arco-pluris mentioned you in a post
@nbandproud then it creates a polysemy. the same as intergender has two definitions, one is intersex-only and the other not, so it could be adherent.
The problem is, this doesnāt work very well. At least not right now.
Because then you have the following problems:
People who donāt understand/remember/care about both definitions, who proceed to only make content that is either vague and could apply to both (except it shouldnāt overlap, especially regarding flags/symbols)
Every time someone mentions that identity on a conversation or on the profile, they have to specify which one they are talking about, because the whole purpose of labels is pinpointing something specific
Both definitions may end upĀ āmergingā with time, because few people use/archive them; see gendercute/cutegender that were originally two entirely different things, also intergender which is many times wrongly described as a mix of the two different definitions
People who will act in bad faith and harass people who are supposedlyĀ āappropriatingā the original label, or āencouraging appropriationā by not making both identities exclusive, even if they are just using another definition that was coined independently (happened A LOT to places that had the old intergender definition)
It will be harder to search for content for both identities if they share the same name
Like. This already happened. And Iām glad to see @beyond-mogai-pride-flags changed it, likely to avoid those problems.