Accurate terminology is important–for example, calling everyone under the LGBTQIA umbrella “gay” would be pretty dismissive/marginalizing to those who aren’t gay.
I disagree. Language is fluid and words mean what society wants them to mean. If a society wants to change a word’s meaning, then it changes. There can be an “umbrella” word to encompass the whole umbrella without having to explicitly enumerate each individual sect within it. Other minority groups in society don’t have to do this. I mean, what if the Native American tribes wanted to be known under the umbrella of combining the first letter of every tribe? The term “Native American” does not inherently marginalize the Cherokee or the Osage tribes.
I’m sorry, but I really feel that to be offended or feel marginalized simply because a community’s acronym doesn’t explicitly include one’s flavor of eccentricity–that, to me really is indicative of one who is highly-oversensitive.
Do you still use dated words for people of color? Those 19th century terms might not be acceptable in today’s society.
But, there is a practical limit to all of this. If I came across someone who is black, and I referred to them as black, and they got offended because they are lighter skinned, and I referred to them as mixed, and they got offended, and I asked them politely how would they like to be called? And they said, please call me black, but not black all the way, because I’m mixed, with 10% white and 20% latino and 60% African American, and 10% is debatable…well I’m not going to accommodate them, sorry.
LBGT-Q is the farthest I will go. Love all you people though, but I have to draw the line somewhere.