“Pride is about identity not sex”

[Chocchops72]

“Pride is about identity not sex”

i just read this statement on a Twitter thread and it really caught my attention. Surely the whole point of Pride is (or was?) to demand / celebrate the right of gay people to have sex, legally, with other people of the same sex as themselves?

As a straight adult human female I don’t have much skin in this game, but this phrase just stood out for me as really weird. Isn’t sexuality - linked to one’s sex - the whole point? It’s like walking the walk, not just talking the talk.

I mean, if it’s true then I could ‘identify’ as a lesbian (not sure how) without ever actually having sex with a woman? But I’d be able to say I’m a lesbian? Am I understanding this correctly?

Correct. We should always say 'men'.

And any 'men' who want access to spaces that are single sex, are automatically a higher risk to women and girls than those that don't. That's how it gets translated to 'trans' as it just so happens, that is what those men that call themselves 'trans' demand.

Pride isn’t for the celebration of religious/philosophical beliefs.

Then why are they celebrating gender identity - which is absolutely a belief system.

Well, I dislike men who claim to be women in order to access women's spaces.
Or men who want to shout down women that don't want them there and gain access to women only events and sporting achievements.
I'm happy to say I don't like those people, mostly because of their behaviour and expectation that other people buy into their delusion to our own detriment.

I'm sure to some people that means I'm a horrible transphobe...to me it's just having boundaries and common sense.

I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that these days the definition of what is accepted as trans by Stonewall, Pride etc. is anything and everything.

Acceptance without exception means accepting these dangerous and unscrupulous men along with everyone else. To distinguish is to be mean, to be transphobic. Self ID means accepting whatever a person says about themselves.

Of course people use the extreme examples to prove a point, but these are because they are happening, and we're somehow being told that it's not really a problem.

Of course people use the extreme examples to prove a point, but these are because they are happening, and we're somehow being told that it's not really a problem

Of course its a problem. Except not when it happens to actual women.

Dangerous men whatever their identity are allowed to be a problem.when it affects trans people. So.much so they must use womens spaces to avoid them whilst simultaneously advocating fir a process that allows said dangerous men to follow them right in.

I’m straight and I absolutely think I should have an opinion on this. I don’t have to be a lesbian to object strenuously to biologically male people, who have had no surgery to remove their penis/scrotum, saying they are women and are lesbians, and that any biologically female lesbian must either have penetrative, penis in vagina sex with them, or be branded as TERFs and hateful bigots who should just ‘get over their genital preferences’.

I don’t have to be gay to support biologically female lesbians who want to exclude male bodied individuals from their dating sites, support groups, clubs and beds.

Well yes exactly. If they argument for allowing TW to use women's spaces is that they are afraid of being attacked, then why are men not being pressured to be more accommodating to gender non conforming men (which is what they are).
Men who are uncomfortable presenting as men does not mean they are women, and they don't belong in women's spaces - it's not up to us to move over and make room for them.
Women have suggested the idea of a third space for quite some time now, and keep being told that it's mean and transphobic. Which basically means they want to access women's spaces and don't care how it affects women.

Again always angry at the wrong people.

Angry at lesbians for having boundaries.

Angry at straight people for having an.opinion about pride.

Angry at the use of inappropriate people to make a point.

Angry at perceived phobias when safeguarding failures or inappropriate behaviour are called out.

Never angry at the subset of straight people usually men with fetishes trying to appropriate homosexuality and bringing their kinks to children destroying what pride was meant to be and the men who are so unwelcoming to gender non conforming males making them feel threatened.

Whatwouldscullydo

Yes, more and more this is looking like a men's rights movement in disguise. Which why it's frustrating when women scold other women for questioning it.

Here's an interesting article by Jennifer Bilek about some of the murky origins of all this.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers

It's US based, but so much of this stuff is imported from America.

@SwitchDiver There is no bigger religion than Gender Ideology. It is a dangerous cult.

Exactly. I mean, they are completely ignored most of the time.

This is the reason this whole left verses right stuff doesn't realky matter. The end result is the same.

The right disagree with being gay etc

The extreme left think its offensive if lesbians won't date trans people amd that trabsing away the gay is progressive.

The result ? Being gay is once again something to hide or is offensive

Oh dear, how will I fit all of those in my calendar...

😂

It’s for this reason I don’t think of politics as left or right; I think of it as circular, where the furthest extremes end up meeting each other.

I'd like to second this. I've never had sex with a woman and probably never will (I'm married), but I'm pretty sure that I'm bi because I am also sexually attracted to women.

But I identify as lesbian, but I think I could go years without sex , im
not asexual, I fall
in love with women. So my point stands, it’s not about sex it’s about identity and everything else,

I'm not talking about sex (as in having sex) either, you seem to keep misunderstanding me.

I'm talking about sexual orientation (i.e. same sex attracted, opposite sex attracted etc.) versus gender identity (as an ideological concept) which is different to your own sense of your identity as a person and as a lesbian.

So in that context, the statement from the OP 'Pride is about identity rather than sex' can be seen as the endorsement of gender identity over sexual orientation - which is happening on a grand scale.

For instance Stonewall and other gay rights organisations now define gay as 'same gender attracted' which is patently ridiculous, since people can identify into whatever gender they like.

Also, FYI - these days 'I identify as a lesbian' is usually said by straight men who want to sleep with lesbian women.

So in that context, the statement from the OP 'Pride is about identity rather than sex' can be seen as the endorsement of gender identity over sexual orientation - which is happening on a grand scale.

I think it is a stretch to infer that from the statement when Pride has always been a celebration of gay/lesbian/bi/queer identity and the right to express that identity in a heteronormative society without being ostracised, murdered, excommunicated or thrown into prison for it.

Sexual orientation is part of your identity and for everyone who wasn’t straight it had to be hidden and kept a secret. To claim that sexual orientation has nothing to do with identity is disingenuous.

According to the U.K. courts, gender critical is a philosophical belief protected under the equality act.

Thank goodness for Maya and her courage.

I agree that we all have an identity which forms part of our sense of self, and for gay and lesbian people that forms part of their identity.

However, my point is that the campaigning from the likes of Stonewall and indeed Pride over the last few years has been to promote 'identity' over reality.

And by that they mean gender identity over the reality of sexed bodies and sexual orientation. That is what I and others find problematic.

Not that someone may have a gender identity - that's their business. But the idea that we all have gender identities (sort of like a sexed soul) and that overrides our material sex. And also, crucially, that self declared gender should be prioritised when participating in things like sports, and public spaces.

I’m going to meet you half way and agree that if the source of such a statement were Stonewall or anyone of similar known views, then I would agree with you that they’d be implying gender identity over sexual orientation.

But we don’t know the source of the tweet? Or at least I don’t? OP doesn’t mention it. It could equally be someone fed up with BDSM and Furries joining family parts of Pride. I think we’d need to know the source of the tweet and a bit more about their views and why they said what they said to know exactly what they mean.

I agree the statement could be read a few different ways, some more of a stretch than others, but all plausible.

@cakeorwine

We" - do you speak for everyone?

What if I said my pronouns are we/us/ ours? 😈

Haha, no, fair enough. Point taken.