Gay male trainer on LGBTQI+ rights at work says not to use the word Lesbianism

[stumbledin]

This is from a facebook post that was public, but then made private given the responses it was getting.

And although from Americe is really worrying as the training was for a project working with young people. So again the tactic raised in other threads about political lobbying, seems to be, work under the radar and influence young people to get the trans agenda implemented.

And I think we have seen here how young people have just been subsumed into the trans rights agenda because it is the only one they are given.

Quote:

^I learned in an lgbt coalition workgroup at work today—from a staffer at lambda legal— that the term “lesbianism” is now considered offensive/pejorative and officially to be avoided. in our workgroup it was to be listed on a published glossary of terms to avoid. i’m not sure what to make of it as it’s a term i have positive feelings towards and i think most of the self-identified lesbians i know do also. i’m curious. it feels like erasure, like collapsing “lesbian” into the word “gay” or collapsing all people into “mankind.” i know many young women prefer the word queer over lesbian and i use them both, and i know that among some, the word lesbian is synonymous with trans exclusion, which i vociferously protest. but who decided lesbianism was an offensive term and was i asleep? can we not have words? i’m likely out of date and not aware of new nuances of power and preference. some people must feel actually harmed by the term. i’m open to learning how others relate to the word. can anyone illuminate an antiquated person, please?

It is included as a term to avoid in this guide by GLAAD: www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/allys-guide-to-terminology_1.pdf and another organization referenced in the thread.

and also in a guide referenced below by Freedom for All Americans.

let's please keep this conversation inclusive of trans lesbians.^

end quote (the italics never seem to work for me) soeven among woke women who think there is such a thing as a trans lesbian are questioning some of the female erasure of trans rights training.

This is what first drew my attention to the misogyny of gender ideology. Lesbians are not allowed to define themselves as female homosexuals because if that definition were to be accepted then those women would obviously have a perfect right to decline the advances of males (howsoever they identify).

Many men who identify as women are sexually interested in women. They're heterosexual in old money. So in their feminine identity they are dead keen to have sex with lesbians. It provides a twofer. 1. They're having sex with a woman, and 2. Their gender identity is being endorsed (I'm a real woman because I had sex with an actual lesbian).

It's no surprise to me that the dating pool for transgender people is very small. However it does seem to come as a big and very unwelcome surprise to men who transition. They feel entitled to sex and react very angrily to rejection.

So the TRAs rephrase their lack of partners as a human rights issue and the effect among the young who are exposed to this ideology is a conviction that not providing sex to poor victimised TW is cruel and transphobic.

Tbh it horrifies me that young women are that gullible. But then again I was pretty gullible at that age, though the bollocks we were expected to swallow were different.

Sexual orientation is a protected characteristic. And it specifically says lesbian.

The Equality Act 2010 says you must not be discriminated against because:

you are heterosexual, gay, lesbian or bisexual

He is in conflict with equality law if he thinks it's pejorative. What a dipstick.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/sexual-orientation-discrimination

It seems to me that it is actually slightly worse, Prawn, in that you have situations where trans identifying XY people are having relationships with cis identifying XX people and both are claiming to be lesbians and claiming the right to speak for lesbians.

Lesbians themselves seem to be harassed and labeled bigots both by heterosexual males, but also by heterosexual women.

Don't get me wrong, the behaviour and entitlement of the XY trans people is more dangerous but I don't like seeing heterosexual women undermining lesbians either.

??! FFS, Lambda Legal.

I guess you're right, ArnoldWhatshisknickers. There are indeed ridiculous heterosexual couples who identify as lesbians.

However it's the predatory and bullying nature of males trying to get lesbians to have sex with them that really distresses me. I remember Magdalen Berns did a video on disobedient lesbians being thrown out of university LGBT socs for "transphobia".

Being a lesbian has never been easy. Society - and men particularly - find women who openly refuse the almighty peen offensive. But this new manifestation seems so cruel and dishonest.

can anyone illuminate an antiquated person, please?

How embarrassing for her. She hasn't figured it out yet: no matter how many apologies she makes for being a woman (and an older one at that), she will always be under suspicion of disloyalty to her superiors in this movement.

Awful. And this is why I don't understand why Linda Riley for example, is supporting those men who seek to erase lesbians.

This is appalling. Doubly so because it's coming from a gay man.

He is in conflict with equality law if he thinks it's pejorative. What a dipstick.

Yes he's a total dipstick! However, from what I understood from stumbledin's post this is an American training session. The US does not include sexual orientation as a protected characteristic under any IIRC title protections at this time.

While sexual orientation (LGB) should be a protected characteristic the recent (May 2019) passing of the US Equality Act through the House of Representatives also includes gender which I do not support. Our highly conservative Senate however was not on board of which I am quite thankful for to be honest. For now the Act is stalled and will likely never make it past the Senate as long as it is republican-controlled.

Don't get me wrong, trans individuals need to be protected from discrimination under the law but not to the sex class detriment. They are already protected under the other title protections so the only thing missing is sexual orientation as a protected class.

Sexual orientation should be added (and should have been decades ago) to all of our title discrimination laws without prejudice.

We do not need an equality act here we have our title protections which can be expanded or refined to include gender with clear definitions to ensure that gender never tramples on sex as a protected class.

It's quite odd/irritating/heart-wrenching/sickening to me how our Democrat presidential candidates for 2020 are so focused on gender when we have so many horrible power imbalances in this country that are omnipresent. There are so many important pressing issues for citizens as well as immigrants and yet the focus is on less than 1% of the population. I mean wtf? Our politicians (primary and fringe parties) are so fucking stupid and worthless there's not one in the race that is worth their weight in dogshit.

It was lesbian erasure that first drew my attention to this whole dystopian nightmare. I used go on Tumblr a lot and it didn't take long for me to notice a lot of libfem and TRA accounts demonising lesbians who didn't want to consider transwomen as partners.

the word lesbian is synonymous with trans exclusion, which i vociferously protest

..this reads as 'some lesbians do not shag male people and I am against this'

My 20 yr old hates using the word 'queer' to describe her (lesbian) sexual orientation.

I'd like to see her reaction to being told she couldn't describe herself as she wants!

I think people (including the author quoted in the OP) may have got the wrong end of the stick about the advice in the GLAAD guide.

The term "Lesbian" isn't discouraged in that document. It's used as an example of good language in several places. It is particularly the use of the word "Lesbianism" that is discouraged. I think because of the way it's been used to characterize an action, often in a sneery way, rather than be a statement about someone's sexual orientation.

So "She's lesbian" is fine but "Her lesbianism is obvious" not so much.

Pah. Italics fail. Lesbianism

though the bollocks we were expected to swallow were different

That would be a good joke if anything about all this was funny.

Would love the trainer to explain what he thinks the L in LGBTWhatever stands for then.

I'm all for this kind of training. It should get whole roomfuls of people awake to the very major issues of this ideology in seconds, hopefully accompanied by the lesbian members of staff standing up, explaining that under the EQA this is discrimination and quite possibly a hate offence, and they're heading out now to talk to HR, PC Gul and their solicitor.

As a side bar, I'm now wondering if any minute we'll see the acronym become QGBT+ and the L people can go off and form paraiah L groups in peace: get the L out indeed.

Although I note that under The One True Faith it's perfectly ok for some people to call themselves lesbians and be celebrated for it, and the interesting thing is that those people allowed to mostly seem to comprise of those born male.

HQ I apologise for my snarky tone should it offend. I'm slightly miffed about the rampant homophobia and erasure/punishing of women for attempting a sexuality that excludes males.

The term "Lesbian" isn't discouraged in that document. It's used as an example of good language in several places. It is particularly the use of the word "Lesbianism" that is discouraged. I think because of the way it's been used to characterize an action, often in a sneery way, rather than be a statement about someone's sexual orientation.

I think this might be it, although the trainer and the docs clearly didn't explain themselves (perhaps intentionally - given the word games people play over this I wouldn't be surprised). The individual word 'Lesbianism' is so often used sneeringly.

I was about to say the same. Words lesbian and gay person are encouraged. It’s turning it into an ‘ism’ that’s the issue.

So you can be a lesbian, but you mustn't talk about your lesbianism.

You can be vegetarian but never talk about your vegetarianism?

You can be Catholic, but never talk about your Catholicism?

You can be transgender but never talk about your transgenderism?

What am I missing here, because it sounds no less insane.

The poster is happy to consider that someone might feel harmed by the term, but uses queer, which I know that some older gay men & lesbians do feel harmed by because of how it was used in the past.

Michelleoftheresistance with Catholicism and vegetarianism you're talking about the actions people who consider themselves Catholic or vegetarian do to maintain a lifestyle consistent with their convictions. Whereas being lesbian or straight isn't about what you do but who you are actually attracted to. You wouldn't talk about someone's straightism. Similarly we talk about being black but not about blackism which would make it sound like to be black you just have to take a set of actions and voila! Black! and people who don't take those actions aren't really.

But mainly I think you're missing the way lesbianism is normally used pejoratively in a way vegetarianism etc. is not.