"Lesbians being anti-trans is a lesbophobic trope"

I've been told by women on MN multiple times that I'm homophobic for saying that I will not ever be willing to learn to become sexually attracted to male people. And homophobic for not being willing to stretch the term homosexual and lesbian to be male inclusive. And that I should not be homosexual, it's transphobic. It all benefits men at the expense of homosexual females, that's the purpose of all of this niggling.

If I found myself fantastically attracted to someone then I would be fantastically attracted to someone. If I felt that attraction I can't think that I would stop being attracted because they then explained that they were a different sex to the one they expected - I might then think perhaps my sexuality had aspects to it that I hadn't realised before. And that perhaps I was bi rather than lesbian. It wouldn't be a problem.

Because the investment isn't in some kind of gatekeeping myself to biological females, it's in having a word to describe how it is for female people whose sexuality exclusively works only for other female people. And dealing with the never ending attempts of male steering (but done by both male and female people for that benefit to male people) to try and change that because of an underlying belief that a female doesn't really have a right to define her own sexuality or refuse to be useful to male people.

While blaming MNHQ. That's a first.

I see we've reached the flounce....

This is bizzare.

The thread was only started because a poster wanted to gloat about a lesbian being allegedly inclusive of male people. I'm not completely convinced as it's a very non committal article.

Why would the OP even bother to do that if it was perfectly normal to say that lesbians are attracted to a well passing, beautiful trans woman as part of their exclusive attraction to women?

OP has only done it to wind up people that expect exclusive attraction to women to mean women, not some men too if they are pretty enough.

So it's a bit cheeky to be all indignant about it on a deliberately goady thread.

If it wasn't controversial this thread wouldn't exist and OP wouldn't be here having a needle at lesbians for fun.

All this horribleness originates with the men calling themselves lesbians. Not Mumsnet. Maybe go and pick on people somewhere that men can also assist you in the questions about the weird article.

@nilsmousehammer What is a 'female smell' exactly?

What is this need to try and wangle those boundaries around until somehow it's possible to crowbar a male into lesbianism? Who is this helping? Why does it matter?
It matters because I'm a lesbian who has just been told by women on mumsnet that I should be excluded from the only community who has ever understood me and given me safety. From when I lost my relationship with my family over 20 years ago for saying I'd never be able to marry a man (since rekindled, not everyone is so fortunate) to having friends to turn to when I was in an abusive relationship with a woman, that community has been my chosen family.

Now, I've been told 'it doesn't matter, just call yourself bisexual, you don't belong any more' simply because I said I wouldn't exclude a well passing, beautiful trans woman from my dating pool.

Well in the words of so many GC mumsnet posters, I'm putting up a wall and saying 'no'. You can't deny the science of attraction to fit into your definitions and gatekeep. Not when it gets so personal.

My last post on this thread, possibly even mumsnet. @MNHQ you are ultimately accountable for this.

I must admit, if I found out that a man I was interested in was female, it would be an unequivocal zeroing in attraction from me.

I also equate the 'HER' app to be potentially used against lesbians in the future as a leverage point 'look it is a 'lesbian' app and we are accepted as lesbians there'. It is disingenuous to ask why it matters so much.

It is like declaring Teen Vogue to be written for teen girls when we absolutely know it is not any more, and declaring that this is what 'teen girls' are talking about so discussion around that subject must be ok! In a thinking world, it wouldn't matter because people would assume there is something very disconnected happening. But we don't live in a thinking world.

@nilsmousehammer How on earth can you say that I have directly lead to homophobia being 'ok' because 'don't be mean'. That feels weirdly personal. How about you hold homophobic people telling gay women to 'try dick' accountable instead of ME? It's bizarre, and such misdirected anger.

Lesbians should not be harangued for not doing men. It's not transphobic. I've made that clear.

I refuse to change how I describe my identity (WTF, how am i even saying that in 2023 on a thread about lesbians on a website for women) because of the myth that someone can't be attracted to a well passing, beautiful trans woman as part of their exclusive attraction to women.

If I'd dated and had a huge crush on Dave down the road who came out as trans yesterday and is now wearing a bad wig, I'd get your point. But I met and was attracted to a very beautiful passing, post-op trans woman.

Another example would be that by your logic lesbians could find trans men like Aydian Dowling attractive. Now I don't find Aydian Dowling attractive, because when I look at him I see a man. I don't compute him as a woman. And I'm not attracted to that...because I'm gay!!! It's so not as simple as you're making out.

A male body with boobs and an artificial vagina and long hair, is still a male body.

Lesbianism is attraction to female people. The whole package of exclusive attraction to female people. The 'but if the male looked like this and this and this...'

No. People aren't human lego. It isn't the secondary sex characteristics that are the focus of attraction. I can appreciate the beauty of a male person, I can love the personality of a male person, but I can't feel sexual attraction to one. Wrong size, wrong shape, wrong smell even. What is this need to try and wangle those boundaries around until somehow it's possible to crowbar a male into lesbianism? Who is this helping? Why does it matter? If you're attracted to people of both sexes and you aren't specifically homosexual, then just be bi! Be proud, enjoy it, it's not a downgrade of any kind!

That scenario only works if the man still finds the transwoman attractive once they know that they are biologically a man.

If they are still attracted and would pursue a relationship I would definitely argue that they were bisexual or at least curious.

If they aren't still attracted then they were fooled by the fleeting outward appearance in the moment and remain heterosexual.

It's not all that complicated.

The 'I can call myself a lesbian while not actually being homosexual' is the wedge that's led to homosexual women being driven out of pride and harangued for not doing men as part of lesbianism.

Your personal choosy choices have impact on others. Your identity preferences lead directly to homophobia being 'ok' because 'don't be mean'.

This whole 'I'm just being me' while walking over other people really has got to stop.

Of course it's okay! I absolutely wasn't saying it's not okay. I'm just saying it doesn't always happen like that, because that's not how attraction works for a lot of people.

I think lesbians should be able to say 'no trans women for me please' and not be able to be labelled as bigots. I also think lesbians should be able to say 'yeah I'd date a beautiful, well passing trans women', especially if she's post-op, and not be told she's no longer welcome in the lesbian community.

There's nothing wrong with being bisexual, I'm just not.

It's so ironic that this conversation about how lesbians shouldn't be forced to like dick, has turned into telling a lesbian (me) that she should call herself bisexual. Is that so different to telling me that I should maybe try dick? The hypocrisy is astounding.

I am more conflicted about those “transmen” formerly known as lesbians who are still hanging around with lesbians while claiming to be boys or men. Totally clear about males of any description violating precious lesbian space and I will actively try to prevent them doing so. I no longer care about being called bigot or terf. They are my boundaries and I will continue to guard them . I do feel resentment when other lesbians invite others to break down the boundaries.

Uh huh...this is the same nonsense of the ' what if someone passed' kind. What if 'I had sex one time with a transwoman (man)'

Don't even engage, it's simply an attempt to breach our same-sex boundaries.

NO

I think it's more 'interesting' that posters are trying to tell an anonymous woman what her sexuality is.

That she's not allowed to call herself a lesbian despite being attracted to women for decades and having ONE relationship with a male born person who presented and passed as female and (I assume from her description) had breasts and a neo-vagina.

Just bonkers.

It’s quite interesting that we have a poster very actively resisting being described as bisexual rather than her preferred definition of lesbian. Why is expanding and changing the well established definition of lesbian (as female same-sex attracted) to allow you to be attracted to biological males (however they dress or do their hair, and whatever name they use) the answer, rather than just thinking: oh, I guess I’m bisexual?

what would be wrong with being bisexual?

Why do you need to redefine the existing categories, rather than just accepting you fit better in a different one than you’d thought?

Why all this effort so that biological males attracted to biological females can avoid accepting that’s just heterosexuality?

'Terfs and trolls' - homosexual females refusing to provide free sex work to males on command. Or to at least convincingly pretend that they would in theory.

😂

Nah mate.

Females are allowed a sexual preference too. And to walk around in a body that they do plan to let a man use. Whatever that man wishes to do in terms of transition or self definition or body modification.

Because female lives do not revolve around male ones, and they are not walking sex resources.

"The meaning of words are important. I don't care what you tell yourself you are. But I'm not going to lie and change the meaning of words because that makes you feel better somehow."

I agree completely, @Jonei. I am not a lesbian, but I wholeheartedly support all those pushing back against men, usually still fully male, anatomically, who define themselves as lesbians and try to coerce or manipulate lesbians (adult human females who are same SEX attracted) into having PIV sex with them! To me that feels very rapey and abusive.

Woman is another word that does not need to be redefined by autogynephile men. It means adult human females, and no-one is 'assigned (a gender) at birth' - their biological sex is created in the womb and observed (with a near perfect degree of accuracy, imo) at birth.

Why is it okay for men to colonize women's spaces in a post-colonialist world?

"I think this helps give another viewpoint to the "gay people are anti-trans" trope that is often used by against the LGB-Alliance and Julie Bindel etc."

Is this what OP meant to say?

TERFs are women who love biological women, then? Ergo, all actual lesbians are TERFs? Thus, lesbians are the new witches in this latest witch-hunt.

Of course attraction can change once you get to know more about the person, and that's fine. If it is ok to change once someone knows the other has hairy toes, supports Manchester United and not City or is racist then it is also ok to change once they find out that it is a TW and not a woman.

I would never date a transwoman for the simple reason that he is a man. Also off-putting is the thought of the cognitive dissonance involved in being in a relationship with such a person

Unfortunately they seem to have got confused with the sources and so misrepresented things.

You may be mixing up her statement in a BBC article, with a previous email she was supposed to have written.

Apparently there was a leaked email in which it was said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10225111/Stonewall-brands-lesbians-sexual-racists-raising-concerns-sex-transgender-women.html

Yet now it has emerged that months before the article appeared Stonewall’s chief executive Nancy Kelley wrote to the editorial director of BBC News to denounce Lowbridge’s work in an apparent attempt to get her piece stopped.

In her email, Kelley suggested that the BBC article would end up being ‘transphobic’ because it represented trans women as ‘sexual predators’, which was a ‘central anti-trans argument’.

She further complained that the ‘highly toxic’ cotton ceiling issue was ‘analogous to issues like sexual racism’.

Thanks for the context to the quote and accurately what she said, rare to see on here
(Genuinely didnt know the full until now, just people saying sexual racist but no source or actual quote)