LOJ and monkeypox. Knows what a man is

[123Callie]

So LOJ has finally decided that men who have sex with men ARE more at risk of contracting monkeypox after all. And he wants them to know this so that they can all go and get vaccinated. Strangely, he is not using inclusive language at all. He only mentions men. There are transwomen at risk in exactly the same way but no mention of the women who sleep with men who sleep with men. Now that men are affected he is well aware that clear language is necessary for health campaigns.

Also, on another note, he doesn’t want men to stop having sex with multiple strangers. That’s fine despite the known risks. Can’t expect a man to take responsibility for his own health over servicing his raging libido.

Trans activists always end up looking foolish as what they're arguing for lacks any rationality or sense.

Wait, so if the definition of 'lesbian' is a male or female who is attracted to both males (with penises) or females (with vaginas) vaginas....then what is the name for a female who is only attracted to females?

According to the trans holy Bible that would be a cis woman who is attracted to cis women I believe.

What would?

and this 'you do you' stuff

women like @TeaKlaxon who have decided to redefine the term lesbian to include 'sleeps with men who have a womanly aura' aren't 'doing them' are they?

if they picked a new term like 'transbian' or 'homogenderal' to describe their sexual orientation, that would be them doing them

but instead they've picked the words 'lesbian' and 'homosexual' which already have simple, well understood meanings and appropriated them. so in fact, they are doing the very opposite of 'them doing them'

I would presume that women who have sex with both other women and men who identify as women are perfectly well aware that in the first case no birth control is required, and in the second it should be employed (cos, yanno, heterosexual sex)

I’m not sure how many times I can tell you to stop telling a lesbian she’s not really a lesbian.

I’m not sure how many times I can tell you to stop telling a lesbian she’s not really a lesbian.

You can call yourself what you want but if you sleep with males and females, you are by the very definition, bisexual! As Bisexual means you are attracted to BOTH sexes.

Just adding one gay man’s opinion on sex with a trans man, mainly for the wonderful phrase “unexpected item in the shagging area”

When she's wrong; we're never gonna stop.

you can tell me as many times as you like

i'm afraid that women who seek both male and female sexual partners aren't lesbians, that's just how words work

I know it, and in fact you know it too. or at least I hope you do for the avoidance of unwanted pregnancies

I’m not sure how many times I can tell you to stop telling a lesbian she’s not really a lesbian.

I'm not sure how many times I can tell someone to stop calling themself a lesbian when they are not one 🤷

if you're attracted to the trappings of femininity rather than female bodies specifically, that's fine. that is a genuine example of you doing you.

It's easy enough for any of us to say we are open to certain things so long as it's theoretical. Sometimes theoretical things can be quite a turn on. It's not always the same story in practice.

@TeaKlaxon

You are free to identify how you want, obviously, even if others don't think it tallies with their beliefs or dictionary definitions. That's absolutely your right.

You're unfair, however, to attempt to redefine the word 'lesbian' and the identity 'lesbian' for others when the overwhelming, vast majority do not want to have sex with someone with a penis.

I guess the simplest way to approach this is to ask - do you believe a lesbian is transphobic if she doesn't ever want to date, kiss or sleep with a trans woman?

TeaKlaxon

But you should address your response to the idiot who thinks that won’t be a problem because the homophobes will know the trans man is assigned female at birth because they will see their vagina!

How do you know a "trans man" has a vagina, hmmm?

Also their vagina?

You mean his vagina, surely? That's misgendering. Or do you not actually believe TMAM. Very common actually. Just like OJ, it's TWAW all day long, but TMAM is too much for so many of you.

I’ve been wondering for a while how that works with people who identify as one of the more esoteric genders. If a caelgender person & an astrogender person get together is that a het relationship because the genders are different? Or are they all bundled together under queer?

Yes, you're the one with the claim, so you provide the evidence for your claim. My 'quick google' was to make sure I wasn't missing an obvious source of such evidence.

My 'quick google' wasn't to provide you with any evidence, it was to show that, for making a claim so doggedly, the evidence wasn't immediately obvious.

But thanks for making it obvious to everyone that you didn't have any evidence for your assertion.

Right, must go and Mumsnet (whatever that means)

Lol @TeaKlaxon It's like you lot need to be reminded over and over that the word already has a meaning, so no, we're going to keep it.

Word 'woman' is taken.
Word 'lesbian' is taken.
You shag men and women, you're bisexual.
Stop to trying to queer the language, nobody's buying it.

You can tell us a billion times, but since you don't know what the word lesbian means, why would anyone ever listen to you?

This is the Peter Tatchell position - 'If you shut the sex clubs we'll all just do it in the bushes instead.'

I've seen quite a few gay men say they are appalled by this attitude.

I'm reading And The Band Played On at the moment. It's quite long and I'm near the end. I've just got to the bit in late 1984 when public health finally stop dithering and close the SF bath houses. The reason they dithered for about two years before taking action was because of attitudes like Tatchell's and TeaKlaxon's - that it was a terrible curtailment of civil liberties. Some men went so far as to suggest that it would be the start of a slippery slope that would end with them all locked in internment camps. By the time the bath houses were actually shut it was too late - pretty much all the men who frequented the bath houses were already infected. Many were already dead.

... something that ultimately only affects the individual concerned and those having consensual sex with them.

I take issue with this. The latest stats show that there are 22 women now infected in the UK. There have also been a few children in various countries infected through household contact. All the data we have on this disease indicates that young children and pregnant women have the worst outcomes.

And among gay men, there are some who never go to sex clubs but are catching it unsuspectingly from their long term partners who've been out cruising - like Malcom Clark's poor friend who ended up in hospital, in extreme pain, with horrible skin infections, and needing reconstructive rectal surgery from the damage done by the lesions.

MPX is almost exclusively being transmitted through sex at the moment but we know it's not just an std. It could easily find a new niche among young children - we know they're very good at swapping germs.

If that happens there will be school and nursery closures (quite rightly IMO, this is a serious disease for young children). But again? After everything our children have lost over the past couple of years? Because it was apparently too stigmatising and homophobic to suggest that promiscuous gay men might want to rein it in a bit while MPX was exploding in their sex clubs and festivals?

This is the feminist forum on a parenting site. Why are we centering men's dicks exactly?

Sheila Jeffreys talks a lot about this men's sex rights movement in Unpacking Queer Politics which you can download here for free:

http://radfem.org/unpacking-queer-politics/

There's been these mixed messages around gay men for a long time. On the one hand they are just like everyone else, no more likely to be involved in risky sexual activities, etc. And then the other side which says risky sex with multiple partners is part and parcel of being a gay man and it's homophobic to say that maybe people need to practice some self-restraint. Not even when there is a real health risk that could affect the community as a whole.

We are so used to the idea that we can easily cure diseases, the idea that behaviour modification is an important way to keep the community as a whole from being affected is something we've forgotten about, despite the fact that AIDS happened within our lifetime.

To me it seems crazy to make the argument that gay men can't control their sexual behaviour, likely to backfire under the least pressure - say STIs stop responding to antibiotics. I don't think it will be seen in anything like the AIDS crises was.