• riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    a- and ppl who aren’t on the binary spectrum?🥺🥺

    (i feel the need to point out that non-binary does not necessairily mean “in between”. i appreciate that u tried tho <3)

    • bmsok@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I didn’t know that would be offensive. I really didn’t. I thought my comment was inclusive to everyone. Can anyone tell me how to be more tactful with my words in the future?

      I have very good friends who identify as their true selves in so many ways and I love them all dearly. It would crush me if I don’t learn something from this. To me, a is part of the category I was attempting to include.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        To me, a is part of the category I was attempting to include

        I could be wrong (and I hope @[email protected] will correct me if I am), but I don’t think “a” is a category. I think they were simulating a stutter. The “a- and ppl” is (I think) meant to be pausing and restarting the word “and” halfway through.

          • AceCephalon@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            As an Asexual, can confirm, they’re just making a joke with a text based stutter, not referring to Asexual or Agender, such as in “LGBTQIA+” that generally refers to multiple things under the “A”.

            In the latter case, it’s left open ended for inclusivity, rather than arbitrarily excluding other things by specifying.

            As for how the original comment could possibly be more inclusive, it’s harder to say exactly, but I can think of something like “Ladies, Gentlemen, and everyone else”, but I’m not exactly great at fancy words… or words in general… but I try my best.

            • bmsok@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ace is the term I’m familiar with, too. I just didn’t want to be left in the dark if there was an even more abbreviated version of the abbreviation.

      • gandalf_der_12te@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Probably “third people” is an appropriate term. Like, in the cold war, there was “first” world and “second” world (not discussing which is which), but then there were bystanding parties not participating in the conflict. They used to be called “third world countries”. Happy to help

    • TomAwsm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I see what you mean, though I would probably make the same mistake myself without thinking it through.

      What would be a better way to address “everyone”?

      • riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        this is a little difficult, as social awareness for nonbinary ppl is still developing and we especially dont have a lot of established formal or fancy ways to address/include them.

        a few small things i have learned/picked up over time:

        1. don’t try to define all nonbinary identities in relation to the mainstream genders.

        example: ladies, gentlemen and everyone inbetween

        • –> ladies, gentlemen and people of all other identities
        • –> ladies, gentlemen and everyone else

        explanation: some nonbinary identities (genders or not) can be defined in relation to men and women but this is not true for all of them. something like “and inbetween” or “all around them” is therefore not fully inclusive and might even imply an underlying ignorance, which could make ppl feel unseen and misunderstood.

        1. try not to seperate into genders at all

        example: ladies, gentlemen and people of all other identities

        • –> everyone
        • –> people of all identities

        explanation: something like “ladies, gentlemen and everyone else” ends up reducing all nonbinary genders into one “everyone else” while the two mainstream genders get named directly. this implies that nonbinary identities are less important to the speaker. it’s ofc impossible to name all identities individually, so when trying to address everyone, i would try to not seperate into genders at all.

        1. dont think of nonbinary identities as necessairily genders

        example: ladies, gentlemen and people of all other genders

        • –> ladies, gentlemen and people of all other identities
        • –> ladies, gentlement and non-binary folk

        explanation: the nonbinary umbrella does, next to nonbinary genders, also include people without a gender (agender). so if we try to address everyone by simply including all genders, we might still forget agender people.


        sowy for the wall of text. i went all out with formatting in the hope that that might make it more readable.

        this is all just my personal perspective and i pwobably didnt get everything right myself. i hope it can still help other ppl be more inclusive :3

        • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          All of this is one reason why I find myself using ‘fellow humans’ as a form of address. Yeah, it sounds like you’re an alien overlord in a skin suit, but it’s 100% inclusive.

          That and (to get all hippy about it) it’s a consciousness shifting exercise - refuse divisions when they’re not necessary for a specific discussion, think at the level of shared humanity as the default.