Roger-Luc Chayer (Image : AI / Gay Globe)
In a free and democratic society, nothing is more scandalous than the deliberate and targeted exclusion of a person or an identifiable group of people. In this case, this exclusion targets lesbian women, and it comes from Grindr, a dating app for LGBTQ+ communities.
Scandalous, isn’t it? But once again, clever social media manipulators have managed to stir up international outrage by spreading fake news, clearly designed to generate clicks, virality, and advertising revenue.
Social media has recently exploded after the publication of articles claiming that Grindr had “removed the L from LGBTQ+” in its privacy policy, suggesting that lesbian women would now be excluded from the app. At first glance, the news seems shocking. However, a careful examination of the facts reveals a much more nuanced reality.
It is true that Grindr has changed the wording of its privacy policy. Where the company previously described itself as “a global LGBTQ+ social networking app,” it now states that it is “a global social networking app serving primarily the GBTQ+ community.” The letter “L” has indeed disappeared from that sentence.
However, this change does not mean that lesbian women are banned from the platform or that they can no longer create an account. Nowhere in its privacy policy or terms of service does Grindr announce the exclusion of lesbian women.
Since its creation in 2009, Grindr has always defined itself as an app primarily intended for men seeking to meet other men. Its core audience has historically consisted of gay, bisexual, and queer men and, over the years, transgender and non-binary people. Lesbian women have never been the heart of the app’s user base, unlike other specialized platforms like HER.
It is precisely this context that several viral publications failed to mention. By isolating the disappearance of the letter “L,” some articles suggested a discriminatory decision, whereas the modification seems to simply reflect Grindr’s historical positioning as a service primarily aimed at men.
The headline “Not for Lesbians” is particularly revealing of this sensationalist approach. While it immediately grabs attention, it goes far beyond what the privacy policy actually demonstrates. No provision states that lesbian women are barred from access or that their accounts would be deleted.
This affair once again illustrates how quickly partial information can turn into a global controversy. A limited editorial change has transformed, through shares on social media, into an accusation of systemic exclusion, without the company’s official documents supporting this interpretation.
This does not mean that Grindr’s decision is beyond criticism. Some members of the LGBTQ+ community believe that removing the letter “L” sends the wrong message or contributes to making lesbian women invisible. This perception is legitimate and deserves to be heard. However, presenting this change as proof that Grindr has officially excluded lesbian women from its platform is not supported by the currently available information.
As is often the case in the age of social media, the line between facts and their interpretation quickly blurred. For journalists and the public alike, this case is a reminder of the importance of consulting the original documents before declaring a scandal.
As insignificant, even microscopic, as the removal of the letter “L” may seem, lesbian women do not need such a wording change. What they need instead is greater visibility and recognition commensurate with their essential contribution to the cohesion of the LGBTQ+ movement and communities.
Lesbian women have played a major role in the history of LGBTQ+ communities, even if their contributions have sometimes been less publicized than those of other groups.
First, they were among the first to build lasting community networks. As early as the 1970s, lesbian organizations created community centers, support services, publishing houses, cultural festivals, and safe spaces that later benefited the entire LGBTQ+ community.
During the AIDS crisis of the 1980s and 1990s, their contribution was decisive. While many gay men were dying or being rejected by their families, thousands of lesbian women volunteered as caregivers, nurses, companions, fundraisers, and activists. They actively participated in care, advocacy for people living with HIV, and the maintenance of community organizations when resources were scarce. Many historians believe that this solidarity strengthened the bonds between the various components of LGBTQ+ communities.
Lesbian women have also played an important role in legal advances. They participated in numerous causes aimed at recognizing same-sex couples, fighting workplace discrimination, access to parenthood, adoption, and the protection of fundamental rights. Many of these gains have benefited the entire LGBTQ+ community.
They have also helped broaden the movement’s demands. By incorporating issues related to feminism, domestic violence, women’s health, parenthood, and economic equality, they have promoted a more inclusive vision of LGBTQ+ rights, beyond issues affecting only gay men.
On the political level, many lesbian leaders have held key positions in advocacy organizations, Pride marches, and equality campaigns. Their presence has helped recognize that LGBTQ+ communities are diverse and that their demands must be as well.
Their cultural contribution is considerable. Lesbian writers, artists, filmmakers, journalists, and academics have made long-ignored realities visible and enriched the LGBTQ+ cultural heritage.
Does Grindr deserve a slap on the wrist for this blunder that will likely go around the world? Probably yes. Because, as harmless as the disappearance of a single letter may seem, it sends a message that, in the current context, could only be misinterpreted.
ADVERTISING
