The UK is officially an intolerant hellhole for transwomen

I'm thinking back to one of my earliest memories in the late 1960s, with a couple of my parents' openly gay (and delightfully camp) friends playing Alice in Wonderland with me using the kitchen table and chairs and a few blanket to improvise a rabbit hole!

Honestly, every single generation thinks they invented both sex and liberal politics (I think it was Churchill who once quipped "Anyone who isn't a socialist at the age of twenty hasn't got a heart. Anyone who isn't a conservative at the age of forty hasn't got a brain" - though I guess that makes me brainless ). And every generation finds itself (if lucky enough to make it as far as middle/old age) suddenly painted as the fuddy-duddy out of touch small-c conservative ones.

morning probably a lot lol although the current 17 year olds are already part of the various communities, the 7 year olds less so obviously. I worked with 7 year olds though, they're very intelligent and inclusive. You will also get children of parents with different sexual and gender identities, and their experiences will be important in the discussions.

From around the age of four, I knew I felt slightly different. I knew I liked to have the stereotypical boys’ toys and clothes but equally I knew that I liked princess dresses, tiaras and makeup

So like every other fucking child in the fucking world you liked a range of toys that were nothing to do with your genitals?

What a load of tosh this all is. The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

I have watched a few of RD's videos, not that one though. Always comes across as very me me me, extremely self centred and rather delusional. There is one video in particular in which RD gives lesbians who are rape victims a "temporary pass" to work through their issues before they have to live up to the obligation RD places on all lesbians to work on their transphobia. That bit always makes me extremely angry.

I personally suspect Riley's girlfriend is in fact bisexual even if that's not how she would choose to describe herself. If she likes penises, that pretty much makes her het or bi. (But we're back with the humpty-dumpty "language means what I say it means" nonsense. Just because someone self defines as category whatever does not in fact mean that they, and they alone get to define the words that go with that category. Language is a social phenomenon: socially agreed meanings matter, otherwise we can't talk to each other).

Which ever way Riley J Dennis is positing it, it's wrong.

I'd bet my right arm it is about how to go down on transwomens' penises. But if it's how to go down on girls, where the fuck does he get off teaching lesbians?

I'd also be willing to bet, since I'm convinced it's about penises (although I can't find the video), that it will be all about how to make a transwomen feel better about her penis.

I can't even find it, not on Vice or on RJDs channel on yt :/

Empress possibly... although Riley is in a relationship with a ciswoman (that is how she identifies) so also, maybe not. Have you watched the video?

there is no such thing as a lady penis, however much the likes of Riley Dennis want to prop up rape culture by guilt-tripping lesbians into having sex with them.

VICE are currently promoting a video in which Riley Dennis gives young lesbians sex tips - including, according to Dennis, about "how to go down on girls."

It suddenly hit me that as far as Dennis is concerned that probably means teaching young lesbians to suck dick. And that made me want to vomit.

writers thank you, you definitely explained it better than I did :)

My Male fiancé is demisexual though he doesn’t use the label. Reading about it did help him immeasurably because he’d spent his whole life not conforming to the sexuality the males around him seemed to display. I agree, however, that I think that because society is so porn saturated, anyone who doesn’t follow that is considered abnormal and hence the label comes in. For me and my fiancé, it was just nice for him to not feel so weird or alone in his sexual response (or lack thereof).
For my fiancé, he has zero sexual attraction to a woman (he is heterosexual) until he has a deep emotional connection. He isn’t interested in looking at naked women or porn (also for moral reasons, but that’s an addition) and he doesn’t understand sexual arousal over a stranger. He’s not had celebrity crushes. When he was younger he used to make the appropriate “noises” in Male conversations to not stand out as odd but nonetheless he gained a reputation for being “straight laced” because he never volunteered attraction towards women, cat-called etc. As he got older, some in his group started going to strip clubs abd he always made excuses not to go because it made him very uncomfortable, the notion of drooling over someone without an emotional connection.

We met online, and it wasn’t until months into getting to know each other that he would participate in any sexual conversation with me (and even then it was clinical and factual, not dirty talk). Since we developed an emotional connection, his sexual attraction to me developed. His desire for sex is highly linked with his need to emotionally connect. His “highlight” for getting off sexually (to be crude) is me telling him I love him during sex.

So, while I can see why people say that many girls choose to hold off on sex until there is an emotional connection, with true demisexuals, it’s not about choosing - there is literally NO sexual desire until the emotional is created.

This was pretty hard for me to understand, and sometimes still is, in our objectification culture. My partner doesn’t check out other women (though on an intellectual level he can understand if a woman is presenting herself as the “ideal” to fit with our culture), and I’ve mostly had partners who are assholes who drool over other women. So we’ve had some issues with my unwillingness to believe him.

Sexuality is an interesting topic.

Datun Yeh absolutely, from my experience most ace people feel the same way, they don't want to go into a relationship trying to trick the other person or having to hide who they are. Also if you really care about the other person you don't want them to be unhappy or uncomfortable, or to feel there's something wrong with them.

There are some ace people in open relationships, because their partners need the sexual side of a relationship as well, if everyone is on the same page and happy then more power to them (I don't think I could do it though).

I have a friend who is "pretty ace" and is in a relationship with someone who is sexual, they talk a lot about boundaries and limits and are both happy with how the relationship is going currently, but friend was very open right from the start.

God prickly, you talk so much sense. Always. One of the most articulate, analytical woman I've ever seen.

I'm one of those people who can do a Topol on almost any subject - on the one hand…on the other hand. Probably because I think most people crave understanding. And if I can manage to do that whilst maintaining my disagreement (if I still have it), it's a bit of a win all round.

And loops. Prickly is absolutely right. A mismatched libido is the deathknell to a relationship.

Many people start a relationship with the best of intentions, in the first flush of passion. Only to find that the libido aspect shakes down a year or so in, and stops working because it's unequal.

The fact that you are fully aware of your own libido, will stand you in good stead. As long as you choose someone who is similar.

And for what it's worth, I didn't start masturbating until well into my 20s. It's a bit of an acquired skill, to be honest.

prickly no absolutely!! I definitely don't want to do that, which is why I'm not currently dating, and why if I did I would be super up front about how I feel and my boundaries before beginning any kind of relationship. I wouldn't want to make another person unhappy or uncomfortable, any more than I wish to be unhappy or uncomfortable.

" if I did have sex with them it would be because they wanted/needed it rather than because I did."

Please do not ever do this to someone or to yourself. Get over to the relationship board and read the threads from people of both sexes on what it is like, as someone with a sex drive, to be married to someone who does not have one. It will destroy both of you utterly. It is not an aspect of your life where you can "fake it till you make it".

I can see why you would want a companionate marriage and a chance to adopt children (or have them via sperm donation) with a woman you felt emotionally close to. But if you genuinely are asexual (and you certainly seem to be), please limit your dating pool to other women who are similar asexual and seek a companionate marriage.

Hope that doesn't sound patronising, but honestly (I'm in my 50s same as lass) by my age, you've watched your friends go through/have experienced yourself most of the available permutations of mismatches in personality, attraction, sex drive that failing relationships can throw up - and mismatched libidos is one of the worst. As the higher sexed partner, either you'll end up feeling undesired, or if you become aware that your partner is "going through the motions to please you" you'll feel like a sexual abuser. Most people with a sex drive would hate to have sex with someone they loved under those circumstances - it would make them feel sick to the stomach. Part of a healthily functioning sexual relationship is mutual desire and the feelings of reciprocity that come with that.

lass except it does mean that books.google.co.uk/books?id=isIaCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT300&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Datun yeh, essentially. All we have to go on as humans is our experience up to the current moment. If you've never experienced sexual attraction to a woman (as a woman) it's reasonable to ID as straight, then you meet one woman and you're not straight...or maybe you are, just not for this person. Labels aren't concrete IMO, things can always change because not all women are the same (or men, or redheads, or whatever).

Romantic attraction and sexual attraction are also different, maybe you can see yourself being in love with a woman, but don't want to have sex with them, you'd quite like to marry a woman, or live with them, cuddle, kiss, care for, have babies with etc... but you're not sexually attracted to them.

Sex and love aren't combined for everyone, especially asexual people. Also love, for aromantics, doesn't always mean the same as it does for sexual/romantic people.

I am not romantically attracted to men, for now anyway, I do want to get married, have babies, be in a relationship, with a woman. But I don't want to have sex with them, or rather if I did have sex with them it would be because they wanted/needed it rather than because I did.

The masturbation question is also interesting, because I don't masturbate and never have, it does nothing for me, and I really feel that is because I don't experience sexual attraction. But some asexuals do masturbate, despite not being sexually attracted to other people.

Brains are weird

Loop I don't think "asexual" means what you think it means.

I have to say at age 58 I'm absolutely loving being lectured by you on the extent of the spectrum of possible human emotions and sexual responses as if this were some wonderful revelation. A point Prickly made pages ago.

I agree, that loop is just putting labels to what has always been there. Prickly nailed it when she said it seems to be a necessary part of the younger generation's navigation through our pornified society.

You have to come out and say you're not a part of that, and demand that that's respected. Because currently, it does seem to be considered a negative thing. Not my generation, certainly. But maybe the millennials have to make a stand.

It's a pretty poor show that being completely normal and not wanting to jump in bed with everything with a pulse, or not finding the right person (maybe never) is considered an identity that needs respecting.

Loop, I hate to break it to you, but no matter how many labels you put on yourself, you just sound like a typical young woman, with the typical feelings, or not, of attractions to another person. You're no more different or unique than my friends and I were at your age. But, feel free to put a label on yourself, if it makes you feel validated. I think my generation would probably been as daft, had said labels been around, when we were young.

So is you can want to have sex without being sexually attracted to that person a meaningful category or just a bit shallow?

And that's where it all falls apart.

lass ok, so "you can want to have sex without being sexually attracted" is not a category, it's just a fact. It's a fact that can exist within any sexuality or romantic attraction or combination of them. The definition of asexual is 'does not experience sexual attraction', it's not a thing that happens to you. Saying that, I wouldn't make someone ID as asexual, or tell them they are, even if they told me that they don't experience sexual attraction, it's not up to me (or anyone else) to tell someone how they ID or who they are.

loopsdefruit

Are you talking about whether someone is straight, gay or bi?

I'm probably not qualified to talk much about anything other than heterosexuality. Whilst I can quite easily see how a woman's sexuality might be more fluid than a man's, I can't imagine falling in love with another woman. Lesbian sex, to me, does not feel at all offputting. It must be quite useful to have someone who understands how the female body works. But, again, I don't think I could fall in love.

Which might be where asexuality comes in. If your sexual attraction, for want of a better word, is low, or zero, it won't really matter which sex you go for.

If you have sexual attraction, my benchmark is always been what do you masturbate to? What fantasies are in your head? To me, that will demonstrate your orientation.

Lass I suppose that would have made you a little bit shallow lol but that's ok haha I also wouldn't put you in a group, because it's not anyone else's place to decide how people should identify

But you can't have it both ways.

You are the one defining all these personality traits as separate categories. You are the one who posited you can want to have sex without being sexually attracted to that person.

So is you can want to have sex without being sexually attracted to that person a meaningful category or just a bit shallow?

As for putting me in a group- all I meant was I had lost track of which of your myriad definitions I would have fallen into had my self- absorption been deep enough to care.

Prickly I wish I could give you a round of applause. 👏