To not be surprised to see threads on LGB being questioned now?!

[SuperNewMe]

Just typed a reply and the thread disappeared quickly (makes a change as when it's trans related ones they stay?!)
So it's not a TAAT, it's just to say that after all the anti trans rhetoric you see on here sometimes, it comes as absolutely no surprise that there are now more threads attacking lesbian and gay couples ( not natural was the phrase used)
Not to mention one still on the go as far as I'm aware that refers to LGBTQ as "special rainbow people"
YABU you're imagining things
YANBU things seem to be ramping up against LGBT people in general
(I say this as someone who's straight and not trans)

do think a person’s expressed sexual preferences can absolutely be a reflection of prejudice, however- we can clearly see this in how black women and fat women and disabled women are often culturally represented as sexually undesirable - and I do think it’s transphobic and sexist and wrongheaded to define a person wholly in terms of their genitals.

It's not, it's defining males who call themselves women as not in their dating pool, because quite understandably most homosexual women aren't attracted to them.

It's homophobic to suggest lesbians should want to date penis people, and misogynist to suggest males in dresses are a type of women. It's the current year version of ' they just haven't found the right man yet'.

So much this. It used to be a tired old dad joke that "I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body".

I agree. Trans activists tend to push policy and practice that is homophobic - for example, lesbians not being allowed female-only dating apps, meetings, etc.

A line paraphrased by a certain comedian until it became an acceptable truth, was it not.

Indeed.

"and I do think it’s transphobic and sexist and wrongheaded to define a person wholly in terms of their genitals"

Lesbians are same SEX attracted

Exactly.

Quite apart from the fact you don’t have sleep with anyone you don’t want to, without having to justify it or worry people will think your committing some form of hate crime, anyone who thinks lesbians are happy to sleep with biological males or gay men are happy to sleep with biological females has lost the plot.

Obviously some people are bisexual or attracted to trans specifically but you still can’t accuse the ones who reject you of discrimination.

I mean I’m a biological female. If a lesbian tells me she doesn’t want to have sex with me because of reasons (doesn’t fancy me) where’s my recourse to kick off? 🤣

Things that never happened #3264890

I do think it’s transphobic and sexist and wrongheaded to define a person wholly in terms of their genitals.

Well @Tandora you can believe that, but I can also point out the contradiction in your position.

You say that people should not be criticised or shamed for their sexual attractions & preferences:

no one should ever be questioned or coerced about their sexual practices. Everyone has the right to accept or reject any sexual encounter absolutely as they please. I believe that any decent person feels the same.

But sexual attraction is often (not necessarily always) very much about genitals. I'm straight & female and I am not in the least sexually interested in other women's genitals; it's a really basic sexual preference. I would not contemplate a romantic relationship with a woman for that reason; my sexual preference is for maleness and male bodies.

So by your logic, I am wrongheaded.

Our genitals are prescribed by our gametes, which determine our sex.
So defining people in sex categories by genitals is basic biology.

a lot of LGB people see the T as a parasite undoing years of work they have done towards acceptance in society. Pretty much as women had to.

If you see homophobia report the post. If you want to call it out in the thread too, that is fine and dandy.

Women and men are sexually and physiologically different

could you please elaborate? If it’s not just genitalia, then which parts are the important parts? Or is it a particular package of parts that determines sexuality (all biological of course, nothing social, cultural , environmental to see), and please elaborate on which precisely is the required package.

It would also be helpful if you could define a “male born person”.

Well obviously, the trans ideology is deeply homophobic and attempts to redefine what homosexuality is. Have you only just noticed this? As it gains momentum, of course they push their anti LGB ideology further.

Yes, this is what I'd say from what I've read on the site. However, I'm aware that as I'm heterosexual I might not notice as much (same as I'd notice misogyny, as a female, more than a male might), so I might be wrong.

I imagine the "rainbow people" comment was referring to gender identities joining sexualities in the acronym, rather than about the LGB part, but I agree it was still unpleasant and uncalled for.

tedious claptrap.
Bleats that MN is homophobic and can't prove it because MN is so far from homophobic that the site owners take homophobic threads down.

Again for those who never listen: if you see a homophobic, racist, transphobic or ableist thread, report it to MN using the report button.

And IMO you should write in that thread that you have reported it for homophobia (or the others) so that if it stands at least people know.

@Tandora “It would also be helpful if you could define a “male born person”.

Do you honestly need help defining what a male is?

So by your logic, I am wrongheaded

wrongheaded in the sense that I would be surprised if this actually how your sexuality works. For example, presumably you meet men/ date them etc, and have a very strong sense of whether or not you are attracted to them before you have ever seen their genitals? What shapes your attraction might be how they look, how they present themselves, what you talk about, how your relate to each other , etc etc. you have no idea what their genitals look like (although you perhaps might make assumptions about them). Of course once you see their genitals you might feel differently , eg if they look different to how you expected , if they are too small etc. I’m not saying genital appearance/ structure is not a factor in sexuality, but sexual attraction is defined by so , so much more than genitals, at least for the vast vast majority of people.

Yes please: a lot of scientists and policy makers would appreciate help with this too.

Bleats that MN is homophobic

I don’t recall “bleating” 🤣🤣 and I didn’t say “mumsnet is homophobic”. Nor did OP.

If people are telling you they haven't seen it, then they haven't seen it?!
I haven't either, fwiw.

Aah that explains a lot

Assuming you mean that our sexual orientation, develops according to our culture and environment, rather than being biologically determined as the pp's comment implies, the pp's point still stands that for most of us are nevertheless unable to change or control whom we feel attracted to. Once that sexual orientation has developed (if it is environmentally influenced), we can't will ourselves to be attracted to people with particular attributes rather than others.

To suggest this is possible and even ought to be aimed at is reminiscent of conversion therapy and can cause deep distress.

It would also be helpful if you could define a “male born person”

A male born person is a man usually. Or it may be a biological man with a female identity.

Is Tandora alluding to sex by deception here?

Wowsers.

mmmm... I think OP may be right.
Although a lot of it is in the simple misandrist cesspool that parts of MN have become.

Few years ago, slagging off Adam Kay for perceived misogeny, one of the comments was about how "a lot of gay men are like that, they secretly hate women" Cue some nodding along posters.

That affronted me hugely. I'm avoiding all the anti-trans & anti-men threads but I suspect they are like that still. Any reason to bash a man, they will use it to bash. That includes for being gay.

Assuming you mean that our sexual orientation, develops according to our culture and environment, rather than being biologically determined

not at all! Biology, culture and environment all play a role. I think this is widely recognised these days.

*most of us are nevertheless unable to change or control whom we feel attracted to. Once that sexual orientation has developed (if it is environmentally influenced), we can't will ourselves to be attracted to people with particular attributes rather than others.

To suggest this is possible and even ought to be aimed at is reminiscent of conversion therapy and can cause deep distress.*

100% hard agree.

The same goes for gender.

Ahh so you are basing your view on the idea that no one can tell women and men apart as long as they wear the other genders clothing?! Yeah, doesn’t work like that. Most of us can very easily tell the difference between a male and a female, irrelevant of how they dress. You’ll struggle to find many (especially women) who have been surprised by someone’s genitals.