I don't perceive that same sex relationships need special designation here because to me the entire forum is not only LGTBQ friendly, but our forum culture does not assume heterosexuality and regards every relationship and grouping as specific unto itself. There are many of us here who don't identify strongly with either straight or LGTBQ, but are just sexual and open to various sexualities. [....]
Sirius Satellite Radio got rid of its OutQ channel because it's commitment to LGTBQ inclusion was so successful, the special designation of a channel for "gay talk" was just not necessary anymore. I see that as a huge cultural success. We only need special sections when a group is marginalized or somehow needs a "boost" and that is not happening in this forum.
I agree with FallenAngelina ...
up to a point. That is, I have a mixed and complex response to the idea that (e.g.) we don't have a need for queer or gay or LGBT radio, which is "not necessary anymore" because of "a huge cultural success" in being inclusive and accepting.
It may well be (and may probably be) that "We only need special
sections when a group is marginalized or somehow needs a "boost" and that is not happening in this forum." But it can't hurt to keep in mind that in the broader culture of most countries where folks are participating in this forum, the marginalization of LGBTQ... folk is alive and well -- though often much improved over recent historical comparison.
The present forum may be basically a safe haven for LGBTQ folk, but that doesn't mean that LGBTQ folk don't have unique life circumstances or needs as a result of their inclusion in this / these category/categories. I have found that it is sometimes helpful for us LGBTQ folk to gather among others who belong to this set of sets to confer amongst ourselves. By no means does acknowledging such a need (or desire) mean that we don't also want to be welcomed in the larger group / forum.
I recently learned of this fellow named Jordan B. Peterson, who has recently become famous and popular. In
one of his online (Youtube) videos he says, “I can’t quite figure out why the postmodernists have made the canonical distinctions they’ve made. Race, ethnicity, sexual proclivity, gender identity, those are four dimensions along which people vary, but there is a very large number of dimensions along which people vary… There is an infinite number of dimensions along which people vary. So the postmodern question is, why would you privilege some of those distinctions over others?”
I'm not sure why he's focussing on "the postmodernists" here. But his gripe is with "identity politics," which, to his thinking, are folks making the 'mistake' of pointing out that some classes or groups of people have been (and are being) selected for maltreatment by others. Those folks who are treated badly by bigots, it appears, should not complain or point it out as members of a group or class of people lest they evoke "identity politics," which according to Jordan Peterson is a really, really stupid and bad thing to do. He does not seem to make it clear why it is bad. But it is!
Peterson also seems to dismiss the whole notion that there is -- anywhere -- white privilege. I assume he'd say the same about male privilege, or heterosexual privilege, etc.
If what Peterson is trying to do is say "Hey, we're all people here!" I wonder why he doesn't just say that, rather than to bitch and complain about folks pointing out the fact of bigotry in the culture?
I bring this up because ... well, because bigotry has not gone away, and its a real thing that is worth taking note of and pointing out. Not everyone is a bigot, of course. But some people are -- and they are still many.
Anyway, my rambling here is not meant to take a position for or against a special section for LGBTQ topics. I have no opinion on that at the moment.
However, my feeling is that it's possibly redundant, or "a solution in search of a problem." Seems like there's a LOT of people already here who openly fit the criterion. therefore everywhere is "a Poly LGBTQ Space."
