Date: Tuesday, February 9th, 2010 07:52 pm (UTC)
I can't help but have faith in our lawmakers to get down a definition that says pretty clearly what they mean by "sexual identity".

Perhaps non-discrimination on the grounds of "sexual orientation or gender identity" would cover it, or does that miss anyone? "Sexual orientationn should cover LGB, and "gender identity" should cover T and I, with queer and questioning folk covered by either or both, depending on whether they are (for queer people) gender queer or queer in the sense of being a blanket term for LGB or pansexual; or (for questioning folk) whether they are questioning sexual orientation or gender identity. Maybe? Or am I completely wrong in my understanding and analysis of what is involved in each identity in the acronym?

I have a sinking that this is a 101 question. I'm really sorry if so.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

mothwing: Image of a death head hawk moth (Default)
Mothwing

January 2022

M T W T F S S
     12
345678 9
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sunday, June 22nd, 2025 09:33 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios