Lumped together

[DannyM]

Is it just me, or is everything that is not cis-gendered and heterosexual all lumped together under one (LGBTQ+) banner?

I don't have to tell anyone here that transgender, sissy fetish and forced feminization are not the same thing, but you wouldn't know it trying to do a search for my upcoming book using any search criteria other than the title. 

[DannyM]

I'm convinced somebody that is looking for a particular fetish is going to read my book and give it one out of five stars, while somebody else who would love it will never read it.

[Kylo]

Yeah, it is. Partly because when the movement was invented they hadn't thought about all of these things, and partly because identity political movements tend to to gather all the groups they think are oppressed together into one homogeneous group, it makes it seem like there are more of them and separates them more from the perceived majority or "oppressor" group. They've done the same thing with "people of colour" - according to the activists, that's just everybody who ain't white. Which is an awful lot of people and variety. But it's done to make the white identity seem even more separate and privileged, and everything that isn't is supposed to unite together in some sort of underdog brotherhood even if there's a hundred different cultures and values and racial identities in there. It's ridiculous, really. 

[Peep]

Yeah, it is. Partly because when the movement was invented they hadn't thought about all of these things, and partly because identity political movements tend to to gather all the groups they think are oppressed together into one homogeneous group, it makes it seem like there are more of them and separates them more from the perceived majority or "oppressor" group. They've done the same thing with "people of colour" - according to the activists, that's just everybody who ain't white. Which is an awful lot of people and variety. But it's done to make the white identity seem even more separate and privileged, and everything that isn't is supposed to unite together in some sort of underdog brotherhood even if there's a hundred different cultures and values and racial identities in there. It's ridiculous, really. 

yeah "the movement" and "the activists" and "[nonspecific] identity political movements"... totally homogenize... broad political issues... and race issues... um...

also it's funny how this cohesive and so specific movement of "thems" and "theys" want to be percieved as a large group and also as a minority?

then again if minorities aren't actually oppressed it's not really an issue that their individual identities aren't distinct. Oh - but wait i thought identity political movements were about subdividing us into more and more identities so that everyone can be a special snowflake? or is that only something we're meant to criticise the "identity politics" crowd and SJWs for on certain days of the week? or... is ... is SJW a generalisation too?  i'm confused

[Kylo]

I can not make head or tail of what you are trying to say.

[MaryT]

LGBTQ+ obviously includes people who have little in common and who certainly do not form a community.  I suppose that it helps to combine the political power of separate groups, as long as they do not have conflicting agendas, though.

[DannyM]

More important, for me, is what do we do about it?

How do we let the sissy fetishists have their fetishes, but also help the people who aren't looking for that to find what they are searching for?

[MaryT]

More important, for me, is what do we do about it?

How do we let the sissy fetishists have their fetishes, but also help the people who aren't looking for that to find what they are searching for?

Lay people like me have no trouble finding sites such as Susan's Place which must be a good source of information.  I'm guessing that you have already exhausted such sources and are searching the wilder areas of your subject. 

If you have specific questions to be answered, perhaps you could post them individially as topics and members could reply by posts or, if privacy is needed, PMs.

[DannyM]

If you have specific questions to be answered, perhaps you could post them individially as topics and members could reply by posts or, if privacy is needed, PMs.

Sometimes, the more specific the question, the less likely it is to get complete answers...

https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,237787.msg2138528.html#msg2138528

[Devlyn]

Is it just me, or is everything that is not cis-gendered and heterosexual all lumped together under one (LGBTQ+) banner?

I don't have to tell anyone here that transgender, sissy fetish and forced feminization are not the same thing, but you wouldn't know it trying to do a search for my upcoming book using any search criteria other than the title. 

I've seen any number of sissy fetishists pass through here on their way to transition.

People doing forced feminization, too. For them it's the path they found to hormones.

[Kylo]

The "inclusivity" of the "movement" is changing too fast for anyone to keep up with or for wider society to absorb.

I was shown by someone an activist poster today that came from twitter that suggested the LGBT community needs to drop the "B" because "bisexual" implies that there are "only two genders". If this is real, I expect those aspects of the "T" will be next for the drop, who identify as being binary. If that's the case, whoever is behind this is making the non-binary aspect of the T community appear to be one threatening to 'cannibalize' the rest of the LGBT identities. It has not gone unnoticed by the non-LGBT, who are taking it for yet more evidence to affirm we are crazy and want to destroy not only the definitions of society and biology but our own movement as well. We have problems.       

[DannyM]

I've seen any number of sissy fetishists pass through here on their way to transition.

People doing forced feminization, too. For them it's the path they found to hormones.

There's nothing wrong with fetishes. I have some. I didn't mean that to sound exclusionist.

The "inclusivity" of the "movement" is changing too fast for anyone to keep up with or for wider society to absorb.

I was shown by someone an activist poster today that came from twitter that suggested the LGBT community needs to drop the "B" because "bisexual" implies that there are "only two genders". If this is real, I expect those aspects of the "T" will be next for the drop, who identify as being binary. If that's the case, whoever is behind this is making the non-binary aspect of the T community appear to be one threatening to 'cannibalize' the rest of the LGBT identities. It has not gone unnoticed by the non-LGBT, who are taking it for yet more evidence to affirm we are crazy and want to destroy not only the definitions of society and biology but our own movement as well. We have problems.       

I wasn't trying to be that politically charged. Maybe an analogy would work better: food.

In my neighborhood is a place that serves Mexican food, has a TV running constantly with soccer games in Spanish and has a good hunk of the decor from Corona. It has some really good food, but the waiters do not all speak great English. About a block away is a Taco Bell. I like Taco Bell too. I eat there quite often. But when i say "authentic Mexican food", nobody thinks I am talking about Taco Bell. They know what I mean.

Once upon a time, when you said gay in literature, you meant either the sidekick to the cis-gendered straight girl or you meant steamy romance novels. Then somebody started writing about more diversity and, more importantly, more realistic characters. But when I talk about stories with transgender characters, unlike my Taco Bell example, nobody in the big wide world seems to be sure what I mean. Maybe the problem is me. Maybe it is a simple matter of learning the right words for the search bar.

[Devlyn]

If we each google the same thing from our own devices, the search results will be different. Google tailors our searches based on our previous activity.

Hugs, Devlyn