Happy Pride vagina-havers

[SapphosRock]

Oh dear Cosmopolitan Magazine. Where to start?

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/love-sex/sex/a28405/10-lesbian-sex-tips/

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/a34553064/first-time-lesbian-sex/

It seems Cosmo's too tips are as follows:

Lesbians must always be considerate that some penis-havers identify as lesbians and must be included in anything and everything to do with lesbians, particularly lesbian sex.

If you’ve never had lesbian sex before watching lesbian porn shows a healthy depiction of lesbian relationships and doesn’t fetishise lesbians at all.

You don’t have a traditional female or male gender presentation? You should consider microdosing on permanent life-altering, experimental hormones. There is nothing irresponsible or flippant about this suggestion.

So glad I stopped reading Cosmo decades ago. Give me a good gardening magazine any day.

Fuck me!! Honestly @SapphosRock I do not know how you even begin to deal with the level of batshittery directed at lesbians without smashing all the things 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

Is there a pink penis beaker on the bedside table?

Cosmopolitan isn't like it used to be huh?! What a load of fucking twaddle. I despair.

The fuck

I'm normally pro all things LGBT but their term isn't even right! There's already a term of a relationship with someone trans (and it isnt lesbian!)

I'm curious who actually buys these magazines. Is it young girls?

So the non-discriminating queer is bisexual. And therefore not queer.
Which is fine, but the whole point of the labels is to make it easier to work out who wants to fuck who.
It's back to secret codes and hints again.
<waves fan and hopes Mr. Darcy notices>

Oh if only there was a word to describe vulva-habvers so we didn't need to reduce definitions to genitals...

And we don't seem to see the same for penis havers in gay magazinesdo we? wonder why that is ...

Isn't bisexual derogated because it includes sexual so there was a recent move for it to be shortened to bi to nudge the sexual orientation part into an oubliette and further blur the boundaries of sexual orientation and gender identity?

I think it's odd that you're all ranting about the wrong bit, which is in fact the 'girl or woman' sentence?

No, pansexual.

Oh, I'd forgotten about pansexual.

microdosing oestrogen? i've heard it all now!

who are you going to ask for this? And how?

Check my assumptions?
No, Cosmo. Check your homophobia and lesbian erasure.

Sorry, I bloody did it again!

I think this is the first time I've found myself agreeing on a thread in these matters. Ignorant, uneducated and dangerous.

This might seem strange because hi, yeah, of course they’re a person, but Price says when you’re wrapped up in this notion of, I want to have lesbian sex, some people forget there’s a human on the other side of their desires, and that can be harmful to them, even if you don't mean for it to be.

For some unfathomable reason, I just can't imagine what kind of lesbian would need that particular advice. Oh, actually....

Agree Gin

Plus it isn't a bloody assumption which is

'a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof'

Lesbians have proof that dicks don't do it for them.

Christ on a fucking bike.

Gosh, I remember the pressure cosmo put us ladies under when it was all’how to give a blow job’ ‘ how to make him happy in bed’ this is insane, and horrible.

It must feel so demoralising for young lesbians to have their sexuality eroticised for the benefit of straight / male Cosmopolitan readers.

But taking cross-sex hormones and transitioning to male / non-binary is taken seriously and written about as a mainstream option:

www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/body/health/a39976179/lgbt-healthcare/

It's not surprising so many young lesbians are identifying as male, non-binary or queer.

This does happen.

As a heterosexual woman I have never thought ‘I want to have heterosexual sex’ as an abstract thought forgetting it involves someone who is also a real person like I am.