Who ought to know better
Someone said what?
The intersection of Twitter and Reddit begets monsters, or something.
Let’s tease out the meaning.
Well, there’s a lesbian walking group (advertised on meetup.com) near me and I really want to go out and meet other dykes so I decided to sign up…
‘this group is for LESBIANS ONLY. Lesbian is defined as same-sex attracted biological woman.’
WHY DO PEOPLE EVEN DO THIS. The absolute nastiness of a group of lesbians, who ought to know better, saying, in essence, ‘haha we’re going to go out and have fun and you can’t come because you’re trans and we don’t want to get trans germs all over us.’ I’m really pissed off and quite frankly upset and I’m not even trans!
But that absolutely isn’t what the group is saying, not in essence or in any other way. It’s not “because you’re trans,” it’s “because you’re men.” LESBIANS ARE ALLOWED TO GET TOGETHER WITHOUT MEN.
I’ll say that again, this time without shouting. Lesbians are allowed to get together without men. That’s legal, and acceptable, and reasonable, and not unfair or discriminatory or any other pejorative. By the same token, gay men are allowed to get together without women.
It’s nothing to do with “trans germs.” It’s to do with sex, and who is which, and the power differential between the two. Men who identify as lesbians remain men, and thus are not in fact lesbians. Men can identify as traffic lights if they want to, but nobody else has to pay any attention.
The comments on the Reddit post all share the poster’s shock-horror at this monstrous exclusion of men from a lesbian group. The Reddit groups is called…”butch lesbians.”
The absolute cheek of that lot!
Also, a gynecologist, a woman made the following joke:
Dr. “I see your married! What are you using for birth control?”
Patient: “Lesbianism!”
Dr. “Well that’s very effective.”
After a thorough scolding from the tranzbian crowd, she apologized and declared that trans lesbians are valid, including NB lesbians. And I’m trying to figure how an NB can be a lesbian if by their definition lesbians are same-gender attracted.
They don’t even know themselves and they expect everyone else to just accept them as they are? They need to “do better.”
Are trans germs archaea that identify as bacteria?
Genderists’ use of the word “valid”, while not the most annoying thing, is nonetheless pretty goddamn annoying. A passport is valid. An argument is valid. You are not valid. They are not valid. Come to think of it, I’m not valid, either. WHARGARBL
It’s annoying, because it’s meaningless yet carries an intimation of approval. The question, “Am I valid?” is then a cousin to, “You don’t want to make me cry, do you?” It’s the same kind of emotional manipulation that characterizes the whole movement.
It’s very goddam annoying. It sounds so babyish and stupid, apart from anything else.
I wonder if this usage of “valid” came about as a result of the tagging of NB onto the TWAW, TMAM mantra. It doesn’t really belong there, but why let any sort of consistency get in the way of some good old forced teaming?
I wonder if it might have happened like this. How best to incorporate a broader swath of gender non-conforming people under the “trans umbrella?” Look at all those people choosing “none of the above” when it comes to the “gender binary.” (Never mind that that’s pretty much everyone; we want to latch onto the self-selected cool kids who want to be special, for whom hair dye and androgyny are vital components of Who They Are. The ones who want to stand out from boring, everyday, everyone else. Not interested in liberating everyone else from the confines of sexist stereotypes, but Strong and Brave individuals willing to stand apart from reject the structures and confines they’re perfectly happy to let everyone else remain trapped inside. The logical choice would have been “TWAW, TMAM, and nonbinary people are neither.” But that sounds awfully negative. So whoever slapped these concepts together decided to come up with something that sounded a bit more upbeat. It’s all about self-identification, the rejection of the gender binary (upon which TiMs and TiFs rely to claim their own “transness”, but whatever) so identifying as NB is something that is a legitimate choice, a valid choice. So “…and nonbinary identities are valid” was born, becoming the caboose on long form version of the boilerplate, thought-terminating slogan we all love, honour and obey.
I wonder how much this has to do with the constant cry for “Authentic” this or “Authentic” that from the left. Authentic = who you really are. Valid is sort of like authentic, right? You can find it in the Google dictionary as another option under “authentic”! So if I am the opposite sex to what people believe I am, then I am my authentic self only as that sex…so that must be valid.
Of course, one definition of valid has to do with legal status. I bet that’s actually where the word started, the desire to legally impose “right think” on us and sic the gender police on all those who dared to call a man a man before asking what pronouns he claims as his.
Someone on that reddit thread begins their post with:
So… a man that looks like a man and is attracted to women. How very unique.
Sadly, this is not the case in Tasmania.
The last Australian state to decriminalise homosexuality (1997).
The first Australian state to permit gender self ID.
The Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination commissioner, Sarah Bolt, has discriminated against lesbian females by rejecting their application for approval of a lesbian only event that excludes males.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X_odqFfoLzWBCM5E03PgHd4hx0sJSiLR/view
I see I have a few posts in the archive about the privileging of trans women over actual women in Tasmania.