because apparently this is an issue

non-woman loving non-womenakasomeone who is not a woman, who loves people who are not women.ex: men and people under the nonbinary umbrella (excluding nonbinary identities that are tied to femininity, like demigirl)

non-man loving non-menakasomeone who is not a man, who loves people who are not men.ex: women and people under the nonbinary umbrella (excluding nonbinary identities that are tied to masculinity, like demiboy)

the definition of vincian (left) is non-women who love non-women,
and the definition of lesbian (right) is non-men who love non-men.meaning that nwlnw and/or nmlnm can NOT apply to mspec identities (bisexual, pansexual, omnisexual) because they’re attracted to the individuals that either nwlnw or nmlnm exclude.using vincian (nwlnw) as an example for the FAQ for clarity’s sake. this all applies to nmlmm vice versa.- but, if they’re a non-woman, they’re still attracted to non-women, aren’t they? they’re a non-woman who loves non-women!!
╰┈➤ I see your point, but you’re wrong. the expanded definition of NWLNW is “someone who is not a woman, who is attracted to people who are not women.” the shortened definition already excludes women, but this highlights it. if they are attracted to women, they clash with the tail end of the expanded definition. “who is attracted to people who are not women.- but what about the SAM?
ⓘ for those of you who don’t know, the SAM is the split-attraction model, used by those on the aro and/or ace spectrums, an example being an asexual person who is romantically omni- asexual omniromantic. this is an example of the split-attraction model.
╰┈➤ the issue here is- if we allow people who use the SAM to also use nmlnm/nwlnw to describe their identities, we are opening a door for mspec lesbians/vincians.
because the definition of lesbian is nmlnm, and nmlnm belongs to lesbianism, that means that being nmlnm means you are both sexually and romantically attracted to non-men (with the exception of aro/ace/aroacespec lesbians).
to rephrase the sentence above to make it clearer, being a lesbian (and being nmlnm) means you are not attracted to men in any way. men have no place in your identity.
mspec lesbians often ignore this to say that they are romantically lesbian, and sexually bisexual, meaning they are a bi-lesbian. this is entirely false as men have no place in lesbianism.
rounding back to the SAM, because bi-lesbians and pan-lesbians are invalid, and their main source of reasoning is the SAM, this means that lesbian as an identity cannot be used in the SAM (unless we’re dealing with arospec/acespec), and because lesbian as an identity cannot be used in the SAM (unless we’re dealing with arospec/acespec), this continues on to say that NMLNM cannot be used to describe any identity that is side by side with another in an individuals split-attraction model, unless the other identity is arospec/acespec. AKA, not bisexual, not pansexual, not omnisexual.
(and vice/versa with vincians and NWLNW, i am just using lesbian as an example in my entire answer for clarity’s sake. if i added “lesbians/vincians” “women/men” “NWLNW/NMLNM” at every turn, it could become difficult to read.)* i would like to clarify that “lesbian bisexual” is the incorrect usage of the SAM, but “pansexual biromantic,” “aromantic homosexual,” “demisexual omniromantic” and so on is the correct usage.
additionally, you can be aro/ace/aroacespec AND lesbian/vincian at the same time. for example, the author of this carrd is an aroaceflux vincian. this is the only example of lesbianism/vincianism having a place in the SAM.