Trans lesbian?

[Timeforatincture]

My first ever post on this board. Long time reader, and have found it highly educational. Thank you everyone.

There is a pullout in today's Guardian about influential lesbians. Cameos and longer pieces. One of the longer pieces is an interview with a "trans lesbian."

AIBUin thinking that's a bit odd?

@Shedbuilder
I ask you the question I've asked earlier: why do you think that a white person identifying as black and expecting to be accepted as such is a terrible, insulting thing to black people, yet you don't think it's a terrible, insulting thing to expect lesbians to accept a man as one of them?

This is an incredibly complicated and interesting question. Clearly race and nationality are different in many significant ways to sex and gender, although there are some analogies. I know that as a woman I don’t regard trans women as offensive or appropriating my ‘culture’; partly because I don’t believe we have a ‘culture’ as women - or insofar as we do, it is socially constructed, and not exclusively the domain of those born female (though i admit I would be sceptical if a trans woman who transitioned late in life claimed to have a full understanding of how those raised as girls experience and are shaped by patriarchal oppression).

I’m not black, so don’t want to speculate too much on the subject. Like sex and gender, there are many nuances and complexities in racial identity - a person of mixed heritage can appear ‘white’ to those around them (my partner being one such person), and so may have a very different experience of being black to those who are immediately perceived as black by everyone around them. And if a person of entirely white heritage had some sort of skin condition that made them appear to others to be black or of mixed heritage, they might come to have some experience of what it is to be black, even though they would only have a partial insight into it.

So, I don’t think this can be reduced to a straightforward ‘this is ok, this is not ok’ proposition.

@CardinalLolzy which things are you thinking of?

I have actually never felt more sad and embarrassed to be a lesbian. The word has been taken from us and completely lost its meaning, I’m mortified to be considered part of the alphabet soup its become, completely taken over by trans issues to the point of blatant homophobia, it’s like nothing else matters, it’s disgusting.

I don’t think I have seen anyone here say that a (non-trans) woman who is only attracted to (non-trans) women is not a lesbian? Or that it is not possible to have this sexuality?

I don’t think this can be reduced to a straightforward ‘this is ok, this is not ok’ proposition.

With many issues there's a grey area and then a line in the sand. The line for lesbians is that they are women who are same sex attracted.

[quote Trevsadick]@suggestionsplease1 your first paragraph has no correlation to the rest of your post.

You said lesbian spaces could afford to remain open and (something along the lines of) you are glad the spaces you like do allow non lesbians in, because thee attendance keeps it open

So who is it these spaces expanded to Include? Only other biological women?

I haven't put words in your mouth. You have said things that show, you are either ignoring huge women's issues, or are not well connected.

YOU only see these issues on line. You may be unaware but colleges are open. Not everyone is sat at home behind a keyboard.

They are out having interactions with people.

And your experience is not everyone else's.

And pretending the issues don't exist because you don't recognise them, isn't helping anyone.[/quote]
I work in further education in inclusion, diversity and disability and my role involves liaising with, well, actually, thousands of young people, with the remit of understanding their experiences.

So thanks but I think I am actually, in comparison to a lot of people on here, in a fairly good position to understand the experiences of young people. It's my day job.

sunavendi I’m not sure if you understood what people were getting at earlier.

Correct me if I’m wrong, and apologies in that case, but I got the impression from your posts that you thought other posters were asking you to explain why white people identifying as black, and appropriating blackness, is deeply offensive and actually racist.

If that’s the case then you got the wrong end of the stick. EVERYBODY here understands that white people appropriating blackness is offensive and just wrong on so many levels. No one was asking or expecting you as a black woman to educate us as to why. We already know. We understand. We are in absolute agreement with you there.

The thing people can’t make sense of is that you can’t see that all the same reasons, exactly the same arguments, apply to a biologically male person appropriating femaleness, appropriating womanhood - and in the context of this discussion, in particular appropriating a sexuality that belongs to biologically female people. That is in fact exclusive to biologically female people.

People were asking you to explain why you see one scenario so differently from the other, when similar power dynamics and history of privilege/advantage are at play. Why do you not recognise the offensiveness and sexism of biologically male people calling themselves lesbians? It’s actually obscenely offensive. And it’s absolutely typical behaviour of those with male entitlement. Something you seem somewhat naively blind to.

I’m guessing you’re quite young. You do seem naive to me. Your refrain of “educate yourselves”, as if you consider yourself to be privy to some wisdom or enlightenment that those of us you castigate are unaware of, rings very hollow. A woman who is not awake enough to her own oppression to realise when she’s being played like a fiddle by the age-old forces of the patriarchy is in no position to educate anyone else.

You think you are at the vanguard of a brave, progressive movement that seeks to liberate people and deliver social justice for all. I think you are a pawn fighting in the service of the Old Order - the same male-centred, male supremacist order as ever. If only you could open your eyes to the fact that the ideology you’re supporting is just as regressive as white people appropriating black people’s lived experience and claiming to be actually black.

I’m sure you’re a lovely person with the best of intentions but you’ve been badly taken in and it’s you who needs to get out of your echo chamber and educate yourself.

Try listening to black lesbians like Allison Bailey and Keira Bell.

Try reading the words of a black woman who calls today’s “progressiveness” for what it is:

www.chimamanda.com/

Part three especially.

It is a dangerous, unjust world out there, and it’s stacked against you in multiple ways. It makes me sad to think of you colluding in your own oppression.

I don’t think I have seen anyone here say that a (non-trans) woman who is only attracted to (non-trans) women is not a lesbian? Or that it is not possible to have this sexuality?

If you say the word lesbian also includes people.born male then you are indeed denying that lesbian means a female same sex attracted woman.

As a bisexual woman, I have experienced many years of people trying to erase or deny my sexuality. As a teenager and young woman, before I’d had relationships with other women, some people said I was ‘really’ straight and just claiming to be bisexual because it was trendy. For the past ten years or so, since I’ve been with my (female) partner, many people have assumed that I’m a lesbian, because attraction to only one sex (/gender) is the assumed norm.

I have heard people (straight and gay, including lesbians) express doubt as to whether bisexuality is real, dismissed it as ‘greediness’, and I have heard lesbians refer to bisexual women who entered relationships with men as ‘going over to the dark side’. From what I hear, bisexual men face even higher levels of prejudice and disbelief.

It’s not a competition as to who is most wronged, obviously. But given that no one (here at least) is arguing that there aren’t (non-trans) women who are only attracted to other (non-trans) women, or arguing that those women aren’t lesbians - I can’t see how any erasure or denial of sexual identity is occurring?

@FloralBunting

Yeah, big hugs to the posters bravely speaking up to tell the lesbians they don't have to sleep with males, but could they just at least stop mentioning that lesbians are same sex oriented because actually, people are just attracted to people, physical sexed bodies are just irrelevant. Shh, lesbians. It's Pride month. No one needs to know you only do women. It's not very thoughtful of you.

Just remembered why I don't post here any more. I've already wasted enough of my life on the types who tell me to shhh about lesbian sexual orientation, because it's not polite, or nice, or appropriate, or because it can be adjusted to accept some males. To those of you who quailed when it was pointed out that you're being homophobic, sad times, I'm sure. But you're identical to every single homophobe I've ever talked to so, I guess you've got to reconcile yourself to that.

Ciao, wims that I respect. Baton handed on from me, of course, but deeply grateful for those of you who took it up. Courage and solidarity.

Floral, so lovely to hear from you. Miss you! And sad that you’re not sticking around. But I get where you’re coming from, totally.

And over the moon for you that you’ve found your somebody to love! 🥰

Lots of love to you xxx

Helen what’s the name for those women who are exclusively same sex attracted? The word that accurately describes them and their sexual orientation?

@suggestionsplease1

Accurately and specifically, that should say

@Thelnebriati

I don’t think this can be reduced to a straightforward ‘this is ok, this is not ok’ proposition.

With many issues there's a grey area and then a line in the sand. The line for lesbians is that they are women who are same sex attracted.

What TheInebriati said. You can quibble over innumerable shades of grey and ifs and buts but the bottom line is that is that a great many lesbians do regard the expectation that men can self-identify as lesbians and expect to be welcomed into lesbian society and accepted as sexual partners profoundly insulting and homophobic. And it's not your right to give lesbian rights away or to condescend to or reproach those of us who are directly affected.

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark I think they generally identify as lesbians, or gay women? Just because other people fall within that category does make them any less lesbians, or gay women.

There are a huge range of different sexualities under the ‘bisexual’ title, and as others have pointed out, an individual’s sexuality may well change and evolve throughout their life. Even if there are other people who identify as bisexual but whose experience or notion of bisexuality is very different from my own, it is not my place to tell them they cannot have that identity (although I would expect them to be able to give some account of why they identified as bisexual - if a non-trans man said they identified as bisexual but had only ever been attracted to women, had never been romantically attached to or sexually intimate with a man, I would query in what meaningful sense they were using the term ‘bisexual’).

Ultimately it’s arbitrary that we have terms/ identity concepts based on whether the sex or gender of the people we’re attracted to is the same or different from our own. We could just as well have some identity categories dependent on whether we are attracted only to people with the same hair colour as us, or a different colour.

*It’s not a competition as to who is most wronged, obviously. But given that no one (here at least) is arguing that there aren’t (non-trans) women who are only attracted to other (non-trans) women, or arguing that those women aren’t lesbians - I can’t see how any erasure or denial of sexual identity is occurring?

Sexual identity?
non trans woman?
Do you mean sexual orientation and a female person ?

If you think transwomen are lesbians you are denying lesbian as a same sex attracted sexual orientation
That is homophobic.

It's thoroughly depressing that after spending decades trying, and succeeding, in getting sexual orientation enshrined in equality law, due to the desperate discrimination that lesbians and homosexual men have faced, that people are furiously trying to dismantle it all.

Being a bit airy fairy about love who you want, and who does it affect and why can't the word lesbian mean anything I say it means, doesn't really cut the mustard when people are discriminated against. You have to have laws in place to deal with it. It's not about manners, it's about legal recourse.

Being proud of homophobia is not a good look.

Fortunately mainstream media are becoming more aware of these regressive attitudes and the sexist, homophobic ideology that places like Stonewall are promoting.

So I expect these sorts of attitudes to be fairly short lived, to be honest.

At least publicly.

@Datun Legal protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is indeed a great and (sadly) necessary thing. I would be the last to want to dismantle it. Fortunately we are all protected from discrimination on the basis of our sexual orientation, whether we are straight, gay or bisexual. Can you explain how anything we’re discussing here would undermine a person’s ability to use the Equality Act to bring a claim that they had been discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation?

Any attempt to re-define the definitions in the equality act doesn't, at least to me, indicate any respect for or agreement with, it. We already have Stonewall campaigning to remove single sex exceptions. Trying to redefine the very basis of homosexuality is in direct conflict with the reason why it's in the equality act.

Pretending that a male and female are lesbians completely ignores why lesbians are discriminated against.

Currently, and fortunately, the equality act does not recognise that sexual orientation could be based on gender.

I predict it will stay that way, but not for the want of people trying to change it.

Helen you may think it’s fine that the same word can be used to mean variously a same sex attracted female, an opposite sex attracted male, an opposite sex attracted female and even a same sex attracted male, but I think that renders the word meaningless and therefore useless.

And it’s really offensive to the same sex attracted women to whom the name always belonged, traditionally. Who now have no way of differentiating themselves from all those other groups.

It’s ridiculous. And you make yourself look ridiculous trying to justify and defend it, honestly.

Ultimately it’s arbitrary that we have terms/ identity concepts based on whether the sex or gender of the people we’re attracted to is the same or different from our own. We could just as well have some identity categories dependent on whether we are attracted only to people with the same hair colour as us, or a different colour.

Yeah, of course Helen, because historically and currently people have been/are discriminated against and persecuted on the basis of the hair colour of the people they were/are attracted to.

Right now there will be people being condemned to death in some parts of the world because they only fancy redheads.

Sure.

Fucking RANK homophobia from you there.

@Datun I’m sorry but your response doesn’t make a lot of sense. Everyone is protected from discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation - not just homosexual people. As long as a person can’t be discriminated against because they are attracted to men, or to women, or to both - that is surely the point?

Currently, and fortunately, the equality act does not recognise that sexual orientation could be based on gender

As I’ve pointed out previously, ‘sex’ in the EA is not just referring to ‘biological’ sex. A person with a gender recognition certificate stating that they are male is a man for the purposes of the EA. So a (non-trans) man who is exclusively attracted to trans men with GRCs is a person of same-sex sexual orientation for the purposes of the EA.

And it’s really offensive to the same sex attracted women to whom the name always belonged, traditionally. Who now have no way of differentiating themselves from all those other groups.

It really is. And also for all those chaps on datalounge who are partly repulsed and partly pissing themselves that some people actually expect them to sleep with transmen - to validate them.

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark
Are you suggesting that the reason the concept of a gay man exists is to prevent homophobia?

Calling me homophobic is both ridiculous and offensive.

[quote Helen8220]@Datun I’m sorry but your response doesn’t make a lot of sense. Everyone is protected from discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation - not just homosexual people. As long as a person can’t be discriminated against because they are attracted to men, or to women, or to both - that is surely the point?

Currently, and fortunately, the equality act does not recognise that sexual orientation could be based on gender

As I’ve pointed out previously, ‘sex’ in the EA is not just referring to ‘biological’ sex. A person with a gender recognition certificate stating that they are male is a man for the purposes of the EA. So a (non-trans) man who is exclusively attracted to trans men with GRCs is a person of same-sex sexual orientation for the purposes of the EA.[/quote]
Helen, you have decided that a lesbian can be a male attracted to a male, a male attracted to a woman, a woman attracted to a male, or a woman attracted to a woman.

It's just jibber jabber.

Lesbians are not there to validate heterosexual males.