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?

I see that Alex Sharpe is on Twitter praising the OP for this 'logical' post, and berating the 'illogical' replies. Yes, apparently it's totally illogical to object that lesbians don't like cock.

Is Alex Sharpe the OP? I got the distinct impression that OP also considers themself logical. And I can't imagine there are many others reading this thread who would think that. But I guess collective narcissism is a thing.

Of course ideally every man should accept a simple 'no' from any woman at any time, and that's what society should be working towards - an end to rape culture, sexual harassment and on and on. Instead women are having to try and reinstate boundaries that have been obvious for a long time - it's truly regressive.

Indeed. Woman should not have to be doing some kind of dance so as not to hurt a man's feelings. The word no should be heard, accepted and respected not seen as the start of negotiation. TW should be respectful enough of lesbians not to put them in that position and then shout and rail because their poor little feelings are hurt.

It is regressive and the demands of TW/TRA are making it even more so.

DarkDayforMN
I thought the same, especially after I looked up her book.

This Alex Sharpe?

Writes extensively on 'sexual fraud' (sex by deception)

Sorry, just looked in on this thread because....well...what is there to still be debating.
Lesbians, I'm assuming, have object permanence. A wig and a head tilt, won't make you forget he's a man.
The op had it in her first sentence/paragraph. What more needs to be said?

Not all bisexuals believe everyone is bisexual. Plenty are quite capable of understanding and respecting that other people's sexual orientations are theirs, and theirs alone. It's not rocket science!

OP, you should know perfectly well people are talking about sexual activity. The context is clear.

If someone said, "I am repulsed by the idea of sexual activity with animals", would you say, "lots of my friends have pets and seem to love them?"

If you can follow why that would be a weird and disturbing thing to say, please realise that what you posted was breathtakingly similar to it. Given context.

31 pages of wheedling and still the resounding answer is ‘lesbians don’t do dick’.

good stuff.

I’m sorry but she didn’t just say ‘I find the idea of sex with men repulsive’ - although clearly that was a large part of what she was saying, and the main point - she said she found men’s bodies disgusting and repulsive. While I don’t want to get bogged down in what is really a side point, I don’t think my interpretation of what she said (that her repulsion went beyond the thought of make bodies in a sexual context) was weird or unreasonable.

And what if some women aren't literally nauseated by the visual sight of a male body? Aren't they entitled to aim for more in life than "absence of nausea"? Like goddamn lust and passion? Sexual arousal, culminating in sexual satisfaction?

And aren't they entitled to a word to communicate that they know they can only find that with women? And no, I don't care whether anyone thinks women might have concluded that they're not interested in men too hastily. The whole world pressures women to consider men as sexual options. Women don't need to be saved from their own decisions here. Trust women to be able to tell that the naked male body doesn't get them interested. If they're wrong to think so, they'll be the first to know. Not you.

To be fair, given this thread and past history, the level of logic being applied is to be expected.

You're wrong.

It was deeply weird and unreasonable and if I knew you in real life, I'd be avoiding sitting near you on the bus ever again. This wasn't just a faux pas, that post was creepy.

Considering some people are so repulsed by their own bodies, they require drugs and surgery, I think pp's seem quite reasonable.

But I really struggle with why GC people would want to tell a woman - a lesbian - who is in a relationship with a trans woman that they are wrong to consider themselves a lesbian

Because reality? A transwoman is a male. If you're a woman, in a relationship with a male, you are not a lesbian.

We don't need to pretend there is anything difficult to define here, we all know what the words mean

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not Alex Sharpe. I have clarified above that I’m a cis gender woman, and she is trans. I also had no involvement in this thread ending up on Twitter.

aseriesofstillimages

As its been put on here.
Where do you stand on gender identity fraud?
Do you think that its ok for a trans woman to 'fool' a woman into a sexual relationship and use a prosthetic penis?

Or do you think that it is sex by deception and therefore sexual assault as it is not what the consented to?

yes, I am very concerned that Stonewall are actively trying to change the laws around sex by deception. And Sharpe seems to be very much involved with that.

Where do you stand on that OP? Have we covered this?

It is ok for a trans person to not disclose their birth sex to a sex partner?

I think the crucial line is between active deception and non-disclosure. If a person deceives someone about something important about themselves, knowing the other wouldn’t have sex with them if they knew the truth, then that’s wrong and probably illegal.

Sorry- I dont think that is a distinction eg in law.
Thinking of case law around hiv transmission.

So, you think someone not telling a heterosexual male they are about to have sex with who has a replica vagina and is not female is ok? That a transitioned male can make that decision for that person?

I don't care whether anyone thinks women might have concluded that they're not interested in men too hastily. The whole world pressures women to consider men as sexual options.

It does.

This is rooted in a belief that female biology is a provided resource for males, and has no point or purpose unless it's serving use to males.

Hence the belief that homosexual females are either deluded and in need of sorting out to serve their proper designed purpose (of being used for sex by males) or that they are bad in refusing males. I think the TQ+ jargon for this is 'gatekeeping their vagina'. (I cannot believe I actually have to repeat this misogynistic lunacy.)

Its incel ideology.

Believing that homosexual females should be bi (or are a weird minority who are kidding themselves because who could really not be all about sexually servicing males, and should be made to behave properly and get with the het) is most likely rooted in a belief that females aren't really entitled to bodily autonomy or a sexuality/life not focused on the service of males.

One fuckton of TQ+ logic is about females and the need for them to revolve their meaningless little lives around the much more important needs of males. Especially the very oppressed poor males.

(Insert rape and death threats here for females who say unfemale things like 'no', and 'fgs will you do something about your misogyny because the bloody dark ages aren't coming back' and 'no emotionally healthy female would ever shag anyone of any sex or gender who has zero interest in whether she consents or is enjoying it and expects her to provide sexual access to her body out of social duty'.) These are the kinds of distorted, prejudiced views of females that boards like this were set up to help females stand up against in the first place.

If a person deceives someone about something important about themselves, knowing the other wouldn’t have sex with them if they knew the truth, then that’s wrong and probably illegal.

It is illegal to deceive someone about your sex if you have sex with them. Sex by Deception. You should ask Alex Sharpe about it, quite a prolific writer on this subject.

I'm saying it too: I find men's bodies disgusting and repulsive.
And I had a wonderful loving father. I loved him dearly and he had a gross,flat, hard, masculine body. Ugh
I'm sure a straight woman would find him very attractive, in fact many did.
..I'm a lesbian; that's simply the way I feel. And it's fine!

So this whole thread is about how repulsive the OP assumes lesbians find male bodies?

Not about how lesbians actually define their desire but how much they do or don't desire the bodies being proposed to them?

I thought the homophobia had hit rock bottom but then... it kept going...

Good point, Blister. Again, it's about a presumed 'yes' that women have to explain why they actually would rather not.

Consent is an ENTHUSIASTIC yes, not just an absence of no.