• Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      Sometimes they must necessarily be excluded. You just referred to trans people without referring to bi people. Were you “excluding” bi people? Well, in the sense of the word that you just (perhaps unintentionally) used, yes, you just excluded them. And it was okay. Because you weren’t talking about bi people. So it was okay to say “trans” instead of “2SLGBTQ+”. Because you were speaking specifically about trans people and that is OKAY. So what would you have me say when I am specifically talking about lesbian, gay, and bisexual people but not trans people??!!

      You’re so hung up on dogma and culture warring that you’re not using your brain.

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          You didn’t say “lgbtq+”. You wrote:

          trans people

          You said “trans”. Stop excluding bi people. Don’t say “trans” say “2slgbtq+”.

          ^^^ that’s you

          I have to think you are arguing in bad faith at this point.

          • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            this is literally my entire post

            they could start by not excluding trans people. you refer to them just like i said; the lgbtq+ community

    • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      my bestie in christ, scientifically excluding a population is not the same as treating a community with prejudice. trans people are excluded from the acronym in the title because there isn’t data on us. it would be misleading and inaccurate to include us in those statistics.