What "agenda" do you think I'm trying to promote? My intention in the article wasn't to assert that she (or the others) necessarily called herself "queer" or "bisexual," but to inform people of some of the passages of her diaries that have been censored because of their "homosexual" content. I don't think those facets of historical figures should be censored like they currently are. We shouldn't assume by default that all historical figures were heterosexual. And history textbooks shouldn't neglect to discuss sexuality when there is evidence that a historical figure was LGBTQ+. The passages in her diary make it pretty evident that she did sexually desire girls, even if she was only around 15. Sorry, but most straight girls don't fantasize about women or experience a state of ecstasy at the sight of nude women's bodies, as she wrote that she does. So why do we need to assume she was straight if we have good evidence suggesting otherwise? That heteronormative assumption carries an agenda of its own.

And the word queer isn't entirely new. It's currently sometimes used as an umbrella term to refer to any LGBT identity. As I said, the modern form of the term probably wouldn't have been used by Anne Frank herself, but sometimes it can be useful to apply modern terms to historical figures. For instance, historians might describe historical figures as having "depression" or "bipolar disorder" even if those diagnoses didn't exist at the time when the person lived. I don't think that's always necessarily harmful--sometimes it simply eases communication or reminds us that mental illness isn't an exclusively modern experience. And in terms of sexual orientation, it's especially important to teach history students that bisexuality and homosexuality aren't just modern phenomena... They've existed for as long as humanity has, so it's important to acknowledge that many historical figures were of course bisexual or homosexual, even if they didn't use the same terminology to describe themselves.