The tone of this suggests further turning of the tide.. can we dare to hope!!

[loopyapp]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10322699/ALISON-BOSHOFF.html

First time I've read mainstream reporting supportive of JKR!!!

@prudencepuffin

The ultimate hope is that you will end up worrying so much about being right-wing that you will fall into line on gender identity philosophy and sign women's rights away, in order to buff up your left-wing credentials.

True. And it wont bloody work!!!

Also, it's such a pathetic scattergun approach. Accuse us of being racist; accuse us of being right wing; accuse us of being anti-Semitic - it's just any old crap they can come up with to avoid actually having a proper discussion, because they don't actually have anything rational to offer. No wonder the preferred stance was 'No debate'.

This is a person who identifies as a transwoman, who moderates a group for women who like travelling. This individual is sexually attracted to women, and was in a relationship with a woman.

If you think this person ever has to worry about being seen publicly holding hands with a girlfriend, I have a bridge to sell you.

@ChakaFridaMendips

So if a religious person scolds a lesbian for not being in a relationship with a male it’s homophobia, but if the LGBT ‘community’ scolds a lesbian for not considering the same thing they somehow have the moral high ground?

Precisely.

Disagreement with lesbians being solely same sex attracted is homophobia.

Disagreement with lesbians being solely same sex attracted is transgenderism.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

This is a person who identifies as a transwoman, who moderates a group for women who like travelling. This individual is sexually attracted to women, and was in a relationship with a woman.

If you think this person ever has to worry about being seen publicly holding hands with a girlfriend, I have a bridge to sell you.

Make up tips!

Yep, cos all we women love swapping make up tips.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

This is a person who identifies as a transwoman, who moderates a group for women who like travelling. This individual is sexually attracted to women, and was in a relationship with a woman.

If you think this person ever has to worry about being seen publicly holding hands with a girlfriend, I have a bridge to sell you.

Ffs. Make up tips and being girly.

@RoaringtoLangClegintheDark
Hi Helen, good to see you again.

Thanks, I just don’t seem to be able to stay away.

Do you think those people who are exclusively same sex attracted should be supported by LGBT orgs such as Stonewall? Are those relationships just as valid as those between people who aren’t fussed about the sex of their partner as long as their “gender” turns them on?

When you say ‘those relationships’, it appears you mean an ‘exclusively same sex attracted relationship’ - what do you mean exactly by that? How is it different from my relationship with my partner, where we are both bisexual (which is a matter of our individual histories and sense of identity, but makes no difference to our relationship with each other)?

Do you think lesbians should be able to specify on a lesbian dating app that they’re only interested in other biologically female partners if that’s their sexual orientation? Without being booted off the app?

Probably yes, but I think there are better and worse ways to communicate it. I see this as on a spectrum with specifying any other criteria about a potential partner - eg no one over 40, under 5 foot tall, East Asian, deaf, fat etc. The bottom line is, we’re not in control of who we’re attracted to, and no one should be pressured into any sort of romantic or sexual involvement with anyone, obviously. But our criteria for a partner don’t exist in a vacuum, and we should be aware of how the way we express them might impact on others.

Do you think people who are exclusively same-sex attracted should be able to be out and proud about their sexual orientation, or should they have to keep it quiet in case it hurts trans people’s feelings?

Again, it’s just a matter of how you express yourself. I’ve been on many pride marches and I’ve seen people express their pride about their queerness in a wonderful range of ways. But if I saw a gay man carrying a placard declaring how repulsed they are by vaginas that would strike me as unhelpful, unpleasant and a touch misogynistic.

Just trying to get a feel for exactly how valid, healthy, valuable and acceptable you think relationships between exclusively same-sex attracted people are

See above re how a relationship between two exclusively same sex attracted people differs from a relationship between two bisexual people of the same sex.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes I remember the woman who shared that on Twitter. She had been kicked out of the group for questioning this.

See above re how a relationship between two exclusively same sex attracted people differs from a relationship between two bisexual people of the same sex.

If both pairs are in committed exclusive homosexual relationships, I am not sure what the difference is, except for the possibility in the future that a bisexual person might consider a heterosexual relationship with a man, transwoman or male born non binary person , whereas a homosexual person would only consider a relationship with a person of the same sex.

I meant a bisexual female person and lesbian,.

You haven’t really answered my questions, have you, Helen?

How’s about this one:

Do you think those people who are exclusively same sex attracted should be supported by LGBT orgs such as Stonewall?

I would like your answer to that instead of the way you avoided that part of the question in your reply.

And when I say “those relationships” I mean relationships between two people who are both clear they are only attracted to the same sex. Of course the relationships in itself doesn’t really differ from that which you have with your partner, but the point as, is you well know, that exclusively same sex attracted people are being ostracised and excluded by “LGBT” orgs for being clear that they will never consider partners of the opposite sex, however they identify.

That exclusion and ostracism doesn’t affect you because you are bisexual and your partner presumably signs up to “same gender” attraction in theory (and luckily is unlikely to have to actually put it to the test as your relationship is so committed), so you two can cheerlead for the theory at no personal cost whatsoever.

So that’s how your relationship is different from that between two women who are challenging the pressure to consider biologically male people as potential partners. You’re included in the great big rainbow family; they’re excluded. Nice.

I see this as on a spectrum with specifying any other criteria about a potential partner - eg no one over 40, under 5 foot tall, East Asian, deaf, fat etc.

That’s deeply homophobic. These are sexual preferences, not sexual orientations, as has been spelt out to you on here many, many times before. Nobody has ever been discriminated against or persecuted because they weren’t attracted to people from races different to their own, and so on.

It’s quite ludicrous that you try to muddy the waters like this, and it’s reminded me that you don’t actually acknowledge exclusive same-sex attraction as a genuine sexual orientation at all - if I remember rightly, you seem to think that everybody is bisexual to some degree, deep down, and just in denial about it. Which, again, is homophobia.

Apart from which, people are fully entitled to their sexual preferences and to state them clearly on a dating site, FFS, otherwise it’s just wasting everybody’s time. Why would anyone want to pressure someone who is never going to be attracted to them into considering them as a partner? What is that if not coercion? And when it comes to actual sexual orientation, the same argument applies tenfold. It shouldn’t even be a discussion. It should be accepted, full stop.

Why is it, Helen, you seem to struggle so much with the concept of women saying no to all biologically male people as potential sexual/romantic partners? I really can’t get my head around it. Does women saying no to men/male people make you uncomfortable in general? It’s a really, really unusual attitude to find in a woman, particularly a woman who thinks of herself as a feminist.

I mean, you might expect it in some deeply devout women who follow a very patriarchal religion, or some very reactionary women who believe in male authority over females, but from someone like you it just seems really odd.

But if I saw a gay man carrying a placard declaring how repulsed they are by vaginas that would strike me as unhelpful, unpleasant and a touch misogynistic.

What an odd response, again. Where have you seen anyone doing that or suggesting that? Nobody is advocating for that, to the very best of my knowledge. And again, your invented scenario has been a means for you to sidestep the question you don’t want to answer.

I ask you again - Do you think people who are exclusively same-sex attracted should be able to be out and proud about their sexual orientation, or should they have to keep it quiet in case it hurts trans people’s feelings?

And let’s be sensible about this and not make up rubbish. We’re not talking about imaginary gay men wandering around with placards saying “fannies smell, yuck gross!”, FFS. We’re simply talking about the right of people who are exclusively same sex attracted to own their own sexuality, to have it acknowledged by LGBT orgs and by society in general without being ostracised or shamed for it, without having to whisper it in secret and make up their own special code for finding other people who feel the same way, like they did in the bad old days.

Just being able to state their orientation freely and have it respected, whether that be on a dating app, at work when someone is trying to set them up with someone of the wrong sex, or whatever scenario there may be where someone’s sexual orientation is relevant.

I think I already know all your answers to my questions though, precisely from the way you haven’t answered them, and I can only conclude that you, notwithstanding that you say you’re a bisexual woman in a long term relationship with a woman, must be a homophobe when it comes to actual homosexuals.

Not so good to see you again after all.

@roaringtolangcleginthedark as always, fantastic post. And thank you for mentioning this point -

'It’s quite ludicrous that you try to muddy the waters like this, and it’s reminded me that you don’t actually acknowledge exclusive same-sex attraction as a genuine sexual orientation at all - if I remember rightly, you seem to think that everybody is bisexual to some degree, deep down, and just in denial about it. Which, again, is homophobia.'

As I've been a bit baffled by that poster's mentioning of bisexuality in the context of same sex attraction - the idea that women might only be attracted to other women seems to be a difficult concept.

Always interesting when people who like to name and define their own labels for themselves, and obviously find those labels meaningful and important, are unwilling to permit others to do the same.

I suspect if I said that I as an adult female homosexual had exactly the same lived experience and knowledge as a TW, I'd be scolded for invalidating the very unique experience of having transitioned, that I could not possibly know what it was like, that I could not possibly understand experiencing other people's feelings towards that transition and living as a trans lesbian.

Why this necessity to insist, female words, experiences, definitions and existence must be blurred and subsumed and stomped out to fit male needs better?

Not really doing much in the winning hearts and minds stakes. They're separate, unique experiences. They're not the same thing. It is not necessary to devalue one group of people in order to sufficiently prop up another. Nor is it acceptable.

@RoaringtoLangClegintheDark

You haven’t really answered my questions, have you, Helen?

How’s about this one:

Do you think those people who are exclusively same sex attracted should be supported by LGBT orgs such as Stonewall?

I would like your answer to that instead of the way you avoided that part of the question in your reply.

And when I say “those relationships” I mean relationships between two people who are both clear they are only attracted to the same sex. Of course the relationships in itself doesn’t really differ from that which you have with your partner, but the point as, is you well know, that exclusively same sex attracted people are being ostracised and excluded by “LGBT” orgs for being clear that they will never consider partners of the opposite sex, however they identify.

That exclusion and ostracism doesn’t affect you because you are bisexual and your partner presumably signs up to “same gender” attraction in theory (and luckily is unlikely to have to actually put it to the test as your relationship is so committed), so you two can cheerlead for the theory at no personal cost whatsoever.

So that’s how your relationship is different from that between two women who are challenging the pressure to consider biologically male people as potential partners. You’re included in the great big rainbow family; they’re excluded. Nice.

I see this as on a spectrum with specifying any other criteria about a potential partner - eg no one over 40, under 5 foot tall, East Asian, deaf, fat etc.

That’s deeply homophobic. These are sexual preferences, not sexual orientations, as has been spelt out to you on here many, many times before. Nobody has ever been discriminated against or persecuted because they weren’t attracted to people from races different to their own, and so on.

It’s quite ludicrous that you try to muddy the waters like this, and it’s reminded me that you don’t actually acknowledge exclusive same-sex attraction as a genuine sexual orientation at all - if I remember rightly, you seem to think that everybody is bisexual to some degree, deep down, and just in denial about it. Which, again, is homophobia.

Apart from which, people are fully entitled to their sexual preferences and to state them clearly on a dating site, FFS, otherwise it’s just wasting everybody’s time. Why would anyone want to pressure someone who is never going to be attracted to them into considering them as a partner? What is that if not coercion? And when it comes to actual sexual orientation, the same argument applies tenfold. It shouldn’t even be a discussion. It should be accepted, full stop.

Why is it, Helen, you seem to struggle so much with the concept of women saying no to all biologically male people as potential sexual/romantic partners? I really can’t get my head around it. Does women saying no to men/male people make you uncomfortable in general? It’s a really, really unusual attitude to find in a woman, particularly a woman who thinks of herself as a feminist.

I mean, you might expect it in some deeply devout women who follow a very patriarchal religion, or some very reactionary women who believe in male authority over females, but from someone like you it just seems really odd.

But if I saw a gay man carrying a placard declaring how repulsed they are by vaginas that would strike me as unhelpful, unpleasant and a touch misogynistic.

What an odd response, again. Where have you seen anyone doing that or suggesting that? Nobody is advocating for that, to the very best of my knowledge. And again, your invented scenario has been a means for you to sidestep the question you don’t want to answer.

I ask you again - Do you think people who are exclusively same-sex attracted should be able to be out and proud about their sexual orientation, or should they have to keep it quiet in case it hurts trans people’s feelings?

And let’s be sensible about this and not make up rubbish. We’re not talking about imaginary gay men wandering around with placards saying “fannies smell, yuck gross!”, FFS. We’re simply talking about the right of people who are exclusively same sex attracted to own their own sexuality, to have it acknowledged by LGBT orgs and by society in general without being ostracised or shamed for it, without having to whisper it in secret and make up their own special code for finding other people who feel the same way, like they did in the bad old days.

Just being able to state their orientation freely and have it respected, whether that be on a dating app, at work when someone is trying to set them up with someone of the wrong sex, or whatever scenario there may be where someone’s sexual orientation is relevant.

I think I already know all your answers to my questions though, precisely from the way you haven’t answered them, and I can only conclude that you, notwithstanding that you say you’re a bisexual woman in a long term relationship with a woman, must be a homophobe when it comes to actual homosexuals.

Not so good to see you again after all.

Brilliant Post. And you won't get a straight answer. I've seen so many people on here attempt to shame women using the term homophobia, when they can't even attempt a definition of it.

👋👋 RoadingtoLangClegintheDark

@RoaringtoLangClegintheDark

So that’s how your relationship is different from that between two women who are challenging the pressure to consider biologically male people as potential partners.
Two people who are in a monogamous relationship aren’t considering any potential partners, so I still don’t see the difference between my relationship and the one you’re talking about. As I’ve already said, no one should have to give any reason for rejecting another person’s advances, but in this situation it’s particularly irrelevant - if someone comes on to me I just tell them I’m in a relationship. Same goes for your exclusively same sex attracted couple.

None of my gay and lesbian friends in real life (who may or may not be exclusively same sex attracted - it’s not something that I’ve discussed with many of them) have said they feel excluded or unsupported by stonewall.

It’s quite ludicrous that you try to muddy the waters like this, and it’s reminded me that you don’t actually acknowledge exclusive same-sex attraction as a genuine sexual orientation at all - if I remember rightly, you seem to think that everybody is bisexual to some degree, deep down, and just in denial about it. Which, again, is homophobia.

What’s the difference between a preference and an orientation - isn’t the latter just a really strong preference, basically? In my view sexual orientations (ie the concept of an identity category defined by the relationship between a person’s sex or gender and the sex/gender of the people they’re attracted to) only exist because of the historically taboo nature of same sex/gender attraction.

Why is it, Helen, you seem to struggle so much with the concept of women saying no to all biologically male people as potential sexual/romantic partners? I really can’t get my head around it. Does women saying no to men/male people make you uncomfortable in general? It’s a really, really unusual attitude to find in a woman, particularly a woman who thinks of herself as a feminist.

I believe in everybody’s right to freely choose their sexual and love interests, and say no to unwanted advances - as I’ve said many times. I personally have no problem at all saying no to men. I just find this tribal, us vs them mentality very strange.

I'm a lefty . Was Labour Party member for almost 30 years and left because of the misogyny of their gender woo woo. My DS and his partner are YCL members and gender critical and DS has wrote for the MS . I think it was the female union rep being attacked on a picket line by TRAs for attending a Woman's Place meeting that did it for all of us. I don't like The Daily Mail especially but loathe The Guardian now and JK is a wonderful woman. Most of the women i know who are GC are lefties.

In my view sexual orientations (ie the concept of an identity category defined by the relationship between a person’s sex or gender and the sex/gender of the people they’re attracted to) only exist because of the historically taboo nature of same sex/gender attraction

If that was the case, no-one would ever be Kinsey 6 homosexual, i.e. incapable of finding the opposite sex sexually attractive.

Sometimes we do not find the bodies of one sex (whether its the opposite or the same) sexually arousing. Blood flow does not increase to our nethers, penises do not stiffen, vaginas do not lubricate.

And that is okay. It is not a symptom of cultural brainwashing, it is a natural variation amongst humans. It is deeply problematic to imply that monosexuals are somehow repressed.

If that was the case, no-one would ever be Kinsey 6 homosexual, i.e. incapable of finding the opposite sex sexually attractive.

Sometimes we do not find the bodies of one sex (whether its the opposite or the same) sexually arousing. Blood flow does not increase to our nethers, penises do not stiffen, vaginas do not lubricate.

And that is okay. It is not a symptom of cultural brainwashing, it is a natural variation amongst humans. It is deeply problematic to imply that monosexuals are somehow repressed.

I think there are two separate points here - first, how we come to have certain sexual attractions - is that physical response to visual stimulus inborn or is it at least partly affected by our experiences and cultural context? And second, whatever you believe about that, why does society categorise people in the way it does? I’ve seen accounts of social history which suggest the idea of people being ‘gay’ or ‘straight’ is a relatively recent notion - same sex/gender attraction and sexual behaviour has been viewed differently in different cultures through history (although of course in the majority of contexts viewed as at best a passing phase and at worst deeply deviant and sinful).

I’m not convinced the modern concept we have today of gay people and straight people hasn’t come about in large part due to oppression and heteronormativity, and the struggle for recognition and gay rights (sorry for the terrible double negative there!)

No Kinsey 6 homosexuals are involved in a relationship between a transwoman who is male and a woman who is female. This is a heterosexual relationship.

I didn't 'learn' to be homosexual from being oppressed, I just discovered that I was exclusively attracted to biological women. Males just don't do it for me, there's no response at all. Don't want to, not interested.

Anyone's welcome to conceptualise my homosexuality to themselves any way they want. What no one is entitled to do is lecture me about a whole lot of prejudice/genital fixation/everyone's pan and it's all in your head word salad that they are saying solely because they would like me to 'learn to cope with' sex with a male for the male's benefit. And because they see my body as a validation zone for male people's choice of identity. And intend to use what really is a lot of homophobia and belief that females shouldn't be entitled to say no to males who want access to their bodies for sex, and a lot of what could well be called conversion therapy type thinking, to achieve this. For males. See: exclusion from 'Pride' because homosexuality for females is now shameful, and threats about rape and murder. For saying no to males who feel entitled to sex.

Word salad doesn't do much to hide the realities there. I was recently told on a MN thread that I could be exclusively homosexual but only if I never mentioned it out loud or did it in public, and kept it secretly behind closed doors. I was not welcome in any LGBT+ community or Pride.

Plot totally lost there. The 80s were a lot more tolerant than this.

Oh and yes; I feel excluded and unsupported by Stonewall. Now you've met one.

@Artichokeleaves

I am in no way suggesting that your sexuality is anything other than what you experience it to be.

No one knows why some people are only attracted to people of the same sex (or, in some cases, but I appreciate not yours, gender) while some people are only attracted to people of the opposite sex (or of a different gender from their own) - or any other pattern of sexual attraction.

There’s nothing wrong with saying “I’m not attracted to men” and/or “I’m not attracted to trans women” and/or “I’m not attracted to anyone with a penis”. Personally I don’t see why it’s necessary to go further and say “I’m not attracted to men and therefore I’m not attracted to trans women”.

Oh and yes; I feel excluded and unsupported by Stonewall. Now you've met one.

I did say ‘friends in real life’, but if you want to view me that way you’re welcome

Why should any lesbian have to "learn to cope with sex with a male for his benefit"! Bloody outrageous to even start thinking this way. Im getting angrier and angrier about this arrogance - at this rate, Ill end up changing over to same sex preference just to stand beside you all on the battle frontline. And dont get me started on men in womens refuges. Its supposed to be "peace to all men" at this season but right now I`m not feeling the love. Yes, yes, I know, some men are lovely and delightful - will tune into that later.

Personally I don’t see why it’s necessary to go further and say “I’m not attracted to men and therefore I’m not attracted to trans women”.

Thing is, when the head of Stonewall is announcing on national radio and in the press that for a female person to be exclusively homosexual is like being fattist or racist - entirely in the context of meaning that they are prejudiced and wrong to not accept TW as sexual partners, lesbians were left to get on with it until this narrative came along - then yes, the point does have to be made that no, it's not a random prejudice against TW, it's that homosexuality is sex based, and exclusive to other biological females only. And that yes, TW are biologically male and so cannot require a homosexual woman to be 'inclusive' with her body, or 'learn to cope' with sex as if she has no right to expect enjoyment or reciprocation but is a designated social service.

At that point I've not just been driven to the discourtesy, I've been absolutely bulldozed to it. And I don't feel a responsibility to protect the feelings of people who have no interest at all in being reciprocally caring or polite.

There’s nothing wrong with saying “I’m not attracted to men” and/or “I’m not attracted to trans women” and/or “I’m not attracted to anyone with a penis”. Personally I don’t see why it’s necessary to go further and say “I’m not attracted to men and therefore I’m not attracted to trans women”.

Are you really so lacking in brain capacity or are you just being deliberately disingenuous?

The reason women who are exclusively same sex attracted have to state they are not attracted to transwomen is because of TW's and people like you insisting that TWAW and therefore TW are lesbian if they are attracted to women and should therefore not be excluded from the dating pool of women who are exclusively same sex attracted.

Artichokeleaves should be able to simply state she is a lesbian and not attracted to men, but under Stonewall's and your nonsense she can't.

Transwomen are male the defining criteria for a TW is they have to be, a man is an adult human male. It should not be necessary for a women to have to say "I'm not attracted to men and I'm not attracted to TW" the first part of the statement should be enough, but it isn't and you know damn well why.

It is homophobic to change same sex attraction to same gender attraction.