Love For Lesbians

3

[love-for-lesbians]

A lesbian/feminism sideblog because doing discourse and activism on my main blog was doing bad things for my mental health

I am a TME nonbinary lesbian, and use she/her and ze/zir pronouns

This blog is inclusive of trans lesbians and trans women in general

Pro he/him lesbians and nonbinary lesbians, but lesbians being into men is not a thing (and the bi lesbian label is both biphobic and lesbophobic)

[angelbabyspice]

I wasn't trying to insinuate lesbians have to or should have to have sex with men. I want y'all to stop making spaces unsafe for lesbians who have or have sex with men. I want y'all to stop making people feel unwelcome just because they don't fit into your nice, neat little box. Other people have different boundary lines for their sexuality. That should be respected, even in lesbian spaces. Not a crazy concept

that’s fine so let lesbians have their spaces lmfao this is not up for debate

[angelbabyspice]

Thank you @thesituation

[angelbabyspice]

Adding prev tags bc I agree. I didn’t want to overstep and talk over the lesbian experience but THIS^^ many lesbians I know have slept with men at some point? It’s literally what society expects from women and puts them in circumstances where lesbians are more likely to have to be forced into situations where they are with men. Again I don’t want to overstep but I’ve seen this happen irl so the negation and lack of consideration of this fact is really alarming.

[love-for-lesbians]

Yeah they way they use being anti-goldstar lesbian rhetoric (the correct way to be) as a trojan horse to try to insert "lesbians are attracted to men" as a talking point is hideous, especially since "all attraction to men is genuine but you can still be a lesbian" is also very damaging to lesbian's struggle with internalized lesbophobia

[thebutchmessiah]

Dyke arm wrestling, Leeds, May 2026

[mousidy]

a large majority of TMEs haven't unlearned the patriarchal idea that womanhood is a bad thing, and they do not believe trans women actually seek and embrace womanhood. a lot of them seem to think we only want (and experience) the surface level aesthetics of womanhood

[mousidy]

I don't know a single trans woman who didn't know she would face a stark increase in misogyny when she started transition. I don't know a single trans woman who's ever seemed to think "I didn't know I would face misogyny too!" I've never met a trans woman who thought she should be exempt from misogyny because of her transness

and yet far far too many TMEs seem to think we are naive to the challenges of womanhood, that we are taken aback by them and regret opening ourselves up to them. the trans women I know embrace womanhood fully, difficulties and all. transfeminism is a movement of women planting our flags within womanhood and fighting misogyny. we are not keeping one foot in some exit door in case the going gets too tough. we are taking an active role in combatting the forces that oppress us as women

(and, by the way, there is no exit door the way a lot of people seem to think there is. there is no coming back from being a tranny in the eyes of the patriarchy. our womanhood is no more a removable costume than anyone else's)

[anglaised]

did you see that bloggers explanation ☠️

full on making up shit to get mad about….my post said “it sucks lesbians on here get a lot of targeting over stuff other gay ppl namely gay men do” which obviously is referencing misogyny and lesbophobia and this person is just…..talking about how they want a man….? yeah i can see why lesbians dislike u ur like. obsessed with positioning urself as better than them for liking men and its very obvious u demonize them automatically bc they arent attracted to men “they hate women for being attracted to men as if thats not how women are wired” most homophobic statement in the world of course lesbians hate u for this like wtf

[love-for-lesbians]

"They hate women who like men because we just like men. not because we're out here calling man attraction 'how women are wired' and framing lesbianism as inherently insipid and juvenile by calling it 'kissing girls' compared to 'wanting a MAN'"

[systarkitty]

DELTARUNIE ART BLAST

[rennerei]

Climb that butch

[123235785898313578973-deactivat]

some visual details from Coming to Power Writings and Graphics on Lesbian S/M 3rd Edition

[fuckyeahsapphics]

HAPPY PRIDE MONTH HONEYS!👩🏾‍❤️‍💋‍👩🏾🏳️‍🌈✨

[pjharvey]

i'm still a leftist but in my experience women are viewed as expendable in leftist spaces, spoken over, treated as stupid, on a level that is astounding. you can get away with an enormous level of vitriolic hatred for women if you couch it in the right terms

[pjharvey]

yeah they think it's bourgeois and childish and that you are bourgeois and childish if you are a feminist. sometimes the ones that want to act like Allies to Women will act like it's cute (read: naïve) that you're a feminist and expect you to be flattered by that. otherwise you're stuck up and obnoxious for acknowledging rape culture, caring about your own safety, and not believing in bullshit like "rich women don't experience misogyny"

[helenvaughans]

from what i've observed, i do think there is some pressure for women in not explicitly feminist leftist circles to affect a kind of "cool girl" posture for the benefit of the men in the movement

[helenvaughans]

same as it ever was!!!

[cyberpunkpavlichenko]

I understand what many girlies are trying to say when they describe trans women as “women you can freely abuse in public” but cis women also very much get abused in public with no recourse. A theoretical sympathizer might exist where there may be less for trans women, but cis women do in fact get abused in public without people stepping in.

Let’s be specific and detailed in our criticisms of transmisogyny. Cisness doesn’t protect you from public abuse but transmisogyny does ensure less general public sympathy. That’s a lot less loaded and nuanced than “trans women experience public abuse that cis women never do because everyone values the safety and wellbeing of cis women.” That’s clearly not true whereas “trans women receive less general public sympathy for the abuse they experience in private and in public” is 100% true.

[mary-philbin]

okay, i am deeply sorry, i know a lot of you on this website are not a big fan of kids and children in general but PRETTY PLEASE can we just NOT normalize the “i don’t like/i hate children but i don’t wanna hurt them”? because, that’s not fucking possible, okay? that’s two views you can NOT simultaneously hold.

because, let’s talk for real, the problem isn’t just direct violence — it’s the dehumanization of children, which feeds prejudice against childhood, childism, and adultism. this logic IS NOT neutral, and it’s one of the most sophisticated ways prejudice gets perpetuated.

“not liking/hating children” reinforces the idea that they’re annoying, dramatic, inconvenient... less human — and therefore easier to discard, silence, or sacrifice for adult comfort.

elisabeth young-bruehl defines childism as prejudice against children as a social group, comparable to racism, sexism, and homophobia. it functions like any other -ism: an ideology that legitimizes treating a group as property, as inferior, or as available for exploitation. she also shows that childism isn’t limited to extreme cases of violence — it shows up in a whole range of practices that aren’t in children’s best interest: neglect, underfunding of schools, the abusive use of medication on children…

saying “i don’t like/i hate children” isn’t an innocent preference or just a phrase — it’s literally the biased expression of a worldview that dehumanizes and diminishes this group. that’s exactly what childism is.

young-bruehl emphasizes that adults who practice childism “all rely upon a societal prejudice against children to justify themselves and legitimate their behavior.” [p.1] a lot of people may not consciously “hate” children or raise a hand to hit them — but the prejudice allows them to tolerate structures that harm children on a massive scale (child poverty, incarceration, violence, abuse, exploitation, neglect, etc.).

rebecca adami uses the concept of childism to analyze adult resistance to actually implementing children’s rights: prejudice against children gets translated into laws, policies, and practices that deny basic freedoms and normalize their subordination. just like a racist can say “i don’t want to see black people getting hurt” while supporting policies that harm them — an adult who “hates children” is, in practice, feeding the cultural climate that makes violence against children thinkable, justifiable, or dismissed.

adami also shows that childism helps us understand how children are exposed to “prejudices, negative attitudes and discriminatory structures in society” — and how this connects to the weak implementation of the un convention on the rights of the child.

the old idea that “children are just mini adults” has been challenged by childhood sociology, and children are now recognized as rights-bearing subjects who deserve to be heard and respected in their choices.

claiming it’s “fine to dislike and/or hate children” means refusing them that status — putting them back in the position of nuisance, of “noisy things,” of objects. which is exactly what critical theory identifies as the core of adultism and childism.

madeline lane-mckinley argues we live in a world that is “deeply against children,” where they’re treated as extensions of the family, the state, or capital — not as autonomous people. she also talks about “adult supremacy” and proposes a politics of solidarity with children, understanding them as comrades in the fight for a better future.

lane-mckinley also points out that the figure of the child has historically been weaponized in service of white supremacy, empire, and political projects that decide which children deserve protection — and which ones can be abandoned to poverty, war, forced migration.

in other words, discourses of hatred and contempt for children participate in the symbolic economy that makes some children’s lives more exposed to violence.

and finally — in ethical and political terms, there is no way to separate “hating” (or “disliking”) children from passive participation in structures that authorize harm against them.

the only position that’s coherent with children’s rights and with critiques of childism is to let go of that hatred and commit to recognition, listening, and active solidarity.

so yeah. there’s no neutral ground here.

[jaubaius]

No way out

[bogleech]

idiot jail for ignorant beasts

[lochnutmonster]

Sisyphus

[chortlebot]

one must imagine sisyphus ouppy

[gragam]

why is a lesbian flag fine but a gay men flag isn't? genuine question

because the lesbian flag was made as a statement to empower women who felt underserved by the lgbt community. the toothpaste flag was made because a certain subset of gay men who are otherwise universally catered to in lgbt spaces couldnt stand to share the rainbow flag with the rest of the community and decided to remake the lesbian flag For Boys. its reactionary and misogynistic which is not really surprising coming from gay men but frustrating nonetheless

[hyumjim]

You actually just have to accept that it is possible for people in your social group to be abusers even if you are not literally Jeffrey Epstein and in fact even if you have no money and all of the odds stacked against you.

It is true that money and power enables abuse on a grand scale, but the converse is not true— having no money and no power does not make abuse less likely. I think many of us know this from experience. There is no special moral quality to being poor or being oppressed. Oppressed people abuse each other all the fucking time, in families and relationships and friendships. People of color abuse each other. Women abuse each other. Gay people and trans people abuse each other.

Cesar Chavez raped the women and girls of the labor rights movement throughout his career, using worker solidarity as a bludgeoning tool to ensure their silence.

If you say “people in my group don’t do this, it’s the powerful men that do it” then you harm yourself in several ways.

1. You signal to your social circle that you do not hold them to any standard of behavior. You have preemptively pledged loyalty, which means that if they behave objectionably, any objection on your part will mean a betrayal of your community.

2. You mark yourself as socially permissive. People in your social group know that you are, at baseline, unwilling to accept or act on allegations against them. To be frank, this makes you very easy to take advantage of, whether in service of abusing someone else or abusing you directly.

And you harm other people by telling a lie. What about all of the people who have been abused by a person within this oppressed group? They have it reiterated that their abuse cannot be spoken about, for the sake of solidarity.

Everybody on this earth has the potential to do immeasurable harm to another person just as they have the potential to do good. You can— and in fact I would say you must— advocate and fight for the rights of your people without making yourself into a useful tool for bad actors within your community.

[vampiricvenus]

We're in the fascist tradwife, stay-at-home girlfriend, revoked abortion access apocalypse, and people who otherwise are sensible still refuse to admit that most likely means an exacerbated violent hatred for women who just point blank will not voluntarily partner up with a man.

[vampiricvenus]

You are a transmisogynist. And just a misogynist in general.

[vampiricvenus]

AND a lesbophobe. Some lesbians are transmasculine, some transmasculine people are lesbians. But most lesbians aren't, and considering transfem lesbians are such an important, invisibilized and vulnerable part of our community, equating lesbophobia to the transphobia trans men and other transmasculine individuals face? It's just parasitic rhetoric.

Somehow ALL forms of oppression transmascs also face them, alongside the actual targets of the bigotry being addressed. This is usurping actual time and space to discuss the specific position of lesbians within patriarchy, (in terms that patriarchy can understand) as women and "women" (regarding non-binary and transmasc lesbians) who refuse men within a system that demands every woman ends up playing free bangmaid, mother, nurse, therapist and punching bag for whichever random man claims her first, and that refusal is met with violence both at micro and macro levels.

Trans men and non-lesbian transmascs DO face genuine horrific oppression and violence. You all don't even need to constantly pull this sort of behavior that does nothing but degendering yourselves, and throwing in this case both lesbians and transfems under the bus, without even addressing your actual DIRE issues.