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?

At this point you're just taking the piss. I can't believe this conversation is still ongoing.

I didn’t realise this was just a game to you. If you’re not going to engage seriously I don’t see why I should bother.

Oh good, you're back. Could we have a definition of woman that is not circular or self-referential, please; and how your friend's partner conforms to that definition? As a lesbian is a woman who is exclusively attracted to other women this would seem to be foundational.

What has being black got to do with the price of bread?

If you are a female woman in a relationship with a female woman, or are attracted to female women, you are either lesbian or bisexual.

If you are a female woman in a relationship with a male man, or are attracted to male men, you are either straight or bisexual.

If you are a female woman in a relationship with a male woman (transwoman), or are attracted to male women (transwoman), you are not a lesbian.

It's really not difficult. Sex matters. It doesn't matter if you grow your hair long, paint your face, chop your balls off and call yourself Mandy, you are not a lesbian and neither is your girlfriend.

Lesbians have had to deal with this bullshit for years. If your girlfriend is "butch" i.e. doesn't look like a stereotype of a woman, you're not really a lesbian because you're actually attracted to a man. But your girlfriend is because men are attracted to women and that's why she looks like a man🙄

I must say, I've really enjoyed this thread and the way it's been conducted, I think I would direct anyone who hasn't formulated their views on the gender argument here because the answers have been concrete.

A shout out to donquixotedelamancha and many others for fantastic responses. I think it will now end as the unanswerable question of 'what is a woman?' has been asked but hats off to Still Images for persevering and really drawing out why it's a short, sharp NO to men's entitlement to women and their spaces.

Thank you ladies

Another one of these whataboutery threads?

You have asked three times and have been unable even to form the question what is a black person? with out putting caveats into the question.

You are desperately trying to move from denying someone's sex and sexuality to trying to redefine what the race of a person is.

Why is it so important to you to remove the protection of other people so that the only protected people are the ones that are trying to remove the protection of others.

Intensely curious if this is yet another attempt to define lesbians as anyone who 'believes' they are a lesbian but in reality they are really a heterosexual man who 'believes' or identifes as a 'transwoman' and a 'lesbian'.

I thought the question was pretty obvious, so I’m not sure why you haven’t answered it yet?

I was trying to make a very simple point, in response to your statement that you can’t know you are something if you can’t define it. As I said before, I don’t think you have to be able to define a term in a completely comprehensive way in order to know it applies to you (or doesn’t). There are plenty of meaningful identity categories where many people might reasonably consider themselves to be inside or outside the category, based on the same facts.

The term ‘Black’ is a good example, in that it is a very important identity for many people, but its meaning varies between different cultures and times, and some people reject it completely. I know some people of mixed heritage who consider themselves Black and others who don’t. I don’t think you can specify a set of criteria that you can apply to every person in the English speaking world to determine whether or not they are Black.

i think sexuality categories are similar. I consider myself bisexual, but I couldn’t give a definition that would definitively ‘sort’ everyone else in or out. You can start with a basic ‘person who is attracted both to people of the same sex and the opposite sex’ formulation. But does a person have to be attracted to both at least one man and at least one woman at any given point in time to be bisexual? So then you could refine it further - a person is bisexual if they have, over the course of their life to date, ever been attracted to at least one man and at least one woman. But then what do we mean by ‘attracted’? What if I once had a crush of someone of the same sex, but have only had sex and relationship with people of the opposite sex - am I really bisexual, or just straight? What if I spend my twenties thinking I’m bisexual, but then have sex with a man for the first time at 30 and realise I don’t enjoy it, so I decide in future to only have sex with women, even though I find men desirable.

And what if I date men up to my 40s but then meet and fall in love with a woman, and never find myself attracted to a man again - was I always bisexual, or have I become a lesbian?

surely in the margins you have to give people space for self-determination?

We don’t let people self identify as indigenous. They have cards. Should we burn the cards and let folks self identify as that? My grandmother who comes from a LOOOOONNNGGG line of white ancestors died her hair black and claimed to be cherokee for years. Bought all the things she thought looked cherokee to her and decorated her house with it. In fact there was a point where I had an identity crisis when I found out she was lying about it. But it’s her identity. Maybe she can identify as cherokee. They can also cross borders into canada without much hassle because the land is technically stolen from them. Why not just let them identify their way in and out of the US and Canada? 😂🤷🏻‍♀️

dyed* sorry auto correct got me

aseriesofstillimages

I haven't answer your question for two reasons.
1/ You have been unable to form the question in a way that makes it answerable.
2/ It is a false equivalence to sex, sexuality and gender.

For the rest of it you have to start with a base point.

If they dig up a skeleton they will be able to give it a sex, pelvic width, hip length, bone density and DNA. Male/Female.

These are scientific facts.

Sexuality definitions are equally as easy

Attracted to opposite sex = heterosexual
Attracted to the same sex = homosexual
Subgroup of homosexual = female female attraction = lesbian
Subgroup of homosexual = male male attraction = gay
Attracted to both sexes = bisexual
Lack of attraction to any other sex = Asexual

Then you have intersex people who have asked to be left out of this.

Others may want to identify by their gender and how they feel, but a lot of us don't want or need to and identify by the sex that we are born as and do not need extra labels placed on us or those terms redefined to fit how an ideology thinks others should be seen.

It only get complex because people are making it complex.

I am quite happy to respect that people "feel" that they are a "woman" or a "man" but when you start pushing terms out like female penis, or a lesbian must fancy a transwoman or they are a transphobe then you lose all respect.

And I know that even thinking this way (in some circles) makes me a transphobe but it is a protected belief and it is held by many people.

I do wonder why your friend and partner don’t just identify as queer

what’s wrong with making your own terms? Why the scramble to redefine existing terms?

I mean I presume the transwoman is not delusional and therefore fully understands that he is male, as does his partner

I didn’t realise this was just a game to you. If you’re not going to engage seriously I don’t see why I should bother.

Breathtaking.

It doesn't matter if you grow your hair long, paint your face, chop your balls off and call yourself Mandy, you are not a lesbian and neither is your girlfriend.

Harsh but fair.

The term ‘Black’ is a good example [...] i think sexuality categories are similar.

There is absolutely no similarity - humans are sexually dimorphic and there is no sexual equivalent of being mixed race. Even if you consider people who have severe DSDs as such, this doesn't apply to your friend unless they have this condition.

This.

Also, is not what the word 'transbians' means?
Or are transbians TW exclusively atracted to TW?

You see, this just makes me even more confused than I was before about homosexuality/trans (as if there weren't enough 'new' sexualities to try to get my head around).

I'm straight and don't know many gay people so what I do know I've mainly gleaned from media, I guess.

I always understood that being gay or lesbian meant you were attracted to people of the same sex and that this was the way you were born and not a choice.

Assuming this understanding is correct, that attraction is based on biological sex, it's a hormonal and physical thing, and I don't see how an attraction to a trans person of the opposite sex who identified as your gender would even happen.

(Surely if you're attracted to either sex, you're bi or pan, whatever pan means.)

I have a colleague who was with her male partner for years and identified as straight. The partner transitioned to be a trans woman and she now considers herself a lesbian. I wouldn't say anything to her, or her partner but I do think wtf...

Implying that lesbians should be attracted to trans women is surely implying that lesbians have a choice over who they're attracted to.

And assuming isn't true, then isn't it a dangerous, slippery slope?

I would agree with live and let live in most day-to-day scenarios. I can't imagine a situation where I'd even discuss someone's sexuality with them. If someone brings it up, I'll just smile and nod. I'm not going to argue with them. If someone tells me they're trans, I'll be polite and use their preferred name but I won't make statements I don't believe in such as that there is no difference between a trans woman and a biological woman.

That is effectively what the OP is asking us to do and to me that's a line crossed. Believe what you want to believe but don't tell me what I have to believe. If I'm being polite, I'm doing no harm.

I thought calling yourself non-binary was the way to signal 'I'm special'. Or is that just a bit boring now? Does adding 'pansexual' increase your specialness because it show that you're willing to shag anyone as well as re-defining your own self?

Is there a hierachy of specialness depending on which woo-words you choose? Or maybe a points system?

@bathsh3ba you are absolutely right. It's exceptionally simple but some people are trying to make it complicated to blur the lines. The question then becomes why anyone would want to blur the lines if they do not have nefarious intentions?

Simple truth:

Men = adult human males, as per biological definition, capable or production of small gametes
Women = adult human females, as per biological definition, capable of production of large gametes
Boys = immature males under the age of consent
Girls = immature females under the age of consent
Transmen (trans identified females) = female to male transition
Transwomen (trans identified males) male to female transition
Lesbian = same sex attracted female/female
Gay = same sex attracted male/male
Bisexual = attracted to both sexes
Heterosexual = opposite sex attracted

Saw this video today and I think 'blurring lines' is a nice way of describing what the original video creator is doing and I agree with the commentator.

There a level of cognitive dissonance required when you watch things like this which very strongly echo gay conversion therapy techniques of 'just try it, you might like it' or 'you just haven't met the right kind of man yet' while also yelling that therapy exploring why a child feels like they are the opposite sex should be considered Trans conversion therapy.

https://odysee.com/@Exulansicc*:d/InShot202208155_222257706:8

Why is the example used always of black people? Why never use white people as an example?

This

Honestly I can buy sexuality being on a spectrum more than sex. Maybe some people are basically lesbians but actually have been attracted to men rarely but as its so infrequent prefer to call themselves a lesbian for simplicity

Was this written by a man? There seems to be absolutely no knowledge about female sexuality from the poster.