| Source | Year | Position |
|---|---|---|
| DC Fiscal Policy Institute | 2017 | Avoid |
| SEIU | 2020 | Avoid |
| Diversity Style Guide | 2023 | Avoid |
| Movement Strategy Center | 2024 | Avoid |
| NLGJA | 2025 | Avoid |
“Avoid … Instead … Sexual preference … Sexual orientation”
DCFPI lists "sexual preference" in the "Avoid" column of its LGBTQ terminology table, pairing it with "sexual orientation" as the term to use instead.
“sexual orientation Not: sexual preference”
SEIU prescribes "sexual orientation" and explicitly rejects "sexual preference" as the form not to use.
“Avoid. Politically charged term implying that sexuality is the result of a conscious choice. Instead use sexual orientation.”
Where the other sources file "sexual preference" in an avoid/instead table, DSG is one of the two that supply a reason: it calls the term "politically charged" — the objection is substantive, not stylistic, since "preference" smuggles in the premise that orientation is a conscious choice.
“Avoid This … Use This Instead … Sexual Preference … Sexual orientation”
Movement Strategy Center places "Sexual Preference" in the "Avoid This" column of its terms-to-avoid table, with "Sexual orientation" as the recommended replacement.
“Avoid imprecise terms such as sexual preference or sexuality. Sexual preference implies a choice; sexuality refers to sexual activity generally.”
NLGJA's stylebook calls "sexual preference" imprecise and advises against it because it implies a choice, distinguishing it from "sexual orientation" and noting "sexuality" refers to sexual activity generally.
The corpus is unanimous: “sexual preference” is a term to avoid, and “sexual orientation” is the replacement. All five sources land on the same side, and several pair the terms directly — DCFPI and Movement Strategy Center in avoid/instead tables, SEIU in an alphabetical “sexual orientation / Not: sexual preference” entry — while the Diversity Style Guide and NLGJA spell out the reasoning in prose. There is no dissent and no carve-out anywhere in the corpus.
The reasoning, where sources give it, converges on one point: “preference” implies choice. The Diversity Style Guide calls the term “politically charged” for “implying that sexuality is the result of a conscious choice”; NLGJA says it “implies a choice” and is imprecise. NLGJA adds the most granular distinction in the corpus, separating “sexual orientation” from both “sexual preference” and “sexuality” (which it defines as sexual activity generally) and from “sexual identity” (a person’s own perception of their sexuality). The preferred replacement is specifically “orientation,” not just any nearby phrase.
Chronologically the position is stable. The earliest source here (DCFPI, 2017) already files “sexual preference” under avoid, and the most recent (NLGJA, 2025) states the same rule with fuller reasoning. The consensus holds from 2017 through 2025; what changes across the sources is the amount of explanation offered, not the recommendation.
See the structured audience notes above: journalists and editors should use “sexual orientation” and keep “sexual identity” and “sexuality” distinct from it; campaigners should note the substantive objection (the “choice” framing); and internal-comms and HR teams should standardize on “sexual orientation” in policy and nondiscrimination language.