Not having sex with someone because they don't have the right genitals is transphobic. No prizes for guessing who's claiming this

What the fucking fuck is actually going on in the world.

Like actually what the fuck.

I like dick, and I like men.. why the fuck would I be transphobic to say no to someone who looked like a man but had a vagina? They can't stick their vagina in me which is the whole purpose, it's why I like DICK.

Urgh. Raging.

surely this stance is undoing everything they've tried for years to get people to understand, sexual orientation is not a choice?

True, but gay men don't seem to be receiving the flak for not wanting sex with women that lesbians are receiving for not wanting sex with men so perhaps they don't care.

You reduce your dating pool when you get married, too. But we don't tend to have any respect at all for people who whine about married people not sleeping with them, or married people whining that they only get to sleep with one person now.

No one suggests that a married man should work on his adulteriphobia. Grow the fuck up, you whinging, needy creep infested movement.

The general public have, largely accepted, that sexual orientation is something where one is just 'born this way'.

And now, all the organisations who have campaigned for decades are saying, nah, not really, only joking, it's all just a choice, haha got ya.

Exactly, I don't get how the "G" in LGBT seem to be so quiet on this, I know they're not the ones getting shouted at to sleep with Man vaginas but surely this stance is undoing everything they've tried for years to get people to understand, sexual orientation is not a choice? I just don't get how the "T" continue to get backing from the community when they seem to have a completely different stance

How the ever loving fuck are we supposed to raise happy and confident young lesbians and gay men, with shitty ideas like this flying about?
Having an exclusive sexual orientation (not a mere ‘preference’, Rachel) is an ordinary, perfectly acceptable part of human existence.

Paris Lees is absolutely right (possibly for the first time ever).

Just stop, Rachel.

"Lesbians OK with dating female humans who wear trousers and have short hair" shocker.

I think more were prepared to date an FTM, unsurprisingly to most but surprising to the genderist researchers.

I remember seeing in the breakdown of participants in the original study that only 9% of lesbians were prepared to date an MTF trans person, so it appears the woke ones are mostly lying or disproportionately over represented on social media.

Indeed.

If it was only 20% fewer then I suspect a lot of people weren't being honest.

Just in case anyone was thinking of going "oh well they can date bisexual people then" - nope, we're not the backup plan, most of us aren't interested in dating people who follow a bizarre religion and often attempt to alter their secondary sexual characteristics either.)

Yes I think they need to realise that they have significantly reduced their dating pool as the below study found. But there are surely lots of other trans people they can date who also don't believe in genital preferences, no?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inclusive-insight/201906/are-trans-people-excluded-the-world-dating

Looking more closely at the patterns of responses, it also became clear that individuals were least likely to express an interest in dating trans women, even if their sexual identity would otherwise indicate an interest in women. Indeed, nearly 20% fewer people indicated an interest in trans women than would have been expected based on the sexual identities of the individuals within the sample.

Guessing this is lesbians, bisexuals of both sexes, and straight men.

The general public have, largely accepted, that sexual orientation is something where one is just 'born this way'.

And now, all the organisations who have campaigned for decades are saying, nah, not really, only joking, it's all just a choice, haha got ya.

I've met gay men who I thought were gorgeous, and straight women too. You know what I did? I got over it and moved on, because I respect other people's boundaries.

Well, I'd date men or women, but not transwomen or transmen. Don't like it? Too bad, because you don't get a say.

(Just in case anyone was thinking of going "oh well they can date bisexual people then" - nope, we're not the backup plan, most of us aren't interested in dating people who follow a bizarre religion and often attempt to alter their secondary sexual characteristics either.)

So are all straight people homophobic? And all gay people heterophobic?

I've never heard anyone with a crush on someone of the opposite sexuality complain the object of their affection is a genital fetishist. "What a waste" and "I wish they were gay/straight" is as far as it goes.
Where does the entitlement come from? And why are they so pushy with their rapey views?

These screenshots from that thread are really upsetting.

Yes, they are. Basically asking for tips on domestic abuse there. Lovely.

McKinnon might well be a troll, they sure seem to love the attention. But this sort of thinking has infiltrated. For example, from a student union:

"For example, if you would date women but never a trans woman (or men but never a trans man), or would date men and women but not non-binary people, this is because you have internalised cissexism and transmisogyny. (The solution is not for you to go out and date a trans person to prove this isn’t true – the solution is to start working on combating these things within yourself.)"

Not quite as blatant as McKinnon telling people to get used to dick, but the same message ultimately. That you should "work on yourself" if you're not attracted to trans people. Most men won't give a shit about this sort of thing, but it is far more likely that it is the young lesbians who will feel the responsibility to be open to dating transwomen. (Particularly as this propaganda is coming from the LGBT campaign.)

I’m away at the moment with rubbish WiFi so I can’t find it, but there’s an old blog (possibly found by the farmers?) where RM says that the the sex RM and RM’s wife had during their marriage was basically rape. (ie RM was being raped). No real rationale is given for this, from what I remember.

Which as ungenerous ways to treat a trans widow go, just about takes the biscuit.

I still can’t get my head around what sort of Mickey Mouse university would employ such an idiot. Did they not meet McKinnon beforehand?

I would also like someone to tweet Alistair Magowan of the BBC, who decided McKinnon was worthy of an article last year and ask him if he thinks McKinnon is a good person to be associated with.

Perhaps McKinnon's asexuality is the result of surgery.

(assuming it exists at all)

It’s as true as I’m sitting here riding a bike... as my mum used to say.

I take the declaration of asexuality about as seriously as I take Rachel's other assertations, honestly.

I’d be interested to know where the cut off point for saying no is? As far as I’m concerned I’m entitled to change my mind at any point for any reason. Even after the person has penetrated me I can say Stop. They can’t legally say “Oops too late”! They need consent for the full duration of the act.

I assumed it was more ‘meh can take it or leave it’. But some people are really over-invested in theorising as to why anyone wouldn’t want to have sex with them.