User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20190324211646/@comment-4189499-20190331235901

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-188432-20190324211646/@comment-4189499-20190331235901 It can't be just LGBT, because there are many forms of non-cishet-ness (thanks for the word BTW Soto!) other than being lesbian, gay, bi, or trans, such as but not limited to those who identify as ace, intersex, pan, poly, etc. Unless you want that acronym to bloom out uncontrollably, you need some kind of catch-all in there.

The only thing is, if you then have a catch-all along with an acronym, you have to make the decision as to who is "important" enough to be included in the acronym part and who is just a part of the catch-all. Personally, if I go with the acronym, I use LGBTIAPQ, but a) that's long and b) there're bound to be categories left out of that which would make the people who fall into those categories feel left out, and considering this is an inclusion measure, I don't want smaller minorities to get the short straw and feel even more left out.