Don't Call Me Queer - The LGB and TQ+ Must Split Campaign

Ah, OK. Heterosexuality.

I've never heard it put like that before.

Yes, some heterosexual people are only attracted to the hyper-stereotypes of the opposite sex. That's true.

If that's "trans gayness" in the TQ+ world, it certainly backs up the idea that the separation of LGB from TQ+ is mutually beneficial. That way, all the trans gay people can carry on being heterosexual and the gay people can carry on being homosexual.

Well, for example, a lot of females are only sexually attracted to very masculine males & males feminine females. So their sexual attraction entails more than biological parts as in gender. By this logic trans people are same 'gender' attracted.

Please could you explain what you mean by "trans gayness"?

So if you've got a person who is no longer interested in sex but wants a same sex relationship what exactly are they 'attracted' to in the person of the same sex?

Personally, even when I'm past sex, I know I won't be suddenly attracted to women as romantic partners. For me there's something more than private bits that is attractive about men & women. It's not just their bodies that separate them so I can appreciate trans gayness.

So if you've got a person who is no longer interested in sex but wants a same sex relationship what exactly are they 'attracted' to in the person of the same sex?

Personally, even when I'm past sex, I know I won't be suddenly attracted to women as romantic partners. For me there's something more than private bits that is attractive about men & women. It's not just their bodies that separate them so I can appreciate trans gayness.

So if you've got a person who is no longer interested in sex but wants a same sex relationship what exactly are they 'attracted' to in the person of the same sex?

Personally, even when I'm past sex, I know I won't be suddenly attracted to women as romantic partners. For me there's something more than private bits that is attractive about men & women. It's not just their bodies that separate them so I can appreciate trans gayness.

That's up there as one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

Really?
So when gay people are no longer of an age or disposition to be interested in sexual acts what's the 'attraction' to same sex partnering?

Are all same sex partnerships sexual ones?

Eh? Exactly the same applies to straight people, doesn’t it? Having a particular sexuality doesn’t mean you will always want sex, or will have regular sex throughout your whole life. Sometimes people have illnesses or injuries that make sex impossible. Sometimes people just aren’t very interested when they get older. They still have a sexuality though, don’t they? Surely you’re not saying that a person has to be engaged in an active sex life to have a sexuality?

Really?
So when gay people are no longer of an age or disposition to be interested in sexual acts what's the 'attraction' to same sex partnering?

Are all same sex partnerships sexual ones?

What's particularly great about this campaign is that everyone who wants to "identify" as queer, asexual (or not, if that doesn't feel right) etc can continue to do so. All of that fits really well in the TQ+

I'm straight but I fully support LGB people making a line in the sand. Sexual orientation/attraction is totally different from gender identity. They are two totally different concepts, as has been said above.

If they get muddled up as concepts, someone's sexual orientation can end up being altered by someone else.

For example, I am a woman and I am married to a man. Neither my husband or I have ever had same-sex relationships. If I identify as a man (which is only possible in the TQ+ world) and we stay married, my husband has now become gay or queer (in the TQ+ world). My actions have changed his sexual orientation, in TQ+ terms. Sex, sexual orientation and gender identity have all become an interchangable muddle.

In the LGB world, even if I do identify as a man this hasn't changed my sex. Which means I'm still in a heterosexual relationship.

I'm very happy for TQ+ people to enjoy and celebrate the muddle that results from not worrying about the difference between sex, sexual orientation and the idea that everyone has a gender identity, as long as they aren't impacting anyone who doesn't consent to it. For example, males identifying into lesbianism and expecting lesbian* women to be OK with that is as much a no as males identifying into women's sports and expecting the same accommodation.

*There is no such thing as a lesbian who is attracted to males.

Being LGB is about which biological sex you’re attracted to, regardless of whether someone identifies as a gender.

Being T is about what gender you identify as, which is very likely different from your sex.

Two completely different concepts.

If you want to be an ally to LGB people, don’t derail the thread with a load of talk about cisgender & pansexuality.

The fact that he's married to a woman doesn't change his sexuality from pansexual to heterosexual.

Assume husband is bisexual but has married a woman. I'm straight but have had bisexual long term partners, they just happened to be with a woman in that relationship, didn't make them straight.

@Waheymum pansexual is still bisexual if that is why you're questioning it.

In that post I specified "male and female" as those two genders. You're allowed to use 'sex' and 'gender' interchangeably within the bounds of the English language. I was not saying "attracted to men and transwomen", don't worry.

We have long argued that lesbians, gay men and bisexual people have little in common with those who identify as TQ+.

We believe that the forced teaming of same-sex attracted and TQ+ people, through the use of the aggregate term LGBTQ+ suggests, wrongly, that these distinct groups have common objectives. We don’t, and this umbrella term serves both groups badly.

The Government has abandoned its use of the aggregate term BAME (Black and Minority Ethnic) and we call on them to do the same with LGBTQ+.

Same-sex attracted people must have specific representation.

More https://lgballiance.org.uk/dont-call-me-queer/

The fact that he's married to a woman doesn't change his sexuality from pansexual to heterosexual.

In that post I specified "male and female" as those two genders. You're allowed to use 'sex' and 'gender' interchangeably within the bounds of the English language. I was not saying "attracted to men and transwomen", don't worry.

Because LGB are to do with sexuality, right? But then is Pansexual included in the plus, and should that be included with the LGB, or by excluding the T+ are you saying that pansexuality isn't a thing? I'm a straight, cisgender ally (my DH isn't straight), for what it's worth. I like words and language though!