Cis labels

"Lesbian: a woman who is attracted to other women
Gay: a term that is used to describe a man who has an emotional and/or sexual orientation towards men.”"

1. Sexism -- gay here listed as supposedly only referring to gay men. Hence 'gay women' get disappeared again. Along with almost every BBC article on gays (when what was meant was both sexes of homosexual), being illustrated with a picture of two men holding hands. Man and male becomes the default, so not needed when you say 'gay men'.

2. Sexism -- gay men get to have emotional and/or sexual orientation. Lesbians just get to have amorphous 'attraction', hence lesbian sex gets disappeared again (not helped by the many gay man I have met who got confused by being told that not all lesbians use dildoes, and then got the puzzled look because stuff without a penis or a pretend penis isn't sex (obviously!)).

3. Doesn't really deal with homosexuality and exclusivity, hence bisexual get disappeared as well based on these definitions.

Ah well, same ole same ole! At least the old style doctors were honest when they called us inverts, the third sex etc etc. Homosexuality, frankly, is no more injurious a term that heterosexuality. You just replace hetero with homo. Gay/straight and so on.

It would definitely make a good case study in how to run a successful marketing campaign.

They seem to have so much working against them - Jenner should be a walking disaster for the cause, and Kelli Malone? Yet, they are redefining what it is to be a women and lesbian. Every statistics they use is misleading at best, but nobody is questioning it , or is shamed for doing so.

I think you are right to believe its just a few big donators behind all of this. Even if every trans activist donated to the cause it wouldn't fund anything like the campaign that they are running.

Yes, Datun, I've seen it a lot in my journeying through gender critical resources. Lesbians are, as a group, far worse off financially than gay men or MTTs, due to the pay gap. They were a big part of the AIDS crisis, sometimes nursing men whose own families were scared to touch them. They were called on for, and gave support in gay communities while so many gay were dying.

However now the lesbians are under attack the gay community is nowhere to be found. It's clear that a lot of lesbians feel very let down. I've seen outrage from gay men on the Datalounge website but it clearly isn't enough.

Personally, I can't imagine gay men being anything but very outspoken if told they had to have sex with FTTs. I am not sure why lesbians aren't more direct with MTTs who invade their space. It seems there's a liberal dollop of female socialization at play.

BigDeskBob

If you read what politically aware lesbians say, they are regarded by the LGBT community as being at the bottom of the food chain. Presumably because they are women (again).

They are resentful because they were asked for help and support during the AIDS crisis and aligned themselves with the homosexual community. But now they feel as though they are being tossed overboard by the trans-community which is considered the top of the food chain, even above gays.

It is deeply worrying. The language change is so subtle that a lot of people won't notice it.

It's brainwashing.

You don't get to market a ideology to this extent without a lot of money.

All these resources take time to write, people's salaries, the infrastructure needed. Non profit organisations rely on donations. So places like Stonewall - call me cynical, but if they receive a lot of money from a pro trans-donor, it is going to affect what they promote. Otherwise the money dries up.

George Soros has donated $28 million to the cause.

There is a lot of pushing the idea that trans people are the most oppressed in society. But as many of them are white, middle-aged, successful men (particularly the cross dressers, as opposed to those with gender dysphoria) it makes me wonder how many of these people are incredibly rich and are pushing the agenda.

On a side note, it also makes me wonder quite how often the public has been duped in other areas. How many times people's opinion is manipulated without them realising it.

I am deeply troubled by that pack. Protecting girls and young women is the last thing on its agenda.

The pack is just another example that makes you think who the fuck is doing this? How has it happened in the blink of an eye? The bias in the toilet scenario is breathtaking, the language in the sexual orientation descriptions is deceitful. Why is there an orchestrated campaign to erase lesbians? It's not as if feminism has been so successful that we've even scratched the surface.

Datun, that link! It obviously been written by, or on behalf of, someone invested in denying lesbians are women sexually attracted to others of the same sex.

TRA have given up on my generation and are gently grooming my daughters instead. In a few years time they won't need law changes, women and girls boundaries will already be nonexistent.

And this one. Blurrinng what it means to be a lesbian. The persecution of lesbians by men claiming to be lesbians is nothing short of scandalous. All of this is CPS endorsed. I can only hope they were not sufficiently aware to the subterfuge going on.

Next, pupils are taught the standard trans activist redefinition of the word ‘lesbian’ in this glossary of terms

“Sexual orientation: a combination of emotional, romantic, sexual or affectionate attraction to another person
Heterosexual: being attracted to people of the opposite sex
Bisexual: being attracted to people of both sexes
Homosexual: originally the term ‘homosexual’ was used by scientists and doctors to describe same sex attraction and behaviour as a sign of mental disorder and moral deficiency. To obtain distance from such medical labels, the terms gay and lesbian are now used.
Lesbian: a woman who is attracted to other women
Gay: a term that is used to describe a man who has an emotional and/or sexual orientation towards men.”

Only ‘heterosexual’ and ‘bisexual’ are given correct definitions. The term ‘homosexual’ itself here is written out, on spurious grounds. ‘Lesbian’ is not correctly defined as a woman who is same-sex attracted, but one who is attracted to ‘women,’ thus allowing the inclusion of self-identified ‘women’ who are male. This subtle difference in definitions is significant; it suggests nothing other than a manipulation of terms in order to justify the coercion of young lesbians to accept males with penises as sexual partners if those males identify as ‘lesbian women.’ Lesbians alone are not described as ‘sexually’ attracted to anyone, a definition which can only benefit males who wish to hide the fact that their interest in lesbians is sexual.

WhereYouLeftIt Of course, they're planning to groom girls out of challenging an obvious male in a sex-segregated space. Someone posted a link recently to a pack being distributed to schools, so that schoolchildren can be taught to not be transphobic.

Link.

In this scenario, a ‘transwoman’ enters the Ladies. Two young women at the sinks whisper their discomfort between themselves: “What’s he doing in here? This is the Ladies,” ‘forcing’ the transwoman to try the Gents’ toilets next time. Here, the transwoman is confronted by two middle-aged bigoted male thugs.
The most physically threatening man bangs on the toilet door, yelling “what you doing in there? You freak!”
...
The most insidious suggestion in this case scenario though, is that it was the women‘s fault for not accepting a male into their toilet. It is women’s job to protect males from male violence, by rolling over and allowing males into their toilets. The message is clear: women are responsible for male violence.

The suggested class discussion point:
“Can you say why the person went into the ladies’ toilets and not the mens’ toilets? How did the women behave towards her? How did that make her feel?”

It wasn't meant to be PhyllisNights.

It was in response to you using the word vulgar. It tickled me.

This is a similar link to the one you have read, but it's more general. Not all of it is aimed at terfs.

But it's all aimed at women.

anti-female-receipts.tumblr.com/tagged/rape%20threat

BBCNewsRave

My post applies to you too .

And I agree with the monumental derailing that goes on with regards to who has suffered the most.

I just want to shout I don't fucking care.

The Facebook page exposing trans misogyny is quite an eye-opener. It's a masterclass of derailing with oppression Olympics.

The women there have clearly reached peak trans repeatedly.

Most of them are at the just fuck off stage. So unfortunately, it just degenerates into a complete blood bath of who can come up with the most creative insult.

However, there are a couple of posters who are fantastically incisive with regards to explaining structural oppression. It's like a lot of the trans allies simply haven't considered it. Eg

"What on earth has the patriarchy got to do with rape and violence?"

"Women aren't oppressed because of their biology, they are oppressed because they are women".

Datun I am fine. I think women just do stuff. We have a lot to deal with one way and another. This bollocks is one thing too much.

Bless? That was a bit patronising, Datun.

Poppy I also hate the phrase "check your privilege." It is not a race to the bottom as to who has been oppressed more and in my experience is very rarely something women say to each other, but is used by TAs to get women to STFU.

Ugh, HATE "check your priviledge". Said by men who are not even remotely concerned with checking their male priviledge.

Annoyingly, I score quite highly in the priviledge olympics (well if you ignore most other countries as TAs do), what with being a mentally ill woman - I'm even diagnosed with essentially, hysteria, so I'm an outcast even in mental health terms - yet to point this out would mean giving them ammunition against me and devalue anything I said even further. Because there is genuine prejudice there, even in activist-type circles. But if I was trans (or at least MtT), these same people would be falling over themselves to be inclusive and I could say bonkers things and they'd go along with it! I mean, we're coming up with stats and studies and facts, and they just say "yeh I'm a woman with a penis" and people agree!

Sorry for slight derail!

[As an aside, my mental health is improving gradually since becoming more feminist, reading more stuff, learning how to deal with/avoid abusive men... funny that. I suspect the mental health team would consider me beyond hope now, and the wider male world, definitely so ]

Shit CharlieSierra. You come on here like an absolute star, fizzing with energy and information.

I know no-one knows who is behind a screen, but when I hear what some people have gone through, I'm amazed they can hold it together sometimes.

Some of that language is absolutely vulgar.

Bless

Good old Magdalen, says it all really, "oh fuck off you wanker". Couldn't have put it better myself!

Thanks Betsy. Doh, I'm really not on the ball at all today.

WherYouLeftIt The CPS Schools Project is here. See also this analysis. Both are on the reference thread

A small clip of Magdalen Berns on Drummond:
twitter.com/adognamedlucky/status/856682400813912065

What about Alex Drummond?
Why does someone male, with a beard, who likes wearing dresses and make up, but isn't taking hormones or having surgery, happier to describe themselves as "widening the bandwidth of being a woman" than "widening the bandwidth of being a man".
Is it reasonable that Alex says they have turned a lot of women lesbian?
www.buzzfeed.com/patrickstrudwick/this-transgender-woman-has-a-full-beard-and-she-couldnt-be-h?utm_term=.kwEBmQ6V3#.npYeBrJ2n

Ok, we need biology, everyone knows it. It's how we make babies. We also need to know which people might get which diseases. So for a variety of reasons, biological sex does matter. This biological distinction also tells us, like it or not, who is more likely to commit certain types of crime, who is likely to be taller, stronger, faster.
We shouldn't have to pretend that it doesn't matter or that one can be the other, just because a tiny percentage of people have a disconnect between their physical body and what their mind is telling them, however awful that feeling is for them. Lots of people endure terrible traumas and unhappiness.
Many women have to deal with the heartbreak of infertility, I'm pretty sure they don't love their bodies; people have serious mental illnesses and lead tortured lives because of it. My son has a disease which ended his career as a ballet dancer, my daughter was diagnosed with a brain tumour at 4 years old and it's changed her life. It's all tragic.
We all have our own personal stories. As a biological woman my story includes being sexually harassed since 11 years old. I detested leaving my carefree childhood behind, being forced to behave in a certain way, be 'ladylike', the utter mortification of starting my periods at the end of term swimming gala in front of the whole school. Everything changed. I went to a mixed senior school and I hated my awkwardness; girl guides was my haven, no boys, no pressure, back to doing stuff I loved, nature, astronomy.
It makes me so angry that even this is being taken away from girls. I couldn't stand showering and changing with girls, the idea of having a boy in there too, irrespective of whether they 'identify' as a girl, would have been unbearable.
I could go on, through the next 40 odd years of harassment, discrimination, rape, fear, pregnancy, childbirth, menopause, 'women's troubles', but you get the gist. I'm a woman.
It shouldn't matter who wears what, or likes what. No one should be discriminated against. But biology matters. And womanface is every bit as offensive and appropriating as blackface. Men appropriating my womanhood makes me very angry. Sorry, that's long.

In my experience TERF = any woman who recognizes reproductive biology. You don't need to be a radical feminist, or any kind of feminist. You don't have to even be a woman. It's just a slur.

"It's going back to that idea that if Danielle walked into a ladies toilet, women would say something."
And at the moment, we are able to say something. The problem is, if self-identification becomes law in this country, my saying something would be a hate crime. And I could be charged and taken to court for it.

Of course, they're planning to groom girls out of challenging an obvious male in a sex-segregated space. Someone posted a link recently to a pack being distributed to schools, so that schoolchildren can be taught to not be transphobic. (If anyone was more sensible than me and bookmarked it/know where it is, could you link please? Thanks.) Which in girls' cases, means being taught that they should suppress any discomfort the feel in sharing toilets/changing rooms with transgirls. With a bit of practice, they'll grow into women with no sense of boundaries at all. They will be sitting ducks, and males can be certain they will not be challenged. Ever.