As a moderator and fellow member of our diverse and vibrant community, I’d like to open up a thoughtful discussion on a topic that’s been on my mind lately.
As an MTF Pansexual individual myself, I approach this subject with the utmost respect and curiosity.
The acronym LGBTQ+ (or in its longer forms, LGBTQIA2S+, etc.) is undoubtedly iconic and widely recognized.
However, I’ve been wondering—does anyone else feel that the growing length of these acronyms can make them cumbersome, as well as, unfortunately, a target for mockery by transphobes, far-right groups, etc.?
For example, we’ve all seen disparaging remarks about “LGBT123”/ random letters on the keyboard, or attempts to delegitimize certain letters within the acronym.
This backlash raises the question: would it be helpful and more unifying to start using a broader, umbrella acronym?
One example some have proposed is MOGAI (Marginalized Orientations, Gender Alignments, and Intersex).
It offers inclusivity without the need to constantly expand the acronym every time a new identity seeks recognition.
Other possibilities could include:
- QUILTBAG (Queer, Undecided, Intersex, Lesbian, Transgender, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay)
- SOGIE (Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Expression)
- GSRD (Gender, Sexual, and Romantic Diversity)
- QRING (Queer, Radical, Intersex, Non-binary, Gay)
- QUARG (Queer, Undecided, Asexual, Radical, Gay)
- ALPHABIT (A fun, though less formal option: Asexual, Lesbian, Polyamorous, Bisexual, All alliances, Inclusive, Transexual/Transgender, Intersex, Bi-curious, Intersex, Transexual/Transgender)
Would adopting an umbrella acronym potentially lessen the ability of transphobes to weaponize or mock the terminology?
Could it also simplify communication while keeping inclusivity intact?
Or does LGBTQ+ hold too much cultural weight and history to consider replacing it?
I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts!
How do we balance the evolving diversity of our community with the practicality of representation?
Should we stick with the current acronym, redefine it, or explore new alternatives?
Tbh, once the + got added on, nothing else is useful.
Yeah, you kinda want to be inclusive to all the marginalized groups, but then you end up exactly where this post is.
LGBTQ+ is as big as an acronym needs to get, it’s already recognized, and includes a term that’s meant to be a blanket term. It is an umbrella acronym. And it’s one that’s hard fought.
That fight, and the reasons for it, mean that you’d have to do part of that fight over again. There’s already a shit ton of struggle going on. Trying to reinvent the wheel that’s carrying you to the fight just doesn’t make sense as a strategy.
If the acronym needs changing, it can wait until it isn’t a distraction
Transphobes are going to transphobe no matter what we do. I don’t think we should take any kind of accommodation for them into our considerations when it comes to acronyms. Screw them.
Updoot for the conversation starter.
I’d like a new acronym for my own use, when I don’t want to say all the letters and the situation requires quick communication (canvassing for political purposes, for example). I’d also like it for things like audiobooks, when the reader attempting to be inclusive suddenly becomes a verbal/audio burden…and it’s kind of annoying to listen to all of the letters over and over.
In written circles like research papers and social media, I don’t really care. It’s easy to get the gist of the letters without taking up too much time or energy, and it’s recognizable.
