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?

There is a word; it's called 'queer'! I loathe the word but understood and supported its utility for those who preferred gender or were sexually fluid: pansexuals, trans etc. I thought it would be a nice 3rd place for them all to be happy without the hard sexual boundaries that lesbians and gay men have.
It wasn't enough. It is never enough.
Now we don't even have the word 'woman'
Women have to say NO

It wasn't enough. It is never enough.
Now we don't even have the word 'woman'
Women have to say NO

This. Nothing will ever be enough because we're not dealing with reasonable people.

Yep. They will not countenance that they are not included in things that are not for or about them, reasonable and tolerant they most certainly are not.

I firmly believe that if women invent a whole new lexicon of words, to cover biological females who are mothers, who are breastfeeding, who are solely attracted to other biological females, or who simply want to define themselves accurately, and if we then want to use those new words to ensure our safety and dignity, or to protect our sporting achievements or access to schemes that promote or award women in various industries, management, academia etc etc, then the trans lobby would IMMEDIATELY demand to be given those words too.

I agree with you all re the use of lesbian (and also about it going beyond vaginas, which was just shorthand, having had no traction when I asked the same question re biological women)- my point is just that the fact that the OP wouldn't even want to give you a new word, which means what "lesbian" used to mean, to use for your own purposes means that OP isn't really acting in good faith when she SAYS she isn't into sexual coercion.

I mean, if it is totally fine with OP for a lesbian not to want to sleep with a TW, then why can't such lesbians have a word and means of organising themselves so they don't have the hassle of having to turn TW down at a point at which it could get nasty for them (or hurt TW feelings)? Denying someone language under the guise of this being transphobic is just another form of coercion and an attempt to gaslight them into feeling that their sexual preferences are not legitimate and need to be kept strictly well hidden

Sorry, there have been so many questions!

When you say ‘Can a natal woman seeking a woman with a vagina have a word for that?’ I assume you’re not asking for my permission - so are you asking whether I think that would be acceptable? I don’t have a problem with that. There seems to be an ever-growing list of more and more specific categories of sexuality. Of course they would still be lesbians as well - assuming lesbian means ‘woman who is only attracted to other women’.

Great! So bio women who only want to be with bio women can have their own word and they can use that word to ensure that they have their own exclusive spaces in terms of dating - clubs, sites, events?

They already have their own word. It's the bisexuals or claimed bisexuals who are trying to repurpose it.

To be clear, the LGB people who think "lesbian" includes male people and women in partnerships with MTF trans people fall into two groups: those who are prepared to sleep with the opposite sex due to their ideological beliefs in gender identity, or those who have no intention of doing so but say they are open to it.

There seems to be an ever-growing list of more and more specific categories of sexuality.

So TW/TM and those who would date/have a relationship/have sex with them need to pick one and use that to describe their orientation. Leave the words lesbian and gay alone to describe those who are.

Of course they would still be lesbians as well - assuming lesbian means ‘woman who is only attracted to other women’.

Lesbians are female homosexuals, they are attracted to those of the same sex as them exclusively, leave them and their words the fuck alone. If that description excludes some - tough, get over it.

Lesbians: are sexually attracted to women only.
Gay men: are attracted to men only.
Heterosexuals: are attracted to the opposite sex only
Bisexuals, genderists, pansexuals, trans people, questioning etc are Queer
Everybody needs to stay in their lane.

It's really very simple
if you enforce strong boundaries
and say NO to blurring/queering them.

OP what is your view on the current case in Tasmania where a lesbian group wanted to host an event excluding any males - including trans women who identify as lesbian.

Do you think that they shoulD be allowed to do that?

I wasn’t aware I had the authority to grant or deny such things. As long as it’s legal they can.

Just as it’s not for me to unilaterally define ‘lesbian’, it’s not for you either. If someone carried out a survey of the general public, I think it’s likely a majority would say that a man who is attracted only to men, including trans men who have had hormonal/surgical intervention, is gay, and a woman who is attracted only to women, including trans women who have had hormonal/surgical intervention, is a lesbian. And likewise straight men who are attracted to trans women and straight women who are attracted to trans men.

@aseriesofstillimages i think that you’d find that it is likely that you’d find that 99.9% of the population would laugh if you said that someone with a dick (or who’s had a dick removed) is a lesbian.

your homophobia is blinding.

There’s another thread about conspiracy theorists going at the moment and it’s really interesting to see the same delusional faux logic used there being used by you.

'If someone carried out a survey of the general public, I think it’s likely a majority would say that a man who is attracted only to men, including trans men who have had hormonal/surgical intervention, is gay, and a woman who is attracted only to women, including trans women who have had hormonal/surgical intervention, is a lesbian. And likewise straight men who are attracted to trans women and straight women who are attracted to trans men.'

Er, no, they really wouldn't.

I wasn’t aware I had the authority to grant or deny such things. As long as it’s legal they can.

We're asking who you will support, when you see a conflict between a group of women who want a female only space, and a male saying he's a woman seeking entrance.

Do you support the women, because the transwoman is being a dick, intruding on their female-only space, or do you support the transwoman because the women are being transphobic/exclusionary.

Simple real-life case: Tickle vs Giggle in Australia (though I think this one's been dropped)

You're saying you're supporting the women, right?

@aseriesofstillimages It's not up to anyone to define anything for anyone else, not even you, but you came on here to say our definition was too narrow.

OK. So:
Recognising that words are used to describe not prescribe sexuality, I can see how this absolutist approach is logically required.

Why would it be illegal?

Are you intimating that women only having relationships with other women should somehow not be legal? In what situation would it not be legal?

'If someone carried out a survey of the general public, I think it’s likely a majority would say that a man who is attracted only to men, including trans men who have had hormonal/surgical intervention, is gay, and a woman who is attracted only to women, including trans women who have had hormonal/surgical intervention, is a lesbian. And likewise straight men who are attracted to trans women and straight women who are attracted to trans men.'

No, it isn't likely, but it's amusing to see you make this claim hardly any of them have surgery or pass as the opposite sex anyway, so you're talking about a tiny minority who "pass" and have also had their genitals operated on.

But again @aseriesofstillimages do you think it's perfectly reasonable and polite for a lesbian to say to all males including MTF trans people, sorry, I'm not interested in you, because I'm a lesbian"?

It’s not a question of reasonableness - if you’re not attracted to someone then you’re not attracted to them.

I’m not sure whether in some cases excluding men and/or trans women from an event/venue might be unlawful discrimination under the Equality Act.

It’s not a question of reasonableness - if you’re not attracted to someone then you’re not attracted to them.

But is it reasonable to expect the specific brush off "no thanks I'm a lesbian" to be understood and accepted by all males including those who identify as women? Please stop avoiding the substantive point.