Page 10 - BEQ Magazine Vol 4, Iss 4 (01032020 Final)_Active

EXAMPLE OF A PARTIAL ONTOLOGY FOR LGBTQ+ PEOPLE

Person
Gender
Expansive Sexual
gender Orientation
Gender fluid asexual
Identity
hetero-
gender nonbinary sexual
queer pan- homo-
man sexual sexual
skolio- demi-
sexual sexual
?
agender woman bisexual

em her them ey she they
gender
intersex male female neutral
him xem zir per he xe ze

Object Subject Birth Legal
Pronoun Pronoun Sex Sex
KEY
? A person with properties defined across
the other classes
Classes / Sub-classes (serve as tethers
Pronoun to the larger, universal world of concepts) Sex
Class members
A relationship that a class or sub-class
has to the larger world
A relationship that a member of the class
or sub-class

Footnote: The unnamed entity Figure 1: This is a partial ontology (illustrative only), a representation of some defining biopsychosocial (biological,
in the center of the graph is a psychological and social) characteristics for LGBTQ+ people . The main purpose of an ontology is to determine relations
person and a person has object between concepts (also called classes) . Classes and subclasses have attributes (roles, properties, slots, etc .) . Attributes may
properties defined across the other have restrictions on them . In this example a person has a gender identity, pronouns, sex and sexual orientation .
classes . Some possible names
for these object properties might “I keep hearing people say, in all areas including work, social explore those spaces, we’re learn-
be “hasGenderExpansiveIdentity”, bring your authentic self to work,” interactions, academia and beyond. ing more about all of us. When we
“hasObjectPronoun”, Patridge said. “For me, that has a lot Less rigidity means more openness, learn more, we can collectively ad-
“hasSubjectPronoun”, “hasBirthSex”, freedom to be authentic and it in- vance.”
“hasLegalSex”, “hasSexualOrientation .” to do with diversity. I do think that
For simplicity, this figure omits (hides) in some ways historically and tradi- creases the likelihood of innovative I had a fleeting moment of frus-
all data properties for this ontology . tionally, [as a society] we had more thinking and behaviors. “Maybe it tration as I realized the opportunity
conservative and rigid structures skewed our data and thought pro- cost of rigidity—lost productivity,
within which we had to work.” cesses, requiring us to function in stalled advances in technology and
These rigid structures limited certain ways,” Patridge continued. the loss of talent to society. I also
our thinking about the possibilities “As we develop the permission to realized how most of our institu-

10 | Winter 2019/2020 businessequalitymagazine.com