeanor is being treated right now.
They are not sending their best. Lmao
Dude it’s all bottoms here!
And now you understand why republicans hate brown people. Made up bullshit.
Removed by mod
