Gender? Sex? Help me out please.

It's not about 'just not dating them'. And it's not about not usually fancying people with red hair, or beer bellies and then falling in love with a fat ginger bloke, or even arranging to meet to have sex with someone and finding that they are not really your usual type. It's about going on a site to meet a partner - possibly casually, arranging to meet them then discovering that they are not the sex that attracts you sexually, and then being abused and/or threatened for not having sex with them.

Most people are attracted to one sex or the other, although obviously bisexual people can be attracted to both. How hard can it be to realise that being expected to have sex with someone from the sex you don't fancy is unreasonable to say the least? Would those who seem to think that lesbians shouldn't 'be unkind' to men who want to have sex with them go ahead and do it anyway sooner than 'make someone feel bad about themselves'?

Another well expressed intelligent post Doodledog ???

Thank you, GG13

But who has said anyone should be expected to have sex with anyone else regardless of sex, gender sexual orientation or any other factor it should always be a choice. In fact I can't think why anyone would want to have sex if the other person was reluctant to do so. And if someone insists it is of course rape. Sexual orientation and trans status is irrelevant. No one should be intimidated and no one should be coerced.

Because I grew up with some of then

Galaxy

Are you saying lesbians and gay men should go back in the closet VS. Shhh dont mention that you are only attracted to women.

What?

No

VS you live in a very strange world.
I never asked my potential boyfriends if they were gay, straight, Roman Catholic, Protestant or Jewish so I never had to say I don’t date any of those groups. I had other reasons for not continuing to date e.g. personal hygiene, wandering hands etc. That’s personal choice not discrimination.
My GC don’t ask whether potential dates belong to any particular group so can’t refuse to date them on those grounds. Granted if my GD discovered the man she thought she was dating was a woman, she would back off, but that’s because she’s not Lesbian. They might continue as friends, but that’s different.
Did you ever really walk round saying who you don’t date? Did you ask potential dates if they belong to a particular group and then announce that you won’t date them because of that?

Mollygo

You have literally just said what I have been trying to say.

There is no need to say "I won't date (insert marginalised group)" you just don't do it

Indeed expressing your sexuality is bad. Gay men should not be allowed to say they wont date wonen.

VioletSky

Dickens I'm really trying here, I agree with you. I just don't feel it is necessary to actually say it.

Can you see the disconnect here?

I think what I can see is that you are attempting to frame the discussion according to what you think should / or shouldn't be said.

Yes, I could have been 'kind' and said what has repeatedly been said, that who you have sex with is your personal choice. Which we all know.

But I went a step further to illustrate a point about choice - to demonstrate that sexual preference is innate, almost instinctive, certainly not easily defined... and not necessarily in tune with one's cultural, societal or political outlook.

... and you disapprove. Which you are entitled to do. And if, as you say, you understand why I responded the way I did, then you will realise that I wasn't deliberately trying to be unkind. And perhaps I should have made it clear that the overweight men I was referring to are those who showed an interest in me... which is why I said maybe I didn't meet the 'right' overweight man.

And neither am I being obtuse. I know full well how you think these discussions should be carried out.

Galaxy

Indeed expressing your sexuality is bad. Gay men should not be allowed to say they wont date wonen.

Can't you see there is a difference between saying

"I date men"

"I won't date women"

They both express the same thing but one is a positive statement and one is a negative statement

This really isn't a hill I want to die on but, I'm just trying to make what I am saying clear because being understood and taking the time to understand what others actually mean... Matters

The original thought behind this was that saying "I won't date trans people" for no reason other than to shout that out comes accross as discriminotry when there is no reason to do so other than, apparently some trans person somewhere has said people should. So what if someone bonkers says that? They aren't relevant to any of us and we choose who we date.

So personally I think the answer is to stand in your own power and say just that

I get to choose who I date

trisher

But who has said anyone should be expected to have sex with anyone else regardless of sex, gender sexual orientation or any other factor it should always be a choice. In fact I can't think why anyone would want to have sex if the other person was reluctant to do so. And if someone insists it is of course rape. Sexual orientation and trans status is irrelevant. No one should be intimidated and no one should be coerced.

Transwomen (and TRAs) have said it. Loudly, aggressively and threateningly to lesbians who (surprise surprise) are not taken in by their female 'presentation' and so burst their AGP bubble.

I respect gay mens sexuality VS so I am very happy for them to say I dont date women. Any woman who is offended by that is self absorbed at best and homohobic at worst.

God one of these days I will type homophobic correctly

Galaxy

I respect gay mens sexuality VS so I am very happy for them to say I dont date women. Any woman who is offended by that is self absorbed at best and homohobic at worst.

I respect gay men's sexuality too and I've never ever in my years of working and socialising in gay places heard anyone say that...

The only time it would be appropriate would be if someone were trying to make an advance on them that was unwanted... they definitely should say that then but that's not the scenario we were talking about.

I'm sorry we couldn't find a way to understand each other properly. It's one of the saddest things about these threads really

Galaxy

God one of these days I will type homophobic correctly

... I had to laugh at that because it's so frustrating when you see the error and can't edit it.

Actually, if you hadn't pointed it out, I wouldn't have noticed - the eye / brain gets trained to see what it should see apparently. There was a 'test' on Facebook once with a badly spelled sentence - an error in every line - and some words with letters actually missing, but everyone could read it clearly because their brain filled in automatically the missing bits.

Not a lot of people know that!

Funny isn't it we always get on these threads allegations about what TRAs have said or transwomen have said usually without any evidence being presented. I think there probably are a few trans people who don't respect other people's boundaries. Just as there are men who don't and even some women who don't. We wouldn't say these people are representative of the whole group, so why are the objectionable trans people considered representative of them?

You don't get to label anyone other than yourself Rosie. That's just how it is

Yet it is ok for women to be labelled by others as cis women, pregnant people, bleeder, cervix-haver, chest feeder, non-men?

SueDonim

^You don't get to label anyone other than yourself Rosie. That's just how it is^

Yet it is ok for women to be labelled by others as cis women, pregnant people, bleeder, cervix-haver, chest feeder, non-men?

Nail firmly hit on the head…

trisher

Funny isn't it we always get on these threads allegations about what TRAs have said or transwomen have said usually without any evidence being presented. I think there probably are a few trans people who don't respect other people's boundaries. Just as there are men who don't and even some women who don't. We wouldn't say these people are representative of the whole group, so why are the objectionable trans people considered representative of them?

Children do that. If you mention any thing that X has done wrong, X and his/ her supporters immediately cry, “ He or she did it first” or “They did it too” as if that makes what X does any better, or excuses the behaviour.
On GN, when someone mentions that some trans use their trans persona wrongly, e.g. claiming to be a woman in order to cheat, or to access vulnerable females’ spaces, out comes the cry,
“Well there are bad men and bad women too!” as if that makes the ill-intentions of some trans towards the rights of females not so bad, or excusable.
It’s a childish excuse, that I often hear in school, but certain posters use it again and again.
The some trans and the non-trans who support them are doing far more to make life hard for the majority of trans than anyone else. Unless you think that cheating and taking something belonging to others is acceptable and trans or anyone else should not be criticised for doing it.

SueDonim

^You don't get to label anyone other than yourself Rosie. That's just how it is^

Yet it is ok for women to be labelled by others as cis women, pregnant people, bleeder, cervix-haver, chest feeder, non-men?

Exactly. Seems some are able to label other people, but others aren't even allowed to use the dictionary definitions. We truly are through the looking glass and Humpty Dumpty reigns supreme.
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

Nowadays it would be 'who is to be master' and it isn't women.

trisher

Funny isn't it we always get on these threads allegations about what TRAs have said or transwomen have said usually without any evidence being presented. I think there probably are a few trans people who don't respect other people's boundaries. Just as there are men who don't and even some women who don't. We wouldn't say these people are representative of the whole group, so why are the objectionable trans people considered representative of them?

Sigh. Here we go again.

No, we wouldn't say that 'objectionable people' are representative of any group, but we do have laws to stop them from doing 'objectionable things' and we did have safe spaces so that women and girls were not exposed to the objectionable people when vulnerable or in a state of undress.

If a man entered those spaces women could ask him to leave, and if he showed his penis they could have him arrested. Now, if he enters the spaces and says he is a woman, women who ask him to leave are called 'phobic', and are not supposed to react if he flaunts his 'lady penis' in front of their teenage daughter or young grandchild.

I don't think it's funny, by the way - it's bloody hard work.

Dr Hilary Cass, a retired paediatrician has published results from her investigation into the Tavistock ‘s Gender Identity Development Service.
Dr Cass is concerned at delays because the Tavistock is the only resource specialising in GIDS.
Keira - referred at 15, three interviews then drug therapy and finally a double mastectomy. She has now realised it was all a mistake, she’s reverted to living as a female but with her voice permanently lowered and her body changed.

Dr Cass is concerned that the long term impact of powerful hormone treatments.

In 2009 there were approximately 50 referrals annually. By 2020, it had increased to 2,500. Initially, mainly boys sought treatment, now teenage girls make up the majority.

One third of the whole have diagnosed autism, or other neurodiversity. A large proportion are looked after children.

This is an independent report from a respected paediatrician.

I’m waiting for the posters who dismiss those of us who express similar concerns to label Dr Cass transphobic, to suggest she would have been homophobic in the 50’s and 60’s

Galaxy

I respect gay mens sexuality VS so I am very happy for them to say I dont date women. Any woman who is offended by that is self absorbed at best and homohobic at worst.

I think the issue here is not with the fact, but the way it's presented.

Some think that your preference should only be coined in 'positive' language and, up to a point, I agree. But what do you say if an individual, for whatever reason, insists that gay men "should" date women? It seems slightly incredible, but I have throughout my life heard the odd comment to that effect, goodness only knows why - perhaps it's thought that dating a woman would 'straighten' them out or something. But faced with that kind of observation what else can you do but be brutally honest and say I don't date women because I don't find them attractive. Is that offensive to women? If it is, we're in trouble.

I tend to the conclusion that it's homophobic like you say - or a comment made by someone who just doesn't understand what homosexuality is. In which case, they need to get to grips with it, and enlightening such an individual with polite phrases like "I date men" doesn't cut it.

Dickens thanks, I'm not good at explaining myself sometimes I think.

It's like if there were 2 dating profiles and I was in the preferences section:

1. I'm looking for a man, 18 to 30, good sense of humour, enjoys being outdoors and physical activity, loves dogs and going on adventures.

2. I don't date women, old people, people who sit around watching tele, overweight people or people who like cats and are boring..

I know that's a out there but profiles like the second one exist and are very very off putting because they don't sound like nice people.