Is fancying a particular sex and not a particular gender bigoted?

[ArcheryAnnie]

Changed name for obvious reasons.

Provoked by this article - which is getting a depressing amount of traction, by a blogger on twitter called stavvers: www.donotlink.com/framed?43198

Short version: if your sexual preferences are linked in any way to the shape of your potential partner's genitals, then you are a bigot. So, eg, if you are straight, you should be attracted to men who have vulvas, and if you are a lesbian, you should be attracted to women with penises. (This isn't saying "it's totes ok to fancy trans lesbians or transmen", which would be cool, it's saying "if you pay any attention to the shape of someone's genitals at all, you are a bigot".) Any way of Doing Sexuality apart from stavvers' way is creepy and weird, and also cissexist and bigoted.

Most of this was aimed at women, naturally. Men's preferences were an afterthought.

In the twitter storm that followed, stavvers and her allies spent a lot of time tee-heeing about how any woman who disagreed with her was probably crap in bed, and all these lesbians who objected it this were prudes who didn't know how to have sex, were probably just holding hands in the dark, and .....dear god it was like a timewarp into the 1950s. Lesbians who choose not to sleep with people - men or women - who have penises are prudish and frigid! How hilarious! How new!

This would all be irrelevant if stavvers was seen as what she is (one of those tedious people who thrive on being "shocking" and "edgy"), but she's got a depressing amount of support for it.

Having read through the whole thing now, stavvers last post makes absolutely no sense when placed next to her, 'everyone who doesn't like penises is a bigot' stance.

She seems confused.

I notice it's only lesbians who are supposed to love penises on trans women, straight men seem to be exempt from that ridiculous expectation. It is a very male entitlement that demands women love their cock and provide them with the sex they want whether they like it or not, those born female don't have that entitlement regardless of how they identify.

We're all entitled to discriminate against potential sexual partners, whether that's based on ethical, religious or political beliefs, race, nationality, hair colour, height, weight, health status, income, accent, sex, genitalia, charm, humour, intelligence.... We are all entitled to choose people we are attracted to and share common goals with. Nobody has the right to demand sex or a relationship from anybody.

It's disturbing how many boys are raised to believe that females merely exist to satisfy their sexual urges and deserve to be bullied into providing them. Obviously having a sex change doesn't change that sick, dangerous and abusive mentality. Those attitudes need to be challenged in everybody who expresses them, trans or not.

I just cannot believe this person actually calls herself a feminist.

Her post simply reeks of plain, outright misogyny.

She really is part of that wing of misogyny which absolutely accepts that women are not the best people to choose what to do with their bodies and who to have sexual intercourse with.

She is disgusting.

But I'm glad she's getting quite a bit of exposure because as someone else said, the more people know about these lunatics, the better. I really wasn't aware that these trans-bigots were such a thing - I knew they were out there, but I thought they were marginal nutters who nobody took any notice of. Stavvers is quite well known though, I had no idea she was such a flake.

If you look at the last comment under the blog, a rape survivor says that since reading the piece she's decided she should stop having sex with anyone until she can get over her fear of penis to avoid excluding or oppressing anyone. For fucks' sake!! This calls itself feminism?

I adore bill's example. But this is really sad, especially the blog comment you mention, flora.

I think it is absurd.

Does that blogger identify as a feminist? If so, I wonder what she thinks it means.
I thought we shouldn't shame women for their sexual choices. Shaming women for saying no to sex is as anti-feminist as it gets imo.

I have never heard of this person

I feel slightly ashamed of trotting this ole cliche out...but she really does give Feminism a bad rap

Not in my name, thank you. And fuck off.

I notice it's only lesbians who are supposed to love penises on trans women, straight men seem to be exempt from that ridiculous expectation. It is a very male entitlement that demands women love their cock and provide them with the sex they want whether they like it or not, those born female don't have that entitlement regardless of how they identify.

Yes, this is what I notice about the whole debate. It's just one more dimension to the oppression of women's sexual choices - "women - you can't be choosy about who you have sex with." Which is the whole fucking problem, isn't it? Men don't like women to be able to choose who they have sex with. (NB. Not All Men!! )

Anyway, I say all people are allowed to say who they are sexually attracted to, at any point of a relationship, without being called a bigot. I am attracted to hetero males. If I met an apparently het male, and it turned out he had a vulva, not a penis, then I retain the right to no longer be sexually attracted to them. That is my right as an autonomous sexual human being. That is everyone's right.

If that's makes me a bigot, then - I don't know what. But I will not have anyone tell me who I should be sexually attracted to, or not.

I dated a post-op transwoman for a bit. We broke up because of personality clashes, not sex. The sex was fine.

But I don't do penises. I don't enjoy penetration full stop and I'm definitely not up for blow jobs. It's not prejudice, it's knowing what I enjoy. If I fell in love with someone who had a penis, genital sex would have to be off the menu.

I am a lesbian, I don't want a partner with a penis. Lesbians have been told for decades that they are bigoted/mentally ill/man hating to reject penises. This is simply a variation on that old trope.

Stavvers is one of those people trying so hard to be open-minded she has not noticed her brains have fallen clean out.

Excellent response to the ghastly Stavvers line of thought here, which articulates how male supremacist conceptions of women's sexuality have morphed into new and hideous forms under the guise of 'sex positivity':

rootveg.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/whose-weapon-is-it-anyway/

Discrimination can end up going all the way to removing a person's choice from them.

Went to look at her TL as my TL was saying their comments weren't appearing. Turns out she's "not approving any more comments because of all the sane people calmly pointing out the flaws in her ridiculous, narcissistic, hypocritical arguments trolls".

QUELLE SURPRISE.

This seems apt

DonkeySkin that's a good post. Ally Fogg really is a dick. I hadn't seen his witterings about "forced penetration" being at the same rate as rapes. How come he doesn't get called out more for being the MRA he is. He toadies up to fun fems like Laurie Penny as cover. Ick.

I was going to post that link DonkeySkin too. It's a great piece.

I agree with ezinma in that who we are sexually attracted to is, in part at least, a social construct that should be challenged. However lesbians are already challenging it by being attracted to women and not going down the heteronormative route.

What stavvers is suggesting is to actually turn that around trying to get women to buy back into heteronormativity again. As other people have pointed out it is only women who exclude men who are being targeted. The penis is apparently that important it musn't be excluded.

No more bigoted than only fancying men who are taller than you or not being sexually attracted to someone with ginger hair or an exuberant personality.

I have never in my life heard of a lesbian murdering a trans woman for having a surprise penis so the "gay panic" defense doesn't really apply here. Also post operative trans women don't have vaginas. They have surgical approximations of vaginas so it would be perfectly reasonable for a lesbian to say no thank you.

No thank you is far more reasonable than I'd be able to manage, I think.

And this thread has reminded me that I unfollowed stavvers, after following her for a while, when I grew tired of her rants about cis women's privilege.

I blocked her because I didn't particularly want her retweeted into my timeline bullying people. It's a pity when someone who obviously has a lot of passion and campaigning energy gets it into her head that the best way to do it is through shouting abuse online at people she disagrees with.

ProfNic but it's the attitudes of women like us that cause men to attack and murder transwomen. Or something. According to twitter.