Letter from feminists against Pride protest

It makes my head ache to try to decode these threads. A lesbian is an adult woman with an adult woman's body. A roomful of lesbians is a penis free room.

So how often do I need to be having sex in order for me to be a heterosexual?

Are virgins then in a state of limbo?

Of course not. Sexual intercourse is different to biological sex.

Sexual intercourse is not required to validate someone's sexuality.

I was hetero sexual before I had ever had sex, I was heterosexual between relationships, I'm heterosexual now. There is no requirement to actually have sex when stating your sexual attraction

What does the IA+ stand for? I also don't understand why they include Q for queer because that's just another word for homosexual. I have a few issues with the wording of the letter.

All of us are active in the arts, community organising, the media and education
How is this relevant?

We have all benefited from the deep analysis, radical lifestyle and astonishing bravery of the lesbian feminists who came before us – actions that we understood to be about dismantling the patriarchy, liberating all women from gendered oppression and re-imagining the future
Most of the early feminists (18th-early 20th century) were straight so I find it very insulting that only "lesbian feminists" are "brave" for speaking out.

It isn’t trans women running down the NHS so that lesbians can’t access the health care they need
A sex change should not be free on the NHS. If you want an op to make your penis look like a vulva then you should go private. The NHS is under enough strain as it is and there are huge waiting lists for people with really serious health conditions (physical and mental).

The astonishing campaign in Ireland to legalise abortion patently understood that abortion rights and trans rights go hand in hand
A woman who is forced to be a handmaid against her will cannot be compared with a man who wants to be a woman (or vice versa).

So you're saying that the definition that "lesbians are female homosexuals" necessitates women actively demonstrating certain sexual activities with other women to prove they meet the label?

I mean, sounds like a very typical male fantasy, but it's not what we're saying at all.

You can be a lesbian who's never had sex. Or one who's had lots. Or one who never even says it out loud. All that you need to be is a woman who's only sexually attracted to other women.

Jeez Snappity your mental gymnastics are getting a workout this morning. Has anyone ever said or implied "homosexual female" means "have to be having sex"? You've inferred something no one has ever remotely suggested. It's the basis for attraction. If people don't act on it sexually it doesn't change that definition.

Homosexual clearly refers to biological sex.

Exactly - although our definition of biological sex differs I am sure. But the point I am making is that while some - increasingly many - lesbians are homosexual the history of the word is much broader and is being redefined in an exclusive way to erase some lesbians.

There was a couple of ladies who lived together near where I was brought up decades ago. They clearly loved each other. They were companions and both had chosen not to be with men. It was a lesbian relationship.

Were they homosexual lovers? Nobody knew: nobody cared. But by the definition of "homosexual female" they would no longer be seen a lesbian couple because they were not out as sexually active. As a lesbian and feminist, I hate the protestors' definition because it is exclusionary and erases some lesbians and places an emphasis on sex rather than romance or companionship.

If people want to celebrate their sexuality they should be able to but erasing lesbians who have a broader view of lesbianism is simply wrong.

"homosexual female" which insists that the relationship must be sexual

I think you're confusing what the 'sexual' bit means - it means attracted to the same sex, not that sexual intercourse is obligatory.

Plus of course, throughout history, lesbians haven't been considered to be 'having sex' because no penis was involved - which is what your definition is edging towards I would say.

Lesbian means woman (ie. adult human female) attracted to other women (adult human females) - if you walk out on the street right now, that's what people would understand it to mean - the amount of sexual intercourse being had is neither here nor there.

which insists that the relationship must be sexual, indeed replaces romance with sex

Homosexual clearly refers to biological sex. It's not "homogenderal". Homo just means same. Sex means male or female as well as the sex act.

Others on that list are clearly not. It's impossible to be a lesbian if you are male.

Perhaps the oldest definition of lesbian is "women who have a romantic relationship with other women". That's a much broader definition than "homosexual female" which insists that the relationship must be sexual, indeed replaces romance with sex, and clearly attempts to narrow woman down to female in an obvious attempt to exclude trans women.

Romance can, of course, include sex but it is so much richer than only being sex.

There are post after post on FWR objecting that trans women are changing the meaning of the word woman but the Pride protesters are doing the same thing and re-defining the term lesbian. The key difference is that one group is being inclusive and embrace more people and one is exclusive and tries to remove people from the old definition.

Duffy has apparently been hounded off Twitter by those who agree to her views on the transgender issue.

I had a look at the responses to one of her tweets - memes and stating biological reality - not a single threat of violence, interesting how that works huh?

To answer your question- yes someone has said none of the signatories are lesbian.

If they have come together to publicly condemn Lesbians the likelyhood that they are Feminists is a gynormous zero

I would add the likelihood that they were lesbians was about the same tbh.

Lass some on that list are lesbians - that is, they are female homosexuals.

Others on that list are clearly not. It's impossible to be a lesbian if you are male.

Did anyone say none of them were lesbians, Lass?

Beth Ditto, Stella Duffy and Louise Wallwein will be interested to hear they are not lesbians.

Ditto has hung her whole career on being a loud, proud, very visible lesbian.

Wallwein I had to Google- she describes herself as a butch lesbian, dyke. Here are a couple of pictures of her. Butch as get out but still obviously a woman.

Duffy is open about being a lesbian but it's not a career defining characteristic.

Yes, some great posts on this thread.

Truly epic and excellent breakdown, NotBadConsidering. I could not get past that first par of eyerolling drivel.

This part though, particularly noteworthy. I also want to see this:
I would genuinely want to know if every single signature on that letter fully agrees with and would happily release the statement "a lesbian can have a penis. Any lesbian who refuses to have sex with someone with a penis is transphobic and a vagina fetishist". It would make their position a lot clearer and get rid of all the bull in between.

Also very good posts, Mogleflop, and GeorgeFayne.

As soon as someone says "I identify as ..." it effectively means they are NOT the thing stated. And that is the crux of the current 'identity politics'. A whole bunch of people claiming to be things they are not. Cool woke/oppression points to be had by all!

I am a lesbian. I do not 'identify as a lesbian'.
I am female. I do not 'identify as female'.
I am a woman. I do not 'identify as a woman'.

I think that if you're going to try to redefine a word, that it's only polite to provide a new definition at least, since words mean things.

I would be universally acknowledged by people on the street as a woman. So that new definition needs to include me. My partner would be clearly seen as a man, so it needs to exclude him.

Transwomen would like it to include them, and transmen would like it to exclude them, so it's getting tougher.

Some fuzziness is OK at the edges (eg. intersex) - because these things are disorders that are, by their definition, fuzzy around sex.

It obviously can't be circular, as that's not a definition.

It's the foundation upon which the definitions of feminism and lesbianism are going to be then built - so it's bloody important.

It's going to affect existing laws, already written with the conventional definition in mind

What is this new definition? Please, there's been a lot of talking about this, it's really important, what is the definition? Snappity?

I counted at least 4 male people on that list (and didn't know who most of the people were) Not "feminists".

To quote someone or other "bullshit, bullshit, it's all bullshit".

Once you see the words "identify as..." you know what follows will be bullshit of the highest order.

I'm heterosexual. I don't identify as heterosexual, it's what I am. Lesbians are adult female homosexuals. They don't identify as lesbians, it's what they are.

Definitions are exclusionary. Words have meaning.
Women have had to fight for every little thing, and everything we have can be taken away. No one has the right to undermine women's rights, and if they do its bizarre they choose to call themselves feminists.

Really? A feminist is never allowed to criticise another woman when she doesn't agree with her?

That's not what this is about. It's about actively working to undermine women's rights.

So in summary of the claims on this thread by those opposing this letter

Trans women are not women
The feminists who wrote the letter are not feminists
One poster even suggested that the lesbians who wrote the letter are not lesbians

Spot a pattern?

...the acknowledgement of reality, Snappity?

Transwomen aren't women.

If you are a rape apologist of either sex, or a male who champions violent pornography and pimping, then you aren't a feminist.

If you are a male you aren't a lesbian.

Easy.

As a feminist I am profoundly concerned by anti-trans feminist rhetoric

Sally Hines, Transgender Identity. As highligted by The Economist.

Another so called feminists with concerns over, you know, real feminism.

mobile.twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1018402888702464000/photo/1