Given the context of this conversation, it is abundantly clear that anyone saying "real man / woman" means "biologically born as a man / woman." The particular phrase "not a real man / woman" can obviously be taken as an insult (in the same vein as "not a real gamer, not a real musician, not a real sport, not a real athlete"), and its probably a good idea to be a little careful with that language, but its really obvious what somebody in this thread means when they say "not a real man or woman" and taking offense at it is silly.
No, no it isn't. Even if it's clear what they mean, they're still using offensive terms. In a thread about race relations, people might know what I mean when I refer to [forbidden word], but that doesn't make it OK to say that, and people would be right to tell me to cut it out.
Transgender issues are obscure enough that it isn't reasonable to expect members of the general populace to use language the community finds appropriate.
"Hey, could you not say 'real man' or 'real woman' and use 'biological' instead? Saying 'not a real woman' is kind of an insult, even if it isn't intentional" <---- VERY VALID AND TOTALLY OK OPINION
"Not a 'real woman?' You're transphobic!" <
DUMB AS FUCK
If you're going to intentionally take offense at a language that has difficulty handling transgender issues I'm not going to be able to take you seriously. It is very obvious what the previous posters meant by "real man" or "real woman," and anyone who intentionally misreads their statements is more interested in mock outrage than honest discussion.
I see no reason to expect people to know what count as offensive of appropriate terms when discussing an issue that is very rarely discussed.
I'd say yes, very much so. I'm straight, I have nothing against transgendered/transsexual/gay/bi/what have yous. I'm friends with several and the like but in the end I'm straight and wouldn't be comfortable (in fact, I'd feel pretty deceived) if I suddenly found out my partner wasn't really a woman far into the relationship.
That said I've heard about the procedures and it sounds like it's still pretty easy to tell once you start getting sexually intimate.
this is a transphobic statement.
It's pretty drilled into everyone's heads due to the culture we live in, but saying "x isn't really x" is not a happy position no matter how otherwise accepting you may be.
Well, it's hard to really call that specifically transphobic. There's a lot more involved there.
It's transphobic to say that somebody "isn't really a woman" because she's transgendered.
I disagree, its a biological fact. If you have a Y chromosome and were born with a penis you are a man. If you underwent 'gender reassignment procedure' you are a man that mutilated his junk.
If that's your thing, fine, good on you, best of luck, really. It isn't any of my business unless we start a relationship. Then it is very much my business.
For the individual who has struggled with sexual/gender identity, it goes farther than strictly chromosomes.
I think thats the best way for me to respond to you, not being a transgendered person myself.
There is no argument here, while society is obliged to treat you fairly and respect the gender you have chosen for yourself the same is not true of individuals. You should clearly be honest and hope for the best, lying will get you nothing and only possibly upset the other person.
That's kind of a pesky word. Is this a choice? Getting surgery obviously is, but whether it's a choice how one feels internally that they are one gender or another seems as difficult a question as the other thread about homosexuality.
I have a F to M friend. She was a lesbian as a woman, and now she identifies with straight men. Having only top half surgery, and given he nature of the type of person he is, I can't imagine he would get into a serious relationship with someone who only liked penis. He's not even sure if he is going to have bottom half surgery. She got ridiculously depressed and now he's a happy hairy dude. He has a better beard than I do. If that is what it took to be happy, it couldn't have really been that much of a choice.
As for the article, I'm gonna say the transgendered person was a dick for getting into a relationship in this middle of this moment of their life. I can't imagine gender reassignment, which requires therapy and a lot of self discovery, is the best time for relationships that are only going to confuse the matters further.
For those of you with HBO on demand, check out an episode of Pornicopia. I forget the number, but its all about kink. There is a brief interview with one of the leading transgendered adult film stars and she says something along the lines of, "I don't tell people I'm dating right away that I'm transgendered, I'll tell them about a month into it. Their first response is always "I'm not gonna touch it, you know, I'm not gonna suck you're dick", but they all do in the end."
Most of her fans are also straight men.
Improvolone on
Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Tangentally, what is the more appropriate manner of referring to such individuals?
Which is to say, while "real" is insensitive, would "biological" be closer to correct and further from cruel?
I mean, aside from rare genetic disorders, a person is chromasomally either XY or XX. Whether or not your exterior shell matches who you are inside doesn't change that biology.
Well, according to trans-activists, you invent new vocabulary. "Natural" women and men are "cis-women" and "cis-men," and the alternative is "trans-woman" and "trans-man."
note that using cisgendered and transgendered terms are only useful when there is a distinction to be made, as in this discussion.
Transgender people have the right to decide for themselves when or if it is safe to come out. Period.
I will say that this is true. But then again, no one is saying that they HAVE to, either. Just that it's very much in their best interests. Even assuming that the partner is fine being with someone who was previously, or is currently, another sex, they are probably less fine being with someone who can't be honest with them.
I know you're just quoting the thread, but I don't like seeing those words under my name as if I said them, because I don't agree with what was quoted.
EDIT: Gah, my tone is all sorts of wrong here - and you fixed it anyway (though it won't transport to others posts).
Transgender people have the right to decide for themselves when or if it is safe to come out. Period.
I will say that this is true. But then again, no one is saying that they HAVE to, either. Just that it's very much in their best interests. Even assuming that the partner is fine being with someone who was previously, or is currently, another sex, they are probably less fine being with someone who can't be honest with them.
Honesty isn't a first date thing, though. I'd expect someone to tell me about their mental health as well, but I can stand to wait until the relationship is about to get serious to find that out.
With being transgender, though, we're talking about a unique issue since most people would expect honesty on this matter from the first meeting, even though there generally isn't a social obligation to divulge anything personal that immediately.
Your buddy goes out with a 'girl' that you know with cartesian certitude used to be a dude. Do you tell him like a 'transphobe' or do you respect the wishes of his date not to be outed as an ex-penile american?
Personally? I'd take him aside and voice my suspicions in private (if I knew that mattered to him and he'd like to know).
If I was certain for whatever reason, I would speak with the transgendered dude(tte) and find out what their intentions were. I would give them the opportunity to reveal the truth on their own terms, but that if they weren't going to (in a reasonable time-frame), I would.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Transgender people have the right to decide for themselves when or if it is safe to come out. Period.
I will say that this is true. But then again, no one is saying that they HAVE to, either. Just that it's very much in their best interests. Even assuming that the partner is fine being with someone who was previously, or is currently, another sex, they are probably less fine being with someone who can't be honest with them.
Honesty isn't a first date thing, though. I'd expect someone to tell me about their mental health as well, but I can stand to wait until the relationship is about to get serious to find that out.
With being transgender, though, we're talking about a unique issue since most people would expect honesty on this matter from the first meeting, even though there generally isn't a social obligation to divulge anything personal that immediately.
We're not talking about a first date thing. If it's a first date, then they're not your SO. I'm assuming they have been going out enough to actually make the declaration that they're together.
Your buddy goes out with a 'girl' that you know with cartesian certitude used to be a dude. Do you tell him like a 'transphobe' or do you respect the wishes of his date not to be outed as an ex-penile american?
You make sure he knows. It is absolutely his right to know something as defining as that about his partner.
A relationship without honesty or communication is not going anywhere. Like any other severe impairment or alteration on a traditional relationship (one party is still married and getting divorced, one party has a serious STD or is HIV positive, one party is on parole, whatever), you need to tell your partner. You might refrain from telling them for a date or two, but eventually the truth will come out and if you've hidden it, particularly for any long period of time, your partner will have a perfectly justified reason for leaving you on the spot.
The rights of the transgendered to remain anonymous are quickly rendered moot in any potentially sexual relationship. Your partner will find out, they have a right to know.
Imagine hiding any other serious complication from your significant other. "Oh, hey, honey, sorry I forgot to mention I'm married and have three children." Would that be acceptable? Can we say the married have a right to out themselves when and where they choose?
There's really no way to base a healthy relationship off of deceit and dishonesty. Any "rights to privacy" or "right to out yourself how you choose" don't change that simple rule.
but that is not really an equal comparison. you choose to get married and make vows binding yourself to another person, and promiscuity is an action you have decided you can do without.
being transgendered is not usually a choice if they want to live a happy comfortable life (as far as they can achieve). gender dysphoria is not something you have a choice about, and some of you in this thread would serve yourselves well by doing a bit of research before making yourselves look embarrassingly ignorant.
gender does not equal sex, a person is not male or female just because he has the visual cues that we accept.
all that being said, i do think that if you are entering into a committed sexual relationship you should make your partner aware of your history. as others have said, honesty is vitally important in relationships, and not being willing to tell your partner of such things is not a good idea in the long run.
Belruel on
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Tangentally, what is the more appropriate manner of referring to such individuals?
Which is to say, while "real" is insensitive, would "biological" be closer to correct and further from cruel?
I mean, aside from rare genetic disorders, a person is chromasomally either XY or XX. Whether or not your exterior shell matches who you are inside doesn't change that biology.
Well, according to trans-activists, you invent new vocabulary. "Natural" women and men are "cis-women" and "cis-men," and the alternative is "trans-woman" and "trans-man."
How do you pronounce that? Is it like "Kiss-woman" or "Siss-woman"?
You don't, because when our language evolves it will be an evolution of definition of known terms as opposed to making new words up.
I really see no reason to blow up about it. Gays were understanding when the word gay went from 'something that is stupid/infuriating/etc' to 'taboo slur' to 'standard definition' (damn that was confusing) so there's no reason to get bent out of shape because someone didn't know "she isn't a she" was offensive.
Sipex on
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
Given the context of this conversation, it is abundantly clear that anyone saying "real man / woman" means "biologically born as a man / woman." The particular phrase "not a real man / woman" can obviously be taken as an insult (in the same vein as "not a real gamer, not a real musician, not a real sport, not a real athlete"), and its probably a good idea to be a little careful with that language, but its really obvious what somebody in this thread means when they say "not a real man or woman" and taking offense at it is silly.
No, no it isn't. Even if it's clear what they mean, they're still using offensive terms. In a thread about race relations, people might know what I mean when I refer to [forbidden word], but that doesn't make it OK to say that, and people would be right to tell me to cut it out.
Transgender issues are obscure enough that it isn't reasonable to expect members of the general populace to use language the community finds appropriate.
"Hey, could you not say 'real man' or 'real woman' and use 'biological' instead? Saying 'not a real woman' is kind of an insult, even if it isn't intentional" <---- VERY VALID AND TOTALLY OK OPINION
"Not a 'real woman?' You're transphobic!" <
DUMB AS FUCK
If you're going to intentionally take offense at a language that has difficulty handling transgender issues I'm not going to be able to take you seriously. It is very obvious what the previous posters meant by "real man" or "real woman," and anyone who intentionally misreads their statements is more interested in mock outrage than honest discussion.
I see no reason to expect people to know what count as offensive of appropriate terms when discussing an issue that is very rarely discussed.
You're right, of course.
I'm sorry if I insulted anyone, it certainly wasn't my intention to do so.
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
I'd say this is most certainly a pre-date conversation. When you get down to brass tax, this is a pretty huge issue to most people. Deceit should not be used to secure companionship.
Deebaser on
0
Options
PasserbyeI am much older than you.in Beach CityRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
Should you lie to someone you're supposed to be in an intimate relationship with about something which is potentially life altering? I would say no, you can't lie about it.
First date, sure, don't mention it, you're testing the waters. If you're thinking you'll have a relationship with them, that's the time to be honest, though. If you haven't told them by the second date, I'd say that's inappropriate and unfair to the other person.
I really see no reason to blow up about it. Gays were understanding when the word gay went from 'something that is stupid/infuriating/etc' to 'taboo slur' to 'standard definition' (damn that was confusing) so there's no reason to get bent out of shape because someone didn't know "she isn't a she" was offensive.
But there is reason to let people know that it's offensive, in the hope that they will stop saying that.
Let's say the boyfriend/girlfriend in question has had full surgery and, even if they need to pump an erection up, has the bits and pieces you love. What is it you are no longer attracted to? The concept of being with someone who is/was the opposite sex of what they are now? While being a valid response, isn't that clearly rooted in some level of homophobia? Wouldn't being okay with this require someone to be at least a bit bi-sexual?
If I'm only interested in natural (as opposed to man-made) vaginas, am I a purest? What about compared with breast implants?
Gender based decisions is something that, for most of us, we've never had to really deal with.
Improvolone on
Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
I'd say this is most certainly a pre-date conversation. When you get down to brass tax, this is a pretty huge issue to most people. Deceit should not be used to secure companionship.
This. We can argue all day about whether or not it should be an issue, but the fact is, for many many people it is one. That alone makes disclosure crucial.
Transgender people have the right to decide for themselves when or if it is safe to come out. Period.
I will say that this is true. But then again, no one is saying that they HAVE to, either. Just that it's very much in their best interests. Even assuming that the partner is fine being with someone who was previously, or is currently, another sex, they are probably less fine being with someone who can't be honest with them.
Honesty isn't a first date thing, though. I'd expect someone to tell me about their mental health as well, but I can stand to wait until the relationship is about to get serious to find that out.
With being transgender, though, we're talking about a unique issue since most people would expect honesty on this matter from the first meeting, even though there generally isn't a social obligation to divulge anything personal that immediately.
We're not talking about a first date thing. If it's a first date, then they're not your SO. I'm assuming they have been going out enough to actually make the declaration that they're together.
But see, most people wouldn't feel comfortable going on one date with a trans person.
I think here, more than anywhere else, the right to privacy and an individual's right to comfort are totally at odds. I mean, having sex with a trans person without knowing they are trans would be tantamount to being raped, for some people. If I gave oral sex to a lesbian under the guise of a biological female, I'd probably go to jail.
At the same time, though, I really feel for trans people. And frankly, if any of the women I've dated revealed themselves as biological men, I don't think I'd care. Doesn't make it right to keep that info to yourself given the reality of how people view trans people, though.
I don't think this is a first date issue any more than any other kind of emotional, personal baggage, like say...being raped/assaulted or something. You don't tell people that before your first date, but you would when it starts to get serious.
Tangentally, what is the more appropriate manner of referring to such individuals?
Which is to say, while "real" is insensitive, would "biological" be closer to correct and further from cruel?
I mean, aside from rare genetic disorders, a person is chromasomally either XY or XX. Whether or not your exterior shell matches who you are inside doesn't change that biology.
You can say "she's transgendered."
Boom. Done. Neutral term, everybody knows what it means.
"She is not really a she" is (a) wrong and (b) implies a value judgment, that transgendered women are somehow inauthentic or dishonest about their gender.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Given the context of this conversation, it is abundantly clear that anyone saying "real man / woman" means "biologically born as a man / woman." The particular phrase "not a real man / woman" can obviously be taken as an insult (in the same vein as "not a real gamer, not a real musician, not a real sport, not a real athlete"), and its probably a good idea to be a little careful with that language, but its really obvious what somebody in this thread means when they say "not a real man or woman" and taking offense at it is silly.
No, no it isn't. Even if it's clear what they mean, they're still using offensive terms. In a thread about race relations, people might know what I mean when I refer to [forbidden word], but that doesn't make it OK to say that, and people would be right to tell me to cut it out.
Transgender issues are obscure enough that it isn't reasonable to expect members of the general populace to use language the community finds appropriate.
"Hey, could you not say 'real man' or 'real woman' and use 'biological' instead? Saying 'not a real woman' is kind of an insult, even if it isn't intentional" <---- VERY VALID AND TOTALLY OK OPINION
"Not a 'real woman?' You're transphobic!" <
DUMB AS FUCK
If you're going to intentionally take offense at a language that has difficulty handling transgender issues I'm not going to be able to take you seriously. It is very obvious what the previous posters meant by "real man" or "real woman," and anyone who intentionally misreads their statements is more interested in mock outrage than honest discussion.
I see no reason to expect people to know what count as offensive of appropriate terms when discussing an issue that is very rarely discussed.
You're right, of course.
I'm sorry if I insulted anyone, it certainly wasn't my intention to do so.
Its cool, I imagine if you or anyone accused someone of transphobia, it was likewise not an attempt to say "YOU ARE A TERRIBLE FUCKING PERSON GO DIE!" and more an attempt to forcefully remind them that what they are saying is hurtful, even if they don't know it.
And now we can all intentionally interpret what other people say in an empathic and useful way and then the forums will shut down in a week because we'll all be bored.
A relationship without honesty or communication is not going anywhere. Like any other severe impairment or alteration on a traditional relationship (one party is still married and getting divorced, one party has a serious STD or is HIV positive, one party is on parole, whatever), you need to tell your partner. You might refrain from telling them for a date or two, but eventually the truth will come out and if you've hidden it, particularly for any long period of time, your partner will have a perfectly justified reason for leaving you on the spot.
The rights of the transgendered to remain anonymous are quickly rendered moot in any potentially sexual relationship. Your partner will find out, they have a right to know.
Imagine hiding any other serious complication from your significant other. "Oh, hey, honey, sorry I forgot to mention I'm married and have three children." Would that be acceptable? Can we say the married have a right to out themselves when and where they choose?
There's really no way to base a healthy relationship off of deceit and dishonesty. Any "rights to privacy" or "right to out yourself how you choose" don't change that simple rule.
but that is not really an equal comparison. you choose to get married and make vows binding yourself to another person, and promiscuity is an action you have decided you can do without.
being transgendered is not usually a choice if they want to live a happy comfortable life (as far as they can achieve). gender dysphoria is not something you have a choice about, and some of you in this thread would serve yourselves well by doing a bit of research before making yourselves look embarrassingly ignorant.
gender does not equal sex, a person is not male or female just because he has the visual cues that we accept.
all that being said, i do think that if you are entering into a committed sexual relationship you should make your partner aware of your history. as others have said, honesty is vitally important in relationships, and not being willing to tell your partner of such things is not a good idea in the long run.
Would you be fine with finding out your partner had a five year currently running drug addiction and was hiding it from you?
That they're seeing someone on the side and are a sex addict?
That they've been hiding terminal cancer from you?
This isn't a "research exact issue and determine if it should be entirely up to them" it IS entirely up to them (heck, even the married dude cheating on his wife, totally up to him if he cops to it with his mistress), but it's a dick move to try and run a long term serious relationship while hiding major aspects of your life. And gender dysphoria is a major thing in someone's life, and shouldn't be an acceptable secret in a long term committed relationship any more than a mistress or drug addiction should be. This is about honesty with your partner, nothing more, nothing less. Subject of honesty isn't really that big a deal, major life factors don't fall into "white lie" territory.
Now, did you hide it for a month while figuring out how to say it because it's hard for you to talk about? Okay! That happens, and shit can be HARD to open up about. Planning on never mentioning it and continuing to hide it and/or lie about it? Yeah, fuck that. That's not how committed relationships roll.
I don't think this is a first date issue any more than any other kind of emotional, personal baggage, like say...being raped/assaulted or something. You don't tell people that before your first date, but you would when it starts to get serious.
Personal baggage doesn't have the same affect on the person you're dating as this would. There's no comparison.
More accurately, "not attracted to people who do not follow his or her preferred sexual/gender identity".
Which is an exact translation of "she isn't really a she" into needless complexity.
More specifically, forgetting the "real woman" thing, is there anything wrong with simply saying "because she wasn't born a woman?"
But she was.
She was also born with "equipment" that wasn't "female".
See, this is where we get into a real tangle. Because when you really get down to it, what does "being born a woman" really mean? Well, on one side, it means that you have a vagina and two X chromosomes. On the other side? That you identify with the social construct of femininity as present in modern society. The first option is close to a binary (intersex is really quite rare), but the second is a continuum. Unless we want to disregard the gender binary entirely, I don't know how to even approach that. Just being honest here.
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
That man has no penis.
That woman has no vagina.
There, can we just stick with qualifiers like that? Just as good as 'she really isn't a she' without getting into controversial statements and underlying meanings.
More accurately, "not attracted to people who do not follow his or her preferred sexual/gender identity".
Which is an exact translation of "she isn't really a she" into needless complexity.
More specifically, forgetting the "real woman" thing, is there anything wrong with simply saying "because she wasn't born a woman?"
But she was.
She was also born with "equipment" that wasn't "female".
See, this is where we get into a real tangle. Because when you really get down to it, what does "being born a woman" really mean? Well, on one side, it means that you have a vagina and two X chromosomes. On the other side? That you identify with the social construct of femininity as present in modern society. The first option is close to a binary (intersex is really quite rare), but the second is a continuum. Unless we want to disregard the gender binary entirely, I don't know how to even approach that. Just being honest here.
And that's the largest part of the issue.
In fact, I hardly use "terms" at all when actually hanging out with transgendered friends aside from what they prefer, which they explicitly told me when we met.
In the end, some people will hate them, and others will accept. Language will fall in line once culture has accepted. Until then they need to make as much noise as possible, even with lame and silly "new terms" in order to force discourse and improve visibility.
What specifically about a person being transgendered that makes another party refuse to be in an intimate relationship is irrelevant to this discussion. They don't want to be in one with them. It's their choice who they get to be in a relationship with, not other people's.
Mean to say it's a big fucking deal, every bit as much as someone's sexual orientation.
Edit: Whether or not they had a kid may be a better example. I'm having trouble putting it into words, but there are definitely aspects of people that play a significant part in defining who that person is. Cis/Trans would be one of those things.
I think part of the reason I would be okay with a biological female and not a transexual female is because I would feel decieved, feel like she 'pretended' (take this word lightly, please, I'm explaining the feelings I'd have not the opinion) to be female to get with me.
That said I still wouldn't be okay with it if she straight up told me from the start. This I can't explain but really, it's a whole new complexity, it's almost as if you're introducing new sexes to the mix.
There, can we just stick with qualifiers like that? Just as good as 'she really isn't a she' without getting into controversial statements and underlying meanings.
What if he does, surgically?
What if she does, surgically?
Do we have to get into uterine/vas deferens possession, then?
I think Belruel's point was that you can't say that a previous marriage and being transgendered are morally equivalent, which is true but not really relevant, because the analogy is only meant in terms of "is it ok to hide embarrassing things from your partner even if society unfairly judges you for it?"
No attempt to state that being transgender is better or worse than drug addiction, divorce, liking foreign movies, psychological disorders, being really into jogging every day and seriously getting pissed if you can't, whatever. There's no value judgment intended in the analogy, so Bel's correct (assuming I'm accurately assessing Bel's point) but I don't think it matters.
I'd say this is most certainly a pre-date conversation. When you get down to brass tax, this is a pretty huge issue to most people. Deceit should not be used to secure companionship.
This. We can argue all day about whether or not it should be an issue, but the fact is, for many many people it is one. That alone makes disclosure crucial.
right here. this is it.
i mean, obviously the trans individual has the right not to disclose his or her initial sex. there is no question of that right. but is it a good idea? will it lead to a healthy relationship? probably not. whether or not you think this is acceptable or a consequence of transphobia, it's true.
Posts
Transgender issues are obscure enough that it isn't reasonable to expect members of the general populace to use language the community finds appropriate.
"Hey, could you not say 'real man' or 'real woman' and use 'biological' instead? Saying 'not a real woman' is kind of an insult, even if it isn't intentional" <---- VERY VALID AND TOTALLY OK OPINION
"Not a 'real woman?' You're transphobic!" <
DUMB AS FUCK
If you're going to intentionally take offense at a language that has difficulty handling transgender issues I'm not going to be able to take you seriously. It is very obvious what the previous posters meant by "real man" or "real woman," and anyone who intentionally misreads their statements is more interested in mock outrage than honest discussion.
I see no reason to expect people to know what count as offensive of appropriate terms when discussing an issue that is very rarely discussed.
I disagree, its a biological fact. If you have a Y chromosome and were born with a penis you are a man. If you underwent 'gender reassignment procedure' you are a man that mutilated his junk.
If that's your thing, fine, good on you, best of luck, really. It isn't any of my business unless we start a relationship. Then it is very much my business.
For the individual who has struggled with sexual/gender identity, it goes farther than strictly chromosomes.
I think thats the best way for me to respond to you, not being a transgendered person myself.
I have a F to M friend. She was a lesbian as a woman, and now she identifies with straight men. Having only top half surgery, and given he nature of the type of person he is, I can't imagine he would get into a serious relationship with someone who only liked penis. He's not even sure if he is going to have bottom half surgery. She got ridiculously depressed and now he's a happy hairy dude. He has a better beard than I do. If that is what it took to be happy, it couldn't have really been that much of a choice.
As for the article, I'm gonna say the transgendered person was a dick for getting into a relationship in this middle of this moment of their life. I can't imagine gender reassignment, which requires therapy and a lot of self discovery, is the best time for relationships that are only going to confuse the matters further.
For those of you with HBO on demand, check out an episode of Pornicopia. I forget the number, but its all about kink. There is a brief interview with one of the leading transgendered adult film stars and she says something along the lines of, "I don't tell people I'm dating right away that I'm transgendered, I'll tell them about a month into it. Their first response is always "I'm not gonna touch it, you know, I'm not gonna suck you're dick", but they all do in the end."
Most of her fans are also straight men.
note that using cisgendered and transgendered terms are only useful when there is a distinction to be made, as in this discussion.
I know you're just quoting the thread, but I don't like seeing those words under my name as if I said them, because I don't agree with what was quoted.
EDIT: Gah, my tone is all sorts of wrong here - and you fixed it anyway (though it won't transport to others posts).
Honesty isn't a first date thing, though. I'd expect someone to tell me about their mental health as well, but I can stand to wait until the relationship is about to get serious to find that out.
With being transgender, though, we're talking about a unique issue since most people would expect honesty on this matter from the first meeting, even though there generally isn't a social obligation to divulge anything personal that immediately.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
There is not enough lime to justify how right this is.
If I was certain for whatever reason, I would speak with the transgendered dude(tte) and find out what their intentions were. I would give them the opportunity to reveal the truth on their own terms, but that if they weren't going to (in a reasonable time-frame), I would.
We're not talking about a first date thing. If it's a first date, then they're not your SO. I'm assuming they have been going out enough to actually make the declaration that they're together.
You make sure he knows. It is absolutely his right to know something as defining as that about his partner.
I edited my response, too, because it came out way too harsh.
but that is not really an equal comparison. you choose to get married and make vows binding yourself to another person, and promiscuity is an action you have decided you can do without.
being transgendered is not usually a choice if they want to live a happy comfortable life (as far as they can achieve). gender dysphoria is not something you have a choice about, and some of you in this thread would serve yourselves well by doing a bit of research before making yourselves look embarrassingly ignorant.
gender does not equal sex, a person is not male or female just because he has the visual cues that we accept.
all that being said, i do think that if you are entering into a committed sexual relationship you should make your partner aware of your history. as others have said, honesty is vitally important in relationships, and not being willing to tell your partner of such things is not a good idea in the long run.
these words already exist.
They are already used.
They have perfectly viable etymologies.
honestly
edit:: I am slow, this is to Salvation
You're right, of course.
I'm sorry if I insulted anyone, it certainly wasn't my intention to do so.
I think it allows for the ultimate ability of choice, without deriding anyone as "unnatural", which is the intent, is it not?
I am male and a man. I am sexually attracted to women who are female.
I have a number of friends who could play mix-and-match all day.
More specifically, forgetting the "real woman" thing, is there anything wrong with simply saying "because she wasn't born a woman?"
First date, sure, don't mention it, you're testing the waters. If you're thinking you'll have a relationship with them, that's the time to be honest, though. If you haven't told them by the second date, I'd say that's inappropriate and unfair to the other person.
Face Twit Rav Gram
But there is reason to let people know that it's offensive, in the hope that they will stop saying that.
If I'm only interested in natural (as opposed to man-made) vaginas, am I a purest? What about compared with breast implants?
Gender based decisions is something that, for most of us, we've never had to really deal with.
This. We can argue all day about whether or not it should be an issue, but the fact is, for many many people it is one. That alone makes disclosure crucial.
But she was.
She was also born with "equipment" that wasn't "female".
But see, most people wouldn't feel comfortable going on one date with a trans person.
I think here, more than anywhere else, the right to privacy and an individual's right to comfort are totally at odds. I mean, having sex with a trans person without knowing they are trans would be tantamount to being raped, for some people. If I gave oral sex to a lesbian under the guise of a biological female, I'd probably go to jail.
At the same time, though, I really feel for trans people. And frankly, if any of the women I've dated revealed themselves as biological men, I don't think I'd care. Doesn't make it right to keep that info to yourself given the reality of how people view trans people, though.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
You can say "she's transgendered."
Boom. Done. Neutral term, everybody knows what it means.
"She is not really a she" is (a) wrong and (b) implies a value judgment, that transgendered women are somehow inauthentic or dishonest about their gender.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Its cool, I imagine if you or anyone accused someone of transphobia, it was likewise not an attempt to say "YOU ARE A TERRIBLE FUCKING PERSON GO DIE!" and more an attempt to forcefully remind them that what they are saying is hurtful, even if they don't know it.
And now we can all intentionally interpret what other people say in an empathic and useful way and then the forums will shut down in a week because we'll all be bored.
Would you be fine with finding out your partner had a five year currently running drug addiction and was hiding it from you?
That they're seeing someone on the side and are a sex addict?
That they've been hiding terminal cancer from you?
This isn't a "research exact issue and determine if it should be entirely up to them" it IS entirely up to them (heck, even the married dude cheating on his wife, totally up to him if he cops to it with his mistress), but it's a dick move to try and run a long term serious relationship while hiding major aspects of your life. And gender dysphoria is a major thing in someone's life, and shouldn't be an acceptable secret in a long term committed relationship any more than a mistress or drug addiction should be. This is about honesty with your partner, nothing more, nothing less. Subject of honesty isn't really that big a deal, major life factors don't fall into "white lie" territory.
Now, did you hide it for a month while figuring out how to say it because it's hard for you to talk about? Okay! That happens, and shit can be HARD to open up about. Planning on never mentioning it and continuing to hide it and/or lie about it? Yeah, fuck that. That's not how committed relationships roll.
Personal baggage doesn't have the same affect on the person you're dating as this would. There's no comparison.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
See, this is where we get into a real tangle. Because when you really get down to it, what does "being born a woman" really mean? Well, on one side, it means that you have a vagina and two X chromosomes. On the other side? That you identify with the social construct of femininity as present in modern society. The first option is close to a binary (intersex is really quite rare), but the second is a continuum. Unless we want to disregard the gender binary entirely, I don't know how to even approach that. Just being honest here.
That woman has no vagina.
There, can we just stick with qualifiers like that? Just as good as 'she really isn't a she' without getting into controversial statements and underlying meanings.
And that's the largest part of the issue.
In fact, I hardly use "terms" at all when actually hanging out with transgendered friends aside from what they prefer, which they explicitly told me when we met.
In the end, some people will hate them, and others will accept. Language will fall in line once culture has accepted. Until then they need to make as much noise as possible, even with lame and silly "new terms" in order to force discourse and improve visibility.
Mean to say it's a big fucking deal, every bit as much as someone's sexual orientation.
Edit: Whether or not they had a kid may be a better example. I'm having trouble putting it into words, but there are definitely aspects of people that play a significant part in defining who that person is. Cis/Trans would be one of those things.
That said I still wouldn't be okay with it if she straight up told me from the start. This I can't explain but really, it's a whole new complexity, it's almost as if you're introducing new sexes to the mix.
What if he does, surgically?
What if she does, surgically?
Do we have to get into uterine/vas deferens possession, then?
No attempt to state that being transgender is better or worse than drug addiction, divorce, liking foreign movies, psychological disorders, being really into jogging every day and seriously getting pissed if you can't, whatever. There's no value judgment intended in the analogy, so Bel's correct (assuming I'm accurately assessing Bel's point) but I don't think it matters.
right here. this is it.
i mean, obviously the trans individual has the right not to disclose his or her initial sex. there is no question of that right. but is it a good idea? will it lead to a healthy relationship? probably not. whether or not you think this is acceptable or a consequence of transphobia, it's true.