Jump to content

LGBT vs. MOGAI


Recommended Posts

While LGBT and MOGAI share many similarities, there are quite a few differences. For instance:

 

By LGBT standards, a non-binary person is a type of trans person, while by MOGAI standards they are two different categories.

 

By MOGAI definitions, pansexuality and bisexuality are two different things, and bisexuality means attraction to several genders but not all of them, while by LGBT definitions, bisexuality is an umbrella term for anyone who experiences attraction to multiple genders.

 

So, what are some more similarities and differences? Which is better to use and under which circumstances? Which one is more common? Which definitions should I use when finding a label for myself?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like LGBT+ is the more commonly used of the two groups, but I asked a few of my friends and several of them said they thought bi people could only be attracted to two genders, which is a MOGAI definition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

I think your friends simply thought of it that way because it's what it used to mean in the past. As far as I know MOGAI is niche and not really known about. It can be seen as shorthand for marginalized identities in general. I'm not sure how prevalent the differences are, since the groups that use it might just not have blended with the lgbtq community enough yet. I'm not super knowledgeable about it though.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is only though AVEN really that I have come to see that bi people are not only attracted to two genders. I always thought it meant attraction to two genders.

 

I have heard/seen MOGAI mentioned every now and then, for a few years, but LGBTQ+ is of course far more common.

 

And actually the first time I came across MOGAI in this sense, I was looking for something entirely unrelated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Horse Ham Radio

There's also GSRM which is perhaps one of the most succinct LGBT+ acronyms out there. Unfortunately it is likely to be autocorrected to "germs" when typed on a phone, which is a pretty bad downside.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Absentminded said:

I asked a few of my friends and several of them said they thought bi people could only be attracted to two genders, which is a MOGAI definition.

It may or may not be a MOGAI definition, depending on how your friends are using it. Are they super familiar with lots of queer community terminology and labels? If so, yeah, they could be using a MOGAI definition. Are they mostly outside of such things? They might be defaulting to the older understanding of the word 'bisexual', the one I heard growing up when things like gender identities outside of male and female were something most people had never heard of and 'sex' and 'gender' were largely synonymous. Bisexuality referred to attraction to both men and women. Certainly usually with acceptance of gender non-conformity and trans people, but the idea of genders outside of male and female was not widespread, and at its most basic, bisexuality was simply the ability to be attracted to, as we commonly said, people of both the same sex and opposite sex.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. So it seems like LGBT+ is the more common one, and people just have some outdated definitions of bisexuality.

Thanks for the help!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Purple Red Panda

Is it possible to see the word MOGAI and not have your brain automatically convert it into Mogwai?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
rachelpenguin

I feel like the confusion with the accepted meaning of biromantic, bisexual etc. as being attracted to more than one gender (rather than being attracted to two genders) lies in the fact that “bi” literally means “two”. The traditional definition of biromantic/bisexual is dependent on a binary definition of gender.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Absentminded said:

I asked a few of my friends and several of them said they thought bi people could only be attracted to two genders, which is a MOGAI definition.

I really don't think it is.

 

This perception or outside-in "definition" of bisexuality predates the creation of MOGAI by many decades. I'd also be surprised if all, or even a majority of, MOGAI people thought this.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand, MOGAI was a very online community which mainly focused on categorization, labels, and validity. A lot of this can still be seen in online LGBTQ communities. However, LGBT has a much longer history and has historically been more focused on action and social change, which includes language but also addressing systemic problems. I think this can provide context for why the two can seem contradictory. Although words like pansexual existed before MOGAI did, I think MOGAI and LGBT treat the function of labels a bit differently. But there’s also a ton of overlap in terms of online discourse.

Here are a couple of videos discussing the topic that I found interesting and useful.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rachelpenguin said:

I feel like the confusion with the accepted meaning of biromantic, bisexual etc. as being attracted to more than one gender (rather than being attracted to two genders) lies in the fact that “bi” literally means “two”. The traditional definition of biromantic/bisexual is dependent on a binary definition of gender.

But that tradition is very old, much older than the contemporary trans awareness. Let's not pretend that usage of terms doesn't change and grow with the times. There isn't anyone actually defending this "definition" of bisexuality from the inside. It's only a criticism lobbed at the bisexual label by people who like their neolabels better.

 

I'm not criticizing the neolabels, I'm just defending bisexuality against a contrived libel.

 

 Being bisexual doesn't rule out attraction to a non-cisgendered person any more than being gay or straight rules it out.

 

We're also not talking about a label for people who are expressly or exclusively attracted to non-cis people, so, I don't see any reason why "bisexual" isn't useful regarding non-cis attraction.

 

To me, it's "not completely straight, and not completely gay either," which says absolutely nothing about how many genders and gender-identities are included in the attraction umbrella. It means "not limited."

 

Anyway, it doesn't surprise me that there are people who want a term which is more explicit about that non-limitation. I just don't think they get to redefine bisexuality as excluding things which it doesn't exclude, and really, didn't exclude under the "traditional" definition either. It's like saying "red" excludes the color of lasers because people knew about other red things before they knew about lasers.

 

Of course, people do get to label their own selves any way they want if they don't like "bisexual" for whatever reason.

 

There probably are bisexuals who are not attracted to non-cisgendered people, or who think they aren't, but I think that's like saying there are straight, gay and lesbian people who aren't attracted to trans people, or think they aren't, and we don't redefine "straight," "gay" and "lesbian" based on this.

 

I feel like it's another example of bisexuality being a punching bag for non-bi people's misperceptions and agendas.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the help. I didn't realize that the older defintion of bisexual was a misconception, not the MOGAI definition.

 

Also, it seems like LGBTQ+ is more well known and has had a greater impact, so I'll probably be more likely to use it as a reference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...