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?

SOMEONE WHO IS UNHAPPY THAT SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT BE DISCOUNTING MORE PEOPLE FROM DATING OPTIONS.

MEN who are UNHAPPY about WOMEN having sexual boundaries. That’s who. And you support and enable that RAPE CULTURE.

Exactly. And the reason why it's such a clunky sentence is because that poster has tried to make it not sound like the entitled, misogynistic demand that women shouldn't limit their sexual partners if it happens to exclude someone who wants to have sex with them.

I'm sorry, you're right. You are obviously much better positioned to speak on their behalf. Maybe you should approach them all about voting you in as spokesperson?

And to clarify after your last posts? Are we to understand that you are not a transwoman, yet speak on behalf of the ‘vast majority’?

So if a straight man was approached by a gay man I think they can easily say 'Sorry mate, I'm not interested', rather than saying 'Sorry mate, you've got a dick and balls and that's a real turn off for me', or if a straight woman was approached by a gay woman, she could say 'Sorry, I'm not interested' rather than shouting out 'God, no, I'm straight, your vulva is really unappealing to me"

For the umpty-billionth time, the issue is that same-sex attracted people had a name for their sexuality and now they don't, because someone else wanted to use it instead.

Why is that ok? Why could the same-gender attracted people not give themselves a brand new name and fight for their own rights under that, beside their gay and lesbian allies? Surely a movement with the passion and creativity to uncover and name ever more detailed gender identities and pronouns could have come up with a couple of names for same-gender attraction as well?

I know the sense of community and friendship has been so, so important for them amongst all the difficulties they have experienced in other areas of their lives and to think that people want to take that away from them, is frankly, horrifying.

And when I read this, I question where the line is able to be drawn. I, too, am completely fucking horrified that you would advocate to remove the spaces needed by females to be single sex because you prioritise the needs of males who identify as women over females. The many, many women who need that sense of community and friendship has been so, so important for them amongst all the difficulties they have experienced in other areas of their lives that is exclusively for females.

It is quite possible to accommodate those male’s needs while maintaining provision for female’s who need single sex spaces. Why on earth would anyone deny both groups have needs?

And it is also probably pertinent to ask again where are the lobby groups that are seeking to ensure that lesbians are NOT abused or harmed in any way or even disrespected by even a ‘minority’ of males who insist that lesbians accept partners with penises.

I ask as a parent of a teen, because I have seen this pressure working on 14 year olds. Any person who dismisses that it is happening needs to start facing the fact that it does. Maybe not in the groups you hang out with, but I certainly have seen the effect and continue to do so daily.

This constant dismissal that it is an issue that needs to be addressed means that the issue will result in the current group of 14 year olds having their boundaries heavily influenced by others. Is that your intention?

Appropriating the name of a marginalised group is a form of oppression. People can believe, if they wish that transwomen who are attracted to members of the opposite sex are " homosexual", but imposing that belief on others is oppression and deeply homophobic.

Anytime you urge an individual to reassess their prejudices, or their privilege when it comes to who they are attracted to and want to sleep with you are attempting to coerce them into overriding their instincts. This is manipulation. This is control. This is gaslighting. It is not in any conceivable way altruistic.

homophobia is not an inherent sentiment of someone who is unhappy that someone else might be discounting more people from dating options.

What. The. Actual.

Who, exactly, goes around being unhappy that other people are "discounting" people as dating options? Who? There are loads of things I am unhappy about, from the biggies (Afghanistan, human rights abuses in various countries) right down to next-door's car parking, and the New and Improved (like fuck is it) recipe of my favourite chocolate bar.

But never have I felt unhappy that someone was discounting too many people from their dating options. No-one does.

What you mean is, some people feel upset that they're being "discounted" as dating options. We've all seen that, from the polemics about the friend zone, to natal males calling lesbians "transphobic" for refusing to be sexually available.

It all deserves the same answer: some women aren't into you. Get over it!

Why could the same-gender attracted people not give themselves a brand new name and fight for their own rights under that, beside their gay and lesbian allies?

I understand why people are using the term but I absolutely hate this “same gender” terminology. I don’t share a “gender” with transwomen. Other women can claim that if they want - though I tend to think those who do don’t fully understand what they are laying claim to- but personally, fuck that noise. And since you really can’t tell someone’s gender or lack thereof by looking at them, and anyway there are eleventy thousand genders, the concept of same-gender attraction is incoherent.

Hear hear, allmywhat

@Helleofabore

I know the sense of community and friendship has been so, so important for them amongst all the difficulties they have experienced in other areas of their lives and to think that people want to take that away from them, is frankly, horrifying.

And when I read this, I question where the line is able to be drawn. I, too, am completely fucking horrified that you would advocate to remove the spaces needed by females to be single sex because you prioritise the needs of males who identify as women over females. The many, many women who need that sense of community and friendship has been so, so important for them amongst all the difficulties they have experienced in other areas of their lives that is exclusively for females.

It is quite possible to accommodate those male’s needs while maintaining provision for female’s who need single sex spaces. Why on earth would anyone deny both groups have needs?

And hear hear to this

@allmywhat

Why could the same-gender attracted people not give themselves a brand new name and fight for their own rights under that, beside their gay and lesbian allies?

I understand why people are using the term but I absolutely hate this “same gender” terminology. I don’t share a “gender” with transwomen. Other women can claim that if they want - though I tend to think those who do don’t fully understand what they are laying claim to- but personally, fuck that noise. And since you really can’t tell someone’s gender or lack thereof by looking at them, and anyway there are eleventy thousand genders, the concept of same-gender attraction is incoherent.

The TRAs have latched onto the word "gender" as a way to force their agenda. Any sensible person knows that fundamentally, when you really get down to it and stop pissing about, it's just a synonym for "sex" and needs no further analysis.

Christ how I'd love to do away with the word altogether and just stick with "sex" so that they can't dance around the language.

Wishful thinking probably as we've now reached the point where there are transwomen claiming they are "female" anyway. They just want what they can't have.

Words have no meaning anymore.

What you mean is, some people feel upset that they're being "discounted" as dating options. We've all seen that, from the polemics about the friend zone, to natal males calling lesbians "transphobic" for refusing to be sexually available.

Let's be honest, we've also seen it in the incel community.

@HeddaAga

What you mean is, some people feel upset that they're being "discounted" as dating options. We've all seen that, from the polemics about the friend zone, to natal males calling lesbians "transphobic" for refusing to be sexually available.

Let's be honest, we've also seen it in the incel community.

This!

A case in point of men becoming murderous when women say no to them.

'I'm owed sex by women' or indeed 'Women exist to service my needs' is a common theme with males in both these groups. Incels appear to believe that women who wear make-up & 'transform' themselves, therefore apparently attracting better looking men (and 'men with money') need bringing down a peg or two - in order to find the men who desire (hate) them attractive. TRA 'lesbian' males believe lesbian women who aren't attracted to them (because they're attracted to women) need to address their prejudices in order to find 'women' with penises (who fancy/hate them) attractive as well. This is male pattern behaviour.

Parody account on twitter.

Any person that you are not attracted to is a person you are actively discriminating against. Try to do better, by being attracted to literally anyone and everyone.

twitter.com/wokeandwoofing/status/1432660401414721540?s=19

We are now at the point where we cannot tell the difference between parody and reality, because they say exactly the same things. And Jonathan Swift thought he had it hard with the politics of his day.

@MistandMud

Would anyone posting here want to date or have sex with someone who didn't desire them? Of course not!

Well, women tend not to have sex with people who don’t want to have sex with them, yes. Men, on the other hand, quite frequently do seem to want to have sex with those who don’t want to.

Yes 👏

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Parody account on twitter.

Any person that you are not attracted to is a person you are actively discriminating against. Try to do better, by being attracted to literally anyone and everyone.

twitter.com/wokeandwoofing/status/1432660401414721540?s=19

We are now at the point where we cannot tell the difference between parody and reality, because they say exactly the same things. And Jonathan Swift thought he had it hard with the politics of his day.

The parodic remark puts me in mind of interviews with Amia Srinivasan about The Right to Sex - some of her arguments are coherent and thought-provoking although I largely disagree with them.

For Srinivasan, differences in fuckability, reproduced as they are in pornography, exist because sex is subject to the “distortions of oppression”; there is a case to be made for removing the stranglehold these oppressive and discriminatory patterns have on our sexual desires.

For Srinivasan, the notion that people who are fat or transgender or simply don’t fit the white and blond mould are sexually undesirable is a matter for political contestation and moral analysis. Enter philosophy, particularly moral philosophy, which can play a part, not in the moralising sense of telling individuals what sorts of sex they can and cannot have, but rather so individuals can reflect on their own sexual choices. Sex cannot be made just, but examining how much of our sexual desires are programmed by the dark side of our beliefs can lessen the injustice.
…
The simplest explanation of the title is that “no one is obliged to desire anyone else, that no one has a right to be desired, but also who is desired and who isn’t is a political question”. The book effectively highlights how sexual desire – who we are and are not attracted to – is political and affected by the prevalent injustices in society and relevant to their elimination.

www.theguardian.com/books/2021/aug/19/the-right-to-sex-by-amia-srinivasan-review-the-politics-of-sexual-attraction

www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1526612534/?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

If your biggest concern is people not wanting to have sex with you, you are not oppressed.

Do you think I can expand that into a book and sell it?

Great post, TalkingtoLangClegintheDark. Being unhappy about not being in someone's dating pool: well, in a sense we've all been there... . But that common human experience is definitely not the same as wanting someone to change the entire basis of their dating pool, just to be nice to people who don't fit in it but would like to. Rather than said people fucking off to the far side of fuck, and staying there.

Examining how much of our sexual desires are programmed by the dark side of our beliefs

I wonder if that extends to questioning kink…. This person framing a discussion of the ethics of sex around “whose bodies confer status on those who have sex with them” sounds like reinventing “female privilege” to me.

Is there a discussion of this book anywhere here? I don’t think I could read it without throwing it across the room. But I’m sort of interested in the argument. Have never heard a logically coherent version of incel reasoning before.

Agree with you Hedda, transwomen who appropriate " lesbian " status often seem to share similar entitled attitudes with incels.

A musing on hormones…from upthread that hormones can be used as part of the definition of being a woman.

There is far, far more to female hormones than oestrogen. Most male to female trans people take only oestrogen, though some also take progesterone, I understand that this isn’t common.

What about follicle stimulating hormone?
What about luteinizing hormone?

And what about post menopausal women, whose hormone levels plummet, do we become less womanly?

Hormone levels don’t change someone’s sex. A male person taking oestrogen is a male person with a higher than normal level of oestrogen. A female person taking testosterone is a female person with a higher than normal level of testoerone.

I guess we will have to wait for that chromosome swapping machine, although why this would be any more likely than finding the cause of gender dysphoria and helping people come to terms with their sexed bodies, I don’t know. I can’t help but feel that the machine would not be a net benefit to humanity, as I can see it being enthusiastically embraced by the kind of society that values boy children way more than girls, so the millions of unwanted girl children will just be made into boys rather than being aborted. Societies with millions more men in them than women tend to do so much better, don’t they?

And what about post menopausal women, whose hormone levels plummet, do we become less womanly?

As always Sophocles, menopausal women are usually forgotten. Maybe TheReluctantPhoenix will clarify which stage of a woman’s lifecycle those males who are identifying as woman are emulating with purely artificial hormones?