At least 24% of the thread posters on r/actuallesbians are male and 56% of the moderators are also male

strictly · 2020-12-29T12:42:22+00:00

I'm not attracted to the men attached to the dicks either.

strictly · 2021-01-23T08:35:36+00:00

Straight/bisexual men having a larger dating pool than lesbians is nothing new. But if they in their words are able to attract so many women they shouldn't really need to complain about transphobia when they fail to attract lesbians.

strictly · 2020-07-31T14:43:31+00:00

Of the female ones only a few seemed to be lesbians. Some had woman-identifying male partners, many posted on the bisexual subs, and many were trans themselves (enbies, female ones). And I didn't count those I didn't know, so I didn't count those who post on gendercynical as male unless there were other things indicating they were male as it was possible they could be female trans people or trans allies. And many male trans people on actuallesbians say they don't use trans flairs there to not get downvoted so I think some might have dedicated profiles where they only post actuallesbians and don't don't talk about trans stuff so the actual male percentage is probably somewhat higher than 24%.

strictly · 2021-01-31T11:00:34+00:00

Trans men are not female and that is the point.

They are female. I don't care if they acknowledge it or not as it doesn't change that they remain female. I am not going to lie for anyone, including these adult human females.

when trans men experience periods, they experience it as trans men

They experience it as female people as female people are the only one who can menstruate. Had they been men they would never have menstruated even once in their life as men never menstruate.

A period in and of itself can be uncomfortable for any individual, and being transgender adds another emotional layer to that.

Me hating getting periods has an emotional layer to it too as I hate knowing I can get pregnant. Female people can have all sorts of feelings (including wanting to be a man), and it doesn't make anyone a man.

GC would make a post about how trans women are evil, narcissistic, AGP

I wouldn't. Many adult human males who want to women are AGP though but that's just a fact, just like many adult human females who want to be men are AAP. I am not going to ignore facts just because it hurt their feelings.

strictly · 2021-01-31T10:47:12+00:00

Trans men accused them of co-opting their conversation.

The unfairness of men being allowed to be shirtless but not women has been a conversation a long time, long before some adult human females decided their nipples were more special than the nipples of other adult human females. So no, there was no co-opting done.

If trans women did this, GC would complain how trans women are oversexualized and don't care about trans men or are using trans men as emotional labor or are narcissists.

Give me a concrete example of this as I don't know what you are referring to.

Why are trans men allowed to have spaces away from trans women but not from cis women?

I don't really care where these particular adult human females have their spaces and using a space isn't obligatory for anyone so they have nothing to complain about there.

strictly · 2020-12-24T17:34:36+00:00

I just think we shouldn't be defining ourselves in relation to men at all.

Some bisexual women use the same reasoning regarding the use of the word lesbian, they think labeling female-attracted women differently based on their attraction/lack of attraction to men is defining ourselves in relation to men and therefore we should just have one big umbrella term for women attracted to women and not further division. I disagree with that reasoning because even if both bisexual women and lesbians are attracted to women we still have different experiences exactly because one is group is attracted to men and the other group isn't. Lesbians who have sexual history with men and lesbians who don't also have different experiences.

strictly · 2020-11-28T16:26:35+00:00

she went from self-hating lesbian victim of bullying to full-time sadomasochistic transsexual pornographer

She's into getting dick so she can't be a lesbian, she's bi if she's into both sexes.

strictly · 2021-06-13T19:24:01+00:00

I am homosexual and I cannot choose to be attracted to men just as I cannot choose to be attracted to horses or my siblings. It would be sexually revolting, and I don’t have anything against men/horses or my siblings platonically. I have met more men than women who share my hobbies etc, I have more male friends than female friends, and it doesn’t change the fact that it would be disgusting for me to be sexual/romantic with a man. That is the reason I don’t, I don’t want to rape myself, I just don't like men that way and it has nothing to do with how much in common I think I have with men platonically. I imagine heterosexual feel the same way as I do about the idea of being with the wrong sex, it just feels unnatural to them.

strictly · 2020-11-05T10:38:30+00:00

Yeah. I don't watch porn but if I did the gay male porn category would be the least interesting category for me as it would have even more men and less women than straight porn, I've no interest in watching men having sex. And if I am going to watch/read something romantic I prefer it to be about two women. I'm not that interested in straight love stories but I might be the odd one out in that gay male love stories are generally even less interesting to me because in a straight love story I might at least be able to relate to the person into the woman if she is interesting character even though I might not be able understand her side of the equation.

strictly · 2020-07-31T10:41:44+00:00

Yes, there are 22 moderators, but 4 of them are bots or dead accounts. Among the 18 remaining 10 of them are male according to their post history so 56% of the mods are male. I also checked the post history of over a hundred posters on actuallesbians to get a number of how many of the active users are male, and at least 24% are male (probabaly more though as I only counted those I was sure of).

strictly · 2021-07-02T19:04:09+00:00

Trans people do not identify with their biological sex.

And you shouldn't automatically assume non-trans people do either, that would be hypocritical.

strictly · 2021-07-02T17:51:22+00:00

Anyone who identifies with their birth sex is cis.

Knowing your sex is not an identity, otherwise all trans people would be considered cisgendered people of their biological sex, in fact trans people would be considered even more "cis" than other people of their biological sex as they more acutely aware of their biological sex than the regular person due to being so unhappy about it. So unless you are willing to call Chaz Bono a cisgendered woman for aware enough their sex to able to be unhappy about it it would be hypocritical of you to misgender non-trans people with false gender identities just for knowing the same biological facts about their bodies as trans people do.

Also, if it had been true we all had this cisgender gender identity you claim we have, it's strange indeed that we would ask you stop misgendering us with this false cisgender identity. Had we indeed had this gender identity you claim we have we would have felt validated by it, like you, and love being called this gender identity, but it's the opposite. Either people should be taken seriously when they talk about their gender identities, regardless of trans status, or nobody should be taken seriously they talk about their gender identities, regardless of trans status. It seems to me though that you think only trans people should be believed and that's hypocritical to me.

strictly · 2021-07-02T14:58:21+00:00

People who aren't trans are cis.

Cis is the short form of cisgender, aka having a gender identity at the same side of your sex, which requires having a gender identity in the first place. Many non-transitioners don't have gender identities. Someone who claims to be against against misgendering should respect the lack gender identities of those who don't have gender identities instead of misgendering them with false gender identities.

strictly · 2021-07-02T14:46:53+00:00

I can use public restrooms that match my gender

If public restrooms are gendered then most of us have no restroom matching our non-existing gender identities so trans people with gender identities would have more privilege than non-trans people without gender identities in a countries with gendered bathrooms.

I have the ability to walk through the world and generally blend-in, not being constantly stared or gawked at, whispered about, pointed at, or laughed at because of my gender expression.

I can reasonably assume that my ability to acquire a job, rent an apartment, or secure a loan will not be denied on the basis of my gender identity/expression.

Hollywood accurately depicts people of my gender in films and television, and does not solely make my identity the focus of a dramatic storyline, or the punchline for a joke.

I will not be harassed by the police or denied services at a bank or other institution because my legal sex does not match my gender presentation.

I can easily find role models and mentors to emulate who share my identity.

Here you seem to be talking about gender conformity and heterosexuality which shouldn't be conflated with not being a transitioner. Non-trans people can be discriminated against for their gender non-conformity just like trans people.

Strangers call me by the name I provide

Being called your name can only be considered privilege if you happen to like your name.

I have the ability to flirt, engage in courtship, or form a relationship and not fear that my biological status may be cause for rejection or attack, nor will it cause my partner to question their sexual orientation.

Here you seem to talk about being straight again but even straight people aren’t safe from being rejected by homosexuals of the opposite sex due to their biological status (aka being the wrong sex). Sexual minorities are used to being rejected for being the wrong sex though as most people are straight. It’s also not unusual for sexual minorities to have had straight-identifying partners who questioned their sexual orientation due to being attracted to someone of the same sex.

If I end up in the emergency room, I do not have to worry that one gender will keep me from receiving appropriate treatment, or that all of my medical issues will be seen as a result of my gender.

Are you saying people with gender identities risk getting their physical ailments dismissed as a result of their gender identity? If that’s case the case that seems like a risk you, as a non-trans person, would share with trans people gender identities as you also say you have a gender identity. Or are you talking about gender dysphoria? Then gender dysphoric non-trans people would encounter the same problem as gender dysphoric trans people.

My identity is not considered a mental pathology (“gender identity disorder” in the DSM IV) by the psychological and medical establishments.

In the DSM–5 it’s called gender dysphoria and people who meet the DSM-5 criteria of gender dysphoria would be considered to have mental pathology regardless if they are trans or not so that’s not a unique issue to trans people either.

People don't speculate that my gender identity is a result of abuse or trauma.

It’s not unusual for trans activists to portray non-trans people without gender identities as liars or bigots for not having gender identities so non-trans people are not safe from unfair speculations either.

I have the ability to not worry about being placed in a sex-segregated detention center, holding facility, jail or prison that is incongruent with my identity.

Only one of the those two things can be true for you, either you have the privilege of being placed in a sex-segregated detention or you have the privilege placed in a gender identity-segregated detention. If the former is true than the latter isn’t, as it’s more or less guaranteed a large bunch of the females in sex-segregated detention aren’t going to share your gender identity. And if you have the privilege of being put in sex-segregated detention then trans people have the same privilege, and neither of you have the privilege of being put in a gender identity-segregated detention, putting you both in the same position. Some countries do put trans people in prisons for the opposite sex though, denying people the right to sex-segregated detention, this arrangement might perhaps feel “congruent” with the identities of males prisoners who want to be around females prisoners (as many of these males don't really seem to care about the gender identities of these females, they just want access to female-bodied people), but for a large percentage of the female prisoners it's going to be incongruent as they never shared any gender identity with these males who call themselves women in the first place.

strictly · 2021-01-31T18:42:34+00:00

Biologically, yes. But socially they are men.

A man is an adult human male, that’s biological, not social. Having different social categories for men and women is what we call sexism, something I am against.

as long as they don't speak for me and cis women

If you have a gender identity we are not speaking for you, we are speaking for people who don’t have gender identities and therefor don’t want to be labeled with false cisgender gender identities.

Trans men should be able to discuss their oppression without cis women interfering.

We are not cisgender. I don’t mind you having a gender identity, your mind, your business, but we speak for our own minds and we don’t have gender identities. Regarding freeing the nipple, female nipples being seen as indecent is the business of every female person, not just the business of female trans people so every female person should be able to speak about it.

They experience periods as men.

Men are adult human males and never experience periods so no.

A trans person's experience with periods and a cis person's experience with periods are entirely different.

People are individuals so there are billions of different of emotions people can have regarding their periods so every individual’s experience with periods will be unique. The way female trans people talk about their experience with periods is relatable to me though. I don’t know your experience with periods but as you talked about periods being emotionally uncomfortable for trans people as a supposed difference between them and people with cisgender gender identities like yourself it seems you don’t find your own period uncomfortable so I would probably relate to your experience much less.

Many would though.

You made a specific claim that we would accuse male trans people for being evil if they were for freeing the nipple, and I said I wouldn’t call anyone evil for wanting to free the nipple. Now you are talking about something else and about people I’m not.

strictly · 2020-12-24T20:24:52+00:00

I define myself by my exclusive attraction to women.

And some see their exclusive sexual history with women as part of their background too. Recognizing that we have only had sexual experience with women, and the impact that might have had on our lives, doesn't mean we automatically define ourselves in relation to men either.

strictly · 2020-12-24T18:23:05+00:00

I just find this subject exhausting and over-talked about honestly

It can be nice to talk to other lesbians with the same background who can relate to that as lesbians with sexual history with men often (not always) assume those who lack sexual history with men must be more privileged and dealt with less homophobia which isn't always the case. If it's considered a triggering topic in lesbian sub I actually think we need more division, a space where lesbians with this background can talk about it without anyone feeling sad about it.

strictly · 2021-07-02T23:16:09+00:00

Cis merely means you aren't trans.

It doesn’t, otherwise you would be fine just calling us non-trans, instead you choose to refer to more narrow concept of having a gender identity at the same side of biological sex even though that’s not the case for us.

Trans people often say calling non-trans people people cisgender is like calling people straight. We don’t call non-homosexual people heterosexual indiscriminately though as not all non-homosexual people are heterosexual. It would be wrong of me to claim heterosexual just means “not homosexual” and call bisexual heterosexual, because heterosexual means more than not homosexual, it means being attracted to only the opposite sex. It’s the same way with cisgender, it implies way more than merely not transitioning.

strictly · 2021-06-13T22:59:40+00:00

But finding the bodies of female people "repulsive" is a whole other matter.

Peakingatthemonoment said that way, referring to sexually, not in general. I feel the same way about men. It doesn’t mean I think all men are objectively ugly, there are horses, cats and dogs who look cute to me too, yet I, like most people, find non-human animals sexually repulsive regardless of their cuteness.

Synonyms for repulsive from Oxford: revolting, disgusting, abhorrent, repellent, repugnant, offensive, objectionable, vile, foul, nasty, loathsome, sickening, nauseating, stomach-churning, stomach-turning, hateful, detestable, execrable, abominable, monstrous, appalling, reprehensible, deplorable, insufferable, intolerable, despicable, contemptible, beyond the pale, unspeakable, noxious, horrendous, heinous, atrocious, awful, terrible, dreadful, frightful, obnoxious, unsavory, unpleasant, disagreeable, distasteful, dislikeable, off-putting, uninviting, displeasing; ugly, as ugly as sin, hideous, grotesque, gruesome, unsightly, reptilian; North American vomitous; informal ghastly, horrible, horrid, godawful, gross, putrid, sick-making, sick, yucky, icky, fugly; British informal beastly; Northern Irish informal bogging; North American informal skanky; New Zealand informal huckery; literary noisome; archaic disgustful, scurvy, loathly; rare rebarbative.

I think all those things are natural things to feel regarding the idea of having unwanted sex with someone one isn’t attracted to. Usually I don’t think about of how it would be like to have unwanted sex, but if the topic comes up, I would say it would be repulsive. It’s not a criticism of the person, I imagine most women, as most women straight, would find it repulsive to be with me sexually, I don’t see that as a sign of disrespect.

strictly · 2021-01-18T13:37:28+00:00

I’m not into porn but if I had been into porn watching men having sex would be the most boring of porn. I don’t care much gay male love stories either as it’s hard to relate.

I’m quite unfazed by nudity and graphic sexual content in movies and TV series though, the sexual stuff seems so impersonal that it doesn’t come off as provoking, it's just bland like watching someone eat some pasta so I don’t really care, I just wait for the story to go on. But when a woman looks at another woman in a certain way in a scene, just one look, I sometimes feel all embarrassed and like I am watching the most risque thing ever, because to me that is not impersonal. I sometimes wonder if straight people watching straight stuff feel more of the former (desensitized as it's so common) or the latter (as they are straight so less impersonal to them).

strictly · 2021-09-14T22:31:22+00:00

However, I don't understand why LGB Alliance and Lesbian & Gay News (LGN) platforming homophobic people such as Julie Bindel and it makes me wary of their intentions.

I agree it’s problematic that the LGB Alliance is letting Julie Bindel speak for the LGB in this matter. Julie Bindel’s beliefs aren’t much different from trans activists as she also thinks sexual orientation can be unpacked. I think it would be better if a new organization for the LGB was started and for that organization to have a logical and internally consistent stance. That way they could educate people and make those who support woke homophobia realize sexual orientation isn’t something that can be unpacked and hopefully that would make people realize their good intentions would cause harm.

EDIT, missed your question at the end.

Why do LGB Alliance and LGN keep giving a platform to Julie Bindel, when she repeatedly makes homophobic and biphobic claims?

It's said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I don’t think the intention was to cause harm in itself but I think most organizations who cause harm don’t have that as their specific intention. I.e I think even most trans activists who want to lesbians to unpack our “genital preferences” are probably genuinely under the illusion that sexual orientation is something a person can “unpack”. I don't know why the LGB Alliance supports Julie Bindel, maybe they believe in the motto "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", or maybe they haven't done their research and thinks Julie Bindel is famous for being an outspoken lesbians instead of being an outspoken political lesbian.

strictly · 2021-07-12T00:33:02+00:00

There are gay women that say they are "into penises, but not into men, so trans women work"

Evidently not gay then.

gay men that say they are "into vaginas, but not into women, so trans men work".

Another example of someone not being gay. Your argument builds on the opinion of supposed gay people yet you don't mention anyone who is actually gay, just people who are attracted to the opposite sex.

What's wrong with "women can have penises, testes, sperm, etc,

Everything.

Why would the words "man" and "woman", "male" and "female" be reduced to sex organs and gametes?

They have never been reduced to that, the very definition you criticize clearly states that men and women are adult humans of a certain sex, aka also adult and human, not just floating sex organs, and the human factor is very encompassing, the exact opposite of reductive. Being adult and human is just not the distinguishing factor between between men and women, as both are adult and human. The distinguishing factor being reduced to sex organs and gametes is good thing though from an anti-reductivness perspective, had we declared the distinguishing factor to be anything else than that then that would have truly reduced men and women to a set of stereotypes. Imagine if we had declared the very encompassing human trait to be the distinguishing factor, then either men or woman would have to be seen as inhuman for that to be the distinction between them.

strictly · 2021-07-10T16:54:42+00:00

I think sexuality is more nuanced than simply being attracted to birth sex.

Your sexuality is more nuanced than simply being attracted to only one biological sex but current available data shows being of the wrong biological sex is a sexual deal breaker for the majority of people (including me) even though it doesn't happen to be the case for you.

strictly · 2021-07-02T20:27:03+00:00

Yes. I had one nightmare as a teenager though where I woke up married to a man and had children (I've never wanted kids). The dream me had no idea of how I could have let something like that happen and looked for a way commit suicide as that reality was too horrible for the dream me to live with. I was very relieved waking up and realizing none of it was true. It was the most nightmarish nightmare I've ever had, and I have had many normal nightmares with murders chasing me etc.

strictly · 2021-06-14T15:54:48+00:00

If one grows up in an isolated chamber, and has no contact with anyone else, they'll never develop any kind of sexual feelings.

I think most would still have a libido as that seems to be the case for non-human animals who grow up isolated from other members of their species, they still seem to have a libido and hump things. Also, humans’ natural state is to be in contact with other humans so looking at humans growing up in total isolation wouldn’t reveal anything natural about humans.

Anyone can fantasize about whichever sex they want.

Sure, I could force myself to sexually picture people I’m not attracted to and the result would be that I would be turned off instead of turned on. I could technically force myself to imagine sex with corpses too, and it would be disgusting. People can choose to imagine sexually disgusting things but they can’t choose to be into it. It would be like imagining drinking pee, sure, I can visualize that, but I can’t force myself to see pee as an appealing thing to drink.

Well, according to those criticising political lesbianism and its familiarities, it's because people claiming they can be attracted to both sexes are, in fact, bisexual, and that, as a fact also, not everyone is bisexual. Now, I disagree with this notion.

You are projecting your own capacity to be attracted to both sexes to people who are wired differently from you.

I find this sex repulsive, but nonetheless can't help myself from being attracted to them.

I don’t think people generally claim to be sexually repulsed by those they are sexually attracted to.

Just because someone can be sexually attracted to both sexes doesn't mean they are.

It wouldn’t matter how many sexual fantasizes I would force myself to have about men, it wouldn’t make men more attractive, it would just reinforce that it would be very sexually unappealing to be with a man.

strictly · 2021-02-07T11:42:56+00:00

It's actually because it's clear that they are romantically and sexually attracted to men, that it's obvious they are not gay.

They could be bisexual, into both sexes. A bisexual woman can lean heterosexual and have a narrow type in women. But if she has a type in woman then I wouldn’t call her straight.

Dating a woman is also fairly consequence-free. No live penis near the vagina or anywhere else. No pregnancy.

As a lesbian I wouldn’t want to be with a man even if he had had a penis amputation. I wouldn’t care how much being open to such men would increase my dating pool as I’m not into men so forcing myself to be with someone I don’t want to be with would just be pointless torture. I have assumed straight women feel like me regarding women as I feel about men, that it would be torture for them to be in a sexual/romantic relationship with a woman. I don’t think lack of pregnancy risk provides enough motivation for a woman to have sex with someone who is sexually repelling to her. If she doesn’t want to get pregnant she could choose to not have sex at all and thus avoid sex that would be repelling to her. And if she likes sex with women then I don’t think she can be considered straight, she would be bisexual.

strictly · 2021-01-31T19:04:20+00:00

Is anything transphobia?

If I have a company and fire someone just for taking cross-sex hormones that would transphobic. Trans people have the same human rights as other people so denying them these rights for being trans would be transphobic.

strictly · 2020-12-24T19:44:56+00:00

As a gold star, I agree that this subject is exhausting and over-talked about (and pointless)

Yeah but you are not all women with this background, like women who don't care if men are in the female locker rooms, they are not all women. Shouldn't we be able to decide for ourselves as individuals if we find that as something we would want to talk about? It shouldn't be forced of course so if you don't want to talk about it, then don't, but I still think others should be able to talk about having that background if they want to.

I'm glad I haven't met any lesbians in real life who want to sit around and chat about being gold star.

I personally would find it interesting to talk with others who can relate to not being able to relate when people talk about their history with men so we are not the same in that regard. It seems you see it as disrespectful in some way to talk about it when it's a neutral topic.

strictly · 2021-10-08T16:39:22+00:00

Everyone has a gender identity and all of us are either cis or trans.

We don't, you are not all people, it's not up to you to gender others against their will and dictate what inside their mind when you only have access to your own mind . I also thought transactivists like you usually claim to support agender and nonbinary people, you don't then, you will still go ahead and misgender them with false gender identities? If you don't have empathy for those without gender identities, how can you expect us to have empathy for those who have?

There are also many cis women who do not find gender identity/ trans women alienating

Only those with cisgender gender identities find it not alienating, as they have a gender identity like you, but many of us are not cisgendered and don't have gender identities. I don’t care if you put yourself in gender box, your mind, your choice, but you have no right decide for other people, who don't even share you cisgender gender identity, that they must be okay with being put in a gender box.

According to a PPRI study, 51% of men support requiring transgender individuals to use bathrooms corresponding to their assigned sex at birth, compared to 40% of women.

40% against is big number.

According to a poll, 59% of men support banning trans women in women's sports compared tp 46% of women. 29% of men oppose banning trans women in women's sports compared to 34% of women.

More people in both sexes supported the ban than opposed, not surprising.

They aren't females, but they menstruate and have PCOS. This is why we use inclusive language, to separate sex/gender from these things.

Had they not been of the female reproductive sex it would have been physically impossible which means they are of the female reproductive sex. Sex refers to sex, not gender: As you say yourself, sex and gender should never be conflated so when I use words for the two sexes I indeed refer to sex, not gender anything.

f we would use gender-neutral language, we would use the term "menstrual products" and not "female products."

Female is a sex, not gender so it’s always gender-neutral, unless you are genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

Having a vagina doesn't necessarily make you a woman. That's the point. It only means you have a vagina.

Woman just means you are an adult human of the female reproductive sex so any adult human of the female reproductive sex is a woman as that is the only thing it refers to. If it means anything else to you then you are genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

This is exactly why we use inclusive language.

Woman is inclusive to all adult humans of the female reproductive sex, unless you are a genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

Everyone has a gender identity.

No, they don’t. If you want other people to take your word for it when you say you have a gender identity then you should give other people the same respect when they say they lack one.

If someone is born female and identifies as a woman, they are a cis woman. Same with cis men.

Woman is not an identity to us, it’s simply being an adult human of the female reproductive sex, something none of us had any say in. If your don’t understand what we mean with woman translate it to “adult human AFAB” in your mind as that is the transactivist way of saying the same thing. You don’t call man-identifying females cisgender just for knowing they are “AFAB” so you shouldn’t do that others either. Knowing biology is not an identity.

When I talk about women's struggles, I include every woman who experiences that struggle.

What is a woman to you? A gender identity? Then it’s absolutely disrespectful of you to include anyone without a gender identity as that is msigendering. But if you exclude everyone without a gender identity you will have excluded people who have faced what we traditionally mean with women’s struggles, so your definition of women’s struggles would be different. It would refer to struggles some people face for having a certain gender identity. I don’t have a gender identity so I don’t know if people with gender identities, like you, tend to face certain issues when they come out as having a gender identity. Either way, if you think those with gender identities need to organize I don’t mind that, but it shouldn’t include anyone without a gender identity. Then we can have a different sex based organization for struggles we face for being of the female reproductive sex.

strictly · 2021-09-14T20:49:13+00:00

I agree that although she might be febfem-- might, she also just might be a politically-motivated straight woman!

I think it’s unlikely that she would be exclusively attracted to the opposite sex. She doesn’t seem to understand that straight women are straight, i.e she thinks it would be easy for a straight woman to just choose to be attracted to women, that doesn’t seem like someone who knows what it’s like to be exclusively attracted to males. She is also in a relationship with a woman and has mentioned having girlfriends as a teenager. I think a woman who is exclusively attracted to men but doesn’t want to be with one due to political motives would rather stay single as there is no homonormative pressuring straight women to be in lesbian relationships so I think it would be quite rare that a straight woman would choose to torture herself like that decade after decade.

strictly · 2021-07-17T17:03:52+00:00

Were those male rats really "pregnant"?

With sophistic word games it's easy to define anything as anything. We could define inanimate incubators for early born babies as "pregnant", and that would have more merit than calling the non-pregnant male rats "pregnant" as at least inanimate incubators wouldn't be claiming the credit of someone else’s body parts while incubating babies. It's the female rat that is pregnant, putting the pregnant part of the female rat inside a male rat doesn't make the male rat pregnant, it's makes the female rat pregnant inside a male rat.

Is it even true that "males can not get pregnant", and "females can not have penises"?

It’s true that flat-chested females can get pregnant and that males can have breasts. You should just call it what is instead of using misnomers, and then there is nothing confusing or strange about it.

Males in the past have been born with uterus

Are you talking about chimeras who are the result of a male and female embryo getting fused? Anyone producing ova is by definition at least part female.

Cis men can impregnate trans men.

Human males can impregnate human females, nothing new or strange about that.

Why isn't it possible to transfer a uterus, ovary, vagina, etc to the body of a male? Why isn't it possible to transfer penis, testes, etc to the body of a female?

We can as a hypothetical imagine taking the ovaries and uterus of a brain dead female human and putting it inside a male human and imagine a pregnancy. That would be the living body parts of the brain dead female human getting pregnant inside a male human, still not the male being pregnant. A female could attach the penis of a brain dead male to her body, she still doesn’t have a penis, she is just using the penis of someone else.

If only men can have testes and penises, and if testes and penises are only male organs, why is it that women with certain intersex conditions have testes and penises?

Anyone who produces sperm (by themselves, letting the living sex organs of a brain dead male person produce it doesn’t count) is by definition male. Anyone who produces ovas (by themselves, letting the living sex organs of a brain dead female person produce it doesn’t count) is by definition female. In a hypothetical case that someone would produce both sperm and ovas (with their own sex organs, not using the living sex organs of a brain dead person) then that person would be both male and female. So either you are saying there exists males who produce sperm, and we completely agree those who produce sperm are male, or you are inventing a dilemma by incorrectly claiming we would consider sperm producers as not being male. Non-males who produce sperm don’t exist simply because anyone producing sperm is already defined as male to begin with.

strictly · 2021-07-10T11:22:50+00:00

Should trans people disclose?

They should disclose if sex is planned.

Why or why not?

Because rape is wrong.

And if so, when (and why then)?

Before sex to prevent it being rape.

Is it a form of rape, sexual assault, or violation to not disclose? If so why and at what point (date? Kiss? Sex?)? If not, why not?

If the victim wouldn't have given informed consent it’s rape.

Is not disclosing sex comparable to not disclosing race, religion, marital status etc? Why or why not?

Being of the wrong biological sex is the greatest sexual deal breaker for the majority of people. Race, religion and marital status are less common deal breakers, and when it's a deal beaker these deal breakers are usually of smaller magnitude than being of the wrong sex (i.e I think most monosexuals who are opposed to being with married people would still rather have sex with a married person of the right sex than a unmarried person of the wrong sex if forced to pick). With less common deal breakers I think the onus is on the one with the less common deal breaker to reveal their deal breaker, and I think ignorance can be claimed if the sexual partner simply didn't know about the deal breaker. Ignorance cannot be claimed regarding biological sex being a deal breaker as that is the default, so if we are aware that we typically pass as the opposite sex we should assume no consent exist until we have disclosed our biological sex and the potential sexual partner has given informed consent.

Either way, any time you have reason to suspect the potential sexual partner wouldn’t give informed consent to sex with the facts on the table it’s violation to have sex with that person while withholding the information that would made them say no. When you had such suspicion it’s morally indefensible to claim you had right to violate the victim just because they forgot to mention their deal breaker, nobody deserves being sexually violated, not even forgetful, naive or gullible people. And if the victim feels raped after the perpetrator intentionally sexually violated the victim the violation was obviously traumatic enough to be considered rape. I.e don’t think someone with an identical twin can at night enter the room of the twin’s spouse and have sex the twin’s spouse well aware the twin’s spouse is under the impression it’s their spouse and claim afterwards the twin’s spouse deserved it for forgetting to specify not wanting sex with the wrong twin.

Is it safer for trans people to disclose or not to? Why or why not?

I think it’s usually safer to abstain from rape attempts when you are scared that the potential sexual partner might get violent as an intended rape victim would have more reason to be pissed than someone who is given the chance to give informed consent. Fear of violence is not a valid excuse to rape someone in my opinion, disclosing or raping are not the only two options, breaking it off without neither disclosing nor raping is better when you fear the one you want sex with.

strictly · 2021-07-02T15:16:37+00:00

You are correct, but cis identities are depicted accurately.

If non-trans people are depicted as all being "cis" then they are obviously not depicted accurately, and it's leads to non-trans people being misgendered in masse with false gender identities, especially by trans activists. being falsely depicted as having a false gender identity is not privilege, it's something that makes people feel bad. Only people who indeed say they have gender identities should be seen as having gender identities.

strictly · 2021-02-01T08:52:06+00:00

Most of us don't define ourselves by our biology.

I don’t define myself by my biology either but I know I have one. Being an adult human female is just a fact, nothing else.

This was about trans men being allowed to show their nipple

The nipples of female trans people are not targeted more than the nipples of other female people so there is no need for a conversation just about about the nipples of female trans people when all female people have the same problem. TikTok is not a trans exclusive space either.

Some men experience periods.

Anyone experiencing a period is by definition not a man so no.

a trans man wrote an article about how getting his period made him feel like less of a man. I don't know any (cis) women who say getting their period makes them feel like less of a man.

Periods not inducing manly feelings is pretty common overall and not limited to trans people. Women rather wanting to be men is not that unusual either.

I always dreaded my period, but I was never devastated and distraught over this.

Periods are physically a nuisance but it’s not the reason I hate it, my first period was traumatic as it made me aware of having a female reproductive system and I hated knowing that. It seems you think a trans person’s emotional experience is always entirely different from a the experience of a non-trans person. If that was true I would believe female trans people never dislike being female, as I dislike being female and female trans people supposedly always feel entirely different, aka, they must in contrary like being their biological sex lot.

My problem is GCs constantly complain about trans women talking over trans men but talk over trans men themselves.

Aren’t you doing the same thing then? You complain about GCs talking over female trans people despite you not being a female trans person yourself. So either it’s okay to complain about how other groups treat female trans people despite not being a female trans person (including GC) or it’s not okay for anyone (including you).

r/FTM made a thread about how happy they were that the sub was banned

I bet male trans people did a thread celebrating the ban too.

From my research of that sub alone, there are more threads complaining about GCs than threads complaining about trans women.

You seem to think I would find that surprising. I am not GC because I think female trans people support GC, I don't really care if they support GC or not. I'm GC because I am critical of gender. I am GC because I don't think sex can be changed and it goes against my moral principles to lie about trans people being the opposite sex.

strictly · 2021-01-23T08:26:04+00:00

My parents are Jehovah's witnesses so I haven’t introduced any girlfriends to them. They don’t approve of my homosexuality as it's against their religion.

strictly · 2021-01-17T04:48:43+00:00

I have assumed they are using new terms to refer to whether they prefer receiving or giving regarding oral sex etc. Most like both giving and receiving though even if they have might like one thing more than the other. Those who only like receiving or giving are quite rare (pillow princesses and stones) but not unheard of. I'm a stone so I have to be open about that when dating as that is not what most women are looking for. I have no desire to shame or put down anyone though, I'm just not into receiving.

strictly · 2020-12-28T23:13:02+00:00

I'm talking about sex dysphoria (not "gender dysphoria" or at least depending on how we're defining "gender" as)

I am dissatisfied with gender stuff too so it's both.

Either a dissatisfaction with your sex organs or overall sex?

I'm think most female trans people who want to be men nowadays are autoandrophilic and I'm not autoandrophilic so I don't experience the same type of sex dysphoria they do, but otherwise yes.

Did you have it before learning about transsexual/transgenders

I wanted to be a boy since I was four years old, I found out about transitioning in my teenage and trans stuff become mainstream later than that.

You are only asking about sex dysphoria but I will mention the gender stuff quickly too as it's somewhat intertwined. As a kid I saw that everything fun was associated with men and everything boring with women. My conservative parents didn't tell me women could do the fun things too, they told me I would change in puberty and start liking the boring things. I have known ever since I was a little kid that I didn't want to marry a man or have children and my parents told me that would change too in puberty. I was genuinly scared that puberty would replace me with a new person, thankfully puberty "just" changed my body in ways I hated, not the whole me.

Growing breasts and getting my period was awful. Growing body parts designed to attract men and feed babies repulsed me. I hated knowing that my menarche meant I was fertile, that the biological purpose of me was to be a baby machine. I felt so humiliated and repulsed by the purpose of my body and dressed in over-sized clothes to hide it. I have never had any desire to have a penis (not into penises) but I hated having a vagina as I knew the purpose of a vagina was for it to be penetrated by penises and pushing out the resulting babies. I also hated seeing my younger brothers growing taller and stronger than me. I hated that women were designed to be physically weaker, slower and smaller than men, it seemed extremely unfair to me. I couldn't see one single that was better about being female, it was all bad. I asked women if they knew any advantage at all about being female and they brought up all the negative stuff like the ability to get pregnant, attracting men, being weaker so men can do things for you as positives (each to their own, I still see these things as negatives). The expectation to like what I dislike just made it more humiliating, the expectation to be so stupid that one would even prefer being physically weaker.

I was a very angry child and a very angry teenager, so very very angry about the fact I had to be female when it sucked to be one. I wanted get rid of my uterus and the breasts as soon as I become an adult to give the universe the finger for giving me these humiliating body parts in the first place. I found out about transitioning so I started looking into it and initially believed in the masculine brain theory. I knew transitioning couldn't make anyone male in the real sense though but I saw females who seemed to actually believe they were somehow male and many of them didn't seem particularly masculine. Not being able acknowledge being female seemed more like wishful thinking than having the wrong brain (and I was a judgmental person at the time). The literature at the time also said most female trans people were gynephilic but many seemed to be androphilic, that too made me doubt the science. I thought of transitioning as way of becoming physically stronger, getting rid of body parts I didn't like the purpose of and passing as male so I would be treated in a way I liked better, but lying about being male seemed like a weak thing to do, like I admitting to myself I'm too weak to face reality as it is. Around that time I also started realizing I can still have a good life as human even though I am female (as everything isn't just about sex one is) and that there was no obligation to like being female just for being one.

Do you still have it?

I'm a lesbian which means I am attracted to the same body parts I don't like having so my perspective have changed to deal with that contradiction. I very much like that women exist so I naturally don't think it's humiliating for other women to be women. Even so, to be okay being female I need to feel my mind has the human freedom to dislike it. I need to have freedom to dislike having the physical capacity to get pregnant. I need to have the freedom to dislike having the physically weaker body model. Having the freedom of the mind to dislike what I dislike makes not me not angry, some things sucks things and that's okay as long I don't have to pretend to like it. The cisgender label trans people want to assign everyone with is like saying female people must not only deal with their biological reality, they must also agree to capitulate their minds and illogically love everything they hate. That makes me angry as it shouldn't be up to trans people to decide what others feel about their biology.

strictly · 2020-12-24T20:01:31+00:00

I don't see it as disrespectful.

Hopefully that clears up all your false assumptions.

If I hear two people talk about knitting and I tell them the subject is exhausting, over-talked about and pointless then I wouldn't act surpised if it seemed like they thought I judged them. But I will take your word for it.

strictly · 2020-12-20T03:42:03+00:00

So, it sorta seems like the overwhelming majority of lesbians who use reddit-like ecosystems prefer a trans-inclusive environment than...this.

As they ban the lesbians evidently no, as the userbase isn't lesbians (as they get banned). It's the males and the bisexual females hanging out there who prefer that male-inclusive environment, which is natural they are male or male-attracted. You don't see the same on active lesbian spaces.

Especially if the goal is avoiding discussing trans people

lol they talk about male trans people all the time there (as many are male and trans themselves) so that discussion isn't avoided.

If I want to talk about actually being a lesbian, there isn't a lot of productive discussion here...

This isn't a lesbian sub so I don't know what you expected. When I want to talk to lesbians about lesbian things I naturally go to the active lesbians spaces (emphasis on the lesbian, not active bisexual and male spaces like "actuallesbian") not lgbdropthet which isn't specifically about lesbians.

strictly · 2020-12-20T01:34:31+00:00

Given that there are only 15-20 users online at any give time

Logged-in users, not users like on reddit where all users are counted. Most people browsing are most likely not logged-in (I usually don't log-in unless I have a specific reason) so if saidit had used the same counting system as reddit the number would be higher.

strictly · 2020-12-20T01:18:26+00:00

Are they banning women for being same-sex attracted?

I don't think they care if the woman is bi, but if she is homosexual (a lesbian) then yeah, "actuallesbians" see that as a bannable offense.

They have linked policy on males and dating which says "Things which are transphobic: Not being interested in, or not dating, a specific woman because she is trans." So they label not being sexually interested in males as transphobic. And transphobia (aka female homosexuality) is against their rules.

strictly · 2020-11-28T19:18:31+00:00

Again: is/was she really?

She's bragging about getting dick and it seems odd to brag about something one would be repulsed by. It's more likely to me that she does sees dick as something worth getting/is into dick as she brags about it.

All we know is that Buck/Susan grew up as a lesbian

If Buck is into dick as she presents herself then she grew up as bisexual, not as a lesbian. I think unless Buck's Angel sexual behavior would indicate otherwise (i.e refused to do scenes with men) we should take Buck Angel's words for it when Buck Angel indicates being sexually into men.

fell into a lifestyle of self-destructive behavior, married a woman, divorced that woman, married another woman and finally divorced her as well. Silly me for making the assumption that Buck/Susan might be... a lesbian.

Lesbians are not the only women who are into women and bisexual women can be self-desctructive too.

strictly · 2020-11-13T03:20:24+00:00

Trans people say they identify as the opposite sex.

Humans have the phychological capacity to identify as anything.

Cisgender people are people whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth.

Have the people you refer to as cisgender verbally confirmed to you that they see their natal sex as a gender identity?

And they say everyone's gender identity is valid

It's not uncommon to see trans people disrespecting and putting false gender identity labels upon people who don't have gender identities.

Can GC explain what is wrong with what I said above?

I don't know you particular beliefs but many genderists talk as if we, the opposing side, agree with a genderist redefintion of "man" and "woman". If a "man" is gender identity to you, then you refer to a different thing than we do with "man", the same with woman, your "woman" and our "woman" are two differnet things. With woman I mean some like Buck Angel (an adult human female), with man I mean someone like Blair White (an adult human male), it has nothing to do with gender or identity.

Why do you say sex is not assigned at birth?

Nobody assigned Caitlyn Jenner with a penis at birth, male Caitlyn Jenner already had one. Nobody assigned Caitlyn Jenner with the sperm to father 6 children, Caitlyn Jenner's male body developed that naturally.

Why do you say people can't be born in the wrong body?

What do you mean with "wrong"? Can a body be "right"? I don't think a body be either as that would assume a brainless sperm with a y or x chromome is a moral agent who can do something morally wrong/right by merging with a egg.

Can you explain why gender identity does not exist?

It clearly does exist in some people just like cat identies exist in some people.

Don't cisgender people identify as/feel like they are the sex they were assigned at birth?

Trans people is probably the group who feel like their natal sex the most as they tend to be so acutely unhappy/dysphoric about it, had trans people not felt like their natal sex they wouldn't remember to take cross-sex-hormones. Regarding adopting natal sex as a gender identity, are you asking if cisgender people are cisgender or if non-trans people are cisgender? Only the subgroup who have adopted their natal sex as a gender identity are cisgender, the rest don't have gender identities at all.

They mean a dog or a fish also have a gender identity

I disagree, I don't think a dog or a fish has a concept of what gender identity is. They might know their natal sex the way trans people know their natal sex but as trans people evidently don't see their own knowledge of natal sex as gender identity, knowledge can't count as gender identity in animals either.

Is it okay to invalidate someone's gender identity?

It's wrong to lie about people's gender identies, speaking biological truths about sex is not invalidating gender identities though. Calling Caitlyn Jenner a man/he for being male can't be invalidate Caitlyn Jenner's gender identity as man/he refer to sex, not gender identity, to invalidate Caitlyn Jenner's gender identity we would have to lie about which gender identity Caitlyn Jenner has.

strictly · 2020-09-27T21:01:17+00:00

Repulsion is a physiological response.

It's a way of saying unwanted sex is unwanted so you avoid it.

I used to be repulsed by snot and poop until I had to take care of young children.

I think your actions would probably reveal you are still repulsed (washing your hands after touching poop, wanting a hygienic partner etc, but I might be wrong).

I’m not repulsed by penises... I wouldn’t want to put one in my mouth.

Which one is it? You wouldn't mind it? (aka not repulsed) Or would it be a negative experience? (aka you are a bit repulsed).

I am not excited about them. I could probably have sex with one. It would be disconnected sex, but that’s my choice.

Why would you willingly choose to have sex you don't want? If you don't want the sex then there is no reason to have it. Anyway, you talk about women who pursue sex with men because they find sex with men lukewarm enough to be worthy of pursuing. So they enjoy sex with men, and pursue it because they enjoy it, they just enjoy sex with women more. That is being bisexual with a preference for women in my eyes.

strictly · 2020-09-27T15:41:52+00:00

My point is that either everyone is bisexual or something else is going on.

I don't understand why saying someone who repeatedly seeks out lukewarm sex with men is bisexual would implicate everyone is bisexual. Self-accepting lesbians don't seek out sex with men as we don't want it to begin it with.

I don’t think this rigidity fits in with reality. And there is a lot of science to back up this fluidity idea.

Bisexual women outnumber lesbians but that doesn't mean everyone is bisexual or fluid.

The whole point here is while a lesbian could (and often are) with men, it is a lukewarm situation.

I don't see how it could be a lukewarm situation for a lesbian instead of a repulsive one. If I only could have sex with the opposite sex for the rest of my life I would choose not have sex at all as no sex would be infinitely better than raping myself. I know lesbians who forced themselves to have sex with a man before accepting their sexual sexual orientation due to internalized homophobia. This was something they regret and did despite their repulsion, not some lukewarm thing they pursue when they have a dry spell.

Do you get the distinction I am making?

The distinction seem to be between bisexual women who are equally attracted to both sexes and bisexual women who prefer women. I consider neither of these groups lesbians.

strictly · 2021-07-19T00:00:46+00:00

I think masculinity and femininity are sexuality.

I am also curious about what you mean with this. Are you saying it sexually arouses a masculine/feminine person to display masculinity/femininity? Or are you saying masculine and feminine people use their masculinity/femininity to attract sexual partners? Or do you mean we are sexually attracted to people displaying masculinity/femininity? Or perhaps a combination of all three?

Masculinity and femininity follow the same pattern.

I don’t think gender roles are necessary for the development of androphilai/gynephilia. I think androphilia/gynpehilia can end up developing in different ways depending on what it hooked into during development. In a society without gender roles there would only be biological sex for androphilia/gynephilia to hook into as that would be the only thing associated with the each sex. We don’t live in a world without gender roles though so for some people androphilia/gynephila might have hooked into everything associated with each sex, including cultural things. Or in some cases it might have only hooked into the cultural things but not the biological sex itself, making the person attracted to masculinity/femininity regardless of the sex of the person.

Is your theory that most people would end up asexual in a hypothetical genderless society?

It's emergent from human nature so you can't abolish it.

I think there might be a biological mechanism making people on average more likely to imitate members of their own sex as there has been a few of studies pointing in that direction. But that wouldn't make gender roles inevitable per se.

strictly · 2021-07-18T22:25:36+00:00

I don't see how this is not the case that everyone is already both male and female when every cell has the potential to become sperm or egg.

I think weightlifters who choose to use a crane to lift more weight than the other the contestants should be declared the winners in the weightlifting olympics. I think humans should get the credit for being the fastest animal on land and on air as we can outspeed falcons with planes and cheetahs with cars.

We could go further, why is it that a heart is different from a kidney, an arm, an eye, a brain, etc, when in natural embryonic development, the same stem cells differentiate to give rise to all mentioned organs? Every organ comes from the same origin, the same stem cells, so why do we consider them to be different from one another? Why do we consider there be a "heart", "eye", etc separate from each other, that are their own things?

I agree, I think doctors during a heart transplantation should be allowed to replace the heart with a liver if the hospital has an overflow of livers. No need to inform the patient of this decision in advance, heart and livers have the same origin as you say so it doesn’t make sense for the patient to see hearts and livers as their own things, it’s not like patient is going to die for it.

strictly · 2021-07-17T19:50:17+00:00

Are you saying CAIS can be either male or female

CAIS can exist in females too, just as CAH can exist in males, but you are probably not talking about them as they are dyadic females and males.

Males with CAIS often have a shallow vagina, undescended testicles and no ovaries. They look female but they are not female.

CAIS identify as women

Woman isn't an identity so identity can't make anyone a woman.

I want good articles

How do you expect such articles to be published when any such article would be censored/banned for not calling woman an identity?

strictly · 2021-07-17T19:17:00+00:00

It still was, there was just misunderstanding, as doctors were not qualified enough for this.

You mean this has been debunked? https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/16/4/717/3114050 I would be interested in seeing the study of the debunking.

strictly · 2021-07-17T18:07:58+00:00

That, and there are men with, for example, persistent Mullerian duct syndrome that have a uterus and fallopian tubes: https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/persistent-mullerian-duct-syndrome/#:~:text=Persistent%20M%C3%BCllerian%20duct%20syndrome%20is,which%20are%20female%20reproductive%20organs%20.

If there is ova production then that person is female by definition regardless of chromosomes. Usually chromosomes indicates sex unless ova production/sperm production show otherwise. But we are talking about intersex cases here, and they are called intersex for a reason.

So females can have penises and testes, and males can have uteruses ...?

Dyadic females never have penis/testes. Dyadic males never have uterus. In intersex conditions sex organ can look in-between, so I don't know if what they call a penis look exactly like the penis of a dyadic male or if it's very masculinized clitoris they call a penis, but intersex people are not dyadic so they are not examples of how it is like for dyadic people. Either way, someone who produces ova would be female by definition, and someone who produces sperm would be male by definition. And most of these "chicks with dicks" are just regular dyadic men with breasts capable of producing sperm (or could if they had not been taking estrogen).

Why would testes and penis be male-only organs when females can have them too?

Testes and penis are male-only organs for dyadic people, and the great majority of trans people are dyadic, not intersex.

strictly · 2021-07-06T23:49:43+00:00

The majority of people in this world identify as men or women

Knowing your biological sex is not an gender identity (otherwise all trans people would be considered cisgendered people of their biological sex) so you need proof that all these people refer to gender identity and not biological sex when calling themselves men and women. You have no such proof so it's disrespectful of you to make baseless assumptions about their gender identities when you don't know what they are talking about. To know if man calling himself a man can be used as proof of the man being cisgendered you first need to ask the man to define the word man, only in cases the man defines it as a gender identity it can used as proof of admitting to have a gender identity. In many cases the man is just referring to being biological adult human male and that's it. To translate it to terminology you understand, the male is just admitting being "amab", and you don't use trans people calling themselves "amab" as proof of them actually being "cisgendered" and having amab as their gender identity.

strictly · 2021-06-02T13:57:58+00:00

that site is using an example of a specific person who most likely does not want his case to be used as an example by transphobes

J.K. Rowling is an example of specific person who most likely does not want her case to be used as an example by those who call her TERF but trans activists use her as an example of "bigot" anyway. People will be used as examples by the opposing side, that's just how it is.

Besides the blatant misgendering

To misgender the speaker needs to claim a person has a gender identity the person doesn't have, which requires the speaker to use gender identity based definitions for the words involved in the supposed misgendering. This makes it very unlikely that any misgendering happened as would require the speaker to be a genderist, aka not gender critical.

To be an ally to a group, you have to listen to actual members of that group, not impose your own ideas.

You call us bad allies but I don't get why you consider us allies to the current trans activism in the first place. We are on the opposing side so you shouldn't really expect us to act like allies. It would be like me complaining about trans activists being bad allies to GC for not actually listening to us instead of imposing their own ideas, it wouldn't make sense for me to expect trans activists to act like allies. I believe female people, even those who identify as men, should have the same female rights as all other females, but that doesn't make me an ally to current trans activism. It's like how I believe all female people, even the conservative ones against abortion, should have the same right to get abortions should they choose to, and that doesn't make me an anti-abortion ally either.

At the very least they could have been respectful by using he and Mr.

There is no moral duty to lie about trans people just because they like being lied about.

strictly · 2021-06-02T00:11:53+00:00

I don't trust sources that purposefully misgender trans people.

Misgendering requires using gender definitions as one cannot misgender someone without first referring to gender identity. Do you have quote proving that this source states that they consider male and female gender identities? Because if they refer to sex they can by definition not misgender, only mis-sex, and calling female people female is correctly-sexing, not mis-sexing. But even if this source had mis-sexed this female person as "male" then I don't think this person would have minded it as many trans people have being mis-sexed as a goal for them.

strictly · 2021-05-02T00:36:34+00:00

Children can't consent but I believe in body autonomy for adults, their body, their choice. Demanding others to lie is not within their right though as the minds of others is not the trans person's body. I think societal no tolerance for lies would make transitioning seem less fun for many, if they can't demand others to call them the opposite sex and are rightfully reproached by society as a whole for demanding that then many probably wouldn't bother taking cross-sex hormones even without a ban.

strictly · 2021-04-30T13:27:53+00:00

I actually compiled a list of all trans-exclusionary lesbian subreddits

You named three subreddit with "cis" in the name so these subreddits are only for the few lesbians who have gender identities. It's clear that reddit is against lesbians being free. So if you see this subreddits as "proof" that reddit allows female homosexuality, reddit only allows female homosexuality for lesbians who agree to adopt this "cisgender" gender identity as trans activists deems it transphobic of non-trans people not adopt sex as a gender identity. Banning lesbians for not having gender identities is wrong, just as it wrong to ban lesbians for being lesbians, the mind should be free too.

And personally I don't really care if a lesbian sub is trans-exclusionary, I care about it being male-exclusionary. I'm fine with lesbians who identify as "non-binary" etc using lesbian spaces (some of them probably identify like that as that is the only way to not have gender identity and not be labeled a bigot by trans activists, or because they have bought into the false trans narrative that all non-trans people would have gender identities). If someone is a homosexual female (aka a female who is exclusively attracted to those of the same reproductive sex) she is a lesbian, gender identity has nothing to do with that.

strictly · 2021-01-19T04:34:35+00:00

I'm curios but why don't you like to be touched? It's that a control thing or something else?

Control over my own body perhaps, I’m not certain. I’ve never had any fantasies about receiving and the idea of receiving anyway makes me uncomfortable. So the way I see it, I simply choose to not consent to things happening to my body that makes me uncomfortable, and as I’m only with women who are sexually compatible with that arrangement it’s a non-issue. I think stones are stones for different reasons though so my case shouldn't be seen as universal.

strictly · 2021-01-04T18:58:04+00:00

Yuck. Love the stereotypes.

I’m not sure if the autoandrophilic females who identify as lesbians to feel more like men are all doing it due to gender stereotypes though, aka wanting to feel masculine, or because it makes them feel more “male” (they might role-play having male genitals), it probably depends on the types of autoandrophilia they have, as auto*philia can be behavioral, anatomical etc.

I think Michael Bailey/Blanchard have said that HSTS in males and females ought not to be seen as mirror images. Autandrophilia and autogynephilia should probably not be seen as mirror images either. It’s worth noting though that Michael Bailey/Blanchard are skeptical about the existence of autoandrophilia but they are skeptical about paraphilic females in general. I think they are more recently open about the idea of autohomerotic females though. In my eyes autoandrophilic females definitely exist and are not so uncommon either (too much evidence for it and I’ve talked to autoandrophilic females) and I think autohomeroticism is a form of auto*phila, not an entirely different thing. Blanchard’s clinical experience is from an earlier time though and autoandrophilic females transitioning seem to be a more recent pattern than autogynephilic males transitioning so he might not have met that many autoandrophilic females during the time he was active. Also Blanchard is gay, and that was probably why he could recognize autogynephilia wasn’t a typical homosexual male phenomena (other researchers at the time seemed to see autogynehilia as something that probably was common in feminine homosexual men). But Blanchard is a man, so he would have other blind spots regarding paraphilic women.

I suspect some patterns in autoandrophilia is somewhat the reverse of autogynephilia. Some autogynephilic men who were previously only interested in women find themselves interested in men after transition, as being with men makes them feel more like women. I think some autoandrophilic women seek out relationships which makes them feel more like men pre-transition but are more likely to indulge in their other attractions after transition when they feel more comfortable with how they think they are seen. I think cross-sex hormones usually reduces the the sex drive in men but increases the sex-drive in women. So maybe autogynephilic male transitioners who have their sex drive reduced are more likely to seek out sex for gender euphoric reasons (strong auto*philia probably works somewhat similar to a sexual orientation, having romantic component, not just a sexual one). Androphilic females who take hormones increasing their sex drive might instead find it harder to resist acting on their previously dysphoria-inducing attractions to men.

I’m a curious person so I read many studies regarding homosexuality due to being homosexual myself. But then I started reading about adjunct topics too as I wanted to see the overall patterns and correlations to understand things better. I joined a place for such discussions which had self-aware dysphoric auto*philic members (who were interested in topic due to their auto*philia). I was on the old debate sub on reddit too and trans people who described their dysphoria in the same as self-aware dysphoric auto*philic people describe theirs usually trash-talked auto*philic people as trenders who can’t feel dysphoria. I think there are many misconceptions about auto*philia like which makes auto*philic people not realize they are auto*philic (seeing dysphoria as proof they can't be auto*philic). Most people with auto*philia have a weak form of it and usually don’t wish to be the opposite sex. Those who have a strong form of auto*philia can be very dysphoric though (extreme cases where dysphoric people have cut off their off genitals themselves where probably auto*philic, not HSTS).

I also think the stigmatization of auto*philia isn’t really doing any side any good. It leads to people not wanting to recognize their auto*philia due to the stigma and I think non-aware dysphoric auto*philic people are those who are likely to spread the idea of universal gender identities as they mistake their auto*philia as a gender identity thing and assume their own experience of auto*philia (gender identity) is universal in the sex they want to be. Gender non-conforming homosexual transitioners who buy into the idea of gender identities might see gender identity as a disposition for masculinity/femininity instead which also leads to problems.

strictly · 2021-01-03T23:34:09+00:00

One fascinating comment

There were two other comments like that (which you probably already saw too):

I was a lesbian that was into yaoi and wanted to identify as bi (no idea why) but was insistent on not being attracted to men. Can't really explain why being a guy that's into other guys makes so much more sense in my mind than being a girl that's into them, but it does, so I'm bi now lol

Oof all relatable! Was a lesbian into yaoi in high school and I felt awful for it. Years later, my SO came out as a trans man, and I realized "oh shit... I too am man" Now very happily in a gay relationship with another man. Yaoi called it. Life is weird.

It's not uncommon for bisexual autoandrophilic women to identify as lesbians pretransition.

although it is rare, so you could have a lesbian autoandrophile (I'm forgetting the exact word for it)

Sexual orientation is the attraction pattern not the identity in my opinion and they all had bisexual attraction patterns. They liked yaoi, wanted to be with men, identity as bi now so they are clearly bisexual. It's seems quite common for dysphoric autandrophilic females to fear being seen as women by men thus they don't want to be with men "as women" and some also see being a lesbian as the way to be "the man" with a woman. When they transition they feel comfortable to follow their attractions to men as it's no longer dysphoria-inducing to them.

Lesbians are not attracted to men in the first place, it's doesn't depend on the state of our bodies, had we been men we would still only be attracted to women.

strictly · 2020-12-24T21:05:56+00:00

don't assume that it's because they are offended, jealous, bitter or whatever

And I don't. I only assume someone is offended by it when they say the subject is exhausting/over-talked/pointless (or something to that effect) as someone who simply doesn't care about the topic wouldn't say anything (if a topic simply disinterests me I just don't engage in it).

strictly · 2020-11-28T20:13:28+00:00

I see your point but tbh I still find it very concerning that someone's sexual orientation can completely shift while taking testosterone ...

I see it as shift in the male/female preference of bisexual people, not a shift from lesbian to straight. Some bisexual people report having cycles where they are more into women and cycles where they are more into men.

strictly · 2020-11-28T17:30:50+00:00

But is/was she really?

If Buck is into dick she isn't/wasn't a lesbian. Lesbians don't become bi but bi people can be late bloomers. And it's not unusual to see bisexual female trans people say they misidentified as lesbians pre transition due to not wanting to be with a man without having transitioned, that's not lesbianism. Wanting to be with men after transitioning is still a sexual interest in men.

The only reason Susan/Buck managed to transition in the first place was after months/years of shopping for a doctor who wouldn't tell her that she was just a lesbian with a mental illness.

Gender non-conforming women are/were often seen as lesbians even if they aren't, especially if they are into women. So I'm unsure if they were referring to Buck being exclusively attracted to women or just Buck being GNC and being into women non-exclusively. I don't know Buck Angel so it's possible she's faking an interest in dick/men and but I don't think there is enough evidence of that.

strictly · 2020-09-19T18:49:34+00:00

i'm a cis lesbian (i wouldn't call anyone else cis without permission, but i do use it for myself), so technically i guess i'm "allowed" to post here.

Being "cis" means you have made your sex into a gender identity. Lesbians don't have to have gender identities to be allowed to post here, they just have to meet the defintion of lesbian (homosexual female).

i do think that trans women can be lesbians, and i would respect their gender and orientation

I think you should be allowed to post here if you are an homosexual female but if you are attracted to these males you are not homosexual/lesbian to begin with. Possibly you think these bihet males should count as "lesbians" while not being attracted to them. But if you consider them lesbians, why wouldn't you rather hang out on "actuallesbians" and discuss "lesbian" things with these bithet males?

strictly · 2021-07-17T19:12:41+00:00

How can vagina, uteruses, ovaries, etc be female-only organs when males can have them too?

I don't know which particular conditions you talk about here, or the state of these vaginas/uterus/ovaries and therefore I can't know which sex I consider these people to be. A person who produces ova is female by definition though.

they might indicate that the definitions of male and female may be flawed

You do realize that language has a limit and that has nothing to do with the definition of male/female in particular? There are tales of Socrates going around asking people to define the most basic things and making fun of them as nobody ever succeeded in giving the perfect definition to anything, all definitions were ambiguous in some way. You can try with what a chair. How would you define chair so it includes exactly all chairs and exactly zero of everything that isn't a chair? It's not possible. Instead you have to be consistent with your rigor, expect the same level of rigor of the definition as you would of other definitions you believe in. You can't expect the impossible though, the first perfect definitions that can be put into words when nothing else in world yet has perfectly worded definitions. In your head though, even though you might not be be to find the perfect words, you probably have a very clear picture of what male and female is, no? The same with the moon, sun, stone, you know what they are, even if your worded definitions could end up somewhat ambiguous.

strictly · 2021-07-16T13:15:09+00:00

What about changing sex with the use of technology and engineering?

Maybe, and if/when that day comes I am willing to consider former males who produce ova and not sperm as having changed their sex and I would see them man-made females and vice versa for former females. Worth noting that I wouldn’t consider this achieved through the organ donation of the sex organs of a deceased female/male as that would be the deceased female/male producing the ova/sperm, not the male/female using the deceased female’s/male’s sex organs.

Is there a reason why a neopenis that looks, feels, and functions exactly like natural penises can not be considered a real penis? Or a neovagina that looks, feels, and functions exactly like natural vaginas can not be considered a real vagina?

If it’s made of vagina cells, has all the functions of a vagina and is made of the person’s own genetic material (not the vagina of a deceased female) then I would consider the neovagina a real man-made vagina. As a lesbian it wouldn’t make me interested in sexually interacting with that man-made vagina though. A male in the future could perhaps with futuristic technology become a man-made female but a male could never become a natural female (a female with a female origin) as history is unchangeable. I would define attraction to man-made females as female attraction but at that stage we would probably create a new system for categorizing sexuality as many monosexuals tend to care about the origin too.

Some trans people seem to think origin shouldn’t matter in hypotheticals like these but humans tend care about origins overall. Most vegetarians wouldn’t eat man-made carrots made from genetically engineered meat of slaughtered cows, most wouldn't pay the same price for a copy of a Rembrandt painting copy as for a Rembrandt painting original, most would be more excited about a love letter written by a crush than the same letter written by someone we don’t care about it. We care about the origin/history as we care about the story behind, someone who artificially made themselves female has another story than someone who was just born that with a female body without intention. So in short I would consider a man-made female as being female, but I wouldn’t consider man-made females as the same as natural females.

At the moment no trans person is even close to having changed sex though, we hear about pregnant "trans men", but never of pregnant "trans women", we hear of "trans women" impregnating but never of "trans men" impregnating, female partners of "trans women" are told to use birth control and "trans men" are told the same if they have male partners.

strictly · 2021-07-10T17:44:00+00:00

I probably wouldn’t use the term rape

I consider the deception method of rape on the same moral level as other methods of rape, it’s one of the most violating things one can do to another person.

Guys may think you are a tease, but it’s better than putting yourself in danger or risking violating another persons boundaries.

I am a lesbian so I have no experience with how sexual situations with men tend to play out. I think if someone is very insistent and wants to fast-track sex then that person needs to take part of the responsibility for not giving sexual partners more of a chance disclose important information so I would consider it one of few mitigating circumstances.

strictly · 2021-07-06T00:05:17+00:00

The only thing is some people don't like to be called cis.

Those who don't like being called cis are those who aren't cis. I think that is kind of given even according to gender ideology, gender identities are supposed to feel affirmative so people who are truly cisgender would love being called cis. A true gender identity wouldn't feel insulting or incogruent to be called, according to gender ideology hating to be called a gender identity would be sign of not having that gender identity.

strictly · 2021-07-05T00:25:44+00:00

Buck is going to say he's a man who was born female.

Which proves that the thing Buck refers to with the letter combination "man" has nothing in common with what GC refer to with man, as we still only refer to males. When Buck refer to males though Buck recognizes not being male. Recognizing one's biological reality is not a gender identity, otherwise Buck Angel would be a cisgendered woman. We are only recognizing our biological reality, and that's it (something many trans people do too).

they don't claim they themselves oppressed due to being female

There are those who indeed do that.

especially after medical transition

You don't define trans people by hormone status so hormones shouldn't matter for you here. You talk about identity and you don't need hormones to have an identity. So either female people can recognize being oppressed due to being female without having cisgender gender identities or they can't and females who call themselves men and recognize their female oppression are all cisgendered women according to you. Which way is it?

Many have said they don't fear going out alone at night the same way cis women do.

Sounds like that has to do with looks, not identity. Unless you are saying they were all cisgendered women before deciding to become trans.

strictly · 2021-07-04T23:17:35+00:00

I recognize I was born female and have female specific internal organs, just as Buck does, if that doesn't make Buck cis then recognizing the same reality Buck recognizes doesn't make anyone else cis either.

If you ask Buck if he's a man

If you ask Buck if Buck is an adult human male Buck is going to say no. As Buck isn't referring to adult human males with the letter combination "man" Buck is obviously referring to an entirely different thing than GC with that the letter combination "man" as we are still only referring to adult human males. We have already determined that recognizing one's physical reality is not a gender identity, otherwise Buck would be cis. To prove males calling themselves men are cisgender you need to prove that 100% of these males are genderists referring to themselves as having gender identities, and absolutely not just recognizing themselves as adult human males, otherwise Blair White would be cis too for recognizing the exact same thing. You have failed to prove that.

Buck also does not claim female oppression.

There have been other females who take testosterone and call themselves as men who have though, are they cis women according to you for recognizing their female oppression as you bring it up?

strictly · 2021-07-02T19:57:16+00:00

Agender is part of the nom-binary spectrum.

More or less all people here would be trans according to the definitions trans activists use, yes. I personally think that is an overly broad definition so I define trans as someone who is taking hormones. But if not having a cisgender gender identity is the being trans to you I think you should own up to that and recognize most of us are trans according to the definitions you adhere to.

that means you can't call yourself male or female anymore.

Plenty of trans people have called themselves their biological sex. Blair White has recognized being a biological male, Buck Angel has recognized being a biological female, are they cis according to you? You shouldn't make special rules just for non-trans people. And trans people say gender identity and biological sex are two separate things so being truthful about one’s biological sex (a truth the person might not even like) doesn’t really say anything at all about that person’s gender identity. Thirdly, even people who call themselves nonbinary and specifically avoid calling themselves the specific letters “male” and “female” are still frequently calling themselves biological males and females by calling themselves amabs and afabs. The meaning of a word is what it refer to, not the specific letters combinations used, so if female trans people call themselves afabs, they are still calling themselves females as female is what they refer to.

strictly · 2021-06-02T23:05:45+00:00

she chose to make her statements public

Then you should have no problems with people having opinions about people who made public statements which this female trans person did.

You don't have to be a "genderist" to misgender someone.

You can't lie about someone having a false gender identity unless you first refer to a gender identity which requires the speaker to use gender identity based definitions for the words involved in supposed misgendering. You have to prove that the source consider "she" a pronoun to be used for those with a specific gender identity. It's very unlikely that they would be referring to any type of gender identity with pronouns as they are not genderists thus they can't misgender anyone with pronouns, only missex if they referred to sex.

It's polite and the right thing to do.

Lying goes against my moral principals and I don't care if people who ask me to lie about them consider me impolite for refusing to lie, it wasn't polite of them to expect me to lie in the first place. I am not going to adopt gender-identity based definitions either as that would lead to misgendering people en masse with false gender identities just to benefit a few, it goes against moral conscience. Innocent people shouldn't have suffer being labeled with false gender identities just because some people don't like being their sex.

strictly · 2021-06-02T11:08:20+00:00

Misgendering is using terms and pronouns that person said they do not prefer.

Misgendering, as the name indicates, is lying about someone having a gender identity they don't have. Calling someone a pronoun they don't prefer is not proof of misgendering as you need evidence the person indeed referred to a false gender identity, and a prerequirement for that is that speaker uses a gender identity based system for their pronoun usage as otherwise they wouldn’t be able to refer to a false gender identity in the first place. The most likely perpetrator of misgendering is thus a trans activist, as they have the required belief system to perform misgendering (and trans activists happen to be quite keen on misgendering non-trans people with false gender identities).

If you refer to something else than lying about gender identities with misgendering then you are using the wrong word for it and should use a more accurate word representing the phenomena you have in mind.

Was it so hard for them to type he, him, his, and Mr.?

I don't use a gender identity based system for pronouns so it would be lying of me to call a known female "he". Lying isn't hard but it's against my morals. I don't use a gender identity based system as that almost inevitably leads to misgendering people en masse and I happen to have strong negative feelings against misgendering (a lie about the mind) as that would be much more personal than any accidental mis-sexing, no one should ever have to be labeled with a false gender identity.

strictly · 2021-06-01T23:51:51+00:00

So it's basically how you perceive yourself?

I am aware I am female the same way female people who identify as men are aware they are female. All female transitioners who identify as men perceive themselves as female as taking testosterone to imitate appearance of the male sex requires having a female perception, had they been unaware of their own femaleness they wouldn’t been able to be dysphoric about their female sex and thus wouldn’t be trans to begin with.

I see myself as female, and would see myself as female regardless of my birth sex.

Then you don’t mean you see yourself as female when you say you see yourself as female as you you don’t refer to female but a gender identity. If female and male are gender identities then according your definition above a gender identity is the personal conception of oneself of having a gender identity, another gender identity, both or neither. That’s a circular definition.

If I was born male, I would transition via hormones and surgery, because being male would cause me dysphoria.

When I have asked people it seems be like fifty fifty, half not caring if they had been born the opposite sex and half who would rather not (but those who said they would rather not said they still wouldn't transition but as transition can't make someone the opposite sex, so they would rather just come to term with it). So if gender identity is body preferences then it would make it morally wrong to call someone a gender identity unless you have proof the person indeed has the body preference your refer to, as otherwise you risk lying about something very personal about them. So if female to you is the preference to have a female body it would be immoral of you to call someone female before asking and making sure this person indeed prefers a female body, and if this person is indifferent it would be immoral to call that person female, as indifference and preference are different things that ought to be distinguished.

strictly · 2021-04-26T11:21:46+00:00

Do you see representatives in public life who "match" you?

If you refer to clothes wearing the same type of clothes as me is relatively common in both sexes as wearing hoodies, jeans, sneakers is seen as relatively unisex. I don't wear bright colors, jewelry, make-up, skirts, dresses, or clothes that show too much skin, people say I would look "cute" if I did but I don't care. Dressing like me doesn't draw attention though.

strictly · 2021-01-17T11:07:35+00:00

I think those terms have gained popularity so people outside the gay male and bdsm community have starting using them too, forgetting there are other terms to use (like receiver and giver). I sometimes see people using the term "butch" referring to masculine straight women too and even masculine men even though that is a lesbian term, so I've thought it was something like.

But it’s very possible my assumption is wrong, maybe they are referring to bdsm or sex with women-identifying males, if it’s on "actuallesbians" the later is quite likely lol.

then, straight people could just as easily use these terms to describe their sex

I am not familiar with the sex lives of straight people but my impression is the phenomena of pillow princesses and stones is almost unheard of in straight sex, so if a straight woman says she is a top I would think she is referring to being dominant, not that she doesn’t like receiving oral/penetrative sex.

strictly · 2020-11-28T19:56:00+00:00

I have read that article before and I think they were all bisexual from the start. Not all female people who transition are into into men after transition so I don't think testosterone creates attraction to men.

The first one, Kissandra says before going on testostoerne "I was primarily attracted to women", so she was bi, according to her own words, as she wasn't exclusively into women.

Emmett says before going on testosterone "maybe I had a couple of crushes on guys, but it was never anything substantial”, so she seemed to have had indications her bisexuality before too.

Tucker says "I was very uncomfortable sexually until I started testosterone. I definitely would never have sex with men before testosterone, but I've had sex with plenty of men after. When you have sex with a man as a woman, there's definitely the dynamic where you feel like a woman". So Tucker seems to have avoided men sexually pre-transition not due to lack of attraction but due to not liking the heterosexual dynamic.

I think Jake was a late bloomer bisexual, testosterone might increase the sex drive so taking testosterone make latent attractions more noticeable.

strictly · 2021-10-07T21:35:57+00:00

This is precisely the reason we use terms like "cis" and "trans".

Many women and men are neither cisgender or transgender, they just don’t have gender identities. Your solution would misgender them with false cisgender gender identities by default which should be unacceptable for someone who claims to be against msigendering.

When differences are relevant to a discussion, we use the adjectives "cis" and "trans."

There exists no reason to group biological females who aren’t taking hormones with biological males who are taking hormones, different sex, and the latter group also has a gender identity which many of the former group find unrelatable and alienating.

In that case we use the phrase "assigned fe/male at birth." But we don't believe biology is relevant most of the time.

You might not find biology relevant in many cases but its relevance is still much greater than gender identity which has a relevance on par of a zodiac sign, only relevant to those specifically into it.

On r/FTM there are posts by people who claim they can't access information or services related to periods, PCOS, etc. because most of the information is written for women and they are not women. Here are some excerpts from this thread

Had they not been female it would have been psychically impossible for them to menstruate and have PCOS. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

researching it was exhausting with how much everything was gendered,

I agree that forced gendering is a horrible thing and that is why I strongly disagree with the transactivist goal of genderfying language. I bet many of the people transactivists msigender with cisgender gender identities also dislike find the gendering of female products.

If this was made to purchase by “people with vaginas” it wouldn’t happen.

We would avoid this by be keeping the word woman sexed instead of genderfying it to gender identity, had the pharmacist not genderfied the word woman then this probably wouldn’t have happened. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

I’ve heard of a post transition trans man with endometriosis who would not have doctors take him on because they couldn’t have male patients in the system with these diagnoses.

The doctor should have realized any female can identify as a man, and that man-identifying females are not less likely than other females to get endometriosis. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

Here are some more posts and articles about the struggles trans men face with regards to language and health care.

The language struggle they have is somewhat self-inflected. Language has become more genderfied as transactivists have lobbied for it become more genderfied, and that also increases gender dysphoria in the overall population as people don’t like being put in gender boxes.

When I talk about women's issues, I include all women including trans women

Who do you include, all people with certain gender identity? Many of those who face women's problem don't have gender identities, if woman is a gender identity to then you can't include them without disrespecting them by misgendering them with cisgender gender identities. And if woman isn't a gender identity to you, why should woman-identifying males be included just for identifying a certain way? The way I see it you have three choices, exclude all women without gender identities, misgender women without gender identities, or exclude woman-identifying males. I think the middle option is the most morally abhorrent one.

strictly · 2021-07-20T17:18:04+00:00

Seems like you’re presuming that survey results = actual number of lesbians in real life = “natural” biological rate of homosexuality among women, is that correct?

Oh so you think lesbians actually outnumber straight women? Lesbians are the smallest sexual minority according to data, but if it would have to fit the sexual orientation distribution of the woman-identifying males then lesbians would the largest group, outnumbering even straight women.

strictly · 2021-07-19T15:22:11+00:00

Please explain where the "prenatal androgens" and "prenatal hormones" that these persons "were exposed to" in utero came from. How are they different to the androgens and hormones that babies are "exposed to" during the puberty of infancy?

I think androgens in general are relevant, and the timing, as androgens don't always have the same effect depending on the timing.

Why is that you (& many others) are so willing to give credence to the idea that "prenatal hormones might influence" human behavior, but totally overlook the possible role of the sex hormones human babies make in vast quantities in the first 6 months of life starting at circa 4 weeks after birth?

I didn't mention the existence of the sun either. Just because I don't mention something doesn't mean I don't believe in it. I can't mention everything as that would make posting something a full time job.

Your generalizations about "monkeys" undermines your arguments.

I said monkeys as I didn't remember the species and couldn't find the study, I mentioned not finding the study and it being several years ago since reading it so everyone would be free to ignore if they wanted to.

strictly · 2021-07-19T00:26:03+00:00

But in what do they based their "gender identity" if not "gender expression"? So, how can then "gender identity" be innate?

I think some trans people who are gender non-conforming relative biological sex base their gender identity partly on gender expression but I think many base it on the body they want to have, and then they invent a narrative where they more or less imagine all people as needing to inhabit a certain body type, that way they can say they are just like the opposite sex for wanting to inhabit that body (by assigning the opposite sex the same desire they themselves have).

strictly · 2021-07-17T18:29:28+00:00

And SRY gene indicates sex in 100% of cases.

I've heard of extremely rare cases where it didn't (like once in a billion) so I wanted to cover it all.

I think it was considered as slur, same as hermaphrodite, until gender identity appeared recently and made slurs like queer or intersex - to be overused again.

I am ESL (English second language) so I am not always familiar what is considered outdated terminology in English.

strictly · 2021-07-08T07:45:09+00:00

Someone who primarily identifies by their sex assigned at birth is cisgender.

Knowing your biological sex is simply knowledge, not an identity, otherwise Buck Angel would be a cisgendered woman, or perhaps "bigender" for "identifying as biological female" and having this "man-identity" at the same time. It's you who is assigning people with gender identities simply for knowing their biological sex, this shouldn't be assumed without asking the person in question if their biological sex is indeed a primary identity to them and the person saying yes to that.

Agender is part of the transgender spectrum.

Yeah, so people who say they have no gender identity wouldn't be cisgender even according to gender ideology.

I know GC people don't agree, but someone whose gender identity matches their birth sex is cisgender. That's literally all cis means.

I actually agree that people who have made their biological sex into their gender identity are cisgender so I have never disbelieved your gender identity. I am saying all the people who don't share your gender identity are not cisgender and that many people are simply biologically female without having any matching gender identity and should not be called cisgender.

That's literally all cis means.

Yeah, making it an insulting thing to be called for anyone who doesn't have a gender identity as it's lie.

However, a GC person will call adult AFAB a woman, even if the person states they are not a woman. They insult AFAB people.

What you see as the insulting thing here is not sharing your definitions, but there is no lie as we are not referring to any false gender identity. Even to you an "AFAB"-person is an "AFAB"-person regardless if that "AFAB"-person likes being "AFAB" or not, and woman is simply the word for adult human "AFAB" to us. I consider lies worse than uncomfortable truths. Changing the definition of woman to refer to gender identity instead would almost inevitably lead to misgendering female people en masse with false gender identities, that goes against my morals.

EDIT: Accidental double negation

strictly · 2021-07-07T23:31:44+00:00

Trans men claim they are men

They claim that they have a gender identity which they have named "man" so they are talking about gender identity, not biological sex. You need to prove 100% of all the men you call cisgender also refer to gender identity and not biological sex, you have no such proof.

If the man did not have a gender identity, he would not be referring to himself as a man, but rather "AMAB".

If a man referring to himself as a man does not have a gender identity he would not define man as a gender identity, that means he would not need to refer to himself with the letter combination "amab" as he uses the letter combination "man" to refer to exactly that. You already know not everybody agrees with your genderfied redefinitions so it's intellectually dishonest of you to suddenly pretend as if everyone (including GC) would refer to gender identity and not biological sex when you know that's not the case. You need to prove the man defines man as gender identity before you safely call the man cisgender for referring to himself a man.

It sounds like you have a hard time understanding that GC and genderists are referring to different things with certain letter combinations, and that it is the thing referred to, not the letter combination itself, which gives a word its meaning. When you call me something I don't care about the exact sounds that come out of your throat, I care about what you mean. Therefor I would consider it an insult if you called me a woman, as you, as a genderist, would refer to a gender identity I don't have, making it a lie. Had you not been a genderist and simply meant adult human biological female, then that is a true statement and not an insult.

strictly · 2021-07-05T23:55:41+00:00

When we coined the term, we meant it to mean someone whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth

If the person in question doesn't have a gender identity then its misgendering, something you claim to be against.

Calling someone cis is not an insult.

When you insist someone without a gender identity has one you are lying about them, and most people see being lied about as an insult, especially if you continue lying about them despite their protest. And as you are lying about their mind that is very personal.

strictly · 2021-07-05T23:36:57+00:00

GCs don't see Buck as a man, but Buck sees himself as a man.

GC sees Buck as an adult human female and Buck does the same. As Buck and GC refer to two different things with the letter combination "man" we have to translate it. Buck is referring to having a gender identity, as anyone can identify as anything there is no reason for me to disbelieve anyone's gender identity so I would agree that Buck has the gender identity Buck claims to have as there is nothing that stops women from having the gender identity Buck has.

Other trans men say it's easier to publish their work than under a female name

Exactly, their gender identity had nothing to with it, any female person passing as the opposite sex/using a male name would get the same result as these females, regardless of gender identity.

they will always experience female oppression no matter what

They will experience it at the same level as any female person in their situation. Females who identify as men and don't pass as men will experience female oppression at the same level as other female people who don't pass as men. Females who identify men and pass as men will experience female oppression at them same level as other female people who pass as men. In countries where abortions is banned pregnant females who identify men will be banned from having abortions just like other pregnant females. Identity itself makes no difference.

I was specifically talking about trans men who pass as male.

Then you are talking about looks, and looks are not same thing as identity.

Anyway, we were talking about cisgender gender identities and experiencing female oppression doesn't prove a person would have a a cisgender identity (fetuses who are aborted for being female may have had any gender identity). I personally don't care that you have a cisgender gender identity, your mind, your business. I do take issue that you want to label people without gender identities with false gender identities against their will.

strictly · 2021-07-03T01:09:13+00:00

I really want to hear your thoughts on this, especially lesbians. She mentions the comphet essay, which I haven't read, but I have read the comphet masterdoc and it's a mess. However, it's important to keep in mind that for the majority of the time she believed she was a "gay trans man", she was on anti-depressants and not experiencing sexual arousal.

I can’t say anything about this specific case due to her young age and the anti-depressants she was on. Many comphet stuff I’ve come across though just reads like the woman is giving a long account of how sexually irresistible she finds men but not liking the power this gives men over her, and for some reason interpreting that as lesbianism.

There could perhaps exist extreme cases where a lesbian for some reason thinks it’s obligatory to have sex with men and thinks testosterone would make such horrible inevitability slightly less so. I don’t think this is common though. Most lesbian-identifying people who transition and start identifying as gay men just sound androphilic, often they admit having been attracted to men before transitioning, having been fans of yaoi/gay porn, and mention androphilic/AAP reasons for having identified as lesbians before (i.e it made them feel more like the men they are attracted to). I think most gender dysphoric homosexual females would rather be straight men than gay men (I don't see why a lesbian, i.e someone who isn't attracted to men, would find the latter better than the former).

strictly · 2021-02-15T19:47:33+00:00

Playboy, pretty much the bastion of male hetrosexuality has, repeatedly, featured transgender women as models

They are a bastion of both male heterosexuality and male gynandromorphophilia as they feature males to cater gynandromorphophilic men too.

but never men (whether transgender or non-transgender) as ones.

You just said they did. Playboy features males gynandromorphophilic men find attractive.

the magazine was open about the models in question being transgender

Of course, as many gynandromorphophilic men are more attracted if they know the person is male.

Which means that there were clearly heterosexual men attracted to transgender women

It clearly shows that the user base of play boy wasn't just heterosexual men but also significant group of bisexual gynandromorphophilic men. Playboy catered two categories.

It seems like your argument is that as gynandromorphophilic men exist then heterosexual men can’t exist and therefor male heterosexuality should refer male gynandromorphophilia instead.

Male gynandromorphophilia doesn’t affect the existence of male heterosexuality, there are many female-attracted men who are indeed exclusively attracted to females. And as there are significant differences between heterosexual men and bisexual gynandromorphophilic men we obviously need different labels for them (you are already conflating these two distinct groups so uniting them under the same label would just increase this confusion).

Abstract knowledge (e.g. the other persons sexual orientation, fertility, marriage status or, yes, not percepted "actual sex") might cause the person to cease persueing, but the sexual attraction based on the perceived properties is most likely still persisting.

Abstract knowledge affects perception and perception affect the vision interpretation. The eyes don’t see the world the way our consciousness sees the world as the latter is the already interpreted version. If I know someone is male there is no way for me to perceive this male as female, he will be perceived as the male he is and I am not attracted males, so zero attraction as I am a lesbian, not gynandromorphophilic.

sexual orientation is based on apparent gender.

I don't know what this "apparent gender" is supposed to refer to. It’s not assumed sex, as you suggest someone can know someone is male yet label the apparent gender "female" anyway making it seem more like its a gender identity thing. Maybe apparent gender is factor in your attractions but that's not how my attractions work like. As people like me, who are exclusively attracted to only one sex, clearly exist, then we ought to have labels for that, and we have. I am not against creating new terminology for attraction patters like yours too. But there is an obvious difference in sexual orientation as you say the way my sexual orientation works is nonsensical (meaning you can clearly not relate) and I can’t relate to attraction patterns you describe either so our distinct sexual orientations should be distinguished in terminology to reflect these differences.

strictly · 2021-01-19T08:08:05+00:00

sex act

I think we have a different definition of what a sex act is. I think we have to agree to disagree.

strictly · 2021-01-19T07:38:53+00:00

to be active you need to do the act

You are referring to specific actions, not sexual actions in general. So you think no other sexual actions count as being active, only the actions that directly interacts with the other person's genitals, right? I think that is a narrow definition of active, I get you would want more from a sexual partner, but I don't think that makes other sexual actions necessarily passive.

strictly · 2021-01-19T06:10:00+00:00

I imagine it would be a dealbreaker for most

Yes, that is why I weed those out so they can weed out me too.

like fucking a sex doll.

A sex doll can’t think, can't talk, can’t move, has no will. Not touching my private parts doesn’t make a sexual partner a sex doll and nobody I've been with has pretended to be a passive sex doll. Receiving isn't the same as being passive (and it's not the same as being submissive either, I'm not looking for being anyone's domme). I am not into casual sex so I've only had sex with women I've been in love with, so I have never regarded a sexual partner as an inanimate object.

strictly · 2020-12-29T02:08:23+00:00

I grew up in a conservative, homophobic and religious family (they are Jehovah's Witnesses, could have been worse though).

As a kid whenever anyone said anything about me getting married to man I always said I wouldn't. People said I would change my mind, I never did.

I had crushes on other girls early but thought everyone felt like that about girls they wanted to be friends with. I started having sexual feelings about women when I was around nine. I thought I had accidentally given myself a sinful sexual fixation to women by looking at the images of the female reproductive system. I was scared my parents would find the biology book and understand the "lewd" pictures I had been looking at.

The kingdom hall (church) used to warn us about the temptations of homosexuality and the temptations of the opposite sex. I thought the temptations of homosexuality was real as it seemed self-evident that people would rather have homosexual relationships, I thought the reason the elders were warning about it was because it was a real risk that the human species would go extinct if the trend continued (they didn't explicitly say they human species would extinct but they talked about it not leading to procreation so I as child interpreted it as that). I thought I would do my duty and not have homosexual relationships but no one would ever be able to force me to be with a man and have children, I didn't care if the human species would die for it. I didn't really get why the elders bothered warning about the opposite sex though as it seemed super easy to resist boys.

I still thought I was heterosexual due the infallibility of the creator, homosexuals were just heterosexuals who had self-induced same-sex fetishes (nowadays I think JWs acknowledge some may be born with homosexual inclinations but that it shouldn't be acted upon). As I thought I was straight I thought straight girls were repulsed by the idea of being with men just like me. I thought even if the creator created all humans to be heterosexual we can still say no to being with males, we can choose being celibate spinsters instead, no religious rule against that (many biblical passages supporting celibacy, I used these to make my parents back off). I thought straight girls acted so illogical when they voluntary pursued boys, like they didn't understand it was allowed to be alone.

I was quite vocal about my anti-sex and anti-romance stance in my teenage so my classmates suspected me of being a lesbian. I denied it (as the creator doesn't make mistakes) but they didn't believe me because it was evident I wasn't into boys. I only knew one person who was openly gay in the school, the girls liked him but they didn't like me so they bullied me lot, not just because of the lesbian thing though, for the way I dressed (looking too much like a boy), and for being strange overall.

I had refused to wear dresses/skirts since I was a little kid. My parents were ashamed of me as it considered an abomination for women to dress like men. I knew I had to give in regarding that if I wanted to be JW but couldn't make myself do it so I never got baptized fortunately.

I thought the sinful part of homosexual relationships was the sex bit so sometimes I entertained the idea that I could find a woman to be in a committed relationship with and we would just not do the sinful sex. I realized it was much harder than I thought in my first relationship, my first girlfriend wasn't religious so she didn't really care if we failed to not be sinful.

There were JWs who said that being with someone of the same sex was like a human being with a pig. The "unnaturalness" of homosexuality bothered me a long time, members of the same sex can't reproduce so homosexuality had to be a perversion. I realized though straight women who don't want children would have to be on birth control, and that seemed quite unnatural too. In that case it seemed better to be homosexual and not need birth control. Also eternal life didn't really seem worth the cost if one had to live life avoiding everything that is fun, and I decided I was fine with being punished with eternal death. I stopped believing in the "truth" (JWs nickname for their religion) later and I'm an atheist now.

I don't have any hard feelings against JWs though. I was never pushed to experiment with boys by JWs (extramarital sex being a sin). I think people from more progressive families might have had been more pressured to be sexually inclusive in order to be nice, and JWs focused more on teenagers saying no to sex despite it not being nice.

EDIT: Being more concrete

strictly · 2020-12-25T22:06:49+00:00

An instinct to conceptualize oneself as a member of a specific perceived sex-trait group

And all trans people conceptualize themselves as members of their so called "assigned sex at birth" which they prove every time they feel gender dysphoria, take hormones and do surgeries.

strictly · 2020-12-24T18:24:14+00:00

What is stupid?

strictly · 2020-11-29T15:10:15+00:00

Demisexual is default to zero attraction until a strong emotional attachment forms.

I believe asexual people exist (people who are never sexually attracted to anyone). Your definition of demisexual here though is very broad and would include many heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual people as is not that uncommon for people to be unable to feel sexual attraction until they have a deep connection with the person in question.

grouping bisexuals and homosexuals with asexuals and those who fall under the asexual spectrum a.k.a. demisexuals is kind of insulting for everyone involved. Especially the homosexuals, because no amount of emotional bonding is going to make a lesbian ok with dick or a gay man ok with pussy.

Your definition of demisexual, defaulting to zero attraction until a strong emotional attachment forms doesn't imply that the demisexual person would have to be pansexual, okay with all genitals as long as the emotional bonding is there. For some people the emotional bonding and the person being of the right sex are both requirements for sexual attraction to be able to kick in.

If you don't want demisexuals to be grouped with heterosexuals, homosexuals and bisexuals then you should narrow the definition of demisexual so it no longer includes people who are able to experience attraction. If you only exclude those who experience attraction pre deep bonding then you will inevitably categorize some heterosexuals, homosexuals and bisexuals as demisexual too.

strictly · 2020-11-29T00:31:01+00:00

This is not necessarily true. She could be enjoying sex involving dicks because of a fetish, as opposed to her sexual orientation.

Then you have a different definition of female homosexuality if you include women sexually into penises as "lesbians" too. Conflating lesbians with women into penis creates practical problems for lesbians, that is why I support dropping the T as I want that conflation to end.

We often assume people's sexual orientation here, but fetishes can obscure sexual orientation-- and fetishes are a VERY relevant component of this conversation

Sexual orientation is not the same thing as the etiology so if someone's fetish makes them into both sexes they are still bi.

There was a study showing that some GAMP men (gynandromorphophiles; "chasers" of transwomen) had a heterosexual arousal pattern-- both physiological arousal and self-reported arousal to women, but not to men-- yet were highly aroused by autogynephilic-presenting men. It's not really being "into getting dick"-- it's about the fetish.

They are into dick though, they just like dick on males with breasts and on cross-sex hormones. I see that as bisexual/heteroflexible. If they want to create a different word for their type of bisexuality I am not against that, but they are not heterosexual if they are into some males too.

strictly · 2020-11-19T01:14:44+00:00

I would refuse. I have no preferred pronouns and I'm not going to pretend to to have preferences I don't have.

strictly · 2020-07-31T17:15:29+00:00

24 percent seems low. I bet is much worst.

Personally I think 24% is high for a lesbian sub, it's one in four who isn't even female. And the real male percentage was probably somewhat higher as I was being somewhat conservative when counting. But I did check over a hundred profiles so I don't think the real male percentage is that far off. But note that the 24% was the unquestionably male percentage. The trans percentage was higher as many posters of the posters were female trans people (non-binary). And lesbians are definitely a minority on actuallesbians as many of female people also posted on the bisexual subs.

strictly · 2021-10-10T13:08:54+00:00

Agender is a gender identity

The definition of agender is not having a gender identity. Go to the agender subreddit and see how much they like being misgendered by you.

I never misgender anyone.

Insisting the all people without gender identities have one is misgendering, which you have done multiple times in this thread alone.

If someone says they're a woman they're a woman.

Is their definition of woman adult human of the female reproductive sex? That’s not a gender identity. Is your definition of woman adult human of the female reproductive sex? We already know it isn’t. Therefore you should use your word for adult human of the female reproductive sex when referring to them, not your word for a gender identity. So yeah, you are are misgendering them by referring to a gender identity when they referred to biology.

If someone's gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth, they are by definition cisgender.

You insist those without matching gender identities have one. People don’t like being lied about.

Most people are cis, even those who don't like the term cis.

A cisgendered person wouldn’t feel insulted when they are affirmed in their so called gender identity. You say you are cis, is feeling incongruent and lied about typical to you when you are called cis? If that’s the normal “cisgender” way of feeling I don’t see how you can believe in the existence of transgender people at all as they would just be regular cis people who just happen to dislike their cisgender gender identity to you.

Everyday Feminism was founded by an Asian cis woman named Sandra Kim.

Everyday Feminism supported the video where Riley J. Dennis shamed homosexuals for their sexual orientation so I don't care if that homophobic organization disagrees with me.

My point is regarding transgender stuff, men are more likely to be on your side than women.

I don’t adopt views because of the sex distribution of the views so I couldn’t care less if men are more likely to agree with me.

They are not female and female refers to anyone who consistently identify as female.

That is you genderfying a reproductive sex which is morally wrong, people shouldn’t be assigned with gender identities by you just for being born with a certain body.

The point is we are trying to de-sex periods if that's the term you want to use. We are saying in humans, periods ≠ female.

Periods are sexed, only one sex is physically capable of having periods, that's biology.

Men and enbies who get periods are not female. Using the terms "women" and "female" don't include them.

It’s physically impossible for people without a female biology to get periods, so yes, female include all people who menstruate. Gender identity never excludes anyone from being female as female is a biologic sex and female biology doesn’t prevent man- or nonbinary identities from forming, which trans people themselves are proof of.

Everyone has a gender identity. Anyone who presents outwardly as female experiences female oppression, regardless of birth sex.

Having a female body is neither gender identity nor a presentation, none of us got a say in our biological sex. You obviously don’t respect people without gender identities as you insist on misgendering us so I don't get why you expect us to more empathy for people with gender identities than you have for us. You evidently don’t think it’s a big deal to make people feel wrong and incogruent by misgendering them as long as that person lacks a gender identity. Personally I wouldn’t even have been against affirming trans people had the wanted affirmations not relied on everyone without a gender identity being msisgendered, but expecting us to to be okay with being constantly misgendered in the name of making trans people feel better is unacceptable.

strictly · 2021-07-20T16:32:27+00:00

I didn’t realize “females” were supposed to keep to some “natural” percentage of non-lesbians.

Expect, not supposed. Had they been "female" we would have expected the same distribution of sexual orientation as among females, and we are not seeing that.

strictly · 2021-07-19T01:22:48+00:00

Could you share the studies you mentioned at the end of your comment?

Here girls with CAH (who were exposed to more prenatal androgens) seem less likely than other girls to follow fake female gender norms (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.2015.0125) so prenatal hormones might influence who we imitate. It was a long time ago since I read about the self-socialization theory so can't find the other studies right now but there was a finding on monkeys where male monkeys didn't learn to be take care of monkey children by female monkeys, but if there were older nurturing male monkeys, then they would follow the example of these nurturing male monkeys and learn to take care of monkey children from them.

strictly