Another swoony Guardian article

[Clangyleg]

A couple in love, surprise surprise one of them is a tw. Glad they are happy but it is certainly not a lesbian relationship and they do not “have a woman’s body”, nor have they “always been a woman” . I think “articles” like this are not helping the debate one bit. Sick of seeing them. A bit of reporting on the not so nice men might be more useful.

agree..

Why on earth would you read The Guardian? Personally, I find it insufferable. It’s so smug, sneering and sanctimonious I gag just reading the front page.

Kris02 well yes I agree in general.

Ah, it's sweet. And love does make people blind. Admittedly, I hadn't realised how blind...but bless 'em.

It's really nice they're in love but no, the TW clearly doesn't have a woman's body since the first thing the female partner noticed was that the TW was male.

Not sure what happened there, sorry. I was quoting the first post.

I did wonder if something was loading!

Love clearly also affects short term memory.

The Guardian is under a lot of fire lately, being accused of transphobia, with two TRA journalists refusing to write for them. They've got to even up the balance with articles like this.

What balance? The gruan has been full on batshit mental TWAW for years now.

Not sure what there is to be annoyed about here, it is just one couples story. 🤷‍♀️

I’m always amazed at how so many of the young people go about castigating us for “biological essentialism”, yet lap up this hokey old stuff about having a “woman’s mind through and through”. 🙄

When it comes to either “biological essentialism”, or some dappy-sappy mystical revived nineteenth-century woo idealism about the essential womanly mind, I know which one I’d rather pick 🙄

It’s manipulative and homophobic, and I have no doubt a deliberate editorial decision.

The Guardian, as a media group, has come under fire for an article published under the Observer by Sonia Sodha for having the audacity to point out that lesbians are same SEX attracted.

So how do they respond? With a lovey-dovey article, that’s just two people sharing the story of how they met. But look at the content: a woman who wasn’t sure if she would still be lesbian if she had a relationship with a male. But this lesbian is open minded, and followed her heart, not like those closed minded bigots like Allison Bailey who won’t even consider it🙄.

And Phew! What a relief! She IS still a lesbian because she discovered her prospective partner “is, and always has been, a woman.”

That is obviously the intention of that article in the current climate. It’s not just to tell the story of two random people, who I wish all the best in their heterosexual relationship. It’s to emphasise that TWAW, and lesbians can see them as women too if they’re just open minded.

It’s a subtle piece of suggestive coercion published intentionally at this moment in time and the Guardian can just fuck off with it.

I would love to know more about the 'mistakes' that the woman made because she 'hadn't come to terms with her sexuality' - mistakes like having relationships with men, for example? Well, glad they're happy.

Here's another example.

Feels like someone sent round a memo.

Those who try to redefine sexual orientation away from the sex of the body end up with a total mess.

What is the sexual orientation or genderual orientation of a female person who is Lesbian but now identifies as a trans man? Heterogenderual?

What if they also fancy nonbinary people with female bodies? Pangenderual?

What happens if this person, now identifying as a trans man begins a relationship with a Lesbian who has never bothered to identify as anything? Are they now a heterogenderual couple or a Lesbian couple or what?

Does the orientation change with every relationship, depending on how the other partner identifies?

What is the basis of this genderual orientation? What clothes someone wears? Their pronouns?

When it comes to either “biological essentialism”, or some dappy-sappy mystical revived nineteenth-century woo idealism about the essential womanly mind, I know which one I’d rather pick

Well yes, exactly.

It’s a subtle piece of suggestive coercion published intentionally at this moment in time and the Guardian can just fuck off with it.

Absolutely this.

Was it the article that started out saying the woman had immediately noticed there was a trans woman in the group, before going on to say that said trans woman was fully a woman both inside and out?

It did make me chuckle.

If a woman is only attracted to humans with vaginas & breasts she is a lesbian. If she is only attracted to humans with a penis & testicles she is hetro. If she is attracted to both she is bi. If she isn't attracted to any humans then I think she is asexual. Anything else just baffles me!!

What article are you referring to?
Your post hasn't linked to anything but people are responding as though it has?
Link please so I can read it too?

It’s to emphasise that TWAW, and lesbians can see them as women too if they’re just open minded.

Not sure that this is the overall point of the article but the reality is that some lesbians DO see TWAW and that isn’t really for anyone to judge. Some lesbians (myself included) are not attracted to TW and whilst that is under attack from trans activists, it doesn’t diminish those in trans relationships.

I don't have a problem with this story at all. Two people who don't quite fit the norm of gay or straight sexual connection have fallen in love. They are discussing it in national media to demonstrate that it is normal and fine and not all transwomen lesbians are coercive men who think lesbians must educate themselves about willy-appreciation. It's a sweet story about true love.

FWIW I am an old-school feminist who vehemently objects to women being erased from society by Stonewall-style misogyny. And I have deep concerns about the pressures on families of trans teens. But that absolutely doesn't mean it's right to sneer at and disapprove of normal trans peole going about their lives. I start to understand why MN has a reputation for transphobia when stories like this are demonised.

Two people love each other. Cute. Nice story. No issue.
Sexual predators pull a dress on over their hairy beards and cocks and insist they are now Lola and need to be moved to a women's prison. Not cute. Bad news. Big issue. Let's fight what matters.

And how do you think 'Lola' persuaded people to let 'her' move into the women's prison?

By pushing the boundaries of language. I mean after all, Putin isn't at war! It's just a special military operation! Lola isn't a bearded man with a cock, her sweet soul is and always was female. This is not an attack on Trans people btw before the ss grabbers start snapping and tweeting. It's an attack on people who misuse language to further their own agenda.

I read the story and it was a very sweet love story. About a man who feels female, who may even have tried to surgically become female and his female partner who finds him acceptably feminine for her personally. Cool story, I wish them well. But don't gaslight lesbians that they have to accept blokes as partners. Of course she knew he was male. We all do, within 30 secs max.

Two people love each other. One is male and one is female. This is not news. The vast majority of couples since the human race descended from the trees could be described like this (possibly not including the love part). I have no doubt at all that this is a panic response from The Guardian to the ludicrously hyperbolic flounce of two freelance 'journalists' who have actually contributed hardly anything to the paper. Meanwhile, truly excellent journalists, who drew readers in, readers prepared to pay for content, are sidelined. I'm thinking of Hadley Freeman and Suzanne Moore. (I know Hadley does still do interviews for them but she dropped her column, and I'm sure the current atmosphere there must have contributed to that decision.)

I wonder how much longer The Guardian can carry on. I much prefer the straightforward approach of The Times and The Telegraph, which have decided to go for a subscription model, or the DM, which floods the website with adverts that you can't block. In both cases you know how they're funding what they do. In the case of The Guardian, where's the money coming from? Surely not many people are paying the voluntary sub in response to the begging message when you click on one of their articles?

I was not beeping sneery. Just pointing out that their relationship is not a lesbian one and the partner is not a woman . Truth.
But we get one of these articles every couple of days from the Guardian and they are absolutely placed to gaslight lesbians into different and obscuring language . They never report on the not so nice males that trespass into our facilities and do harm. They even lie about it, as in the WiSpa situation.Funny that. And no I am not going to link it. Don’t want to give it any more attention.