To think that if you claim to support lesbians you should agree with this statement?

[TheLWordNotTheQWord]

"Exclusive same sex attraction is a valid and real sexuality, there is absolutely nothing objectionable about being exclusively same sex attracted, and those who are should be able to live their sexuality free from any form of hate, discrimination, coercion or harassment, and are fully supported by our organisation as part of the LGBT community”

Four major UK LGBT organisations have declined to support this statement. All of them claim to represent - and receive government funding to support - lesbian women:

"LGBT Health did not respond to any of our attempts to secure a response from them in regard to our statement, even after discussing our email with us in a phone call and reassuring us they would respond. LGBT Youth Scotland replied to say they had received our emails, but did not give their support for our statement and ignored our further attempts at contact. Stonewall told us ‘we cannot help you with that’, so they formally declined. And the Equality Network told us they never provide support for statements they don’t write themselves, however they did go on to confirm with us that they do not consider women to be lesbians on the basis of being female homosexuals, because the only way they define the term ‘lesbian’, is based on gender identity (so for example they would not, then, consider women who are solely attracted to other females regardless of their identity, as lesbian women)."

(see page 24: secureservercdn.net/160.153.137.99/hjn.a49.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/FEMALE-ONLY-PROVISION-REPORT-1.pdf )

@WelcomeToGreenvale sums it up perfectly, it's not the statement anyone has a problem with, it's the transphobic intent behind it.

But you guys just carry on in your own echo chamber. You will be (and already are) on the wrong side of history.

I feel like feminism that endorses the erosion of womens boundaries fails us completely.

These were the demands of the womens liberation movement:
The women's liberation movement asserts a woman's right to define her own sexuality, and demands:

Equal pay for equal work
Equal education and job oportunities
Free contraception
Free 24-hour community-controlled childcare
Legal and financial independence for women
An end to discrimination against lesbians
Freedom for all women from intimidation by the threat or use of male violence. An end to the laws, assumptions and institutions which perpetuate male dominance and men's agression towards women

Define her own sexuality

Please report any posts you find transphobic. MNHQ deals with them promptly.

You will be (and already are) on the wrong side of history.

Well that’s us told. 🤷‍♀️ back in a minute, I’m just off to tell my niece that she has to accept dick, or she’s not a real lesbian, but is indeed a transphobe. Oh unless the dick identifies as a male dick, then she’s just bi, but if it’s a female dick, that’s ok, because she’s still a lesbian. Wrong side of history my arse.

it's not the statement anyone has a problem with, it's the transphobic intent behind it. I REALLY don't understand how ANYONE can think that.

When not agreeing that women have the right to bodly autonomy is the start of a very slippery slope... it is disgusting that such sophistry is being spouted, wrong side of history, FFS! I bet that sounded good, felt powerful to type. But, as with all idioms, it means very little yet reveals quiet a lot!

What is the end game? What the fuck do such people really want?

nobaggypants

I dealt with that point if you’d like to engage constructively, rather than just be dismissive with meaningless grandstanding like “wrong side of history”.

If you can show me Stonewall support the sentiment of the statement then I’ll retract my comments. My understanding is that they don’t, in which case you saying it’s not the statement, it’s the intent behind it is just deflection from a very important issue.

If you change your name and call yourself Hequakes...then still no as men are allowed to make the distinction.

It amazes me that anyone can not see how the trans movement is trying to remove womens autonomy.

I dont agree with the 'it's because of the organisation'

Every organisation could issue a statement saying 'we womt endorse this as we dont want to endure anything from 'x organisation' however, of course, we full agree with the statement itself'

But as usual it easier to side with the people who have dicks. Let's not upset them.

Men get upset when women won't go along with the 'pretendy lesbian' thing. Same old story.

Oh yes, that'll be it. I forgot to remember the Pervy Male Lesbian Sex Fantasy. SIlly little, pink female me!

Ah yeah, more trans hate.

@WiddlinDiddlin I'm genuinely curious- you actually consider same sex attraction to be hateful to trans people?

I knew it would make it obvious to anyone why organisations might refuse to support a statement that is perfectly reasonable because of a certain context.

Stonewall have made very clear, as outlined in the OP and previously, that they do not support the sentiment that exclusive same sex attraction is valid, regardless of context.

I'm being a bit thick here. Does the LGBT movement now say that women can only identify as lesbian if they are prepared to sleep with transwomen with penises? If you are a lesbian who will only sleep with women what are you to be called?

defective

I don’t think it would be right to say the whole LGBT movement thinks that, however some high profile voices seem to.

I think it’s less that women who only want sex with natal women can’t be lesbians, and more that such lesbians are transphobic.

If you are a lesbian who will only sleep with women what are you to be called?

They've been called 'vagina fetishists', which oddly enough seems to be about the only unacceptable fetish nowadays.

That's the least controversial statement I've ever read.

Only a homophobic misogynist could have a problem with it.

Thanks Newark I honestly thought that we were going to be told there were new terms!

Errol I hear what you are saying. I do feel for those young (and not so young) women who are coming out as lesbians now. I never thought that I would think coming out in the 80s was easy compared to now! I'm really saddened by it all. However, to be honest the gay and lesbian community was very separate then, we did come together for some things, pride, HIV support being two, but it was always an uneasy alliance. Women as second class citizens, with lesbians barely given a thought, nothing new there. I had hoped for better.

It's not your post i have a problem with baggypants, it's the misogynistic and homophobic intent behind it.

Does the LGBT movement now say that women can only identify as lesbian if they are prepared to sleep with transwomen with penises?

The major, government funded, LGBTQQIAAKCTT+ organisations all promote that as a goal. To varying degrees they accept that women can have a 'genital preference' but that's only because those women have been indoctrinated by the patriarchy and don't realise they should be attracted to hair length, clothing and inner essence.

If you are a lesbian who will only sleep with women what are you to be called?

I think bigot is the preferred term.

What seems really strange to me is straight women saying they are now lesbians because their male partner haw transitioned. It is literally redefining homosexuality as a temporary thing based on who you are in a relationship with at the time.

I'm a bisexual feminist & love vaginas, but ok.

You conveniently missed the second half of that statement out which is 'and I also love penises and male bodies of all gender identities' - so you are not in the least bit affected by what is happening to us lesbians but have decided to stand with the males, while comparing women defending their same-sex-only attraction to the KKK. That is homophobic.

Oh, and these LGBT organisations shouldn't have waited for this Scottish group (whatever you think of them) to ask them to support this statement, they should have done it themselves already because they are supposed to support lesbians.

You conveniently missed the second half of that statement out which is 'and I also love penises and male bodies of all gender identities'

Why do you conclude this? I have never said anything of the sort. As a bisexual woman, I no more have to be attracted to all bodies and gender identities as a lesbian. It just means I am attracted to more than one sex or gender.

so you are not in the least bit affected by what is happening to us lesbians but have decided to stand with the males, while comparing women defending their same-sex-only attraction to the KKK.

Again, I wonder where you and other posters are reading this. Please read my posts without just randomly adding your own assumptions.

Then tell us how the pressure for lesbians to accept girld**k has affected you as a bisexual woman.

As a bisexual woman you are also attracted to some people who have dicks.

Lesbians are not.

Do you also believe that gay men should have sleep with people with vaginas, if they where mens clothes? Do you think it's ok to tell gay men that?

Cause I am currently sat in jeans and DPs hoodie. I also have a unisex name. Would you think it's ok to tell a gay man he must sleep with me?

As I explicitly said before, I do not think lesbians (or anyone) have to be attracted to penises at all (in response to S1naidSucks on the previous page). You are not reading what I am saying. You are -for some reason- looking for someone to argue against.