Trans lesbian?

The redefinition of the words that have had specific meanings for an awfully long time, and that still have those definitions for the vast vast majority of people here and over the world (in their language) is a massive act of appropriation.

The fact that the words being redefined are words that have been used by various rights movements to fight for change.

Words that still in law penalise certain groups.

Woman girl lesbian gay man. Homosexual. Female even. Really fundamental terms to describe large groups (half the population for girls and women) being unilaterally changed.

The arrogant imposition, insistence that the new definitions are the ones that must apply. Even though it makes a nonsense of women's rights, gay and lesbian rights issues, statements and activism.

That any attempt to describe these groups otherwise- rights for people who are assumed to have ovaries, rights for homosexuals. Are lambasted for being dog whistles, exclusionary etc.

We're not allowed any words instead of the ones that were well understood, clear, and still used that way by pretty much everyone.

Why are homosexuals and female people not to have any name as a group? How are we to organise and raise awareness about the many different issues we need to address, and that are specific to those groups, without any words?

I note that even media outlets and charities that say woman is a category for anyone who wants to be in that category. Still use the words with the original meaning for their fundraising and headline news.

When the BBC says girls in X country have been targeted in some way they mean sex. Vagina havers.

They never say children with vaginas have been targeted. They say girls.

So they don't take believe girl means any child who feels like a girl do they. Or they are not prepared to put their money where their mouth is. So they are liars, or they are cowards.

Also the fact that the words man and boy have not been subjected to the same level of outrage if they are used to mean male. Even on many things where the word woman has been erased.

@DrBlackbird here you go - it’s in the 4th section (sorry, ‘paragraph’ was misleading) just above the title ‘Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): gender and sex’

How can sexual attraction towards someone you've only just seen, or met, be based on an invisible feeling in their head?

Agree. It can be based partly on the way they present I guess. But just because someone is wearing stereotypically female clothes for example doesn't mean they even have a gender identity.

The EA applies to 'associations' I think. So it doesn't apply to casual groups. Not quite sure where the line is drawn.

But casual groups don't need to adhere to the EA surely.

Otherwise if I was going out to the pub with a female group of friends that I wanted to be female friends only, (which I personally don't go in for but I know lots of women do) and a chap wanted to come then the idea is you can't say no because sex discrimination in the EA.

I'm pretty sure that's not how it works.

Both.

But there are only c.5000 people with a legal sex that is different to their birth sex.

So a person's sexual orientation for the purposes of the Equality Act can be dependent on whether they have a GRC?

eg transwoman with GRC attracted to women - homosexual
transwoman without GRC attracted to women - heterosexual
transwomen attracted to women and transwomen - bisexual.

I still don't get what the EA has to do with lesbians being told they have to accept males into Facebook groups etc.

Me neither. Unless sex means legal sex so they have to accept those with GRCs? But from reading this thread, it seems lesbians are being told they have to include anyone who identifies as female.

But there are only c.5000 people with a legal sex that is different to their birth sex.

[quote Helen8220]@TheInebriati

That’s interesting, thanks. I see paragraph 4 says: “It is important to note that the law in the UK treats the terms sex and gender as interchangeable.” Which suggests that the references in the Equality Act definition of sexual orientation to attraction to the same or the opposite sex could equally refer to gender.[/quote]
TheInebriati references:
www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

I'm not seeing what you see with that sentence you quote from this document. Rather, it's stating that....

Sex and gender are terms that are often used interchangeably but they are in fact two different concepts, even though for many people their sex and gender are the same. This article will clarify the differences between sex and gender and why these differences are important to understand, especially in research and data collection.

And...

Sex and gender are different concepts that are often used interchangeably. The UK government refers to sex as being biologically defined, and gender as a social construct that is an internal sense of self, whether an individual sees themselves as a man or a woman, or another gender identity.

If they mean different concepts, then they can't be interchangeable...

Or why it means lesbian is anyone who cares to adopt that 'identity'.

It's all a bit of a mess I expect.

I still don't get what the EA has to do with lesbians being told they have to accept males into Facebook groups etc.

In the Equality Act, does sex mean biological sex or legal sex?

Oh and the fact that lesbians have been fetished by penis people forever and so being able to enter their groups etc with impunity is obviously going to be appealing to certain types of penis person.

The argument that everything set up for gay men or lesbians should be open to everyone, even casual Facebook groups etc. Is because of equalities laws?

The fact that changing lesbian to mean anyone who says they are one. Rides roughshod over/ ignores the historical oppression of both gay men and lesbians and the fact that around the world it is still illegal in some countries? And that laws are based on sex...?

So in Iran some gay or lesbian couples, under the new definitions. Would be arrested and some would be fine? So it's not a gay rights issue? Something else then. What? Hard to say.

The fact that a masc presenting transwoman and a lesbian holding hands etc will not invite looks/ abuse/ arrest in the same way two vagina owners can?

Oh god I know one of those people and they openly told me when I very first met them about how they'd used prostitutes

Oh yuck. I can believe it though. Online lesbian groups are full of wrong'uns, the TRAs become moderators and delete all the female homosexuals who dare disagree with them. It makes it seem like the group members all follow the TRA agenda but IRL lesbians are getting really pissed off with it all.

It's funny isn't it, there seems to be a certain type of lesbian that:

• uses prostitutes
• threatens rape
• gets aroused by wearing fishnet tights and feather boas
• fetishises lesbian sex
• transplains lesbianism to women

And it isn't the type that are born female.

Which suggests that the references in the Equality Act definition of sexual orientation to attraction to the same or the opposite sex could equally refer to gender

You should get yourself a job at stonewall. You'd fit right in there ☺️

@TheInebriati

That’s interesting, thanks. I see paragraph 4 says: “It is important to note that the law in the UK treats the terms sex and gender as interchangeable.” Which suggests that the references in the Equality Act definition of sexual orientation to attraction to the same or the opposite sex could equally refer to gender.

The word 'woman' is taken (adult human female). We are not conceding this sex based term to describe the female of the species - used in the same way as mare, sow, hen, doe - to become a gender based term.

The word 'female' is taken (member of the sex class which produces large immotile gametes and has the capacity, in mammals, to bear young).

The word 'lesbian' is taken (female exclusively same sex attracted)

The word 'apple' is taken, the word 'tomato' is taken. Just because they may both look red (or green) and be spherical and have seeds and are fruit and you are fine with both, doesn't mean you can force tomatoes on someone who is allergic to them and insist it's really 'just like' an apple and suggest there is something wrong with her for making a fuss.

Stop it.

The Equality Act 2010 in combination with the GRA gives 'legal' female/male status in most but not all circumstances only to those who hold a GRC (approx 5-6000 people).

There are estimates of 500,000-600,000 trans people in the UK, so roughly half a million plus without a GRC. Without a GRC, they remain their birth sex in law. So the chances of meeting an actual GRC holding 'female'-in-law-with-some-exceptions "lesbian" is less than 1%.

The protected characteristic of gender reassignment was never designed to cover crossdressers.

Here is the Labour peer, Baroness Thornton (and still the Labour peer responsible for Health and Social Care) presenting the Bill to the Lords back in 2010 and explaining precisely who the protected characteristic of gender reassignment - clause 7 - is designed to protect.

"The point I was making is that that is the range of things that could happen for a transsexual person.

However, Clause 7 does not cover transvestites or others who choose temporarily to adopt the appearance of the opposite gender.

While we do not condone anyone being treated badly because of the way in which they present themselves, it would not be appropriate to provide people who present themselves temporarily as of a gender other than their birth gender with the same protection against discrimination that is available to a person with gender dysphoria, who is somebody who has been assigned one gender at birth, but believes that they are of another gender. That is the point—it is what happens to that person that the Bill attempts to address."

Baroness Thornton on Monday 11 January 2010
hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2010-01-11/debates/10011139000077/EqualityBill?highlight=transvestites#contribution-10011149000003

It is Stonewall who put crossdressers (transvestites) under its trans umbrella alongside and as 'equally trans' as transsexuals.

Stonewall's position of TWAW and TMAM stands in direct contradiction to the intended protection in the EqA for both the protected characteristic of 'sexual orientation' and for 'gender reassignment'.

Can there be an organisation that advocates effectively for both the LGB and the TQ+? Is it impossible to lobby simultaneously for people for whom attraction is solely sex-based and for those whose personal gender identity is the deciding factor?

Surely they need new (maybe portmanteau?) words to describe people who are attracted primarily by gender rather than sex and stop trying to hijack the old ones.

www.theguardian.com/media/mind-your-language/2016/feb/04/english-neologisms-new-words

A couple of males are in a long term relationship. If one announced a new gender identity, would that automatically become a bisexual relationship? And if both, would that then be a lesbian relationship?

Nope. Tomatoes are not and never will be apples...

What do the equalities laws have to do with who people want to fuck?

The test case that defined 'sex' in UK law is is Corbett vs Corbett.
Gender cannot be defined in law and has no legal status.

[quote Helen8220]@Trevsadick
If you look back up thread you’ll see that the majority of the responses to things I’ve said have been much more along the lines of ‘you’re a homophobe and trans women are men’ without much more.

I’ve explained why the protection afforded by the Equality Act against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is in no way undermined by the recognition that trans women can be lesbians.[/quote]
''The UK government defines sex as referring to the biological aspects of an individual as determined by their anatomy, which is produced by their chromosomes, hormones and their interactions.''
www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

HTH.

How can sexual attraction towards someone you've only just seen, or met, be based on an invisible feeling in their head?

I entirely agree, Erikrie.

What trans activists are engaged in is the structural abuse of women and girls, with lesbians targeted in a very particular way.

Also of GNC children, many of whom will be gay.

There is or should be no debate to be had on what level of abuse of women/girls/lesbians/gnc children is acceptable.

The only answer is none, none at all. Or it should be. Would be, if we lived in a world where the values of safeguarding and true EDI were genuinely respected. If what is in our society actually matched what it says on the tin.

Heres a question
a)How many straight women on here ever been sexually harassed by a lesbian?
b)how many women (bi/straight/lesbian) been harrassed by a male
c)how many lesbians have been sexually harassed by a transwoman who claims to be a lesbian

I would guess very few to a)
Most women to b)
And c) many more than a)

Male pattern behaviour doesnt change with a change of prononuns and trousers for skirts