Do we have it anywhere on record that Stonewall does/does not support people to express their sexuality as exclusively homosexual?

[JustcameoutGC]

The expectation that lesbians accept partners with penises was one of the things that really made me start questioning gender identity politics more closely.

Exclusively homosexual lesbian spaces have disappeared as viewed to be transphobic. Just look on any lesbian dating apps and many of the users are male and be-penised. Some may be fine with this, but all of my lesbian friends are not, and they feel very disenfranchised, but equally they feel unable to speak out. Just look at what happened in Manchester.

I just can't wrap my head around how the prevoiusly stalwart and highly effective champion of gay rights has now essentially outlawed exclusive homosexuality.

Have they made any statements that make this stance clear? Have they actively said they do not support exclusively homosexual spaces?

@BilindaB

She' been charged with a homophobic hate crime. Do you usually want to let people who commit crimes like that off?

When theyre trumped up bullshit, yes. Every time.

He went there to make trouble anyway, it was a stunt.

I see we're circling back to gravy boats in definition world now...

Millar:

''The charge also alleges she wrote personal and false information relating to a female police constable on social media.

The offence is said to have been aggravated by prejudice related to sexual orientation.''
-------

Innocent til proven guilty, I know.

@BilindaB

2. is a circular definition. You have used the word being defined in the definition itself.

That's how dictionaries do it, I showed that last time. Go look for yourself.

I've had a look as I remember that discussion.

Was this your post?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a4295102-Does-anyone-ever-wonder-how-this-will-end?msgid=109030802

Did you see the crowds that were there for her though! Nearly forty people!

@BilindaB

He went there to make trouble anyway, it was a stunt.

And there it is!

He wore the shirt and hat to 'make trouble' anyway.

It was a stunt.

'He deserved it!'

'Was this your post?'

No but thanks for bringing it to my attention.

And there it is!

He wore the shirt and hat to 'make trouble' anyway.

It was a stunt.

'He deserved it!'

and it's still not analogous to someone deserving to be raped. Because in that case, they don't deserve it for what they were wearing. In his case, he deserved to be made to leave because of what he was wearing (and that it was a stunt).

Sorry Bilinda. My mistake. That was a different discussion with a different poster. It wasn't about circular definitions.

I don't remember a recent discussion with you or anyone else about circular definitions. Perhaps you're mistaking me for someone else?

Do you even hear yourself Bilinda?

How you can not see the comparison is quite astounding.

So the dictionary definition - and I know how you all love those- now says a trans woman is a woman. Because times have changed. Or Merriam-Webster's has been 'captured' by the dreaded trans agenda.

Could you post a link to a circular definition in a dictionary Bilinda as you claim that's how dictionaries define things? Or a link or screenshot of your earlier post that you referred to?

This thread is about the homophobia inherent in Stonewall's redefinition of same sex attraction to same gender attraction.
It is not the place to discuss a court case which already has its own thread.

@BilindaB

He went there to make trouble anyway, it was a stunt.

You're doubling down on this?

Are you saying that April Preston and her friends had agreed to meet up with him and shout at him?

This is a page I think you need to read, urgently.

rapecrisis.org.uk/get-informed/about-sexual-violence/myths-vs-realities/

@BilindaB

So the dictionary definition - and I know how you all love those- now says a trans woman is a woman. Because times have changed. Or Merriam-Webster's has been 'captured' by the dreaded trans agenda.

It's an American dictionary isn't it? I wouldn't be at all surprised at capture.

In his case, he deserved to be made to leave because of what he was wearing (and that it was a stunt).

So, in his case, he deserved to be abused, harassed and assaulted because he had the audacity to wear a shirt that showed his support for an alternative LGB charity to a pride event. One man! And his treatment was proportionate in your eyes.

meal
1 any of the regular occasions in a day when a reasonably large amount of food is eaten.
"the evening meal"

1. the food eaten during a meal.

television
noun
1 the transmission of programming, in the form of still or moving images, via radio waves, cable wires, satellite, or wireless network to a receiver or other screen.
2 the process or product involved:
'to watch television.'
3 an electronic device or set for receiving television broadcasts or similar programming.
4 the field of television broadcasting, or similar transmission of programming.

Bilinda, none of your examples show what you think they do. Not one of them show that when there is two distinct options, such as woman/man, that one can ever become known as the other.

They also do not show a new meaning being shoehorned into diluting an existing and centuries old meaning.

But crack on.

On dating apps, I don't know never been on one, are you allowed to say 'Men under 6 foot, don't swipe right?'

It's a way back but I'm just reading the thread. There was BelindaB giving dating advice when up popped this gem!

Why are we being mansplained lesbian dating by someone who has never online dated?

That “meal” example is not circular.

That’s one definition building on the other.
So you could substitute in like so:

2. the food eaten during [any of the regular occasions in the day in which food is taken]

Now let’s try the same with your definition:

2. someone born male who has transitioned to being [an adult human female]

Do you see the problem with that? (If not, I have to wonder how you are defining ‘male’ and ‘female.’ Certainly not in a logically coherent manner.)

I'd just like to say that I am convinced Belinda (or is it Bettina? whatever) is here with women's best interests at heart, and every post is very definitely in good faith and I'm sure everyone reading can see that for themselves.

@BilindaB

Millar:

''The charge also alleges she wrote personal and false information relating to a female police constable on social media.

The offence is said to have been aggravated by prejudice related to sexual orientation.''
-------

Innocent til proven guilty, I know.

Notice the word alleges in there perchance? Know what that means?

Quite right Innocent until proven Guilty.

BilindaB, I haven't read the whole thread but I wanted to say that I appreciate the tone of your argument and in my view, you seem to be trying to have a reasoned debate here. I'm grateful that you are hanging on in there and making the effort.

There are obviously a number of posters who have totally made up their minds on this issue and are not at all open to argument. But I think there are probably many others who are trying to engage with the issues and make up their own minds.

Personally, I'm not sure I agree that everyone who says they are a woman is a woman. I do have some concerns about transwomen in sport and in women's prisons. But I also think it must be awful to feel you are trapped in the wrong body and to feel so rejected by both toxic masculinity and by feminists. I'm happy to respect preferred pronouns and I'd want to be an ally to anyone who has made the tough decision to transition.

I guess I'm sitting uncomfortably somewhere in the middle of the debate and thinking about the arguments on both sides. I'm pleased that you are taking the time to engage and explain what often seems a minority viewpoint on here. Thank you.