Concept of ‘exclusively same sex attracted’

It's ridiculous to suggest that all LGB people feel the same about trans-inclusion. What a silly thing to say.

Some people don't need any reason, just an excuse, to try to pull down someone more successful than them. Especially if it's a woman, though I wonder if envy played it's part in Glinner being dropped so quickly by his 'friends'.

I expect fear plays a part too. But 'the right side of history' narrative may help sweeten the bitter pill they have to swallow. That they're actually cowards. None of the stated 'reasons' stand scrutiny. None of their real reasons bear thinking about.

But how would they justify it in a way that would be acceptable for public consumption. I know many people would find that explanation entirely acceptable but not everyone.

I don't think they even had to justify it. A few people yelling 'JKR is an awful transphobe' all over Twitter was enough. And suddenly that became the narrative.

I have the same sense of bewilderment about it as you. There's nothing rational about it at all. However a lot of people were very quick to try to drag a smart, successful, confident woman down.

But how would they justify it in a way that would be acceptable for public consumption. I know many people would find that explanation entirely acceptable but not everyone. And, as you said, more will let others do their thinking for them. Perhaps they can be persuaded to think for themselves?

I'm curious as to why they think that

Because it differentiates between sex and gender and argues we should prioritise vulnerable women's sex based rights. The militant TRAs cannot deal with the idea of these women's rights prioritised before their's.

But most people who think she's transphobic do so because the internet told them that and they literally cannot think for themselves. Much less seek out her own words to verify popular opinion.

The degree to which vast numbers of people are simply brainless sheep is possibly the most depressing thing about all this.

yep!

@TheKeatingFive I don't believe it's transphobic either, but some people who obviously haven't read it think it is. I'm curious as to why they think that. It pretty much sums up my thoughts on trans-inclusion. I'm not l or b, I don't think I belong at Pride.

I'm a bit disappointed that the OP doesn't seem to think that lesbians who turn up for the march in Leeds won't have been at pride. She may be right, I wonder if she finds that as sad as I do. I think tw should be included as tw. OP do you think tw should be attending a Lesbian Strength march. Just to get the thread kind of back on its rails.

I think the essay is still online. It's not even slightly 'transphobic' (word has lost all meaning in fairness)

I'd love to learn what JKR said that was transphobic. I don't suppose....?

Yeah, some of those 'Style & Beauty' threads can be brutal. I'm too scared to even look at Gransnet.

It's on 17th September in Leeds at 2 pm. Perhaps if the OP rocks up she may learn a thing or two.

At the end of the article @loopycurtains posted above Julie says there will be a Lesbian Strength march in Leeds. I wish them well. I hope it isn't invaded by bady dressed men.

Sorry, I KNOW it's the Fail and I KNOW I'm resurrecting a thread that looked like it may have mercifully died. But thought this article sums up so much of what so many PPs have been trying to say to the knuckle-headed OP. Whether or not OP is still reading (and let's face it, who cares because they clearly don't want to listen), I have found this thread depressing but informative and enlightening so for anyone else who is interested...

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11165667/JULIE-BINDLE-says-time-break-growing-list-identities-make-LGBTQQI.html

And anyone that cannot spot the binary, sex based disparity in entitlement and labour in all this has both hands over their eyes and is shouting 'la la la' to drown it out.

No one in all this has any problem at all in knowing which party is of which sex, and which sex gets which treatment.

And this is why the best that gets offered to female homosexuals is 'learn to cope' (with straight sex)

Because it is demanding that a female homosexual intentionally forces herself to engage in sex with a person she perceives and experiences as male in order to nurture the male person's inner definition and identity.

It is the ultimate in using females. The absolute ultimate in conversion therapy. The absolute ultimate in misogyny, that sex is something for males to enjoy (however they identify) and not for females: it is a social service to perform for others. And good female homosexuals will learn to do this - by which is meant, practice it, (you can find the 'how to' guides in lesbian mags these days) and 'unlearn your genital prejudices' (grit your teeth, lay back and think of Stonewall)...

ffs how sick can you get?

Why can a female's right to declare a sexuality that will never under any circumstances involve any male not be something to be out and proud about?

When people are proudly trying to reclaim all kinds of kink why is female homosexuality such an absolute anathema that they really shouldn't be allowed to hurt other people by talking about in public places? Or resisting their rebranding and 'encouragement' to be bisexual while calling it 'lesbian' ?

LOL the description given to Null from a man who had sex with a TW leapt out at me as well as it left nothing to the imagination. The blow by blow account of what his experience was like was eye-popping. Clearly the guy is open-minded otherwise he wouldn't have had sex relations with a TW but in no uncertain terms he describes how the experience was in no way similar to having sex with a female.

Some people have actually reflected, because they're coming from a place of promoting consent and freedom from coercion, rather than gender identity ideology, and said "I'd not seen it like that before, but I see your point".

We can see aseriesofstillimages trying to use that logic against women here by saying we're implying that straight women shouldn't have the right to say no to any man they choose and lesbians can. She knows that isn't what we are saying.

Exactly. I interrogate that response. Every single time. Because that is what is meant by it.

Hence the never ending 'I graciously permit you to say no on an individual basis but not to declare your body off limits to the entire sex class of males'.

It's been a wake up call to me on these themed threads in the last few days that there are women right here on MN who don't believe that other females should be able to refuse male people sexual access to them.

That a female has no business to wanting a life that will never be sexually useful to a male - even when the male demands it and makes all sorts of special pleading for it.

I see the women on AIBU constantly who show really remarkable misogyny - from the 'yes he just tried to strangle you but you probably annoyed him, so dry your face, go and give him a big cuddle, say sorry and make him a nice dinner' posts, to the sniffy, reproachful 'you don't like her do you?' posts to the woman who's posted that her MiL is constantly unkind and invasive and inappropriate with her. Just somehow I'd thought we'd got over the homophobia part.

But no. Like feminism, it was something female people were allowed to borrow for a bit until male people found an aspect of it that they wanted. Now female people have to give it back and not resist or complain, and it's the same core thought: if a female or her space or resource is not in some way serving a biological male then she is selfish and misbehaving.

And no one with these awful attitudes have the slightest problem knowing who is the servant and who gets served, there is no confusion at all. None. No checks of any kind needed, no concerns about misattituding, because it's based on binary biological sex based thinking. Despite a lot of performative stuff about avocados.

This is so true. I never really got it completely until this issue was mainstream.

I certainly would have dismissed it as daft feminist hyperbole. It's very hard to do so now.

And, of course, even if it was a choice (which I know it’s not), men don’t like women making choices that deny men something they want.

This is so true. I never really got it completely until this issue was mainstream.

@ArabellaScott - spot on. But trans women take it personally because they don’t like women asserting their boundaries, and they want to use trans rights ideology to allow them to fulfil their desire to have sex with lesbians. I think it comes from a very homophobic belief that lesbianism is really just a choice, and women only make that choice because they haven’t had sex with the right man yet.

And, of course, even if it was a choice (which I know it’s not), men don’t like women making choices that deny men something they want.