Lesbian Bill Of Rights International (LBORI), of which the WDI USA Lesbian Caucus is a member, has sent the following letter regarding UNAIDS’ new “Terminology Guidelines,” which almost completely erase lesbians as a meaningful category.
To the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS):
Lesbian Bill Of Rights International is an international network of radical feminist, lesbian organizations that have all adopted the Lesbian Bill Of Rights (the LBOR). We are writing to you to express our opposition to the 2024 “UNAIDS Terminology Guidelines.” Our opposition is based on the LBOR, which provides, in pertinent parts:
‘Lesbian’ means a human female homosexual; or, a woman or girl who is exclusively same-sex attracted;
. . .
RESOLVED, that lesbians have the right to be recognized and referred to as a discrete and independent category; that is, as lesbians rather than ‘LGBT’ or ‘LGB’ or ‘gay’ as a catchall;
. . .
RESOLVED, that lesbians have the right to differentiate and separate from gay men, who are first and foremost men;
. . .
RESOLVED, that lesbians have the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of their lesbianism in employment, housing, physical and mental health care, and public accommodations; [emphasis added]
Your introduction to the UNAIDS Guidelines states in part:
Consideration and use of appropriate language can strengthen the global response to the HIV pandemic by diminishing stigma and discrimination and increasing support and understanding for individuals and communities living with HIV.
Lesbians constitute a discrete, definable demographic. Moreover, lesbians are a particularly vulnerable demographic. Because lesbians are at the intersection between same-sex attracted people and the sex class of women and girls, lesbians are the group most affected by the rise of transgenderism within the political, professional, social, and medical spheres. Women have transmitted HIV to each other via lesbian sex; and there are lesbians living with HIV. Yet discussion of lesbians and lesbian communities is almost completely absent in your UNAIDS Guidelines; except where the Guidelines define “homosexual,” lesbians are forced-teamed within “LGBTQIA+,” in violation of the LBOR and in violation of lesbians’ basic human rights as full human beings.
Lesbians have limited common ground with gay men and bisexual people (same-sex attraction); and no political common ground whatsoever with any of the other letters. Lesbians are entitled to separate consideration for purposes of HIV programs.
The Guidelines’ definition of “sexual orientation” should have defined and discussed the particular needs of lesbians with respect to HIV programs. Instead, “sexual orientation” is defined as follows:
Sexual orientation is a person’s inherent emotional, affectional or sexual attraction to other people. A wide range of sexual orientations exist—for example, a person may be attracted to people of the same sex or gender, people of a different sex or gender, or people of more than one gender. Some people do not experience sexual attraction. Sexual orientation and gender identity are distinct, and one cannot be inferred from the other. SOGIESC is an abbreviation for sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sexual characteristics.
This distorts and tends to erase what it means to be a lesbian.
The Guidelines say this about “Women’s Empowerment”:
Women’s empowerment can be defined as promoting and achieving women’s self-worth, their ability to determine their own choices, and their right to influence social change for themselves and others to overcome the obstacles of structural inequality that have historically placed them in a disadvantaged position. Political, social, legal and economic empowerment of women is both a goal and a process, mobilizing women to respond to gender discrimination; to achieve equality of welfare and equal access to resources and opportunities; to benefit from protective laws and access to justice; and to become involved in decision-making at the domestic, local and national levels and have access to power. All people at all levels can actively support women’s empowerment.
We don’t disagree that the empowerment of women is desirable. But “lesbian” is a sexual orientation based on sex, and not a “gender identity.” That is, a lesbian is a lesbian whether or not she “identifies” as lesbian. All lesbians are women or girls. Lesbians can be masculine-presenting or feminine-presenting, or not have a “gender identity” at all. But no lesbian is male. The political, social, legal, and economic empowerment of lesbians needs to be specified as a goal of UNAIDS if this document is not to be discriminatory on its face.
Your definition for “gender-transformative HIV response” includes this statement: “Gender-transformative programmes recognize and address HIV-related disparities across genders, and seek to transform gender norms and stereotypes that increase the vulnerability of people who do not conform to gender norms.” Even by its own terms, your Guidelines fail to serve either women in general or lesbians in particular. They should be reconceived, and rewritten with direct input from lesbians as “lesbian” is defined by the LBOR.
Lesbian Bill Of Rights International
WDI USA Lesbian Caucus
Lesbian Resistance New Zealand
Lesbian Action Group (Australia)
Lezbicon (Norway)
ArciLesbica (Italy)
Thank you for sharing this. We are adult Female Homosexuals. XX to XX. No matter how we may express ourselves or how we dress.
No male can ever be Lesbian no matter what. Even if he ” identifies” as a woman, attracted to women. In essence this is a hetrosexual relationship.
Lesbians also need access to Female only Lesbian centered spaces for our own socialization and safety separate from males attempting to colonize and control us whether they be gay, straight, bi or trans.
Thanks so much for spelling this out.
I agree that the guidelines need to be rewritten with input from groii you ps to which they refer. I am heterosexual; but trying to define one’s humanness & rights based on such identity is thin ice indeed.
So, too, any attempt to define & discriminate trans-persons, who have explicitly different, yet essentially similar concerns. These relatively new attempts to provide distinction by sex-at-birth, gender and identity are important. And no one wants to be ‘lumped’ together with people with whom they do not and cannot identify.
Being ‘smart’ about words is a very important task, not to be done lightly, but weighing each word. Certainly the people being defined should be closely consulted.
I agree that the guidelines need to be rewritten with input from groups to which they refer. Trying to define one’s humanness & rights based on such identity is thin ice indeed.
Attemps to define & discriminate any one of these groups, who have explicitly different, yet essentially similar concerns begs logic. Such relatively new attempts to provide distinction by sex-at-birth, gender and identity are important. And no one wants to be ‘lumped’ together with people with whom they do not and cannot identify.
Being ‘smart’ about words is a very important task, not to be done lightly, but by weighing each word. The people being defined should be closely consulted.