Transgender Philosophy (Questions, Ideology)

[FNH]

Is it transphobic to say you are only interested in someone born with XX chromosomes and the sexual characteristics associated with it?

[hey]

I am assuming this in reference to "transgender" vs "transgendered."

If I haven't made it clear enough, I am not going to accept "It's offensive/rude/disrespectful" as a discussion ending argument for valid points of contention. We went through a whole song and dance in establishing that proper pronoun/classification use is based on self-identified gender vs. assigned-sex-at-birth/biological-sex/etc. I am enforcing, loosely, the use pronouns based on self-identified gender because I think it was clear one side won that argument (because they presented an argument that, logically, the other side had no counter for). And in order to facilitate the discussion moving on, I'm not permitting people who have lost the argument to sulk in the corner continue to use the words they want to just because.

However, this is a different argument about linguistics. The poster you are disagreeing with has presented evidence, written by a transgender woman, that the use of the "-ed" suffix is a matter of grammar, not disrespect, prejudice, etc. The evidence has specific, on-point, rebuttal to the main argument that has been used to defend "transgender" vs. "transgendered" (i.e. that the -ed implies that something has been ‘done to’ the ‘transgendered’ person). Furthermore, from what I can tell, he has been completely respectful about trying to engage in the discussion.

The fact that he disagrees with you, and the fact that disagreement regards an issue you believe to be inherently about respect, does not render his behavior disrespectful. Insofar as you find it offensive to be called transgendered instead of transgender, you are entitled to be addressed with all due care and respect.

But you do not get to set the terms of the nomenclature the rest of the forum uses. You want everyone here to drop the -ed off the word, give an argument for it besides the fact that you find it disrespectful.

However I suggest that you let it go because this discussion about semantics has been highly counterproductive. You are making mountains out of molehills, and it is notably aggravating to a number of posters who are trying to engage you on substantive grounds.

Okay, bye.

[Cream Soda]

Hypothetically the only thing they couldn't fulfill is carrying a child and sharing genetics with your children. You could still have a biological child of your own (surrogacy) or adopt. A more flat out "that's just not for me" is generally less slippery.

Invoking "trasphobe" over these issues, however, is nonsensical. Attraction and acceptance are two very different things.

Well this definitely applies to pre-op, but not every transgender person gets surgery, but simply put, vaginal sex. (though with that said, even post-op, does it feel the same as a birth vagina?; serious question here)

[Vandalhart]

Well.. I have a feeling this thread may have just come grinding to a halt.

[Gredival]

As I understand it, the issue of transphobia is centered around how you regard and identify transgender persons. It's not about the fact you find yourself incompatible with a transgender woman versus a born-female woman, it's the why of it.

So let's take a ride on the hypo train.

You (a male at birth who identifies as a straight male attracted to females) are about to sleep with Bridget . However when the clothes come off, it turns out there is some equipment down there that you didn't expect! What's at issue is why specifically you are backing out.

A) The plumbing system down there matches your own, and you don't find that equipment sexually appealing. You otherwise find Bridget attractive, but you're not interested with the alternative ride you are being offered compared to the ride that you thought you were going to have.

This is an attraction issue. You're into girls, you see her as a girl, but regardless of that, she is not physically/sexually attractive to you with her clothes off because of how her body is. Therefore, this is not transphobic.

B) The plumbing system down there matches your own, and therefore you mentally identify Bridget as male. To you, it is no longer sleeping with a woman, it's sleeping with a man. And because you are straight, and you are identifying Bridget as male, you are no longer attracted to her.

You identified her as female beforehand, you could not distinguish beforehand... but now when presented with genital dissonance you can't help but see her as a him. This is transphobic. The key point is that the reason for the loss of attraction is centered around your inability to regard her as female.

This probably coincides with being mildly homophobic -- not in a prejudicial way, but in the respect that you you otherwise found her attractive but now you cannot accept that attraction because it would be gay because you see her as male.

[NynJa]

I still fail to see how sexual attraction to someone because of their plumbing is transphobic. If this person no longer wants to associate with said person because they're transgender, then yes, thats transphobic. But a loss of physical attraction because they have plumbing thats associated to males/men/whatever the PC term is, I dont see how thats transphobic, thats just someone who has a sexual preference to women, on the inside and out, imo.

[Moss]

Transphobic just seems like an unnecessarily broad and harsh word for that scenario.

A) The plumbing system down there matches your own, and you don't find that equipment sexually appealing. You otherwise find Bridget attractive, but you're not interested with the alternative ride you are being offered compared to the ride that you thought you were going to have.

True.

B) The plumbing system down there matches your own, and therefore you mentally identify Bridget as male. To you, it is no longer sleeping with a woman, it's sleeping with a man. And because you are straight, and you are identifying Bridget as male, you are no longer attracted to her

This is (partially?) correct. I see a woman with male genitalia, I am no longer attracted to her because she is not a woman biologically. Is that a controversial statement? I wouldn't even say I "see her as a him" as you put it, just that I don't see her as "fully" a woman. Sorry if that last statement sounds crass but I don't know of a better way to word it. I have no issue recognizing anyone's gender. If a biologically born male friend revealed to me he was a woman, I would have no issue now calling him "her."

I'm probably getting trapped into another semantic whirlpool but I'm not understanding that definition of "transphobe."

[Cream Soda]

As I understand it, the issue of transphobia is centered around how you regard and identify transgender persons. It's not about the fact you find yourself incompatible with a transgender woman versus a born-female woman, it's the why of it.

So let's take a ride on the hypo train.

You (a male at birth who identifies as a straight male attracted to females) are about to sleep with Bridget . However when the clothes come off, it turns out there is some equipment down there that you didn't expect! What's at issue is why specifically you are backing out.



This is an attraction issue. You're into girls, you see her as a girl, but regardless of that, she is not physically/sexually attractive to you with her clothes off because of how her body is. Therefore, this is not transphobic.



You identified her as female beforehand, you could not distinguish beforehand... but now when presented with genital dissonance you can't help but see her as a him. This is transphobic. The key point is that the reason for the loss of attraction is centered around your inability to regard her as female.

This probably coincides with being mildly homophobic -- not in a prejudicial way, but in the respect that you you otherwise found her attractive but now you cannot accept that attraction because it would be gay because you see her as male.

Unfortunate too, because Bridget could get it... but I'm not even into the idea of anal, so yea

[Tyrath]

You identified her as female beforehand, you could not distinguish beforehand... but now when presented with genital dissonance you can't help but see her as a him. This is transphobic. The key point is that the reason for the loss of attraction is centered around your inability to regard her as female.

This probably coincides with being mildly homophobic -- not in a prejudicial way, but in the respect that you you otherwise found her attractive but now you cannot accept that attraction because it would be gay because you see her as male.

The issue is, biologically they would still be a him and a lot of attraction is biological. I can still accept that person's gender to be female, but if they have a penis they are still biologically male and that doesn't turn me on.

[Raldo]

Sounds like category A to me then; not sure why people are focusing on category B.

[NynJa]

Sounds like category A to me then; not sure why people are focusing on category B.

because

The issue is, biologically they would still be a him and a lot of attraction is biological. I can still accept that person's gender to be female, but if they have a penis they are still biologically male and that doesn't turn me on.

is Cat B

[Vandalhart]

A little training. It might help with shock for some in the future.

Register to see the NSFW content

Spoiler: show

Not sure if my attempt at lightening the mood will get me in trouble

[Melena]

Apparently this particular defense is in fact banned in California.

Yeah it got banned after a guy managed to get manslaughter instead of murder after he flipped his shit over a woman he was having sexual relations with was actually a pre-op woman. Wasn't far from where I lived and it set off a huge firestorm over lgbt rights.

[wipers]

A little training. It might help with shock for some in the future.

Register to see the NSFW content

Spoiler: show

Not sure if my attempt at lightening the mood will get me in trouble

Following pictures can't be unseen.

[Gredival]

Phobias are about fear or intolerance. In a non-sexual context, transphobia includes when you refuse to acknowledge people by the correct gender. This includes the "Okay I'll refer to you as she/her, but you have a penis so you're really a man" -- it's akin to homophobics who say that "Homosexuality is a lifestyle" and think that it's a condition which can be "cured."

The goalpost here is about your perception. Transphobia comes into play when your inability to be attracted to a MtF transgender is derives from an inability to see her as a woman. Where the mere fact that she has/had a penis forces you to think of her as male or as a man. Where, regardless of whether you can see what's under her clothes, you are distinguishing her from a "normal" woman.

It's fine not to be attracted to her, as long as you can quantify it in terms of something other than "She's a man." To be crass, the difference between A and B is "You're hot with your clothes on, but I don't want to handle that stuff you have under your clothes" vs. "You're really a guy."

Now the problem is that attraction is a sliding scale sort of phenomena. What happens in most cases, I think, is that there is bleeding from A into B. Straight men, by definition, are attracted to feminine features. Therefore, by default, they are not physically attracted to male genitalia. What tends to happen is that the knowledge that a woman has unexpected equipment down there creates a "bleeding" effect -- while you were ignorant and she has all her clothes on, she is attractive and desirable, but after you know what she has underneath her clothes then it's a "cannot unsee" deal. But you don't see her as a romantic/sexual partner anymore because your attraction to her feminine features is competing with the seed in the back of your mind that, with her clothes off, there are masculine aspects which you definitely are not attracted to.

A more crude example that might be more illustrative is a MtF transgender woman whose transformation is not very convincing due to a late transition or what not. A lot of straight guys are not going to not interested in this woman. The question is why you aren't. Is it because she LOOKS like a man, or because she IS a man to you?

Her features are masculine and, as a straight man attracted to women, you do not find them (or her) attractive. That is fine. That means your lack of interest isn't because you are transphobic, it's because she doesn't fit what you are socially and biologically driven to find desirable. She is female... simply not one you find attractive. Just like probably thousands of women who were born female that you don't find attractive for whatever reason.

But if the reason you can't find this woman attractive is not just masculine features, but the belief she actually is a man because of what's under the clothes, then it's a problem. You're then demonstrating the belief that assigned-sex-at-birth is inescapable and is a core facet of the way that you can relate to people.

I still fail to see how sexual attraction to someone because of their plumbing is transphobic. If this person no longer wants to associate with said person because they're transgender, then yes, thats transphobic. But a loss of physical attraction because they have plumbing thats associated to males/men/whatever the PC term is, I dont see how thats transphobic, thats just someone who has a sexual preference to women, on the inside and out, imo.

I see what you are describing a clear situation A in my interpretation. You're saying it's just plain loss of physical attraction. It's akin to how a lot of men don't like women with "too much" muscle. They associate muscle mass with masculinity, so a muscled woman isn't attractive. Not because she's not a woman, but because she doesn't fit match the template for femininity they find attractive.

[Tyrath]

I think you're having trouble separating the sex and gender. I can fully acknowledge a person's gender and see them as a woman, but the sex at birth is relevant to attraction. Not finding them attractive because of their sex does not mean that I ignore their gender, it simply means that attraction is multi-faceted and one part of their identity does not match up with what I find attractive. In this case, it is their sex. You can be someone with a penis that identifies as a woman, but your sex does not change just because your gender does.

Like I said, attraction is multi-faceted. You are attracted to someone based on all of the things that make up their identity. It would have the same effect on me if I found out a girl I was attracted to was a heavy smoker or a bible thumper, I just wouldn't be as attracted to them anymore.

Edit: All of this is in response to a woman who has a penis. I missed the MtF example in your post and you're right in that case their current sex would be female so that shouldn't be the issue. My problem though is that you're applying that same thing to both scenarios where she has a penis or had a penis.

Where the mere fact that she has/had a penis forces you to think of her as male or as a man. Where, regardless of whether you can see what's under her clothes, you are distinguishing her from a "normal" woman.

It's not the same. If you are post-op and don't have a penis anymore than your sex has changed to match your gender identity as a woman. In this case, seeing that person as a male is not an applicable reason for why you don't find them attractive. They are not male in either sex or gender. But if they haven't had that change done, then their sex is still male and it's an acceptable reason to not want to be with that person.

If we're talking about a MtF that has had the surgery done, if I found them attractive to begin with, finding out that they were born with a penis may give me pause, but only because it's not something I've ever had to deal with. But if I found them attractive to begin with and I still do even when their clothes are off, I probably wouldn't care that much.

[Tarage]

Is it fatphobic(Or whatever the PC word is, I don't know) to not be attracted to someone who is severely overweight?

Same concept applies I think.

[NynJa]

someone will say thats not the same cause you know someones a fatty when you see them, and you dont need their clothes off to discern it.

[Gredival]

It's not the same. If you are post-op and don't have a penis anymore than your sex has changed to match your gender identity as a woman. In this case, seeing that person as a male is not an applicable reason for why you don't find them attractive. They are not male in either sex or gender. But if they haven't had that change done, then their sex is still male and it's an acceptable reason to not want to be with that person.

That's the point. What we speak of when we talk about transphobia when someone is inescapably caught up in sex-at-birth as the only reality of what a person's sex/gender is. It's not that they have masculine features that are unattractive to you. It's not that they have a penis, which is unappealing to you. It's literally that they were born male, and therefore are male.

Basically imagine that we had some magic spell that could completely, fully, one-hundred percent transform a person between sexes. You are even fully fertile after the fact, with fully operational genitalia. If, at this point, you still couldn't be attracted to a woman who underwent this magical spell because at one point in time this woman once had a penis (which was been magically and completely transformed), then you are transphobic.

[thetruepandagod]

Is it fatphobic(Or whatever the PC word is, I don't know) to not be attracted to someone who is severely overweight?

Same concept applies I think.

What about someone that used to be fat, lost weight, take her clothes off and you see a good 30lbs of loose skin that was hidden and hanging. Are you fatphobic then?