Pride doesn’t represent me

[Vegansausageroll]

Just been watching Joe Lycett’s big pride party.
It was all sexualised smut. It’s ‘furries’ , kink, drag, sex and innuendos galore. This isn’t all what pride is about! It’s supposed to be about our sexuality and our rights and not being ashamed of who we are. But there is no representation for young people like I was! I want people to be themselves and express themselves but it all just seems so extreme now!

I’m a middle aged gay woman. I like books and countryside walks!

I am very worried about equal rights and the way they are, once again, under threat.
I have nothing in common with the people that now dominate ‘pride’. The last woman’s group I went to has long been shut down, as have the lesbian groups I used to attend back in the day. I’m worried gay youth are being sent a message that their sexuality must be linked to a certain type of ‘lifestyle’ when many of us just want to live a regular life the same as our straight friends - the only difference is the sex of our partners 🤷‍♀️.

@penpalgal very well said.

@penpalgal brilliant post- !! Totally agree

@penpalgal awesome! Well said

Well we have an ever-increasing membership and are open about who is welcome and people choose to join or not on that basis. Someone may feel on reading that it is not the right place for them and that is of course their choice.

We haven't had any issues with people citing problems with the presence of our trans members. We mainly hear problems about unwelcome advances from non-trans lesbians to other non-trans lesbians during nights out at pubs and clubs and we deal with that on a case-by-case basis.

And of course I do mind you asking.

We are going backwards.

For a long time, gay people on television were either a freak on Big Brother put there for us to laugh at; an outdated stereotype - usually a hairdresser; or a girl's gay best friend.

Then things changed slightly, and real progress was made for about 10 years in the 2010s, where the message was (rightly) that gay people are normal. They're that person you see in the pub or the supermarket. They live on your street. They like the same things as everyone else, they just fancy someone of their sex.

Now it's gone backwards. Gay people like drag queens, wear underwear on the street and indulge in kink. They're soft, flamboyant and fully immersed in this "culture". They're "queer", and all like the oddballs at school. Only they don't grow up or mature.

I can see attitudes significantly changing, and it feels like we're quickly heading back to the early nougties.

And I blame Stonewall and the trans lobby.

Thats a shame @suggestionsplease1 as it would be great to hear more about lesbian groups! There are not enough of them and plenty of lesbians on this thread, some of whom may enjoy joining a group and widening their circle. They wouldn’t necessarily support having male bodied lesbian identified people (your term trans lesbian doesn’t really make sense - appogies- because surely that could also then count as female to male trans people who identify as lesbians also?) however half or more of your membership probably don’t support having these members but just ignore it because a) they would be accused of transphobia if they spoke up and b) they actually want to be a part of a lesbian group!

@suggestionsplease1 so are you a trans lesbian or a non-trans lesbian? Because that would seem to inflect your viewpoint on this quite dramatically. It seems rather disingenuous not to make that clear. Most other posters on this thread have been more than happy to talk about their own sexuality and “identity” (so-called).

I shouldn't have to declare my identity to you. But as I have mentioned it in others posts over the years on mumsnet I am a non trans lesbian. And my sentiment on this issue is representative of the vast majority of lesbians I know. Probably a bit like how the 1 million plus people at London Pride shared values of inclusivity and support for each other rather than division and hostility to their fellow minorities.

Just because no one in your group dare speak out on the matter does not mean they are in agreement with it.

Oppressed groups are usually allowed, if not expected, to exclude their oppressors in their definitions and activities. All except one group of oppressed people.

Only women are expected to centre and prioritise their oppressors in their own fucking civil movement.

Imagine forcing another oppressed group to “be kind” and accept their oppressors identifying into their community. There’d be absolute outrage.

Hmmm; I wonder why the other gay people I know aren’t into the whole thing then (like others have said on this board?)

I don’t notice much solidarity from you to us, your fellow lesbians. Given that we are a minority even within the LGBT “community”. No?

In any case, straight men aren’t a “minority”. Yet by virtue of uttering the words “I am a woman” do you believe that they magically transform into one? How? Is it just a matter of self-perception (I believe I am a minority therefore I am)? Or is it qualified by any of their other facets of identity?

So do trans women have to have longstanding gender dysphoria to qualify as a minority; or is self-declaration enough, even if they have been happy white wealthy straight men right up until literally that moment?

And at that moment they become a “fellow minority” alongside, say, a poor disabled black working class lesbian woman, no matter what; and if she doesn’t then recognise their “identity”, she’s the problem?

I’d love to know what would happen if one of the female lesbians in @suggestionsplease1 groyp said they weren’t happy with males in their group. How fast on a scale of 1 to usain bolts record would they be ostracised and bullies? No wonder ‘no one has a problem with it’. It’s called fear. When the head of stonewall compares lesbians to racists for not wanting to sleep with males, there’s a big fucking clue that women are being bullied into compliance.

If you want me to show solidarity with the value of hostility, no of course I will not do that.

It could be said you’re showing hostility to those in your group who might disagree with having people who were men in the group though…but that’s ok? It’s perfectly possible to suggest a group is for x,y or z politely. There is actually not need to be hostile. So far the only people receiving hostility in this context are women.

@theclangersarecoming you put it really aptly!

apologies for my typos!

No. They are shown no hostility. They are simply expected not to treat anyone else in the group with hostility, and we would address any hostility towards them as well.

So if they politely requested that the group was for female homosexuals only, you’d be happy with that?

We'd ask them to read the long standing information about the group and make sure they were happy with that so they can feel it is a good fit for them.

@suggestionsplease1 stating plain material fact is not “hostility”. Expressing opinion politely in a reasoned argument on a mumsnet thread is not “hostility”. You mendaciously speak of it like we are turning up and being personally aggressive to people in your in-person social club; and you know perfectly well that this is not true. Saying men are not women and straight men are not a minority and they are also not lesbians is pure fact, not hostility.

And moreover, trying to tone-police women for stating basic material fact is disingenuous in the extreme, and itself more than a little passive-aggressive (— one might even say hostile…?)

Would you accuse African-Americans of being “hostile” for posting out that Rachel Dolezal was not in fact black; and being generally opposed to her “identifying in” to their group?

So irs not a lesbian group then? It’s a group for anyone? Awesome. Why not just say that then instead of misleading people by saying it’s a group for female homosexuals? Surely a ‘group for anyone’ is way more inclusive and welcoming, and everyone knows what they’re getting.

What's your next policing action, out of interest?

Would you like us to research everyone's sexual history so we can get our jollies excluding anyone who has previously slept with a man as they should properly identify as bisexual rather than lesbian?

Some people thrive on division and ever increasing segregation. Thankfully our group is not like that.

I shouldn't have to declare my identity to you.You might as well. It's not as if you're actually declaring anything when your words don't mean things. You had to add two prefixes to "lesbian" to make it mean what it means.

That’s good. I think there should be more ‘groups for anyone’. And more lesbian groups. That way, you get your inclusive group for anyone, and female homosexuals get their groups just for female homosexuals. Everyone is happy. Wine is drunk.

It’s disingenuous in the extreme to suggest that knowing that men are not women is “policing”.

One might think, rather, that making everyone pretend something is true, that they know isn’t actually true, for fear of being chucked out of a group or being called “hostile”, is “policing”.

But up means down in the new ideology; and as usual men’s feelings are much more important than women’s realities. That, I might suggest, is a position rather hostile to women: whatever it is, it isn’t one in which actual women are foregrounded or celebrated in any way.

One more question though @suggestionsplease1 — at what precise moment or by what precise mechanism do men get transformed into women? How does it actually work? Not a single trans activist has ever been able to tell me.

They spin round three times, sprinkle the glitter and utter the magic words.

I have never seen so many gay women/ lesbians/ bisexual women/ queer women out and about enjoying themselves openly as I do at the moment!

This is a meaningless statement when what you mean by "gay women/ lesbians/ bisexual women/ queer women" includes both straight males and women who lead entirely (or almost entirely) heterosexual lives.