Concept of ‘exclusively same sex attracted’

[aseriesofstillimages]

I have seen various people on this forum say that to be gay or a lesbian is to be ‘exclusively same sex attracted’, and that therefore, for example, a woman who is attracted to or in a relationship with a trans woman cannot correctly describe herself as a lesbian.

Setting aside the problems with presuming to correct another person’s understanding of their own identity, I can’t see how this absolutist approach is logically sustainable. If I am a non-trans woman who has only ever - to my knowledge - been attracted to other non-trans women, but then am attracted to and get off with a woman in a bar who I subsequently find out is trans, do I immediately stop being a lesbian? What if I don’t stop finding the trans woman attractive after learning that she’s trans? What if I never find out she was trans - is it the case that I have ceased being a lesbian, but will never know this?

But I don’t think that affects how a trans person with a GRC would be regarded for the purposes of the definition of sexual orientation? A trans man with a GRC who is only attracted to men would be regarded as sexually orientated towards people of the same sex.

Saying 'I am a lesbian' is the boundary and it should be respected by all men, however they identify.

if a trans woman knows the woman she’s chatting up is a lesbian rather than bisexual, she should probably make them aware she’s trans before anything happens.

probably??? No probably about it, ffs.

I don’t know if my friend has changed, she may always have been potentially attracted to trans women. And I certainly haven’t changed, I’ve always been bisexual, I don’t remember ever thinking that lesbians weren’t allowed to be attracted to trans women.

Or, in a precise analogue, that vegans could not enjoy a rabbit stew, steak tartare, and a dozen ortalan?

Thanks, although I should clarify, I don’t believe ‘gender is more important than sex’ - there are obviously many situations where sex is crucial - such as reproduction.

When you talk about reproductive potential being an important factor for you in choosing a partner, is that really a matter of sexuality and attraction, or about making sensible choices in light of what you want from your life? Although I’m bisexual, I could have chosen to settle down with a man if it had been important to me to have a child carrying both my and my partner’s genes - I would still have been bisexual.

And re piv sex - that completely makes sense. I have a friend who always says she could see herself being with a woman if it weren’t for how important piv sex is to her. I’ve never had piv sex, so I don’t know what all the fuss is about :) As a side note, there are probably people who would try to tell me I’m actually a lesbian for that reason.

On the point about superficiality - I can’t really see why it is better for one’s attraction to be determined by a person having the biology to produce small gametes or large gametes (or indeed, the nature of their genitals) than anything else about them - including their personality, which, as many people on here would agree, is not determined by biological sex.

I'm an old fashioned (50+) bisexual woman. I have lesbian friends who felt the need to get married to men to hide their sexuality. I have lesbian friends who went through conversion therapy and worse at the hands of their parents who thought it could be beaten out of you. Like it was some sort of curse.

Thankfully, in the last couple of decades, those friends have gone on to legally marry their same sex partners. I found this refreshing and progressive.

However, some of my lesbian / female gay friends have found themselves besieged by people with dicks via Online Dating. I've found the same thing. If I choose to seek a woman via online dating, I do not expect to find a man masquerading as a woman. Furthermore, I do not wish to have a man who is getting off sexually on pretending to be a woman. Which, unfortunately has been my experience. And when I say experience, I mean repeatedly and with the sole purpose of kink.

@aseriesofstillimages "I don’t remember ever thinking that lesbians weren’t allowed to be attracted to trans women."

You seem to be missing the point.

No one is saying that Lesbians are not allowed to be attracted to Transwomen. Everyone is allowed to be attracted to anyone.

But it is not a lesbian relationship, you could describe it as a same gender relationship but it is not a same sex relationship.

The Equality Act doesn't say that if you go through Gender Re-assignment then you are the other sex by the way.

😂

No, the Gender Recognition Act says that - see my earlier quote from the Act

to be honest, if a person said they were a trans woman but had taken no steps at all to transition - whether medically or socially - I would internally question what it means for them to be a woman, or trans. And if a woman who said they were a lesbian was in a relationship with that person, I would internally question what it means for them to be a lesbian.

in order for categories of sexuality to mean anything, they have to have something to do with observable aspects of sex or gender.

No, it doesn’t. Your quote does not say that.

A GRC does not change a persons legal sex for all purposes. What gave you that idea?
Are you claiming that lesbians must include trans people with a GRC in their dating pool? If so, this thread has become an example of the cotton ceiling.

It literally does, here it is again:

Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person’s gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender (so that, if the acquired gender is the male gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a man and, if it is the female gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a woman).

it says it in the brackets

Well, for all purposes subject to some specific exceptions.

No, of course I’m not saying that. I was responding to someone who claimed that ‘lesbian’ is defined in law as a biological female who is exclusively attracted to biological females.

apart from the fact that ‘lesbian’ is not defined in law, I was pointing out that, even though the Equality Act defines sexual orientation in terms of a person being orientated towards the same sex, or the opposite sex, or both, that definition has to be read in light of the GRA - so a trans man with a GRC who is only attracted to men would count as having a sexual orientation towards the same sex, for the purposes of the Equality Act.

apart from the fact that ‘lesbian’ is not defined in law

Yes it is. Lesbians are defined as same sex attracted. Gender has nothing to do with it.

''A woman who is attracted only to other women is a lesbian.''
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/2/1/9

But I don’t think that affects how a trans person with a GRC would be regarded for the purposes of the definition of sexual orientation? A trans man with a GRC who is only attracted to men would be regarded as sexually orientated towards people of the same sex.

I'd genuinely appreciate it if you can cite the case law for this.

Even with a GRC, a persons gender presentation does not trump the protected characteristic of sex.
If a service provider can lawfully exclude trans people from a rape crisis counselling session; then so can lesbians exclude them from their dating pool.

''There are circumstances where a lawfully-established separate or single-sex service provider can prevent, limit or modify trans people’s access to the service. This is allowed under the Act.''
www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/separate-and-single-sex-service-providers-guide-equality-act-sex-and-gender

DarkDayforMN
It must be the forbidden, taboo nature of it. You aren’t allowed to ask to see the GRC, despite the uncontrollable lust it apparently excites in you. You can’t even ask if it exists. A permanent state of teasing and temptation.

😂

Yes it is funny, @aseriesofstillimages but you realise that @NecessaryScene was making a point about your claims, no? What do you think about the idea that only the males with GRCs make it possible for males to be called women and their partners to call themselves lesbians?

Those are the explanatory notes, which aren’t actually part of the legislation.

What relevance does a government piece of paper from the Ministry of Truth have to someone's sexual orientation?

What would be an example of discrimination, harassment or victimization covered under the EA that would affect 'a trans man with a GRC who is only attracted to men would count as having a sexual orientation towards the same sex, for the purposes of the Equality Act.' @aseriesofstillimages please? A discrimination through perception in a work place/other place - yes, sure could occur.

If you tell someone they're not lesbians if they are in het relationship in workplace I'd think that'd be covered as an expression of GC belief, although IANAL.

I mean there's unlikely to be a test case, 'cos who cares unless they make others tell lies - then there may have be a GC court case to explain the obvious to the deluded.

There doesn’t need to be any case law, but it is clear on the terms of the legislation.

No it isn't.

Males with GRCs are not the same as women legally because there are exemptions possible, where other members of their sex would be included.