Butches against transpohobia

[Catsanfan]

I saw a woman wearing a T shirt saying 'Butches against transphobia' today. It astounds me that some lesbians would think that way. I wonder what she would do if presented with a penis on a date?

Language 'evolving' naturally is a bit different to top down enforcement of language change to suppress a population and enable colonialists.

Check your history book.

I think there's an interesting point buried in here somewhere.

It's not about how people define themselves but how they define a word.

People feel as if they own words, when what they own is their own feelings. Nobody 'owns' a words, and yes, words' meanings can change. That's usually an organic and perhaps messy process. But nobody can unilaterally declare that a word means something other than what it is commonly understood to mean, because they've decided that 'lesbian' can include men, for example.

You can't change the meaning of a word by force. Well, you can try. But language resists. Especially when we need certain words to be clear.

They take 'lesbian' and we have to revert to 'female' and they take female and we have to go to 'biological woman' because the fact remains and always will that we need words that have clear meanings, especially when its about something as fundamental as sex.

Words are tools that we use to convey information, they work when we all understand the meaning. The meaning is shared.

Really? Surely by changing from a woman to a man, you're rejecting lesbianism

Cross post, Frood.

You're concerned that the term lesbian is compromised...I can tell you right now that it is...but not really because of the reason you think, younger lesbians are identifying away from this term as they do not like the policing of boundaries and definitions that we are seeing on this very thread.

Conversion therapy, and people being told that they are in some way wrong or mistaken for being same sex attracted is nothing new. Unfortunately.

So you're not going to answer my question then?

Is a woman, who in their beliefs is more radical comparatively than most feminists, believes that transwomen are men and should not have access to womens spaces, in the wrong for saying she does not want other people to call her a trans exclusionary radical feminist?

I'm not a lesbian, I am bi/pan. However, it is not true to say I would be disappointed to sleep with a woman who did not have a vagina. For example, one of my hugest celebrity crushes is Hunter Schaefer. All woman, but she does not have a vagina AFAIK (she didn't used to, she may do now). BTW, a lot of lesbians (not all, of course) also find her irresistible.

Don't be absurd.

This isn't the natural evolution of language.

This is the forcible colonisation of language by a self interested lobby group, with the specific goal of depriving other groups of people with competing interests to their own of the ability to talk about those competing interests.

If you no longer have a word for female people because it has been redefined to include male people, women's rights become men's rights, women's spaces become men's spaces and women's sports become men's sports.

If you no longer have a word for same sex attracted females because it has been redefined to include male people and heterosexuals, lesbians can no longer describe themselves, advocate for their own rights and needs or establish clear boundaries around who they will date.

If you redefine the word female to mean "most females and some males" and male to mean "most males and some females", your protected characteristic of SEX in the Equality Act becomes fucking useless.

If you define people objecting to any of the above as "transphobia", you successfully silence most of them and then you harass and threaten the ones who won't stay silent and then laugh as they, and not you, get cancelled on social media or fired from their jobs.

No.

Enough is enough.

This is not the natural evolution of language.

That is NOT how language evolves.

This is a deliberate attempt to sabotage the rights of other groups by preventing those groups from defining themselves and organising themselves in their own self interest.

Yes, mate. A feminist can exclude male people without excluding 'trans' people.

The key part here is your statement: I am bi/pan.

Interesting isn't it that some kinds of policing are ok but others aren't?

And conversion therapy should work only for T affirmation but not to protect homosexual women from being pressured to be open and willing to provide sex to men against their sexual orientation and wishes rather than distress the man?

This is sexism on crack.

You can dress it up in redefined words to try and hide from yourself what you're enabling, but the reality does not go away.

All woman

No. Hunter Schaefer is male. Women are female. You are bisexual, lesbians, gay men and straight people of both sexes are only attracted to one of the two sexes.

No, she's not wrong. Because it's not trans exclusionary, it's MALE exclusionary, as all feminism was before the entire western world took leave of its bloody senses.

Hi, can you explain what 'femininity' consists of, please?

Thanks.

The person I was quoting said that bi women would not want to sleep with a woman who had a penis, and I was correcting that assumption.

Yes but you are not a lesbian! Many lesbians would object to having sex with the person you mentioned in this comment

folk on FWR don't like queer either, whatcha gonna do?!

Well possibly respect the many LGB people who have explained many times that 'queer' is a slur and a word they are very uncomfortable with.

But apparently this political movement sees society in two groups: them as the people who matter, make the rules, get to be treated as they wish and should never be policed and questioned

and a kind of slave class who will just shut up and provide labour. And don't get to have identities or words or an inner life or even the right to say no to unwanted sex if it distresses one of their betters.

So you're not going to answer my question then?

I disagree with your false premise, so it's not a question I can answer.

I think all lesbians would. Unless they are actually something other than a lesbian.

If you read the quote tree, the person I was responding to made the same claim about bisexual women, and said we would prefer cis men to trans women, with no reason for saying that at all.

@suggestionsplease1

Language evolved as it always has done in every culture, over centuries. New meanings are formed or added, old meanings sometimes drop away.

That doesn't mean that language should be manipulated by political activists for some crazy ideology.

I see, that's fair enough, thanks.

Could you expand on what 'femininity' means, please?

'Queer' has not been a slur for about half a century, if not longer.

Look, if you're sexually attracted to trans women, you crack on. Good for you and good for them.

If you're identifying as bi or pan while you do that then you're not treading on anyone else's toes.

Well apparently there are quite a lot of gay and lesbian people who didn't get the memo that they were supposed to stop finding it offensive.

Ah. So you're informing LGB people that their slurs and memories and experiences don't matter, their voices don't matter, they're old, and now their betters are here and telling them to get over it because it's a word they like the feel of playing with?

Are we respecting people or not?
Do people's voices matter or not?
Are we being kind or not?

This is all bullshit isn't it? It's just that some people matter and some don't. It's colonialism.