GSM also includes kink, polyamory, and other such identities which still come with bucketloads of straight cis privilege. I will not switch to GSM in discussions of oppression because while those identities are non-normative, they do not face the oppression that trans* and LGBAP+ people do, and oppression/privilege dynamics are incredibly important.My gender has nothing to do with my sexuality. I agree with this. Furthermore, I get trashed on by gay and bisexual identified people all the time. How can people who are fighting for their own rights and acceptance, deny it to others?
I love this & have been saying things like this for years, but lets not leave out genderqueer, genderfluid, non-gender people as well as All Trans* folk!
A lot of the of the Cis LGAB community can be very transmisogynistic & also gender & being Trans* has NOTHING to do with sexuality. But we also need to add a “P” to LGAB for Pansexual, cause if not that’s like saying only two genders exists. We all know that’s not true.
So YES, Trans* people need our own movement!
What about the GSM (Gender and Sexuality Minority) acronym? I personally like that one.
I wouldn’t mind being in the same movement as them, if they just included us in more than just their acronym.
I hate labels but I actually like that acronym, because it isn’t based off labels. I hate the “LGBT” acronym with a burning passion because there is no way you can fit every different sexual orientation and gender identity into one acronym without leaving some variable out, so “GSM” has my full support and I hope more people identify with it in the future. Mila, you deserve a huge hug for bringing this up because I’ve been trying to figure out what the acronym was and was completely spacing out for the past year or so I’ve been advocating against using “LGBT” to describe people that are in the GSM. So thank you.
I don’t agree with OP, I agree with socialistexan. GSM, OGSM, or OMGS (Gender/Sexuality Minority, Outside the Gender/Sexuality Mainstream, Outside Mainstream Gender/Sexuality), because it means if you identify as non-heternormative, you’re included. And that’s what the queer movement should be. Acceptance for all OMGS people. Asexual, bisexual, homosexual, pansexual, *sexual (sans hetero), fluid sexuality, agender, bigender, trans*, gender-fluid, etc.,
Now… how to add in romantic minorities? GSRM? OGSRM? OMGSR?
if you’re trying to have accurate discussions about privilege/oppression you shouldn’t be using any kind of generalizations anyway, whether LGBT or queer or GSM or otherwise.
And as for the claim that other minorities don’t experience privilege/oppression in the same way - well neither do any of the other LGBAP+ people. Gay men have their issues, lesbian women have different issues; bisexuals have a whole different set of issues altogether, as do asexuals; trans people are completely different, and even ftms and mtfs and nonbinaries will all face different privileges and oppressions, plus when you consider intersectionality you get a whole giant mess. But basically, “they have different oppressions” doesn’t apply here; if you want to actually acknowledge differing privilege/oppression dynamics, then LGBAPT+ whatever has all the same problems that you claim GSM does.
Also, surprise! many people do include polyamory and sometimes even kink in the alphabet soup acronym anyway. And also, GSM is often used to refer to just gender IDs and sexual orientations, not to kink. So, y’know, one is not inherently better or worse than the other.
(Source: the-unpopular-opinions)
