To think that gay and lesbian people should be able to have a conference in peace

[nothingcomestonothing]

Transactivists have tried to disrupt the LGBA conference by releasing insects into the venue. It's disgusting . Because they don't think gay men and lesbians should be allowed to meet peacefully without them.

No one is stopping transpeople from having events by themselves, why shouldn't gay men and lesbians be able to meet if that's what they want to do? It's just repackaged homophobia - same sex attracted people aren't allowed to have their own conference.

https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1844763982453670350

Even Jimmy Wales said never cite Wikipedia as a source for a college essay. The entry for gender critical feminism shows why. Too many flaws to bother refuting item by item.

I can tell you think you are very clever and funny, but there’s certainly nothing authentic in what you just wrote as you well know.

Of the minority of people of all sexual orientations in the study who were open to dating a trans person, yes

Yes, most people are not open to dating a trans person. Why do you think that is? A) because trans people are hideous, B)……. ?

Brilliant.

Why do you think that is? A) because trans people are hideous, B)……. ?

Why do you think it is?

I think the articles about who rejects who in dating are so silly and a waste of time and effort - you cannot make anybody see anybody they do not wish to.

This bit from the linked article made me laugh though because it’s so patently untrue:

”The growing number of interracial relationships is the sign of a less racist society, but these relationships are the healthy byproduct of broader shifts in societal attitudes, not of activists hectoring people to be more pluralistic in their choice of partner.

It ignores that some people date interracially for racist reasons! That’s off topic but it just caught my eye.

This kind of response gives incel. Why does supporting somebody and being an ally to them have to involve romantic encounters?

I mean, I am both clever and funny as it happens but what I wrote was utterly ridiculous (and threw in a few stereotypes for fun).

Why is it ok though for one person to say that lesbian to them means will sleep with some biological males but not ok for me to say it means sleep with only biological males? Where is the line if the line is self defined? You obviously don't think it's ok for me to define my sexuality if it's as I described, as lesbian- why not?

I don't think it's ok, because it would be erasing lesbians, it would remove the ability to clearly state your sexuality if anyone else could just self define into it. It would make it meaningless in terms of protection against say discrimination if anyone could say they were lesbian based on their own sense of their sexuality no matter who they actually sleep with.

People should be able to sleep with who they want, dress how they want, feel however they feel. In a perfect world where we were all equal this would be fine and we could just get rid of all the categories for people and just be people. This isn't the world we live in though and various groups are oppressed, discriminated against or have challenges due to their biology / health etc. or even just have specific needs and interests. To be able to discuss and meet the needs of those groups of people we need to be able to name them and clarify who is in that group. Those groups should be able to meet together to advocate for themselves. Groups might include lesbians, women, people with disabilities, carers, trans people, people from various religions, train drivers, nurses...

Can you really not see how to at least a group of lesbians redefining their sexuality to include biological men might feel like erasure and even homophobia? And allow there should be safe space for these women to discuss this?

PiggleToes · Yesterday 21:54

a lot of heterosexual men would not consider dating a trans woman because they are transphobic - hell yes.

The vast majority would not consider having sex with a tranw because they are heterosexual and therefore, not sexually attracted to other men. Transw are men, no matter how lovely their frocks and how good they are with their makeup.

Well you won’t give a clear concise definition of a lesbian so honestly what is the problem with what she wrote? You say they aren’t authentic but how can anyone decide if they do or not fit into the category?

MaryEllenWaldron · Yesterday 22:09

The Earth is round and there are two sexes - Science.

The Earth is flat and there are multiple genders which may not correspond with the body they inhabit. - Ideology with no basis in science.

That's succinct and accurate.

Have you read the thread?!

By the way- back to the original subject -

Turns out that wicked and powerful swarm of trans activists who released the crickets into the conference were 6 teenagers.

. 6 teenagers.

Sorry @JHound i read this wrong- you were responding to what the other poster wrote.

No idea what that even means

Yes, we knew that.

Read the edit.

Ah cool.

I didn’t. Certainly puts things in their appropriate context .

I edited it as I realised my comment was better directed at another poster.

Astonished by all the people on this thread thinking that other people’s sexuality is a matter of external/ societal evaluation and judgement, rather than something that is known and understood by the actual person.

TRAs are parasitic to the LGB.

They are sucking the life out of previously great LGB events. It's become overly sexual and fetish like now.

Vulnerable children are being persuaded they are in 'the wrong body' if they don't conform to outdated stereotyping of what boys and girls should be, or behave like.

It's sick.

Yes. Six silly kids who were manipulated by a violent criminal called Sarah Jane Baker.

Vitriolic expression of transphobia here. Lovely way to start a Monday morning

Yep.

Basic science.