5 ms·

Just so we are on the same page on what is being discussed, here is what I think is the complete relevant text of the advisory: [1] > Some states have enacted

Just so we are on the same page on what is being discussed, here is what I think is the complete relevant text of the advisory: [1] > Some states have enacted laws and policies that may affect 2SLGBTQI+ persons. Check relevant state and local laws. It also links to a general page with information about traveling outside Canada for such persons. [2] To answer a question I had: 2S: 'Two-spirit is a modern, pan-Indian umbrella term used by some Indigenous North Americans to describe Native people in their communities who fulfill a traditional third-gender ceremonial and social role in their cultures.' [3] [1]: https://travel.gc.ca/destinations/united-states#laws https://travel.gc.ca/destinations/united-states#laws [2]: https://travel.gc.ca/travelling/health-safety/lgbt-travel https://travel.gc.ca/travelling/health-safety/lgbt-travel [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit

NotYourLawyer 3y ago
[flagged]
- dang 3y ago
  Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for, and if you keep it up we're going to have to ban you. (No, this is not because we don't like your views. We don't care or know what they are, and it would be just the same if you flipped the high bit on all of them.) If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
rightbyte 3y ago
Reads like some sort of parody to me. I+ was new to me too. "Intersexual" and the plus is inclusive of everyone that the previous letters don't cover. I guess there won't be more letters added then?
- blamazon 3y ago
  The I is intersex, not intersexual. It is a term for people who are born biologically with a mixture of male and female traits, through chromosomal abnormalities or otherwise. This is something like 1-2 percent of most human populations, which is relatively significant, but we rarely know about, talk about, or recognize those people, hence the inclusion.
ska 3y ago
This is a good point. The actual advisory amounts to "don't assume everything is the same as Canada, or that all states are the same". Link [2] is far more general travel advice for these people, and talks about things not relevant to travel in the US but there isn't any suggestion differently.
tomohelix 3y ago
While I understand the point of expanding the term to give representation, at this point it is a caricature. They tried so hard to look inclusive that the term become so unwieldy and obscure, nobody would use it except those who are so deep into it and those who want to mock it. Also last time it was updated, there is an A in the term somewhere. Guess they dropped it or forgot it.
- barryrandall 3y ago
  Which "they" are you talking about?
  - camdenlock 3y ago
    Identitarian activists, presumably.
- blamazon 3y ago
  The A is generally for asexual and the reason to leave it out is because asexual people do not face the same kind of direct social discrimination of the other groups represented in the non-plus part of the acronym. That's why you don't see A in this official Canadian government communication, but you might find it in say, an online essay critiquing of a movie, where one might say, for example, that asexual, bi, gay, lesbian, queer, etc characters historically been somewhat underrepresented in media. IMO, there's no need to be the same acronym every time - context matters, like most language. You can pull stuff out of the plus as required, or just as you feel like. It's no big deal. LGBTQ+ is standardized for most people in most cases, such as the headline of the post we're discussing, even though the actual Canadian government communication it's reporting on uses 2SLGBTQI+. We know they're both talking about the same general group of persons, but thinking "what the heck is 2S?" is a large part of Canada adding that, because they want you to learn about it. Ditto for the I. Take those two away and we're back to LGBTQ+ which I don't think is considered obscure or unwieldy. A bit of extra formality is generally to be expected from government documentation, I think.

NotYourLawyer 3y ago

[flagged]

dang 3y ago
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for, and if you keep it up we're going to have to ban you. (No, this is not because we don't like your views. We don't care or know what they are, and it would be just the same if you flipped the high bit on all of them.) If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

rightbyte 3y ago

Reads like some sort of parody to me. I+ was new to me too. "Intersexual" and the plus is inclusive of everyone that the previous letters don't cover. I guess there won't be more letters added then?

blamazon 3y ago
The I is intersex, not intersexual. It is a term for people who are born biologically with a mixture of male and female traits, through chromosomal abnormalities or otherwise. This is something like 1-2 percent of most human populations, which is relatively significant, but we rarely know about, talk about, or recognize those people, hence the inclusion.

ska 3y ago

This is a good point. The actual advisory amounts to "don't assume everything is the same as Canada, or that all states are the same". Link [2] is far more general travel advice for these people, and talks about things not relevant to travel in the US but there isn't any suggestion differently.

tomohelix 3y ago

While I understand the point of expanding the term to give representation, at this point it is a caricature. They tried so hard to look inclusive that the term become so unwieldy and obscure, nobody would use it except those who are so deep into it and those who want to mock it. Also last time it was updated, there is an A in the term somewhere. Guess they dropped it or forgot it.

barryrandall 3y ago
Which "they" are you talking about?
- camdenlock 3y ago
  Identitarian activists, presumably.
blamazon 3y ago
The A is generally for asexual and the reason to leave it out is because asexual people do not face the same kind of direct social discrimination of the other groups represented in the non-plus part of the acronym. That's why you don't see A in this official Canadian government communication, but you might find it in say, an online essay critiquing of a movie, where one might say, for example, that asexual, bi, gay, lesbian, queer, etc characters historically been somewhat underrepresented in media. IMO, there's no need to be the same acronym every time - context matters, like most language. You can pull stuff out of the plus as required, or just as you feel like. It's no big deal. LGBTQ+ is standardized for most people in most cases, such as the headline of the post we're discussing, even though the actual Canadian government communication it's reporting on uses 2SLGBTQI+. We know they're both talking about the same general group of persons, but thinking "what the heck is 2S?" is a large part of Canada adding that, because they want you to learn about it. Ditto for the I. Take those two away and we're back to LGBTQ+ which I don't think is considered obscure or unwieldy. A bit of extra formality is generally to be expected from government documentation, I think.