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?

In what way do I ‘disagree about a lesbian saying no to a man or a trans woman’? I have said more than once (and anyway I would hope it goes without saying) that every person has an absolute right to say no to sexual intimacy or romance with any person, without having to give any reason at all.

@AmaryllisNightAndDay
take it from me a lifelong Lesbian:
transwomen are men, they are not 'very different' because they may wear makeup or have had some surgery. It makes absolutely NO difference to us Lesbians.

Fair enough @QueenHippolyta , you're in a better position to judge than I am.

In your response to the bbc article you that it wasn't a major problem (paraphrasing).
And your response to the workshops was to say that the person joined stonewall later. Nothing about the workshops that I can remember.
And your anecdote of your "lesbian" friend and her male partner.
But then it circles back around to the importance of the definition of words both lesbian and no.

that every person has an absolute right to say no to sexual intimacy or romance with any person, without having to give any reason at all.

Is it ok for them to say, "no thanks, I don't want to sleep with you as I'm a lesbian" to any male of whatever gender identity?

In what way are they different sexually from men?

Well, the OP's friend might think so... but I don't want to speculate about how the OP's friend might think they're different.

And your anecdote of your "lesbian" friend and her male partner.

I imagine from my anecdotal experience that it's the male who is especially attached to the idea of either being or being in a partnership with a "lesbian". Many TRA supporting women seem to think the term "lesbian" is old fashioned and undesirable and prefer "gay" or "queer".

"We already went through the vegan example, and I explained my view is that this is more analogous to some vegans eating honey, rather than someone claiming to be a vegan while eating meat. I know you disagree, and that obviously comes back to your view that there is absolutely no meaningful difference between any transwoman and a man."

Several things here.

Firstly, Veganism is, unlike sexuality, a matter of choice, a matter of decision. Profoundly principled and ethical choice, but choice nonetheless. As a lesbian Vegan I can -and do - make choices about the kind of food i eat based on my ethical positions, but I cannot make a choice about the kind of person I am sexually attracted to, that is hardwired in.

Secondly, your attempt to identify Veganism as a spectrum rather than an absolute (nothing derived from animals) (along, no doubt, purer or less pure lines : good vegans here - won't even eat honey; less good vegans over there - won't eat meat but occasionally steal from bees) is where this daft rhetorical forced teaming falls down; just as lesbians don't do dick, vegans don't do honey.

And this is why I don't like argument by analogy; extremely slippery beasts, analogies. Stick to proper definitions of what things actually are rather than what you think they are like and we wouldn't have to waste half a whole thread refuting specious disingenuous attempts to prove that not only is there "absolutely no meaningful difference between any transwoman and a man" but black isn't white, either.

One of my gay friends is adamant that their is a battle between gay and queer people.
The gays (using the term for gay and lesbian) being older less likely to to take the crap (having fought for their rights) and the queers (is that term allowed now?) siding very firmly with the trans lobby.

But for a long time is the USA there have been workshops for men to become 'alphas' on how to attract and have sex with women, and it seems to be the same tactics used for transwomen to have sex with women.

But for a long time is the USA there have been workshops for men to become 'alphas' on how to attract and have sex with women, and it seems to be the same tactics used for transwomen to have sex with women.

Yes and one of the people running those workshops was barred from entry into the UK to run one here on the basis of the content of said workshop, notably @aseriesofstillimages skated right over that when I pointed it out earlier and asked what the difference between the two workshops were.

In what way do I ‘disagree about a lesbian saying no to a man or a trans woman’? I have said more than once (and anyway I would hope it goes without saying) that every person has an absolute right to say no to sexual intimacy or romance with any person, without having to give any reason at all.

What you are deliberately missing here @aseriesofstillimages is that lesbians shouldn't be having to say No to transwomen, transwomen should not be in their spaces and on their dating apps. Lesbian only dating apps, clubs, etc., should be just that lesbian only, no men whatever they identify as.

'I agree that anyone can say no to anyone without having a reason because I'm a nice person who doesn't believe in sexual coercion'.

In actual fact that conversation goes:

'no, no thanks'.

'You're saying no because I'm trans and you're transphobic. WOULD you have sex with a TW?'

'No, because I'm homosexual which means exclusively attracted to biological females, sorry. I'm sure you're lovely but...'

'you're prejudiced, I'm a woman, you're a bigoted bitch, you should overcome your learned genital fetishes....yada yada yada'.

And now you're faced with an angry, upset male, a bigger, stronger male with a sense of sexual entitlement, reading from a political belief which covers Twitter with rape and death threats to women who recognise sex in the meeting of their own needs and feelings. It's like being faced with a male in a female only toilet; the women this does not work for will largely not argue, they will get the fuck out of there as fast and discreetly as possible because they don't want to get hurt.

This business of 'I give you permission to say no to people on an individual basis but never on basis of a group characteristic without calling you names' just allows people to promote TQ+ queer politics (and its homophobia) without getting their hands personally dirty and still feeling nice about themselves. While promoting coercion, homophobia and male supremacism. They don't look at that bit. That's nothing to do with them. They just enable it to happen to other people.

VestofAbsurdity

To add to your post ( i hope that you don't mind)
We have also had on here anecdotes of people who have had husbands transition and now consider themselves lesbians even though they are having sex with the same person.
It beggars belief.

that obviously comes back to your view that there is absolutely no meaningful difference between any trans woman and a man.

Yes. Exactly.

In terms of sexuality, homosexual attraction, there is no difference. Because while I respect a TW's choice of term for themselves and their identity, the reality is that they are male. And that is their sex.

A TW may be very attractive, but they are not female and cannot be a female regardless of degree of outer cosmetic changes and choices around dress. To homosexuals this is the key issue. To frame this as a fault in homosexuals and something they should change and overcome to benefit males? Is homophobic. And it sees the male need and entitlement and feelings as more valuable and important than the female - in fact the very language requires the female to see sex with that male as a social duty of being female (they should learn to cope, stop selfishly prioritising their own orgasms) and that male people get to have their feelings catered for by others, while others must train themselves to think and sexually provide access in male centred ways. The female is a resource, with a duty to provide, while the male has no responsibilities and a lot of entitlement. Which makes an absolute nonsense of pretending this isn't rooted in a belief of binary sex classes with set hierarchy and roles.

If people who wanted to view this as being same gender attracted would have their own words for it, and respect that homosexuality is different and fine and just as valued, there would be no problem here. At all. We'd all be fine and the LGTB+ community would just be more diverse.

But the target of this argument is that homosexuality is not morally and ethically ok, that it must change and reframe to be same gender attracted (or as I would term it, hetero or at least bi), that the word homosexual and lesbian must be taken over and adapted to the hetero/bi meaning, and homosexuals who won't stop homosexualing and saying so and arguing against the removal and redefining of their language and identity should be shamed, shunned and pushed out of the LGBT+ community.

How is this anything good or inclusive or acceptable?

This business of 'I give you permission to say no to people on an individual basis but never on basis of a group characteristic without calling you names' just allows people to promote TQ+ queer politics (and its homophobia) without getting their hands personally dirty and still feeling nice about themselves. While promoting coercion, homophobia and male supremacism. They don't look at that bit. That's nothing to do with them. They just enable it to happen to other people.

Exactly! So much for gay and lesbian "pride", eh?

Add away FrippEnos!

This business of 'I give you permission to say no to people on an individual basis but never on basis of a group characteristic without calling you names' just allows people to promote TQ+ queer politics (and its homophobia) without getting their hands personally dirty and still feeling nice about themselves. While promoting coercion, homophobia and male supremacism. They don't look at that bit. That's nothing to do with them. They just enable it to happen to other people.

Oh yes the I give you permission bit is simultaneously enraging and excruciating - just who the fuck do these people think they are? You can say no to an individual for any reason but you can't use that reason to rule out everyone that you would rule out for the same reason - I mean what the ever loving hell is this bullshit?

The sex of a person is fundamental in attraction to that person it is not a mere preference.

Lesbians are attracted to females, not all females that is where other preferences come into play, but the initial and fundamental part of the attraction is that the person is female. Do I feel sorry that transwomen do not fit into this category for lesbians? No I do not.

How is this different from cultural colonisation?

You're saying no because I'm trans and you're transphobic. WOULD you have sex with a TW?'

This is exactly how it would go, and it's how anyone who understood what motivates many TRAs would expect it to go. Because it's so often a power trip. For eg there was an account of Mridul Wadhwa at a party and MW forced the issue of whether MW was a woman or not by getting the host to ask everyone even though no one wanted to say it. It's controlling.

you're prejudiced, I'm a woman, you're a bigoted bitch, you should overcome your learned genital fetishes....yada yada yada'.

Often with a chorus of useful idiots, flying monkeys or both joining in.

Let‘s see. If I am a vegan and meat disgusts me, but someone somehow manages to smuggle meat into the vegan curry I eat, and I don‘t notice it (hard to fathom, but let‘s imagine it for the sake of the argument), am I still a vegan?
I‘d certainly puke, if I were told in the aftermath…

A friend of mine who hates, I say HATES seafood (because that includes all the intestines), once unwittingly ate a bowl of clam chowder (due to a translation error, long story). Once he realized, what he had eaten, he puked his heart out.

Surely, what you eat is less personal to you than who you have sex with, no?

OP!

Still no answer! I have asked this question soooo many times!

Can a natal woman seeking a woman with a vagina have a word for that, to shortcut the process of looking for a sexual partner? If she just doesn't want to have sex with a TW, because she just doesn't want penis or neo vagina, can she have a word to identify that? Can those women who feel this way hold events, mark themselves out on dating sites without being hassled for being transphobic?

The word doesn't have to be lesbian. Could be something else. But can women have a word and category for this?

Rather than lesbians having to find another word I suggest that those who are trying to expand the definition and obfuscate the meaning of the word bugger off and use another word that accurately describes them, why the fuck should lesbians, i.e. women, have to give away the word that describes them, has always described them and comes with a long history?

Why is it always expected that women will capitulate and acquiesce? The answer is a very loud and firm NO.

In short; is it ok for a female to define a sexuality for herself that she says will never involve or include any biological males? Regardless of how males feel about this?

Is this something acceptable for a female to do in this interesting world view? To go around openly and proudly having a sex life that no male is wanted as part of, and a body that is never going to be of use to a male person?

The word lesbian is already taken, why should lesbians give it over to males.

Also there is a lot more to being an actual lesbian than just the vagina and that buys into the whole ‘genital fetish’ we are already been accused of.