Diva editor, responds to 'lesbian rights alliance' article in the times.

[garam]

Another strongly worded restating of support for trans rights....

"A Times article, published today, announces “lesbian fury at Stonewall over ‘trans agenda’”, as if the 135 signatories of an open letter speak for every lesbian in the world.

Sorry, but you're wrong.

Given DIVA’s unequivocal stance on trans issues, I’m sure it goes without saying, but for anyone not quite sure: those 135 signatories do not speak for us, or for the majority of cisgender lesbians.

The letter, from an organisation calling themselves the Lesbian Rights Alliance, accuses Stonewall of erasing lesbians and says: “Stonewall has rarely represented our interests. Now in your single-minded policy to promote the trans political and ideological agenda you not only fail to represent us but you actually promote lesbian invisibility – and lesbian erasure.”

I do agree that lesbians are underrepresented in the LGBT community. But it's worse for bisexual people, and even more so for trans people who are also lesbian or bisexual. That's why it's so important that a magazine like DIVA exists, and that an organisation like Stonewall is women-led and promotes bi and trans inclusion. It's the likes of DIVA and Stonewall who are making us more visible.

In fact, I'd go further. It is not Stonewall – or any other LGBT organisation – erasing lesbian identities, but these so-called feminists who, by peddling hateful and transphobic rhetoric, make people like me not want to use the word lesbian to describe myself because I don’t want to be associated with their views. What a sad state of affairs.

The letter continues: “We urge you to stop claiming to represent us and leave the L out.”

Take your own advice, LRA, and stop claiming to represent lesbians. You do not speak for me, for DIVA, or for the majority of our community.

As I’ve said before, and I’ll say again, trans women do not erase lesbians. I believe we are enriched by trans friends and lovers, parents, children, colleagues and siblings.

Groups like the LRA would have you believe that it’s “them versus us”. It’s not. They are us. We’re one and the same, and we can’t let divisive, hateful and misguided people drive a wedge between us.

DIVA publisher Linda Riley agrees with me. She says: “It seems ironic to me to complain about a lack of lesbian visibility while, at the same time, asking the L to be removed from LGBT.

“We are stronger as a community and 135 lesbians should not be able to decide what a whole community should believe.”"

Lol, it's not going to quadruple, Milly. It's going to fall if anything (like it has already).

Yes, Milly, but your support (roughly 25% a few months ago) is in free fall as public awareness increases and people realise this is nothing like the homophobia of the 1980s. In fact, quite the opposite.

The disinfectant of sunlight does not help transactivism.

Expecting more than 18% of people to believe that women have penises certainly is optimistic. Expecting more than 18% of people to be OK with women and girls being forced to change and shower with penises is misogynistic.

I am expecting this figure to drop once more of wider society becomes aware of this niche market.

I can't see how anyone can simultaneously justify 'transwomen are women' (with all that implies) and self ID.

Wait till the general public realizes that self-ID means that Alex Drummond can change with their teenage daughters at the pool if Alex feels like it.

Expecting more than 18% of people to believe that women have penises certainly is optimistic.

If a true believer like garam can't bring themself to assert 2D + 69 = L then expecting the general public to go along with "women have penises" is wildly optimistic. The only way self-ID is going to make it into law is covertly.

May I just say how vile I think you are to compare people rejecting a belief in Genderism to the horrific experience of the AIDS crisis.

What is the motivation for trying to equate one’s innate sexual orientation to racism and fatphobia?

everydayfeminism.com/2016/12/dating-preferences-discriminatory/

This video explicitly states that lesbians can “unlearn” their conditioned repulsion to penises if they just try, because refusing is like saying you’re not attracted to black people.

I never understand why this is thought to be such a winning argument. Everyone is allowed not to be attracted to black people (including other black people) or any other racial grouping. Or fat people. And we can quietly think the worse of them for it if we want to.

But actually trying to shame them and browbeat them out of such an intimate, complex preference is both pointless and wrong. Who cares why anyone does or does not like to have sex with any particular kind of people? No one's sexual freedom of choice to pick or reject any other consenting adult should be curtailed.

Well, quite, Regina. People can campaign for equal rights in housing, employment, etc. But although incels, TRAs like Riley J Dennis and Drew DeVeaux (who came up with the Cotton Ceiling concept) bitch about being refused as sexual partners, you can't campaign for sexual access to others. Well, you can - I've witnessed it on YouTube - but it's grotesque and repugnant. And depending on who's doing it and how, it can be pretty rapey.

Sex is not a right. No one has to shag you.

Given the level of male violence we live with it cannot come as a surprise that a large segment of the male population and a surprisingly large share of the female population do not think women are entitled to say no to men who want to fuck them.