My gratitude for our country discussing LGBT rights abroad wasn’t overshadowed by the headlines only mentioning “gay rights”, but it did force me to stop and think.

LGBT means Lesbian (society lumps them in “gay rights” so okay), Gay (right on target, good job!), Bisexual (in the general family if you squint) and Transgender (nothing to do with sexual orientation or being gay at all). So really, does that title of “gay rights” include and represent everyone mentioned in the article? Not a chance.

The article could have easily said LGBT rights, right? And then the title of the article would have been accurate, and truly informative. Was LGBT not sexy enough? Is “gay rights” more digestible than “LGBT rights”? Or was it that the people who were in charge of this article simply thought they had covered all the bases lumping “it all” under one general, understandable term?

This article struck a chord with me, like a toddler recklessly plucking at an expensive guitar. Just like when I attend one of my support groups and they mention our “gay sons and daughters” never stopping to consider that I’m sitting right there in the front row and they’ve actually just excluded me. When I’ve mentioned it before I’m met with a general and heavy sigh, like my request for inclusion is just me standing on a soapbox asking to further “my cause”. And nothing could be farther from the truth, and yet it’s not.

If my own local group leader can’t see that trans kids are not under the umbrella of “gay” how do I expect mainstream media to get it right?