What's wrong with just using "homosexual" as a descriptor?
Well, it's not very catchy, is it? Plus it's very clinical sounding. And it doesn't really solve the underlying problem, in that the term "homosexual woman" may be a description for who it is that gay women are, but it's not really a name.
no subject
Well, it's not very catchy, is it? Plus it's very clinical sounding. And it doesn't really solve the underlying problem, in that the term "homosexual woman" may be a description for who it is that gay women are, but it's not really a name.