Tell Ardrossan Accies RFC to Condemn Actions of Innes Frazer in Sexual Abuse of Lesbian Teenager

Listening to Lesbians



On December 17, 2016, Innes Frazer, a rugby player for the Ardrossan Accies RFC, coaxed an 18-year old autistic lesbian into a storage container at Ardrossan Rugby Club in Ayrshire, Scotland.  He kissed the teenager, touched her breasts, exposed himself and forced her to touch him and then told her to lie about what he had done.  This is after Frazer had introduced the young woman to his friends as “the autistic lesbian” and himself as, “the only one who could turn her straight.”  Despite the victim being a lesbian, despite her having said “no”, and despite the judge explicitly stating that Frazer abused a vulnerable teenager for his ‘own sexual gratification’, he cleared him of sexually assaulting her.

A source close to the victim’s family have told Listening 2 Lesbians that the young woman is, “gutted at the verdict” and that “it took everything she had to go…

View original post 134 more words

Surprise! A republican man hates women

Bonnie Bacarisse, writing for The Daily Beast, researched a republican representative and demonstrated that he is in fact the founder of ‘The Red Pill’ men’s rights forum. She wrote a thorough analysis of both how she found out it was him and the nature of the MRA forum, going back several years. It’s long but worth reading—it’s a good look at the type of misogyny that festers beneath the surface of men who talk about things like “traditional marriage” and “family values.”

Robert Fisher, a representative for New Hampshire, has written some of the following comments:

“I’m going to say it—Rape isn’t an absolute bad, because the rapist I think probably likes it a lot. I think he’d say it’s quite good, really.”

“Marriage, and yes, female oppression, slut shaming, religion, these were all a means to control hypergamy. Marriages might be considered loveless, and women might have been unhappy, but for men it meant marriages that lasted, commitments that continued, and protection against the fickle whims of females.”

“To give women autonomy is to take away the very thing that made marriage a realistic institution.”

He also believes that it’s “evolutionarily advantageous and perfectly natural” for middle-aged men to ogle the breasts of 15-year-old girls and that women’s personalities are “lackluster and boring, serving little purpose in day to day life.”

This is a man who is so paranoid about false rape accusations, that he claims to have a video camera set up in his room in order to document any sexual encounters.

As Bacarisse reports, “As a candidate for state representative, Fisher proposed bringing concerns about the supposed plague of false rape accusations into the statehouse.”

Time magazine got a quote from him about the revelation that is the founder of a misogynist hate forum.

“I’m disappointed that this sort of attack has replaced real news, but it strengthens my position and resolve that fighting for equal rights is more important today than ever. Here’s my message to the public: I am not disappearing. I will continue to stand strong for men’s rights and the rights of all.”

He literally just said, “Yep, I’m an MRA.”

Take note women: republican men say “family values” because that sounds nice, but what they actually mean is reversing the feminist movement, taking away women’s autonomy, and giving men full control over women. They don’t care about “families,” they care about preserving male power.

Right wing women attempt to try to explain away their husband’s behavior, but the rotten truth is that: he hates you.

Another lesbian feels like a guy

A reader sent me this video and asked for a post about it. It’s a short documentary-style video about a lesbian who identifies as a man and has no plans to transition. Here’s the video:

She says the same thing I’ve heard 100,000 times now from women who identify as men: “Ever since I was small, I always identified more with boys, I always kind of felt more like a boy.”

As is very common in stories of women who identify as men, they turn out to be attracted to women. Gender dysphoria doesn’t just randomly strike random women. A large majority of the women who “feel like a boy” are lesbian or bisexual. This makes it really freakin’ obvious that gender dysphoria in women is often related to the difficulties of being a same-sex-attracted woman in a sexist and heteronormative society.

This particular lesbian who identifies as a man doesn’t plan to transition. This means what she is experiencing is not discomfort with her female body, it’s discomfort with the feminine gender role. She’s okay with being female, she just “isn’t a woman.”

Dear readers, please raise your hand if you feel discomfort regarding the feminine gender role.

When dressing as a woman, Lauren feels like she is in drag and like she is putting on a character. She feels this way as an actress, but she seems to be implying that that’s the way she feels about being a woman all the time. This is also a comment I’ve heard before. Some people think that “being a woman” is an act that has to be performed, involving specific dress, appearance, mannerisms, speech patterns, and behaviors. This is not true. A woman is an adult human female, and the only way to be a woman is to be born female and to grow into an adult. Anyone who is existing in a female body is “being a woman.” It turns out that women can have any kind of mannerisms, appearance, and behavior. We can have any kind of personality and thoughts and feelings. Everyone with a female body is a woman, no matter how she feels or what she wears. There is no acting involved at all.

In the video, Lauren is shown on a bus “manspreading” across her seat. This is probably supposed to display her masculine mannerisms, although she looks like a typical woman and no one would mistake her for a man.

So why does Lauren “feel like a man”? I can tell you right now. Lesbians often grow up feeling different from other women. We are often baffled at straight women’s behavior, and we often identify with the cultural stereotypes assigned to men. These days there is no on-the-ground lesbian community, so there is no way for lesbians to share their feelings with other lesbians and find out that we have similar feelings. Instead there is a “queer” community that is all too eager to label women who aren’t feminine and who vaguely and subjectively “feel different” as not-women. They can be nonbinary, or trans men, or genderqueer, or any other bloody thing. The message is clear: real women are feminine, therefore unfeminine women aren’t women. It’s the same old-school sexism that caused the last two waves of feminism, repackaged as “progressive.”

Here’s the thing: a lesbian is a female homosexual. If you are female, and you are exclusively attracted to females, you are a lesbian. Whatever feelings you have toward yourself are lesbian feelings. If you feel like hot stuff, you walk with a swagger, you like looking at the ladies, you want women to think you’re a stud, you like wearing comfortable clothes, you don’t fit into the same culture as straight women, but identify with men, you’ve always felt “different,” and you don’t meet the dominant cultural idea about what women are, then congratulations! You are a perfectly normal dyke. Your membership card’s in the mail. Welcome to the club.

Question: What does it mean to be trans?

You may recall I ordered several books at once and that I’m reading “all of them first.” Two of them are by Leslie Feinberg. I’m not going to review them each separately because to be honest I have indeed been reading both of them at the same time, (along with Hannah Hart’s book, and some more books I just signed out of the library yesterday because apparently I need to be reading like six books at the same time because I’m a nutcase.) I’m just going to tell you my thoughts as they come to me, and these thoughts might be inspired by either book.

Reading Leslie Feinberg has been setting off lots of fireworks in my brain, and by fireworks, I mean thoughts, questions, and realizations. One of these questions brings me back to the very basics of the issue, which is what does it mean to be trans?
Feinberg offers two definitions of trans in her book Transgender Warriors, (page x of the preface):

  1. Everyone who challenges the boundaries of sex and gender; and
  2. Those who reassign the sex they were labelled at birth

The definition #1 is fascinating to me because it’s so broad and vague that it could include almost anyone. To even begin to understand this definition, we’d have to agree on the definition of ‘gender’ (a word which has many meanings) and then once we’ve agreed on a definition of gender we’d have to agree on what it means to challenge gender.

John Money, who coined the term gender, defined it as: “the overall degree of masculinity and/or femininity that is privately experienced and publicly manifested in infancy, childhood, and adulthood, and that usually though not invariably correlates with the anatomy of the organs of procreation.”

Knowing that gender corresponds to how masculine or feminine a person is, and knowing that the concepts of masculinity and femininity are largely based on stereotypes about what men and women are like, feminists have taken “gender” to mean a set of culturally-constructed sex stereotypes. As we feminists note on a regular basis, the culturally-constructed sex stereotypes limit both sexes but primarily harm women, who are at the bottom of the sex hierarchy.

The feminist movement is, in part, a movement to abolish the feminine gender role—to abolish the limitation of women to the role of wives and mothers whose job is to stay in the kitchen, to abolish the sexist beauty standards that reward women for wearing uncomfortable clothes and makeup, and to give us the freedom to express ourselves as we see fit. (Of course, the feminist movement is also about ending male violence, which is related to changing the masculine gender role and restructuring society so that men and women have equal power.)

So, from a certain standpoint, feminists as a group can be lumped into the category of “trans” on the basis that we challenge the concept of gender. So many times I’ve read some writing by a human female who says she doesn’t identify as a woman because she doesn’t want people looking at her breasts instead of treating her like a person, and I’m like “DUH. That doesn’t mean you aren’t a woman, that means you’re a feminist.”

This isn’t usually what transgenderists mean when they talk about challenging gender. They aren’t usually talking about abolishing stereotypes. Usually their focus is on treating ‘gender’ as a social category of ‘man’ or ‘woman’ or other categories, that are divorced from biological sex, where ‘challenging gender’ means challenging the idea that there are only two possible ‘gender categories’ for people to identify into. Transgenderists are a wide variety of people, and some of them do want to abolish sex stereotypes while others want to reinforce them because that’s what props up their identities.

With a definition of trans that is so wide open as to include anyone who challenges gender, which is itself a wide open concept, you can argue that radical feminists are inherently trans. It’s a hilarious thought, I know.

Magdalen Berns has an excellent video where she explains some of what the issue is with the definition of trans being so wide open. I’m throwing this in here because I like the video and it’s related to this topic.

Feinberg offers a list of the possible people who could be included under the trans umbrella:

Transsexuals, transgenders, transvestites, transgenderists, bigenders, drag queens, drag kings, cross-dressers, masculine women, feminine men, intersexuals, androgynes, cross-genders, shape-shifters, passing women, passing men, gender-benders, gender-blenders, bearded women, and women bodybuilders. (Transgender Warriors, preface, page x).

This is a really varied group. I have the same problem with this group as I have with lumping Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals under the same umbrella. We have different interests and different needs, sometimes our ideas conflict with each other, and we cannot speak with one voice. For example, gay men will sometimes adopt babies via surrogacy, and lesbians don’t require the “right” to purchase children birthed by other women. In fact, lots of us are against surrogacy on the grounds that it exploits women’s bodies. Gay men and lesbians can’t be said to always have the same interests or even that our interests are always compatible with each other. In addition, bisexuals often accuse lesbians of “biphobia” and the reverse happens too; lesbians feel that bisexuals are homophobic for some of the things they say. I don’t see how all these groups can be under the same umbrella when we often find ourselves against each other. We can all work together on broad issues such as same-sex marriage, but we don’t often have much in common.

I believe the interests of transsexuals and cross-dressers are very different and often contradictory, to the point where they cannot be under the same umbrella. A transsexual wants to change his or her body and permanently live as the opposite sex. A cross-dresser isn’t trying to change his or her body but just likes dressing up. Whereas transsexuals want the right to modify their bodies, cross-dressers want the right to cross-dress without modifying their bodies. How to accommodate transsexuals and cross-dressers in washrooms is very, very different. Whether or not “being trans is a choice” or whether it should be a protected category of people is a very different conversation whether you’re talking about transsexuals or cross-dressers.

How many times does a person have to cross-dress in order to be considered “trans”? I have worn men’s clothes before, so am I trans? My partner often wears men’s clothes so is she “trans”? Am I a TERF with a trans partner then?

Also, I wrote a fairy tale with a cross-dressing character. My character Noble is someone who “challenges the boundaries of sex and gender,” and I celebrated this character as a hero. Am I a TERF who celebrates trans people in fiction in addition to having a ‘trans’ partner?

Another thing. One of the groups listed in the umbrella up there is “masculine women.” I’m attracted to masculine women, so am I ‘exclusionary’ of the people I’m attracted to?

When you leave the definition of trans wide open like that, all sorts of interesting interpretations are possible. This really sheds light on both the need to define trans in a coherent way, and the meaninglessness of the idea of “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist.” If my partner and my friends and my fictional characters and maybe even me, can fall under the umbrella of ‘trans,’ then how can I be trans-exclusionary?

A trans blogger once wrote a hit piece about me arguing that I am indeed trans-exclusionary, despite the fact that I listen to trans people (watch their videos, read their books), have a partner who is a gender-bender, interact politely with trans people in real life, and have never actually banned a trans person from anything. His argument was that I am exclusionary because I exclude transwomen from the definition of woman. I don’t think this is accurate, because it’s not me personally excluding transwomen from the definition of woman, it’s the definition itself. A woman is an adult human female, and a transwoman is a human male. Males aren’t females. All males are excluded from the definition of female for the same reason that cats are excluded from the definition of fish. They are two different things, so naturally they don’t fall under the same definition. This has nothing to do with me or my personal prejudices, it’s how language works.

I regularly celebrate people who challenge the limitations placed on us because of our sex; in fact, I even wrote a Manifesto for such people (with the help of a few friends, thank you!) so I am actually doing some of the work that Leslie Feinberg considered to be liberation for trans people. People on the Internet like to frame issues in very black-and-white terms with no room for nuance, they like to ignore what people are actually saying and argue against straw men, and they like to misrepresent their alleged enemies in order to make a big show out of hating them. Far from being bigoted and hateful toward those who are gender nonconforming; we feminists have many of the same goals as they do.

I find it very frustrating and disappointing when people prefer to argue against straw men rather than engaging with what someone actually said, and when people claim to disagree with someone whose position they have not even read or understood.

The question of “what does it mean to be trans” has not been settled. There is no answer; the trans community leaves this wide open on purpose. I think this is a bad strategy, because there are people who don’t have gender dysphoria and don’t make body modifications calling themselves trans and speaking for trans people and this is wrong.

Very much related to the question of ‘what does it mean to be trans’ is the question of ‘what is trans liberation, exactly’? Is trans liberation the liberation of people with gender dysphoria in order that they may treat their dysphoria the way they see fit, or is it the liberation of cross-dressers who wish to cross-dress in public? These two things are not the same at all. These are two different movements. One is a medical movement about how to treat people with an illness and the other is a movement to change social rules about appropriate dress and behavior in public.

I enjoy reading Leslie Feinberg. She writes from experience, and unlike the college students who claim that cupcakes are transphobic, she has experienced actual violence for living in a body that people can’t easily recognize as male or female. I value her perspective and I agree with her on a lot of things. For example, I don’t think that people with ambiguous gender presentations are ‘freaks’ nor should they be denied basic rights such as housing, employment, and health care because of people’s prejudices toward them.

I’m going to explore my next question, ‘what is trans liberation, exactly?’ in another post, since as usual it’s going to get long-winded.

Video: Man explains to other men how to have “lesbian sex”

It’s Riley J. Menace again! In this video entitled “Having sex as a trans lesbian,” the heterosexual male YouTuber delivers his usual brand of preposterous nonsense and homophobia disguised as “progressive” politics.

He is addressing male-bodied people who identify as “lesbian” or “nonbinary” and who want to have sex with women. He starts off by saying there are no sex ed resources for these types of “queer trans” people. Ironically, since he is addressing male-bodied people who want to have sex with women, he is actually talking about hetero sex, the most-talked-about type in the world! And unlike most sex ed programs about hetero sex, Riley doesn’t say anything at all about birth control, making this information less useful than most regular sex ed! There are so many complete reversals of reality in queer/trans “logic” it makes my head spin.

People think that lesbian sex only happens between two “cis” women, Riley explains, but lesbian sex can also occur between two trans women or a nonbinary person and a woman, even if they have penises!

In order to respond to that, I will need to use this “fail” button.

The reality-denying queer/trans community likes to pretend that “lesbian” is an abstract concept that anyone can define for themselves and a free-floating identity label that anyone can try on like a hat. Well, it’s not just “anyone” because, in the queer/trans cult, only men can define what a lesbian is, and any actual lesbians who attempt to define “lesbian” are bigoted TERFs.

Sexual orientation is what sex you are attracted to, not what gender. Lesbians are female homosexuals, that is, humans of the female sex who are attracted to humans of the female sex. By definition, anyone who is male cannot be a female homosexual, since he is not a female anything. Men who believe they are “transwomen” or “nonbinary” are not lesbians.

The first thing Riley explains to the male “lesbians” he is addressing in this video is that sex doesn’t always mean penis-in-vagina sex (PIV.) This is just golden, because the only people in the world who think that sex=PIV are MEN. You would never have to explain to an actual lesbian (female homosexual) that sex isn’t always PIV, because for us, sex never involves a penis. We do not think about penises at all when we think about sex!

Men who identify as transwomen like to claim to have female brains, but they demonstrate at every turn that their brains are just as male as the next douchebag’s. If a man actually did “think like a woman,” it might occur to him that penises aren’t the center of the universe, without anyone having to explain it to him.

One of the bits of advice he gives is for men who are worried about going on hormones because they enjoy PIV and they aren’t sure how hormones will affect that.

It’s hard to even find adequate words to convey how incredibly homophobic and offensive it is to suggest that men who like using their penises to penetrate women and who haven’t even taken any hormones can possibly be regarded as “women” or “lesbians,” or that the heterosexual intercourse they’re having can be regarded as “lesbian sex.” A man who hasn’t taken any steps to medically transition and likes using his penis to penetrate women isn’t even a transwoman, so even if transwomen could be called “lesbians,” (and they can’t), he still wouldn’t make the cut. He’s just a regular straight man!

In 2017, in liberal circles, it actually needs to be explained that lesbian sex never involves a penis. It never involves a man of any kind. Lesbian sex, by definition, can only occur between women who are attracted to women.

Riley explains that sex doesn’t always have to include penetration, it can also involve touching your partner’s genitals with your hands! There’s another thing that all women already know, and the only people who haven’t gotten that memo are men! Men are the ones who define sex as “when I put my penis in a thing.” Women, however, define sex as when we engage in pleasurable activities that lead to orgasm. Women’s bodies respond to manual and oral stimulation and we all know that without being told!

His next bit of advice is to use sex toys, and then he reveals that this video is being sponsored by a sex toy company, Adam and Eve, who has provided him with sex toys to demonstrate! Wow. This isn’t the first time a sex toy company sponsored a video by a trans-identified person so that they could give “advice” on products to buy. As I said last time, if your liberation movement has corporate sponsors eager to sponsor you, it isn’t a liberation movement! So what products does the company Adam and Eve think that male “lesbians” need to buy in order to have “lesbian” sex?

Firstly, a large massager with a very powerful vibration, that, personally, I would never use because intense vibration like that makes me numb, that also has an add-on attachment for a penis! So a guy can have “lesbian” sex by putting his penis in a vibrating massager! And this is better than a regular sex toy for men because it’s more “feminine” and seems like something a “cis woman” would use. Pardon me while I laugh my ass off!

The next one is a strap-on, because if you put a strap-on over your penis you can feel like you’re having real “lesbian” sex! And just so that you feel really girly while using something so phallic, it’s pink and has a frilly-looking pink strap! (However, the dildo itself is still penis-shaped, which is weird. They make dildos that are smooth and not penis-shaped, so if you were dysphoric while wearing a dildo, wouldn’t you want the smooth kind?) I wouldn’t use a silly, pink frilly strap. Real lesbians use leather, dude!

The next sex toy from our lovely sponsor is one that stimulates the prostate. News flash: zero lesbians have prostates!

After he puts the sex toys away, Riley explains to the dudes who aspire to be “lesbians” that sex is a whole-body thing, you can focus on parts other than genitals, and lots of foreplay is good. Again, all women know this by instinct. It is only men who think that there is “foreplay” and then “sex.” That’s because for men, “foreplay” is just an annoying thing you have to do to get your lady interested in being penetrated. Sex between women is naturally a whole-body experience because we don’t define sex as ‘when I put my penis in a thing.’ Even those of us who enjoy penetration know you don’t start by immediately jamming things into her, you start by getting her aroused!

Then Riley finishes his autogynephile sex ed talk by suggesting BDSM. It never fails–the queer/trans cult is totally into the idea that if you are already dissociating from your body, the solution is to dissociate more. Riley suggests a paddle and some bondage equipment helpfully provided by his corporate sponsor. He mentions PIV again here, I don’t know why. It’s almost like he has PIV on his mind? Because he’s a straight man?

Riley is always offensive, but this video really tops them all. A man purporting to explain to other men how to have “lesbian sex” is just the height of male entitlement to appropriate lesbian identity and erasure of actual lesbians. I know that tons of people on various social media platforms have already told him how homophobic he is, and he just doesn’t care. Actual females, including actual lesbians, are not as real to these men as their fantasies are.

Reading anti-gay comments

Today I decided to read some homophobic articles just for the hell of it. I’m curious about what homophobic people are saying these days. I know they used to say that we were “destroying the moral fabric of society” just by loving each other. I found that phrase upsetting at first but I eventually learned to find it funny. Like, how can you destroy the moral fabric of society by loving someone? People who say this are nuts.

So I read an article from 2015 called “10 Reasons Why Homosexual ‘Marriage’ is Harmful and Must Be Opposed”. The reasons are:

1.  It Is Not Marriage

They define marriage as a union between a man and a woman and then conclude that since gay marriage doesn’t meet this definition, it’s not marriage. Okay… whatever!

An amusing quote from this section is that same-sex marriage “denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage.” That’s…weird. Somehow, two women getting married negates the difference between the sexes? As far as I can tell, when two women or two men get married, the biological categories of male and female remain intact.

Also, ‘complementarity’ is not a word.

2. It Violates Natural Law

I had never heard the phrase ‘natural law’ before, and just by the sound of it I assumed it was a law of nature. You know, like matter cannot be created or destroyed, and gravity pulls objects together, etc. But no, I looked it up, and apparently ‘natural law’ means the social constructs man have designed for how humans should behave. As the Christians have worded it: “Natural law’s most elementary precept is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.” So because men invented ‘natural laws’ outlawing homosexuality, therefore homosexuality is wrong. This is a fancy way of saying “because I said so.”

3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother

Well that’s just silly. All children have a mother and father– it’s scientifically impossible for any child not to have both, because a child is created from an egg from the mother and a sperm from the father. Whether or not the child is actually raised by both parents is a different story. There are many reasons why a child may not be raised by both parents, and although it’s important for a child to have loving parents, the biological parents aren’t always the best ones for the job. Some biological parents are abusive or unable to care for children for other reasons.

4. It Validates and Promotes the Homosexual Lifestyle

Homosexuality isn’t a lifestyle, it’s a sexual orientation. It would still exist even if it got no validation, because it’s not something we consciously choose.

People who are homosexual have lots of different lifestyles. For example, I am childless, urban, and geeky, and I spend lots of time reading. Other gays and lesbians might be rural, outgoing, adventurous, or sporty. Some of us are soccer moms!

Are these folks worried that if we “promote” homosexuality, the incidence will increase? Do they think that heterosexuals will be so seduced by the lure of homosexuality that they’ll convert? Because if so, I think they are demonstrating that they have a poor opinion of heterosexuality!

5. It Turns a Moral Wrong into a Civil Right

I still can’t figure out what is morally wrong about two adult humans loving each other. Why is love wrong, Christians?

6. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union

Why does marriage have to create a family? But seriously though, these people are obsessed with producing children. They act as though the entire purpose of human existence is to produce children. Despite world overpopulation, dwindling resources, and a fragile economy, apparently we should all be having tons of kids. Conclusion: being Christian is about being irresponsible!

Check out this incredibly creepy paragraph: “Traditional marriage is usually so fecund that those who would frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the birth of children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families.” ……really? That’s how Christians describe their sex lives? Sounds awful to me!

7. It Defeats the State’s Purpose of Benefiting Marriage

“One of the main reasons why the State bestows numerous benefits on marriage is that by its very nature and design, marriage provides the normal conditions for a stable, affectionate, and moral atmosphere that is beneficial to the upbringing of children—all fruit of the mutual affection of the parents. This aids in perpetuating the nation and strengthening society, an evident interest of the State.

Homosexual “marriage” does not provide such conditions. Its primary purpose, objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two individuals whose union is sterile by nature. It is not entitled, therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.”

………….okay…… the State shouldn’t approve of any straight marriages among infertile couples or couples who don’t intend to have children?

8. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

They’re upset that they might have to perform a same-sex wedding or rent or sell things to gay people. I would agree that a church shouldn’t be forced to perform a same-sex wedding if they don’t want to, because if you are a church you should be able to practice your religion as you see fit. I don’t know why any gay couples would want to go to a homophobic church and try to bully them into performing a wedding ceremony though—that would be really uncomfortable.  I’m always confused about why companies wouldn’t want to sell things to gay customers. You have a business, you need to make money, but you pick and choose who to sell things to? Do you interview all your customers to make sure they don’t do anything in their private lives you disapprove of before selling them a cake? (Answer: no, it’s ONLY gay people they disapprove of). If I had a business, I would still sell things to Christians, even though I disapprove of their silly hatred. Customers are customers.

9. It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution

“If homosexual “marriage” is universally accepted as the present step in sexual “freedom,” what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain “avant garde” subcultures are already advocating such aberrations.”

I used to think this argument was stupid, but now that I see what’s going on in the ‘queer’ community, where they are trying to normalize ‘kink’ (aka sexual abuse) that includes things like ‘age play’ (acting out pedophile fantasies) and how they approve of ‘transwomen’ like Stephonknee acting out pedophile fantasies in public, I’m starting to think this argument isn’t so stupid. This is why it’s very important for lesbians, gays, and bisexuals to speak out against the sex-pozzie culture that is promoting abusive and dysfunctional behaviors. Being gay or bi is NOT about normalizing sexual abuse, it’s not about having an ‘avante-garde’ sexuality, and we have to keep making that clear, since there are pro-abuse infiltrators trying to attach themselves to our movement.

If people on the right are homophobic when they equate homosexuality with pedophilia, incest, and bestiality, then people on the ‘left’ who say these things should be considered homophobic too!

(Autostraddle = homophobic)

10. It Offends God

This is always an invalid argument. ‘An imaginary character I made up doesn’t like it’ is not a way to convince anyone of anything. I can make up imaginary characters and say they disapprove of you too, that doesn’t mean you will care. This is just another fancy way of saying “because I said so.”

Then I read this article “16 People Who Are Anti-Gay Explain Their Stance On Homosexuality.”

I’m not going to go through the whole thing point by point. A couple of general themes were:

(a) I don’t hate gay people, I just hate gay culture.

This means that the person has a superficial understanding of gay culture. They think being gay is about waving rainbow flags, marching around in skimpy outfits, drinking at the bar and being promiscuous. That’s because they only know what they see in short news segments, and this is the sort of thing that ends up on the news because it’s flashy. In reality, gays, lesbians and bisexuals spend most of our time doing the exact same mundane things that everyone else is doing. We wake up to an alarm clock, take a shower, go to work, drink coffee, go home and try to figure out what’s for dinner, visit our friends, engage in hobbies, and spend time with our spouses and families. Our lives are way more boring than what is presented in the media.

(b) They hate people who are ‘flamboyant’ and just want us to be like everybody else for their comfort.

This is interesting. Conservatives do hate the flamboyant types the most—and that goes for both feminine men and masculine women. They don’t hate gays as much if we look like everybody else, but when we are noticeably gay, they object. They want to normalize and standardize humans and make us all the same. What puzzles me is—why would you want everyone to be the same? Don’t you think the world is a more colorful place when there is diversity? Do you want things to be more boring? I just don’t get it. Even if there is a ‘normal’ way to be, I don’t see why everyone has to be that way.

Here’s a couple of comments I do want to quote:

“Like asexuality, homosexuality is a non-helpful trait that some people have, like an extra toe. It has no evolutionary advantage.”

What’s up with these people and their obsession with breeding? I was surprised that someone considers asexuality another deviance. I think it’s good for society for there to be some humans who don’t reproduce. People who reproduce have to spend large amounts of money and resources on raising their kids, and people who don’t reproduce are free to do other things. It’s good that not all of us are focused on reproduction, since there are lots of other important aspects to life. And as I said above, we are facing an overpopulation problem. It’s actually long past due we stop breeding so much.

“As a Christian, I believe that God created us for heterosexual marriage. He created man and woman, and called it good. Heterosexual sex is a gift from God, it is something that we should cherish and delight in. Throughout the Bible, it is clear that homosexuality is a perversion of God’s original gift. It is something immoral. When I see a homosexual couple, it makes me sad. This is not because they sicken me, disgust me, or because I think that somehow I am better than them. It saddens me because they are partaking in an act that is the very perversion of the good gift that God granted us.”

Again…these people literally believe our entire existence is for nothing but breeding. It’s so weird, do these people not have anything in their lives besides their kids? Do they not have hobbies or careers? Do they not have friends, and holidays, and vacations, and favorite TV shows, sports, anything? There are tons of fulfilling and worthwhile things that people do besides get married and have kids.

This woman thinks that hetero sex is a “gift from God”— well I feel the same way about my own sex life! I think that my sex life is a gift from the Goddess. I thank my lucky stars that I am a lesbian so that I can have the best sex any woman can have, and without the risk of pregnancy. I feel sorry for straight women, since they have way fewer orgasms and have to put up with all sorts of bullshit from their male partners!

I guess what I’ve learned from this experiment is that anti-gay bigots today are still obsessed with sameness and normalcy, still obsessed with breeding, and still really ignorant about what gays and lesbians are actually like. Bunch of idiots!

Our Scarlet Letters

My Only Path to Power


“Giving up her individuality, she would become the general symbol at which the preacher and moralist might point, and in which they might vivify and embody their images of woman’s frailty and sinful passion.” – Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

A list of reasons for admission into a women’s asylum in 1864 include “ill treatment by husband,” “excessive sexual abuse,” (a little is ok I guess) “desertion by husband,” and “desertion of husband.” When men misbehave, women pay the price. A woman with the misfortune of marrying (or being married off to) an abusive man might be committed regardless of her response to her situation: neither enduring the abuse, nor leaving, nor waiting for him to leave would spare her. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

The list of reasons women are killed in “honor killings” include refusing an arranged marriage, refusing marriage in general, and getting raped. When…

View original post 1,047 more words