This year's pride month

[maybeuptight]

Just wondering if anyone thinks it might be different this year?

Last year it felt like you couldn't leave the house in June without encountering rainbow "Love is Love" posters, Tesco sold drag garden gnomes, and bacon lettuce tomato sandwiches turned into LGBT sandwiches in my local shop.

This year some local pride events have reported inadequate funding, and Stonewall have said they are in financial difficulties. But the Supreme Court ruling has also prompted lots of protests, so maybe people will feel motivated to get involved?

Why do you think they feel they have more in common with straight people despite trans people being members of the LGBT community? Come on, you’ll need to do better than that.

This is another of those threads of "don't tell gay people whether or not to accept trans" followed by "I'm gay and I'm telling all gay people to accept trans".

Gay men don't want to date trans men, and most lesbians don't want to date trans women. Now I regularly see a lot of "lesbians" (the AGP males) state that they as a "lesbian" are happy to date trans women.

This apparent voluntary acceptance of trans people into the dating scene by gay people doesn't really exist. And again I regularly see gay men say "trans men are men, gay men should date them, but I wouldn't". The majority of times it is expected that other people date them, but not the individual virtue signalling it.

”Chained to radiators”. Interesting turn of phrase. Are you referencing the incident of Boy George abducting a young male escort?

*Quite rightly given that the LGB alliance has done next to nothing for LGB people^

Defining homosexuality according to the ruling of the Supreme Court is a cornerstone of an LGB charity.

Which is why the attempt to shut it down failed.

So which LGB organisations have not been allowed to exist, and allowed by whom?

You, yourself have just admitted that lesbian. gay and bisexual people who uphold the concept of homosexuality shouldn't be allowed to go to their own march.

Lesbians have been threatened every single place they have gone to. From sitting on chairs, to eating pizza, to speed dating nights.

But, of course, you're quite right, that all these organisations are absolutely legally allowed to exist. Something that the Supreme Court has just confirmed. And people trying to shut them down isn't working.

Wrong.

You can't just decide that words don't mean what they do mean, and not expect people to tell you you're wrong!

A Lesbian is a woman. If someone who claims to be a lesbian is attracted to men, but says they're a lesbian, they're wrong. They could be attracted to as many men as they like, but they can't claim it's a homosexual orientation.

This determination to rip up the equality act specifically in terms of lesbianism is what influenced the Supreme Court to act as they did.

The attempt to override the equality that gay people have fought for has failed.

I think you should let lesbians, gay men and bi people be the judges of whether trans people should be part of their community.

Oh, the irony

There is not policing of lesbians going on.

Women who put dicks in their dating pool are straight or bisexual.

Women who don't put dicks in their dating pool are lesbians.

It's being nut free or not nut free. Lesbians are nut free. They don't have nuts in their dating pool.

This is not policing lesbians. This is saying that the definition of a lesbian is without nuts and this can't be changed.

If you want to be bisexual, crack on. There's nothing wrong with that. Why do you seem to have a problem with that? Does it have less social status to declare yourself bisexual? How very biphobic of you? But having nuts in your dating pool is not being a lesbian.

The only policing going on is telling lesbians that lesbians can include nuts in their dating pool and forcing them to include bisexuals and men in a lesbian only setting. This is not ok.

Just have a bisexual group and have done with it.

The end.

Except I haven’t told anyone they must accept trans people.

If the existing LGBT+ community isn’t to anyone’s liking they are entirely free not to be part of it. Unlike some on here I’m not going to claim they are not really gay or lesbian or bi.

I just want those of us who are trans inclusive and enjoy and want to be part of an LGBT+ community to have the same freedom. Stop policing people’s sexualities, stop policing people’s communities, and stop implying that the test of womanhood is whether a lesbian will shag someone (spoiler - we’re not contractually obliged to shag anyone, and when we choose not to it doesn’t mean that that person isn’t a woman).

And yet here we are, with the usual suspects whinging about Pride month with hundreds of thousands of participants in London alone, while their trans exclusionary equivalents have been largely shunned by LGB people who want nothing to do with them.

I hope so. That’ll put the kibosh on it.

@PlanetJanette sory if I missed it but please could you explain how a male can be a lesbian? A lesbian is a female homosexual so that would automatically exclude all transwomen wouldn’t it?
or am I being thick and you’re saying trans inclusive lesbians are those who date transmen. They can be lesbians as they are female.

How you can say that in the same breath is saying you don't include LGB people who uphold homosexuality, is beyond me.

It's you who is being exclusionary. And exclusionary to the very people who founded the march in question.

Men are not lesbians. It's a simple as that. No one gives a flying fuck if straight men want to be allies, allies in dresses, even. But they're not lesbians.

It's a bit pointless having the conversation. You will not be allowed to exclude men and women on the basis of their sexual orientation. And it's a sexual orientation that's based on sex, not gender.

Liverpool pride has been cancelled due to a lack of funding

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/liverpool-pride-cancelled-2025-devastating-31795563

You really think that the law requires pride parades to include people with trans exclusionary views?

That Supreme Court judgment has gone to your heads. It's become all things to all people.

Hint - there is no legal obligation to allow people who disagree fundamentally with the purpose of a march to participate in the march.

You mean explain why some people think that being a woman is more than just a biological state and therefore trans women are women?

No. You can go look up the thousands of other exchanges on that question.

The point is that people are entitled to believe that trans women are women, and that trans men are men. And to march in support of that viewpoint. And to exclude those who disagree with that viewpoint.

Looking forward to hearing how it's all the fault of the dastardly trans cohort that Liverpool Pride took the decision to sever its ties with its main sponsor.

So you're saying again that it is fine to exclude lesbians who do not want to date trans women (biological males) and exclude gay men who do not want to date trans men (biological females).

You keep lumping all LGB together by saying that they have no issue with dating trans people (of the biologically opposite sex). Even though there are plenty of gay men and women who claim otherwise.

You're getting very close to saying that a lesbian isn't a real lesbian unless she wants to date trans women.

Well, it didnt help.

A statement from the board said: “LCR Pride Foundation has ended its relationship with Barclays. We unanimously and unequivocally condemn the statement made by Barclays’ chief executive last week regarding banning trans women from female bathrooms and the subsequent actions of the bank

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/lcr-pride-foundation-ends-relationship-31598395.

There's a legal issue with excluding lesbians on the basis that they believe that sex is real.

Looking forward to hearing how it's all the fault of the dastardly trans cohort that Liverpool Pride took the decision to sever its ties with its main sponsor.

I suspect it's not to do with trans people as such but a growing public weariness with dipsticks who insist on telling everyone that sex isn't real, even when definition which protect lesbians, gay men and trans people as well as women rely on the identification and material reality of sex.

Now, are you going to comment on what's wrong with being bisexual and why you are so keen to be something of a 'puritan' and insist that lesbians that date dick are not bisexual. I'm very interested to hear your explanation....

Quite entertaining to see the TRAs stepping in to FWR arguing their stuff
Stating biological sex is real isn't a 'viewpoint' or 'belief': it's Fact
A biological male cannot be a lesbian.
And no cis thanks - its offensive and unnecessary

LOL - no there's not. No one needs to admit people to a parade when those people fundamentally disagree with the objectives of that parade.

You guys need to stop pretending that the Supreme Court judgment does things it really really doesn't do.

It didn't help because...the sponsor took a decision that Pride organisers regarded as being at odds with the values of the event, and they took the decision to sever ties.

Sounds pretty normal to me.

No. None of that is true.

First, I have repeatedly said that anyone can reject any sexual partner for any reason they wish. No one asks you who you're prepared to have sex with as a condition of participating in a pride parade. No one is excluded based on who they are or are not willing to have sex with.

Second, it is absolute nonsense to claim that I am in any way close to saying that lesbians who won't date or have sex with trans women aren't real lesbians. The only people on this thread trying to dictate who is and is not a 'real lesbian' are those who insist that lesbians who believe trans women are women can't possibly be real lesbians.

They only want sponsors who are willing to break the law. They spat their dummy out because Barclays are complying with the SC judgement.

Now pride can say that doesnt align with their values, thats fine, but they need to generate their own funding from now on. They can not expect private business to break the law as a condition of giving money away to them. Its madness, childish and a sure fire way to lose sponsorship and as a result events not to go ahead.

quite simply? the TRAs and trans-lobby have been too loud and too in everyone's faces/spaces and this has led directly to less acceptance of LGBT (but particularly the T) people.

You have nobody to blame but yourselves. The Collateral Damage is caused to the LGB so i blame the TRA for that.

You and your so-called Pride is a load of exclusionary tosh. If it weren't for the long hard battles the LGB fought the TRA would still be in their closets. Standing, indeed, on the shoulders of giants. Trampling them underfoot with nary a backward glance. That is what the T has done. Slow. Handclap.