In Sunday’s New York Times, an article about Visa restrictions noted that,

“Religion and sexual preferences, as well, are sometimes cited as reasons for tourists to be denied entry to one country or another.”

Substituting “preference” for “orientation” is both insulting and sloppy, but it would be easy for someone who reads the article to argue that words are just words. The larger narrative of the piece was that the visa process is often overly restrictive, which suggests that writer Mitchell Higgins was not intending to make a political statement with her syntax. Maybe Higgins should just spend some quality time with the GLAAD Media Reference Guide.

But the larger implications of misusing words like “preference” was underscored over the weekend when a spokeswoman for the US Census disclosed that the 2010 census will not distinguish between gay individuals and couples and their straight counterparts. When asked whether the census would question Americans about their orientation, spokeswoman Cynthia Endo said that the census “is all about numbers. This is not about lifestyle or anything else.”

Lifestyle. Preference. Both words imply that being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender is a choice, and that implication opens the dangerous idea that orientation or gender identity can be changed or “cured.” Words have meanings, and in Endo’s case, her words are representative of harmful policies that have real impact. Not being correctly identified– and particularly not being counted– means the LGBT community can be disregarded as a tiny minority. If we’re going to fight for and win the equal treatment under the law we so rightly deserve, we’re going to have to be counted first.