Better question: What makes you think they are not included in LGBT or Queer? Also, I know the inclusion of two spirits within the LGBT acronym is contentious with many native Americans as well. It’s why the pride flag with the native American feathers is frowned upon at many queer events.
If everyone is included in queer why be anything other than the Q community? What elevates some queerness to a place where it deserves recognition on its own and why is some queerness relegated to a bucket labelled “Miscellaneous”?
I think you made my point for me.
In case you missed it, we don’t need the acronym at all. We already have one word that describes us all in any form that takes, and making an acronym that is overly long and extends/contracts depending on the whims of the writer is overly complicated and defeats the purpose of having an acronym.
Also, funny how you aren’t going to argue the point that the inclusion of two spirits is controversial within the native American community itself, when that was the point you jumped at me with.
Controversial in a community other than my own means that two spirit isn’t my point to argue for or against. I led with it because it was the thing that was there after the Q, which seemed to be where you were drawing the line in the sand. I’ll concede that point.
The only thing I’d say about adopting “queer” as an umbrella term for all of us is that, as a term of abuse, a lot of us have strong negative associations with it and would hesitate to self-apply it. I use it, I like stealing power back from the bullies in that way, but I’m not gonna force someone to self-apply a slur that dredges up memories of being physically beaten, or their friends killed. An umbrella term could work, but maybe not that one as long as that trauma is still present in the community.
Crazy people recently adopted the Q for QAnon so unfortunately the single letter wouldn’t be great idea anytime soon.
Maybe we need to own the Q so hard that Qanons will be afraid to identify with it.
