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?

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.

Yeah, bet there are loads and loads of those about 😂

How is this 'gay is bad' ideology any different from Section 28?

@Thelnebriati

How is this 'gay is bad' ideology any different from Section 28?

It isn't. It's deeply homophobic.

[quote Helen8220]@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]
No, I’m saying that you saying that classifying people according to their actual sexual orientation is as arbitrary as classifying them according to their hair colour sexual preferences is a hideously stupid and offensive thing to say given the history of real, actual homophobia, which has had to be vigorously fought against to achieve civil rights and protections, and which you should be very well aware of.

Are you one of those women who downplays the reality of misogyny too? Oh it doesn’t matter if men say they’re women because it’s not like there’s millennia of history of men oppressing and abusing women every which way they can,, is there? Tinkly little laugh and head tilt! Is that you?

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark

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.

Yeah, bet there are loads and loads of those about 😂

Call me clairvoyant, but I'm guessing that this determination to redefine the meaning of the word lesbian, has got nothing to do with men going out with transmen.

Just a hunch 😆

@Thelnebriati

How is this 'gay is bad' ideology any different from Section 28?

Quite.

And I still can’t get over that hair colour shite.

Call me clairvoyant, but I'm guessing that this determination to redefine the meaning of the word lesbian, has got nothing to do with men going out with transmen.

Just a hunch 😆

Ooh, spookily intuitive Datun 👻

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark

Call me clairvoyant, but I'm guessing that this determination to redefine the meaning of the word lesbian, has got nothing to do with men going out with transmen.

Just a hunch 😆

Ooh, spookily intuitive Datun 👻

Well I can't help thinking that my second sight would come in very handy, in terms of sexual orientation being based on gender.

I mean i've been told countless times that you don't know anyone's gender until you ask them.

That's going to make sexual orientation very tricky. You'd have to actually strike up a conversation with someone before you knew whether or not they were included in your orientation.

Strewth, it's gonna take ages to get a shag at a party.

@Datun I thought we were talking about how the Equality Act works? You were suggesting that unless we rigidly stick to saying a trans woman can’t be a lesbian that would undermine the legal protection provided against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. You haven’t explained why, and seem to be rambling onto other matters instead. You keep saying how important it is to be logical about these things so I was expecting a clear answer.

That's going to make sexual orientation very tricky. You'd have to actually strike up a conversation with someone before you knew whether or not they were included in your orientation.

What a bizarre way of approaching attraction. Don’t you work out if you’re attracted to someone by looking at them and talking to them, rather than trying to work out if they fit into a particular box?

Yes and the first thing a lesbian notices is the sex of the person and describing sexual orientation as" fitting into a particular box "is particularly demeaning.

No, I’m saying that you saying that classifying people according to their actual sexual orientation is as arbitrary as classifying them according to their hair colour sexual preferences is a hideously stupid and offensive thing to say given the history of real, actual homophobia, which has had to be vigorously fought against to achieve civil rights and protections, and which you should be very well aware of.

Are you one of those women who downplays the reality of misogyny too? Oh it doesn’t matter if men say they’re women because it’s not like there’s millennia of history of men oppressing and abusing women every which way they can,, is there? Tinkly little laugh and head tilt! Is that you?

I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and answer sensibly, although I’m not convinced you have any interest in civilised discussion.

The fact that categories of sexual orientation are arbitrary obviously does not mean that the prejudice that people have faced over hundreds of years as a result of having romantic and sexual relationships with people of the same sex or gender is not real or serious. It does however mean that those categories can (and have) change and evolve, and vary across different cultures. Do you think that a man who is attracted to both trans men and non-trans men faces any less prejudice than a man who is attracted to only non-trans men? Do you really believe that the people who seek to oppress and punish those who aren’t heterosexual care whether their attraction is same sex or same gender?

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark and I realise that being gay or bisexual doesn’t necessarily mean that a person can’t be homophobic, but I hope you appreciate that calling a person homophobic who is themselves not straight and so likely to have experienced homophobia is not very pleasant.

You were suggesting that unless we rigidly stick to saying a trans woman can’t be a lesbian

There's nothing "rigid" about wanting to have accurate definitions of what words actually mean, particularly words that apply to a specific class of people who are oppressed in unique ways.

Do you really believe that the people who seek to oppress and punish those who aren’t heterosexual care whether their attraction is same sex or same gender?

How unfortunate it is now those who deny sexual reality who seek to oppress and punish same sex attracted women for having the temerity to not include males as potential partners.

In fact, it's pretty shitty for a woman not from that class to decide that women who are exclusively same sex attracted don't have a word to describe them.

I realise that being gay or bisexual doesn’t necessarily mean that a person can’t be homophobic, but I hope you appreciate that calling a person homophobic who is themselves not straight and so likely to have experienced homophobia is not very pleasant.

If the cap fits!!!!

You need to give this up, Helen. It's not going to fly. Not on Mumsnet, and not in the wider world. Male people who are attracted to women are straight or they are bisexual. Not lesbians.

I agree. The denial of exclusive same sex attraction as a sexual orientation is homophobic.

@Ereshkigalangcleg as I said above, there are people who identify as bisexual who I might find it hard to understand how they think the category fits them; but as long as they’re not telling me I’m not bisexual it’s not really my business. Similarly, no one is telling exclusively same-sex attracted women that they’re not lesbians.

It may not ‘fly’ on mumsnet. However, in my experience the wider world is very different to MN.

But I agree I should probably give up trying to convince people here. That doesn’t necessarily mean I will though. I still think that it’s good for people to have an opposing view present in their echo chamber.

Similarly, no one is telling exclusively same-sex attracted women that they’re not lesbians.

That's all that "lesbian" means. As I said, the denial of exclusive same sex attraction, as a specific sexual orientation, not bundled up with straight and bisexual people of both sexes, is homophobic.

By appropriating their name to include males, you are precisely telling same sex attracted women that they are not lesbians.

However, in my experience the wider world is very different to MN.

I'd imagine Mumsnet is much closer in reality to most people in the wider world than your echo chambers. Mumsnet is more liberal than most people, even.

Your view rests on the belief that trans women are essentially no different to non-trans men. I disagree. I think that ‘lesbian’ can still be a meaningful term while including women who are attracted to trans women. You subscribe to a narrower definition. The difference is that I’m civil about expressing my view, and I recognise that other people have different views.