In my practice I find that sexual identity and sexual orientation are completely unrelated. I have several transgendered patients (all M to F) and while most see themselves as heterosexual women my original transgendered patient (and the one who is the longest post-surgery) is in a multiyear steady relationship with another women and freely identifies herself as “a big bull dyke” (her words). Yes, the joke is old, but my patient never felt herself to be a heterosexual male; in her mind, she was always a homosexual woman.
The proverbial lesbian trapped in am man’s body rears its ugly head. Well, it’s not a man’s body, because it belongs to her and she is a woman. It just has this figure flaw and hair where it shouldn’t be.
I’m doing my best to help my lesbian lover transition physically. I am getting fairly good at electrolysis.
Kelly, if anyone uses that old and sick joke, you might just smile sweetly and say, “Well, I’m letting my inner Lesbian out, and if you want, I’ll be glad to give you a head start with the surgery required.” 
I have to admit to being one of those lesbians who has a minor prejudice against transexuals. Three of my lesbian acquaintances were born as men, and while that makes no difference to my friendship with them, I would be uncomfortable about the idea of dating them. I think it’s because we often have to defend our sexuality to others, and anyone who blurs the borders - transexuals, stone butches, bisexuals - makes our ‘territory’ harder to defend. It’s not a laudable mentality, of course, and I do hope that as society as a whole accepts gay people more, gay people won’t feel the need to be on the defensive so much. For myself I’ve been out for less than a year, so I’ll probably get more relaxed with time.
Just because you’re homosexual doesn’t mean you’re automatically freed from all the prejudices we all grow up with. That goes for the transexuals themselves too, of course.
Well, QueenAl, as long as you admit it’s your prejudice and that it is irrational and you’re trying to overcome it, I don’t think anyone could have a problem with that. Everyone learns and changes as they meet more kinds of people! You seem quite reasonable and self-knowledgeable, so I don’t think I could even begin to class you as someone “anti-trans.”
If I promise not to go to a “Womyn’s Gathering,” you’ll promise not to throw me out of it?
LOL
I don’t actually think Womyn’s gatherings would be my thing (though you never know). However, if you ever went to one of my lesbian bars, I wouldn’t throw you out, as long as you got the drinks in. 
I’m not at all bothered by that. Who you date is entirely your own business.
The sort of prejudice that I am bothered by is the often-expressed attitude that gynophilic male-to-female transsexuals are not entitled to be lesbians – or even women – and cannot be trusted to enter “women-only” or “lesbian-only” space. That’s the sort of insult that I find truly offensive.
See my above post regarding my own feelings on transexuals entering lesbian bars. However, I don’t own a bar, and I’m unsure about the policies of those who do. Not that they’d be able to spot a transexual and turf her out on the spot even if they wanted to, but how would they react if, say, the London Transgendered group asked for use of one of their rooms for meetings? And how would the other customers react? I’m fairly certain that my friends would be OK with it, but maybe I should just ask them.
There have been reports of DNA testing at the door by some “womyn-only” groups (most notably the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival).
In my opinion, they should be obliged to let them use the room as long as they agree to abide by the establishment’s rules. After all, as an innkeeper they’re obliged to serve anyone and everyone who keeps the peace and pays their tab. That’s been the common law of England for five centuries, no reason to change it now.
You might look up Norah Vincent for an example of a prejudiced (and rather annoying) lesbian with the antitranssexual attitudes I find so offensive. I think she writes for Salon now; the piece that best exhibits this attitude, though, is this little gem that she wrote for the Advocate a couple years ago. (She took a lot of heat for that one.)
DNA testing on the door? For real? Wouldn’t that be extremely expensive, difficult to administer, and require customers to wait for days while their results were confirmed?
Pub landlords, as it usually says somewhere near the door, ‘reserve the right to refuse service’ to any customer, without giving a reason. They are not obliged to serve everyone. In any case, some all-female bars are actually private clubs, where you have to register as a member before you enter. (Of course this usually means nothing more than writing your name and address in a log-book). So they would not be obliged to let them use the room, but I do hope that they would choose to.
I posted at my regular board asking about attitudes towards transexuals - I’ll let you know what they say, though they will probably go for the middle-ground response.
The MWMF has been reported to have demanded a DNA karotyping proving that the prospective attendee has two X chromosomes before permitting admittance. They don’t care how long it takes (it actually only takes a few hours, from what I understand, since all you’re checking for is XX vs. XY), what it costs, or how inconvenient it is; what matters is keeping those dangerous female impersonators out of their precious “womyn-only” space. Any “male energy” in the vicinity would ruin the experience for them. (They allow the male offspring of attendees to be present in child care, though. I guess immature Y chromosomes aren’t dangerous.)
I believe that they’ve backed off from this position; now if you don’t have a penis anymore and don’t actually tell anyone that you weren’t born that way, they’ll leave you alone. But if they find out – any way at all – you’re outta there. Amazing that radical feminism has its own version of “don’t ask, don’t tell”, isn’t it?
Then again, Kelly, I guess we should be grateful that those particular institutions are saving us from the horror of having to associate with such po-faced louts as themselves.
I wonder what they would have done in case of Turner’s (XO) or KLeinfelter’s syndrome (XXY)?
Good grief, Doc. Bigots don’t have to deal with details like that. Whether they’re fundaloonies or “womyn-born-womyn” exclusivists.
They’d make you take a written, 600 question exam to prove your true womynhood of course!
A lot of wommyn’s groups spot off about the repression and prejudice of phalocentric society. But their gynocentrism is just as bad.
Gender bias becomes even more ridiculous when you examine just how blurry the distinctions are.
I agree. One of the things that I’d truly like to see changed in my lifetime is the idea of gender being binary. After what I’ve seen and read, it’s a multidimensional continium. Unfortunately, this trend seems here for the long haul.
That is truly sick. What a bunch of enormous fucking assholes. However - if “legally” you are recognized as female, then isn’t there a civil case there if you are denied entry? 
Seems like a nice embarassing lawsuit would nip that in the bud…
I know that “real” lesbians are typically very uncomfortable around M->F TG/TS lesbians, and you know what? That’s really too bad for them. That sort of intolerance and insensitivity is a slap across the face of the very definition of the female mind. Like it’s not hard enough trying to find acceptance with both yourself and in society - being denied acceptance by the very group you actually belong to is quite sad. No wonder suicidal thoughts and suicide are so common among those suffering with the ‘stigma’ of being TG/TS.
Let’s not foget too that many TG/TS people do face hatred and abuse from gay men as well - those who see them as “betraying” maleness by trying to “leave” it (as if one was actually ever really male…).
lee - too bad they don’t make affordable home laser kits, huh?
Well, MWMF is a “private club”. In general, nondiscrimination laws do not apply to private clubs. Since they own the land they use for the gathering and do not have any public involvement, their decision to exclude transsexuals (as well as men) is not subject to review under antidiscrimination law.
DNA testing?? Holy HELL. That’s simply heinous. Just goes to show there’s a lot of bigotry and hate around. Nice to see that these idiots feel that everything they amount to can be reduced to one chromosome. I wonder how they manage to feel any pride in anything they do or feel, since in their eyes it’s not what they do with their lives, or what they feel deep down that counts; but just one little chromosome.
Personally, I don’t understand why some people find it hard to accept that chromosomal sex, gender and sexual orientation are three unlinked things. I suppose that once they have a system of categories to put things in, they are stubbornly resistant to the idea of modifying those categories. But then, you’ve got to modify your world view when confronted with new evidence. It’s only good and right to adapt your hypotheses to form a coherent theoretical network sufficiently underpinned by empirical evidence.