Do we have it anywhere on record that Stonewall does/does not support people to express their sexuality as exclusively homosexual?

I will, I've thought a lot about it, but I will want to phrase it well, so at some point you'll get my answer. This is not a dodge.

I'm sure it will be totally convincing and not at all like all the other absurd special pleading we've heard from trans activists and their supporters.

Bilinda can we also expect an apology for your homophobic comments along with your explanation of how a transwoman is a " woman"

You've got nothing. Just a degree in mental gymnastics.

Hilarious projection.

I wasn't saying the two were comparable, I was listing preferences that are considered ok, some that maybe aren't and saying if you can have these preferences, of course you should be able to be specific if you are gay or lesbian, it's much more important and should be beyond criticism.

Well, you’ve got chutzpah, I’ll give you that! 😂

You've got nothing. Just a degree in mental gymnastics.

Haha! Well, that's the equalities act told. 🤣

I was friends with a lesbian couple. One of them went through a bit of a crisis and identified as a trans man. They went through with the full surgery. As soon as they had a penis, it broke their partner's heart because they couldn't deny they weren't attracted to them anymore. She had absolutely no wish to be anywhere near a penis. She tried and tried to be supportive of them, but as their voice started deepening, their breasts were removed and they started growing facial hair, she found herself completely turned off. She ended their relationship on the grounds that she is a lesbian and they aren't a woman any more. They understood completely and they themselves are vocal about lesbians and gay men being perfectly entitled to be same sex attracted and not attracted to trans people. There are enough trans and Pansexual people in the world for everyone to find a partner. They also don't like trans "allies" screeching that anyone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people is transphobic. As they say, not one person in the world is owed sex from anyone else and nobody should have to pretend to be attracted or frightened to say they are or aren't to anyone. That's what gay people have already been through, and now suddenly they're being forced through it again by the militant woke. Almost every gay person I know is utterly horrified by the trans agenda. Many trans people have been vocal about how they do not support this mindset that everyone who doesn't want to fuck them is bigoted and have then been called bigots themselves.

If someone tried to "re-educate" me on who I was attracted to, they'd be told to fuck off. My trans friend said people should find these screeching harpies some OAP porn and call them ageist and bigoted if they refused to watch it.

''You are attempting to portray it as a prejudice, a bias that is somehow distasteful and on a par with racism. You are determined not to accept it as an orientation. It’s sickening,''

You've got nothing. Just a degree in mental gymnastics.

I would not use the phrase 'male people, including transwomen' because that is unnecessarily inflammatory, given that many transwomen do not consider themselves male people, and a large section of the public, whether you like it or not, affirms that.

I'd hazard a guess that quite a few of 'the public' get the terms mixed up and think you mean 'woman who want to transition to manhood'. That's certainly the case among quite a few people when I've mentioned it.

It's impossible to define 'transwoman' without mentioning that they are male. I don't mean impossible to explain it to those steeped in the terminology throughout school and via the internet, but try explaining it to my MIL, for instance.

Thank you BilindaB

This board in particular goes out of its way to misrepresent the vast majority of trans people by maintaining an overt focus on a minority viewpoint and then attempting to extrapolate from this that is some sort of official position of a broader community.

You, yourself, have just said it's better if lesbians remain quiet about their sexual orientation!

At the same time as maintaining this view point is not a minority one!

No one needs to go out of their way to do anything. You're doing it all for us.

''Hello, could you please explain to me how transwomen are women? Ta ever so.''

I will, I've thought a lot about it, but I will want to phrase it well, so at some point you'll get my answer. This is not a dodge.

This is a concerted attempt to undermine and erase the sexual orientation of lesbians. Lesbians in the traditional sense of biologically female people only attracted to other biologically female people. It is pure homophobia

Bilinda, you came on this thread to deny it’s happening and then proved you’re a part of the phenomenon.

You don’t support these lesbians’ rights to support and representation. You don’t recognise that theirs is an actual sexual orientation, with all your dreadful false equivalences. You are attempting to portray it as a prejudice, a bias that is somehow distasteful and on a par with racism. You are determined not to accept it as an orientation. It’s sickening,

I’m raging. Floral, I’m so angry that you and other lesbians have to contend with this. After all you’ve been through already, to have this from the “community” that’s supposed to support you, be for you - it’s nightmarish.

Looking back to get this quote also reminded me that I, and I think others, asked for evidence that the 'vast majority' of trans people have stood up and defended victims of the abuse and harassment lesbians have received if they don't agree with it?

To make it very easy, where is the evidence that the lobby groups have issued statements that lesbians clearly stating their boundaries should be respected and not abused by their members?

Anything?

**would you agree that if a lesbian says "I will not date or have sex with any male people, including transwomen" then that's perfectly reasonable? ''

Yes, totally.

You can also say 'I will only date people of colour, I won't date any man under 5'8, I couldn't date a fat person, I only date asian women, I only date men who make more than 50k a year, I'm only looking for a vegetarian, etc.**
Implying sexuality is a "choice" shows appalling homophobia. This is hateful speech.

HTH

So that, I think is the difference. It seems some people want to shout out loudly 'O I would never be attracted to a trans woman.' That's not necessary - you don't have to shout it out loud but you can have it as your preference and no one should expect you to do otherwise.

Lesbians can only be lesbians if they are quiet about it, because it upsets the men who want to have sex with them?

Got it.

And for the zillionth time, suggestions, excluding all men, however they identify from one's dating port is not a sexual preference.

It's a sexual orientation. Protected by law. Under the equalities act. Equality? Remember that? Among other things it was designed to eliminate the open homophobia demonstrated by your comment.

Lesbians are just as entitled as transwomen to march, celebrate, wave lesbian flags, and make it known, deafeningly, to the whole world that they don't sleep with men, however they identify.

I wasn't saying the two were comparable, I was listing preferences that are considered ok, some that maybe aren't and saying if you can have these preferences, of course you should be able to be specific if you are gay or lesbian, it's much more important and should be beyond criticism.

Did I not give you the answer you wanted when I said 'yes, totally?' Are you looking for a row, whatever I say? It's tiresome. Don't be tiresome.

Weird how both of Bilinda and suggestions are ignoring the fact that sexual orientation is a protected characteristic.

Yes, it’s perfectly legitimate to exclude whoever you want from your “dating pool”, for whatever reason, but we don’t protect any of those other categories in law. There isn’t a name for people who are only attracted to/not attracted to people of other ethnicities, people of different body shapes/sizes, people with different hair colours, etc. It is not a sexual orientation; it’s a sexual preference.

And everyone is of course fully entitled to their sexual preferences, but they’re not recognised as orientations in law. There is no long and shameful history of women who are only attracted to 6’+ men being marginalised, ostracised, victimised for their preference. There have been no organisations undertaking conversion therapy to try and make them be attracted to shorter men. No corrective rape on the grounds that only being attracted to taller men is “unnatural”. All the usual sexual harassment, assault and boundary violation that men inflict on women in general of course; but nothing on these grounds specifically.

But there has been all this and more in the case of women who are only attracted to other women, and we all know that, the government knows that, and all the biologically male people ever who felt/feel aggrieved because a woman says no to them know that.

It is absurd, disingenuous, and homophobic to pretend there’s any equivalence at all, and it just shows up the fundamental dishonesty of that position, the fact that there is no sound argument on that side at all.

This is bigotry, and I think it’s disgusting.

It does come across as lesbians being permitted to identify as such but needing to be careful in stating this out loud or publicly using that identity to maintain their own boundaries.

At the moment I'm hearing a report on the news about how women in Afghanistan are currently restricting their apparently still existing freedoms anticipating punishment and I can't help but find these very different situations to be vaguely similar.

The final sentence "And that anyone attacking her for holding this position is being homophobic?" is problematic, as homophobia is not an inherent sentiment of someone who is unhappy that someone else might be discounting more people from dating options.

That's a very odd sentence. What does it matter to you if someone else is 'discounting more people from dating options'?

Isn't 'dating' about being with someone to whom you are attracted? So if you 'discount' people from your 'dating options' the only person this affects is you, because you are reducing the options available to you. How does this affect other people enough to make them 'unhappy'? Other than in the sense of feeling sorry for you because you have decided to make yourself lonely by depriving yourself of possible relationships?

These cute little 'Well, you can have a racial preference, but it might attract criticism' analogies are just the bog standard TRA line of comparing women's boundaries to racism, and in this instance suggesting that the oppobrium TRAs are subjecting lesbians to is because lesbians being lesbians is akin to being cruel or racist

Exactly.