Sure, if that’s you’re response to that exact question then yeah. But lets be honest here. Sub 10% of the population is identifies as anywhere on the LGBTQ spectrum (more or less). It’s pretty safe to say that if 90% of anything is ___ that’s the normal thing. I don’t understand why so many people are afraid of being labeled abnormal. Abnormal =/= morally wrong or anything.
But the reason it’s an issue for many is that people don’t really say “normal” to refer to things like sexuality, gender, etc. in a “statistically most likely” way, they use it specifically to exclude the other group from being considered normal as something lesser. Or, to put it another way…
Let’s be honest here. a high percentage of the time that someone categorizes something (implicitly or explicitly) as “abnormal” it is done with intent to label the subject as something undesirable. It’s pretty safe to say that if a term is very often used in a negative way in a specific context, then we can reasonably assume that default definition when that’s the context we’re in. I don’t understand why people are so often afraid to acknowledge that we don’t live in a world of pure definitions, and rather must exist in a situation where the context of a statement is relevant.
What’s the odds Bob’s a bigot? Someone asked how to describe their sexuality, “normal” is not a useful answer.
It’s not a bigoted one either.
“I like feminine people of all genders, what is that?”
“Normal.”
We don’t know OPs gender, but it doesn’t matter. All sexualities are normal.
Sure, if that’s you’re response to that exact question then yeah. But lets be honest here. Sub 10% of the population is identifies as anywhere on the LGBTQ spectrum (more or less). It’s pretty safe to say that if 90% of anything is ___ that’s the normal thing. I don’t understand why so many people are afraid of being labeled abnormal. Abnormal =/= morally wrong or anything.
While it’s <10% across the entire population, LGBTQ identification rates are at 23% for GenZ. https://news.gallup.com/poll/656708/lgbtq-identification-rises.aspx
But the reason it’s an issue for many is that people don’t really say “normal” to refer to things like sexuality, gender, etc. in a “statistically most likely” way, they use it specifically to exclude the other group from being considered normal as something lesser. Or, to put it another way…
Let’s be honest here. a high percentage of the time that someone categorizes something (implicitly or explicitly) as “abnormal” it is done with intent to label the subject as something undesirable. It’s pretty safe to say that if a term is very often used in a negative way in a specific context, then we can reasonably assume that default definition when that’s the context we’re in. I don’t understand why people are so often afraid to acknowledge that we don’t live in a world of pure definitions, and rather must exist in a situation where the context of a statement is relevant.