Feminists only claim to care about lesbians in order to justify transphobia

*Coyoacan
*

Namalt is a perfectly legitimate position to hold, @sakura, because it is true. It is not an argument against same-sex spaces, but it is an argument against saying that all men are foul.

No you've misunderstood. I don't necessarily think all men are like that. I've never said I have.

What I'm saying is, if a woman generalizes about men because she wants to separate herself from them in some way, (and the example I give is on my other thread where I specify I would only ever want a female midwife,)
to be told my right to have a same sex caregiver is unreasonable because namalt is anti feminist.
.I was told I was unhealthy, that I was living my life in fear, I've also been told in a sort of religious type way that people "wish me peace " , I was told to overcome my fear of medicine when I repeatedly said it's not so much medicine I don't like, it's being treated intimately by men.

1 Much as you wish it were true the number of actual lesbians that are claiming to have been forced to accept penises in their relationships is fractionally small.

2 They appear to be the same people who have espoused particularly transphobic views. Eg the ones saying no TW in women’s toilets.

1 The coercion by these males is aimed at the younger lesbians who are coming to terms with their sexuality. It is these young women we aim to protect from such corruption of their sexuality by men.

2 UK law provides for men in all their forms to be excluded from toilets designated for females.

Women are asserting their boundaries and will continue so to do.

It's never happened to me, but I know it's happening to other women

Much as you wish it were true the number of actual lesbians that are claiming to have been forced to accept penises in their relationships is fractionally small. They appear to be the same people who have espoused particularly transphobic views. Eg the ones saying no TW in women’s toilets.

Everywhere there are a majority of lesbians saying they have not been forced to accept penises. You just choose not to believe them.

In schools now young girls are being told that if this is the case then they are probably trans

Then it’s up to us to make sure there are enough gender non conforming women role models around. Like the fabulous butch lesbian referred to here. Who is definitely not a ‘buffoon’.

Many of the feminists arguing for the right of lesbians to not include willies in their sex life are themselves lesbians and a hell of a lot of heterosexual women support them regardless of any other political views they may hold.

Exactly. The coercive behaviour re enforced acceptance of penis in lesbian relationships encapsulates the whole issue around consent and boundaries women have faced since for-fucking-ever.

It's like 'first they came for the socialists and I didn't speak out...' in reverse. So, this time we're on it. We've seen the writing on the wall and hell yes we are speaking out for lesbians and we are also speaking out for women who don't want to wax cocks and balls and we are also speaking out for women who have earned gold on the podium, only to see it given to a cheating man and we are speaking out for children and we are speaking out for ourselves.

Namalt is a perfectly legitimate position to hold, @sakura, because it is true. It is not an argument against same-sex spaces, but it is an argument against saying that all men are foul.

If you are a marxist, one would criticise all attitude that went against Marx's writings, likewise a Trotskyism should adhere to what Trotsky said. But there is no rulebook for feminism other than centering women's rights and needs. Lots of brilliant women write and talk on the matter, but a woman can be a feminist without having read any of them.

Feminism aims to dismantle patriarchy and achieve autonomy for females over their lives. It seeks parity of power and control. It focuses on the entire collective sex class that is female. It is practised by females, with females, for females across the world.

Of course feminists support their lesbians sisters ... they have already taken steps to dismantle patriarchy from an important part of their lives.

sakura184 perhaps you should start a separate thread to thrash it out.

Although personally I see no value in coming to a concensus on Mumsnet I do enjoy reading different perspectives laid out.

Philosophical thought is driven by disagreement. Disagreement helps you to test your own thinking and can provide new perspectives.

Anyway back on topic.

Many of the feminists arguing for the right of lesbians to not include willies in their sex life are themselves lesbians and a hell of a lot of heterosexual women support them regardless of any other political views they may hold.

*@Outanabout
*
Apples and oranges. What women have in common is being women, and ridiculous fuckery like 'marriage is prostitution' alienates women from a movement that should be drawing women in, not driving them away with unrealistic grandstanding.

Alternatively make feminism anything you want it to be to get more women on board with it. Oh wait that already happened , the pimp and trans lobby loved us for it

@Watchfulwaiter
*
*
No, I'm of the opinion that feminism is up for debate, but a lot of feminists can form a consensus opinion. (Consensus opinions aren't always correct of course).

I agree with you about a consensus opinion in feminism. It might help if we thrashed it out on mumsnet.
Namalt is blatant ant feminism because basic feminist theory is that women are an oppressed class. So if a woman wants to generalize about men and is told namalt, then the person saying that to her doesn't recognize the class basis of her oppression.

Why are some people so heavily invested in trying to shove people into 'true feminist', 'false feminist' boxes?

This.

sigh

There is no single authoritarian doctrine on feminism. Even within those who do centre women.

It would be really counter productive for feminism to become so narrow that it no longer allowed for debate, disagreement and discussion.

We are all wrong at times and the best way to explore that and help others see things in a different way is through conversations. People will only change their minds if they are allowed the time and space to come to their own conclusions. Getting obsessed with thus idea of purity tends to alienate and entrench and doesn't achieve the goal you want.

Ultimately the strength of an argument should always speaks for itself rather than someone being told 'it's the right belief' if you are a feminist or whatever political view it happens to be.

It is healthy for there to be disagreement to an extent for this reason.

Not to mention women do see centring women in different ways. They have different priorities and considerations. Sometimes in focusing on one thing you miss how it disadvantages another group of women.

Then there is a range of views within coming from a pragmatic approach and a purely ideological one.

Both can absolutely centre women, just disagree in how that's achieved.

Apples and oranges. What women have in common is being women, and ridiculous fuckery like 'marriage is prostitution' alienates women from a movement that should be drawing women in, not driving them away with unrealistic grandstanding.

Sakura

"So you're of the opinion that feminism is anything you want it to be"

No, I'm of the opinion that feminism is up for debate, but a lot of feminists can form a consensus opinion. (Consensus opinions aren't always correct of course).

I would say you're of the opinion that feminism is anything you want it to be -
You don't give the rest of us any room whatsoever for any interpretation of our own other than your own, how sad for you to be so self satisfied in your own opinions.

So some of us aren't doing feminism right sakura184? Or, at least, not up to your exacting standards. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to point out exactly which lines we have to toe to qualify and I'm sure we'll all rush to get ourselves with the program. Shouldn't be too difficult for you to lick us all into shape, most of the job's been done for you already since we're all quite compliant having been accustomed to being told what to do and think and how we're doing it wrong by men our whole lives, we shouldn't have an issue with other women telling us the same thing.

Can you STOP doing the @thing please, all the bloody email notifications are getting annoying!

Changing the definition of feminism Did I say anything about that? Nope, I think not. Did you agree with my definition or not? Or it is just that I'm not particularly interested in joining in your mass classification scheme of feminist/ not feminist. Enough if my thinking is as feminist as I can make it, and what other women have to say is interesting.

When someone is more interesting in classifying rather than actual discussion, it usually ends up being less helpful to any progress.

I disagree with you Sakura, and I don't think this is going anywhere at all useful. In fact, possibly boring...........................

@Outanabout

Why is it only women's politics that has to cater to everyone? Why do we have to make feminism nice and palatable to the masses?

Do you think communist men put up with this if a conservative goes onto their forum and tries to get them to make their politics more likeable, or change it so it fits in with something everyone can get on board with

I don't consider NALMALTING to be anti-feminist it can be the start of a learning curve.

It's also quite possible to be right wing and be concerned about lesbians. In fact some lesbians are actually are right wingers. (Admittedly I can only think of one lesbian whereas I've known a few right wing gay men personally)

Jeez it isn't enough that we have men trying to control us, seems like every one in the world feels the need to lecture women on the right way to be feminist.

@SomeDyke

Being nice has got us nowhere . Changing the definition of feminism in order to be nice to misogynistic women, no thank you

@Watchfulwaiter

So you're of the opinion that feminism is anything you want it to be

Namalt, is not up for debate. If you go on threads namalting then you're a blatant anti feminist.

See, there you show where we totally disagree, once the phrases 'no debate' and calling it anti-feminist creep in. Ideological purity wouldn't have saved us from the current mess, and won;t help us get out of it either. And very interesting, don't you think, that it is the pro-porn, pro-gender side that is also going for the same 'no debate', ideological purity style of approach........

Nope, I'll go for listening to all women, thank you very much, and not being scared to disagree. Arguments and debate, not these silly bans or refusal to engage.

Well I think every single marriage is an individual one, with it's own strengths and weaknesses. I will not be told I'm not a feminist because I admire some peoples marriages, whilst being critical of others.

ALL women have something useful to say, and we should be concerned about all women.

As a feminist I am concerned about all women. I want us free.
But that doesn't mean feminism has to change to suit all the people who get upset that they don't like what it means and what it stands for , to the point where it becomes unrecognizable as feminism.

@Endofthedays

Well she identified as a lesbian. I know she married John and I think that was something to do with her being very sick and in America being unmarried and without the insurance you needed left women very vulnerable. I know she has received a lot of criticism from feminists for marrying him. I think she loved women first and was a lesbian because she wrote so much about being a lesbian