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?

@Ereshkigalangcleg I’m not sure what echo chambers you think I inhabit?

Ah, the old echo chamber argument!

You don't have an 'opposing' view, you have a homophobic view. Lesbians are same sex attracted. That is the definition. You are denying reality in an attempt to legitimatise your homophobic views and are rightly being called out on it.

Your view rests on the belief that trans women are essentially no different to non-trans men. I disagree.

Good for you.

@334bu as tempting as it is to just hurl insults back and forth, I don’t think that’s a particularly good use of anyone’s time.

I’m not sure what echo chambers you think I inhabit?

The ones where everyone thinks it's perfectly reasonable to call males lesbians?

I thought it was good to have an opposing view in your echo chamber?

Your view rests on the belief that trans women are essentially no different to non-trans men. I disagree.

Any man who considers himself entitled to call himself a lesbian, snd expects actual same sex attracted women to consider him a potential sexual partner, is enacting male gender.

So his sex is male, his gender is male, his gender expression is male, leaving only the so-called gender identity to possibly be female. As it is completely invisible, no one can be sexually attracted to it.

I think that ‘lesbian’ can still be a meaningful term while including women who are attracted to trans women.

Do you think it includes:

A male who is attracted to women, if that male expresses that they would like to be viewed as a woman?

Two males attracted to each other, where both males express that they would like to be viewed as a woman?

No I have no more time to waste talking to a person who has such disregard and contempt for homosexual women. Good Night all.

You don't have an 'opposing' view, you have a homophobic view. Lesbians are same sex attracted. That is the definition. You are denying reality in an attempt to legitimatise your homophobic views and are rightly being called out on it.

That is your definition. It is not the single, universally accepted definition. Comparing the acceptance that a trans woman - or a woman who is attracted to trans women - can be a lesbian to actual homophobia (eg claiming women can’t be attracted to women, or that it is somehow wrong or less valid or healthy than attraction to people of the opposite sex or gender; that lesbians aren’t ‘real women’; that lesbians just haven’t met the right man yet) is in itself both ridiculous and homophobic.

The approach here of people hurling allegations of homophobia at anyone who disagrees with them feels very similar to the way that many GC people accuse TRAs of alleging transphobia of anyone who disagrees with them. It’s not a particularly constructive or subtle technique (particularly when directed at someone who has been in a same sex relationship for over ten years).

The approach here of people hurling allegations of homophobia at anyone who disagrees with them

No. Not "anyone who disagrees". They're just calling out the denial, by you, of exclusive same sex attraction as a specific sexual orientation, one that people are oppressed for all over the world.

It is not the^ single, universally accepted definition^

If I define a pineapple: "a pineapple is a blue fruit", then instantly the definition of pineapple is not "the single, universally accepted definition".

Do you think it includes:

A male who is attracted to women, if that male expresses that they would like to be viewed as a woman?

Two males attracted to each other, where both males express that they would like to be viewed as a woman?

If a person claims to have a gender identity that doesn’t immediately make sense to me I would generally refrain from expressing an opinion. It may be interesting philosophically but in practice it’s not for me to decide.

On the other hand, I would be very comfortable saying that a relationship between a non-trans woman and a trans woman who, for example, transitioned as a teenager, has had extensive hormonal and surgical intervention, and has been regarded by most people they interact with as a woman for the majority of their life, is a relationship between two lesbians, if that is how they regard themselves.

People have spelled out very clearly why denying exclusive same sex attraction as a specific sexual orientation, to pander to this ideology, is homophobic.

No. Not "anyone who disagrees". They're just calling out the denial, by you, of exclusive same sex attraction as a specific sexual orientation, one that people are oppressed for all over the world.

Again, do you think exclusively same sex attracted people are oppressed all over the world more than bisexual people, or people with same sex and same gender attraction?

If a person claims to have a gender identity that doesn’t immediately make sense to me

What gender identity here doesn't make sense to you?

Again, do you think exclusively same sex attracted people are oppressed all over the world more than bisexual people

What is the relevance here?

If I define a pineapple: "a pineapple is a blue fruit", then instantly the definition of pineapple is not "the single, universally accepted definition".

Well, I think it’s still close enough to universally accepted that your random unilateral alternative definition wouldn’t make a difference. The situation we’re talking about is more akin to there being some sort of new fruit which taste like a pineapple but looks like a cross between a pineapple and a melon, which doesn’t have a settled name yet, but quite a lot of people call it a pineapple.

More seriously, in calling me homophobic for holding these views, you are calling a very, very substantial number of gay men and lesbians and bisexuals homophobic, which should probably give you pause.

What gender identity here doesn't make sense to you?

For example, a person born female who presents as stereotypically female, uses female pronouns and has a female name, has had no physiological changes, but says they identify as a man.

Or the same person, who says their preferred pronouns are he/him; I would always use those pronouns, but I would inwardly wonder what it really meant for them to identify as a man.

More seriously, in calling me homophobic for holding these views, you are calling a very, very substantial number of gay men and lesbians and bisexuals homophobic, which should probably give you pause.

You should look at how many of that substantial number of gay and lesbian people actually would include trans people in their dating pool, whatever they say, according to research. So when it comes to it, I'm not sure they really do hold the same views as you, a person attracted to both sexes. But it's easy to say it.

Any man who considers himself entitled to call himself a lesbian, snd expects actual same sex attracted women to consider him a potential sexual partner, is enacting male gender
And to my mind, should have 'rapey git' tattooed somewhere prominent, for the avoidance of doubt. But as a (retired) heterosexual woman, what do I know? A fair bit about rapey gits, actually.
This is all about the erosion of boundaries, and there is fuck-all 'kind' about it.

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

And yet you posted, that women don't ever feel under pressure to date or entertain men's advances.

Which has been a problem for women forever. How can you have missed that and say you are shocked 'if that happens'.

It shows a woeful lack of understanding of their experiences.

Again, do you think exclusively same sex attracted people are oppressed all over the world more than bisexual people

What is the relevance here?

You seem to imply that part of the reason that sexual orientation labels must exclusively be applied on the basis of biological sex is that people with exclusively same sex attraction have been historically oppressed (and still are in many cultures). I am querying that logic, on the basis that it seems to me people who are attracted to people of the same sex (or gender) - whether exclusively or otherwise - have been equally oppressed historically (and still are).

For example, a person born female who presents as stereotypically female, uses female pronouns and has a female name, has had no physiological changes, but says they identify as a man.

Or the same person, who says their preferred pronouns are he/him; I would always use those pronouns, but I would inwardly wonder what it really meant for them to identify as a man.

How odd, Helen, I didn't actually mention anything about their pronouns in the specific post you were replying to. I merely said that they were male, and either attracted to women, or in a relationship with another MTF trans person.

What exactly, when you read my post, made you comment about "a gender identity that doesn't make sense" to you?