Shocking behaviour towards lesbians at Leeds 'pride' today

[CaptainKirksSpookyghost]

Thread 2

Previous thread here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3656142-Shocking-behaviour-towards-lesbians-at-Leeds-pride-today

As has been repeatedly stated, the lesbians were just standing there. Wearing T-shirts. Not doing anything. No banners, megaphone, nothing. And they got surrounded and shouted at.

Interesting datun I’ve been trying to work out how it worked, people saying ‘120 people crowded them just for wearing a T-short’ but it doesn’t really make sense. The video doesn’t show the lesbian woman at all or what they were doing/holding or even discuss it.

The summary someone posted said this-

Point 3 says - most of them men who try crowd them and block their banners.

Yet point 4 says - ‘They move in on the lesbian protesters BEFORE they had even started their protest. At this point their banners were still packed away’

So what was it? How are they blocking the banners if they hadn’t even got their banners out?

Hard to tell since the video doesn’t show it!

lesbians who won’t sleep with TW or sufficiently validate their womanhood always get called TFS

Does t*rf mean lesbian? Or a feminist who excludes trans people?

Is an Anti-Woman Activis
Another attempt to shut me up. I’ve marched for woman many times. Volunteered helping homeless woman and children, helped at refuges, got other people to access the freedom program. Been abused by more than one man and fought against an inept justice system for woman as well as an inept healthcare system. Don’t you dare say that I’m anti-woman. You do not know me. For all I know, your only contribution to woman is sitting on mumsnet all day berating other woman. It’s Uncalled for.

‘lesbians don’t have to sleep with men’ Lesbians don't sleep with men just as Gay males don't sleep with women whether or not they state they are men, identify as gay and insist their vagina is a male vagina.

Are you happy to inform Gay males that their homosexuality is exclusionary and that transmen are gay men if they say so? Owen Jones reaction to the premise of acceptance without exception in those circumstances was very telling. Or is it only transwomen who are to be accepted without exception?

What you are proposing will signal the end of all legislation designed to protect and safeguard lesbians and gay males.

RosesAndRaindrops What EarlyWalker just said.

What a surprise.

clearly chanted they were protesting against “trfs”, but because the individual woman were lesbians it’s seen as a lesbian attack? Do you see the hypocrisy?*

No terf is an insult. Where did the wine insult the tras?

Rather than objecting to the notion that lesbiansshouldsleep with men, they’ve reversed it to say thattranspeople arenotlesbians.

Lesbians cant have penises. This was the protest. Trans ideology states that biological men can be lesbians. They cant.

That's not saying trans women need to leave or should exist.

They didn’t say ‘you in the blue top, you want trans people to die! You can’t even say a proper sentence! You sound like a bloke’ etc, though did they?

No a large group had a go a smaller group (Rose's calls this bullying) and started throwing insults. Terf and bigot, werent even factual insults. They were neither bigots or terfs.

they are objecting to trans ideology

I object to trans ideology. I think it is fundamentally sexist. Why is it wrong to object to an ideology that I think is harmful? I'm pretty sure the blasphemy laws were repealed.

So yes - the yellers were directing “no T**Fs” at those 13 individuals. NOT to an institution. To those individual people.

The young lesbian - who transitioned and felt very harmed by it - she is protesting the belief system that harmed her.

She doesn’t want young women to get hysterectomies at 20 and regret them. She didn’t know you could be a butch GNC lesbian. She thought she had to be a transman.

She is not saying “no trans at Pride!” But that transactivism erased her. She was erased into a TM and it harmed her.

(Some TM will live forever happily as TM - they exist as well. As do butch GNC lesbians, who should not be abused as t**fs.)

I would not tell a gay man he was no longer gay if he slept with a transman.

I agree gay men should never be forced to sleep with transmen, but if they include them in their dating pool and see them as men then that is absolutely their right and not my place to question.

It boils down to your opinion of trans people. If you believe trans woman are just men, of course you would think the same for dating purposes. If you are someone who sees trans woman as trans woman then you are likely to see them as woman for dating purposes.

It’s really not hard to understand if you try and be a little tolerant of views that differ from your own rather than assuming everyone who disagrees is out to get you.

Yes, Owen Jones was specifically asked whether he would perform cunnilingus on a transman with a vulva.

His response was that he was disgusted, and that this question was homophobic.

So why is it so different for this group of lesbians asserting their sexuality?

Why no baying mobs at Owen Jones - calling him a transphobe and a bigot?- or are we to expect baying mobs at men asserting their homosexuality in the near future?

I object to trans ideology. I think it is fundamentally sexist. Why is it wrong to object to an ideology that I think is harmfuL?

Absolutely nothing merry, you object if you object, even protest if you like. But don’t pretend that you’re not actually objecting to it.

Er, well I agreed with all she said in that post.
Could have typed it all out again for you so it was said twice instead?

if you try and be a little tolerant of views that differ from your own rather than assuming everyone who disagrees is out to get you.

I am tolerant of many people who have different political and religious beliefs.

The point where my tolerance ends is where their actions harm me.

'TWAW' is as harmless as 'the earth is flat' or 'Mary was a virgin' up until the point where it starts affecting legislation and policy. We have reached that point.

But don’t pretend that you’re not actually objecting to it.

Who is pretending that they don't object to trans ideology?

I object to Catholic doctrine on gay marriage. That doesn't mean I am not tolerant of Catholics.

*And here we have it! It's not a question of " views that differ from your own" it is the lie .. it is the fiction ..

And here we have it you say?
We do indeed with that response.
But it's not against trans at all like said upthread?
It clearly is for some.

roses early don’t feel you have to answer this.

But if you want to - can you explain what it is about “lesbians don’t have penises” that you object to?

It boils down to your opinion of trans people. If you believe trans woman are just men, of course you would think the same for dating purposes. If you are someone who sees trans woman as trans woman then you are likely to see them as woman for dating purposes.

It’s really not hard to understand if you try and be a little tolerant of views that differ from your own rather than assuming everyone who disagrees is out to get you.

And here we have it!

It's not a question of "views that differ from your own" it is the lie .. it is the fiction .. it is the demand that the meaning of woman be redefined because some men are demanding this redefinition.

The response to this is "No!" on all 3 counts.

I would not tell a gay man he was no longer gay if he slept with a transman

He is gay. He is Bi, which comes under the 'gay umbrella', doesnt it?

I'm intolerant of anyone trying to remove laws that safeguard people on the basis of their sexual orientation.

I'm intolerant of people who think that people protesting for their rights to be upheld under the law are to be condemned as protesting against others.

but if they include them in their dating pool and see them as men then that is absolutely their right and not my place to question.

I really couldn't care less who an individual sleeps with or what they call a romantic partner. Again, the problem is use of language in policy and legislation.

People aren't stoned to death for having heterosexual sex. There are no social or religious consequences to having heterosexual sex any where in the world. Heterosexual marriages are recognised everywhere. Rights are restricted on the basis of observed criteria, not subjective identity.

Without a rewriting of the sacred texts of the major religions or the sudden development of an ability to reproduce asexually, some people will always see homosexual relationships as a threat.

Rights can only be protected with clear language. As with women, you can't protect people who you can't define.

But then why can’t trans people be tolerant of the lesbians’ differing views? Why are they assuming that the lesbians are out to get them?

Sorry that was too early I am a slow typer

So we keep repetitions of

People should be able to date who they want

And

The lesbians invited abuse by protesting at pride because they protested against trans people (yet posters here in the same situation claim bullying)

Let's get this straight. No one has said people cant date who they want. The fact that you keep saying thos means you are wilfully ignoring it.

The protestors protested against trans ideology and the impact on them. Not trans people. Again the fact that you keep saying this means you are wilfully ignoring what is being said.

So if you keep ignoring it and posting factually incorrect statements, you dont really have a point.

I would not tell a gay man he was no longer gay if he slept with a transman

Why do you think lesbians are feeling pressured into stating their boundaries and definitions?

It isn't about what individual people choose to call themselves, it's not about uppity lesbians policing whether or not someone is properly lesbian, and it's misleading to suggest it is. This is about lesbians reacting and defending themselves from blanket ideological statements that invade their right to define themselves, their sexuality, their boundaries. Ones such as 'some lesbians have penises'. And that lesbianism is a genital fetish. And that a lesbian who excludes male people from their body and bed should be re educated by being hanged or beaten with a barbed wire covered baseball bat. THIS is the reason that lesbians are feeling driven to stating boundaries. They have been driven to what you perceive as discourtesy, they didn't start this. Live and let live wasn't extended respectfully to them at all. Their right to self definition and their own language and authentic selves and so on isn't equal at all.

It's really not hard to understand if you try to be a little tolerant of views that differ from your own

Bloody hell, the condescension and lack of grip on reality there....

Do you mean the same way the TRA community are tolerant of views such as 'I reserve the right to know the difference between a male and a female when choosing a sexual partner' and 'women excluding males from their bodies, beds and dating pools are entitled to do so'? Please do share some examples of this tolerance and live and let live, please. Please. Some evidence that this community gave the faintest flying fuck for the interests of women would be very helpful right now. Or is it the case that this tolerance is owed by women but not equally deserved by them?

It boils down to your opinion of trans people. If you believe trans woman are just men, of course you would think the same for dating purposes. If you are someone who sees trans woman as trans woman then you are likely to see them as woman for dating purposes.

Why just men? They are men, why add just in. We have already agreed that people can not change sex. Therefore, they are men on a biological level. They can not be lesbians. Thats a fact.