107 replies to this topic

[DashSim]

To be honest, I've never heard of someone who wouldn't be intimate with a trans person that didn't have their reasoning amount to some degree of transphobia; I've never heard any reason that didn't ultimately boil down to some variation of 'eww trans icky!'

[Fabbrizio]

As it would seem, this needs to be posted:
http://queersunited....-checklist.html

Credit to Vaelstrom for the find.

Edited by DavidReinold, 31 December 2011 - 02:58 PM.

[Din]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being transgendered or gay. I've had multiple friends from both of these "categories", and you know what? They were, are, and will continue to be some of the nicest people I've ever met.

Now, I just wish we could learn to see that. It's always something - race, religion, sex, and now sexuality. Many people just seem to require a group to feel superior to in order to make themselves feel better.

With that rant done, no person, I think, is completely "masculine" or "feminine". I myself am male, and you know what? I hate doing a lot of typical male activities, and I don't really have that "macho" mindset. If I want to laugh, I will laugh. If I want to cry, I will cry.

So, I wish society could see past the front of its nose, and not berate people for being "girly" or "boyish".

[Fabbrizio]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being transgendered or gay. I've had multiple friends from both of these "categories", and you know what? They were, are, and will continue to be some of the nicest people I've ever met.

Now, I just wish we could learn to see that. It's always something - race, religion, sex, and now sexuality. Many people just seem to require a group to feel superior to in order to make themselves feel better.

With that rant done, no person, I think, is completely "masculine" or "feminine". I myself am male, and you know what? I hate doing a lot of typical male activities, and I don't really have that "macho" mindset. If I want to laugh, I will laugh. If I want to cry, I will cry.

So, I wish society could see past the front of its nose, and not berate people for being "girly" or "boyish".

Okay, that's going in my signature. I believe this discussion is over, Din just won.

[DashSim]

Lists like that are nice. Many aspects of transphobia - or homophobia, or racism, or misogyny - are so normal and so accepted that it can be very difficult for people who aren't directly affected by lacking these privileges to even see that they exist.

[Beefster]

One thing I find odd about gender boundaries is how one-way they are. I've noticed that girls can do very boyish things without any social repercussions. They can wear men's clothing, (and often do) work with cars, play sports, and plenty of other "manly" things.

Yet, when men do girly things like picking flowers, baking cakes, wearing skirts, and watching shows about ponies, many people automatically assume that they're gay. It's ridiculous. (Not saying I would wear a skirt though, but that's more due to functional reasons.) At least it's acceptable for men to wear pink now.

Eddie Izzard (A comedian) crossdresses frequently, but he's straight. It's not even a sexual fetish.

I don't really support crossdressing, but that's just because it's nice to be able to distinguish people from tertiary sexual characteristics rather than having to rely on secondary characteristics. (Breasts for ladies/Broad Shoulders for gentlemen) And considering how primary sexual characteristics aren't acceptable to show in public, that obviously isn't an option.

tl;dr version:
Girl who likes boyish things == Tomboy
Man who likes girly things =/= Gay

Sidenote: I often make sexist jokes, so I sometimes come off as a misogynist, but I'm actually somewhat of a feminist- I really don't care what women want to do with their lives, but I still believe their most important role is being a mother. (pretty much just includes giving birth and breastfeeding, at minimum)

Edited by Beefster, 08 January 2012 - 06:19 PM.

[Radien]

Well, of course that would be nice if the people that are affected could be totally open about it and everybody would accept who/how they are. Also, Bambi shouldn't die and after buying two pricy drinks you should get one free. But that's simply not the world we live in.

And may I be quite honest? This is somewhat directed at Robin's post: All you guys with that "Oh I totally accept you but please stay away from me" attitude - that's borderline hypocracy.

Perhaps you didn't understand: I was NOT being idealistic. The idea of being open with your partner is pragmatic. You have to know whether your partner truly supports your way of life, rather than assume that they are as accepting as they seem to be. Revealing the truth about your gender identity is a way of protecting yourself. Keeping it secret is the "idealistic" choice (and the more dangerous one).

(Note: please do not confuse "idealistic" with "ideal." They are very different.)

To be honest, I've never heard of someone who wouldn't be intimate with a trans person that didn't have their reasoning amount to some degree of transphobia; I've never heard any reason that didn't ultimately boil down to some variation of 'eww trans icky!'

Still, if you are trans and keep it secret, by not telling them, you are imposing your own morality on them without their knowledge. It's not right.

Don't get me wrong: the homophobic people who become violent in the face of trans partners is even WORSE. But still, trying to trick those people into following a "higher" set of morals is not right, either.

[Fabbrizio]

I don't really support crossdressing, but that's just because it's nice to be able to distinguish people from tertiary sexual characteristics rather than having to rely on secondary characteristics. (Breasts for ladies/Broad Shoulders for gentlemen) And considering how primary sexual characteristics aren't acceptable to show in public, that obviously isn't an option.

This post made absolutely no sense. If someone wants to hide their primary characteristics, and their secondary characteristics contradict their primary characteristics, chances are they want to be treated exactly how they appear. If anything, crossdressing is a reference point for how out OUGHT to treat someone.

It's not 'a man dressing like a woman' it's 'a woman in a man's body'. Now if you're talking about intimate relationships...well, that's an entirely different issue.

[Radien]

It's not 'a man dressing like a woman' it's 'a woman in a man's body'.

Personally, I don't even like seeing this kind of distinction. It still draws a very distinct line between the genders, even if it encourages people to permanently cross the line if they feel more comfortable on the other side.

It may be an uncomfortable thought in our current society, but I think the world would be better off if the distinction between male clothing and female clothing were blurred much more than it is.

During one of the cultural revolutions -- perhaps in the 60s, I dunno -- it became much more acceptable for women to wear clothing that was once restricted to men (e.g. PANTS). However, if you go shopping, you'll still see a very clear line between men's clothing and women's clothing. There is a clear division between "pants for guys" and "pants for girls." One of the main excuses is sizing -- girls and guys need different fits, and the respective sizes are more likely to buy clothing that fits the stereotypes for their gender -- but there are women who are big and tall enough that they end up wearing men's clothing sometimes, and there is women's clothing that MIGHT be accepted/popular as men's clothing, but it's not available in men's sizes.

For instance, at this moment I'm wearing a black T-shirt with a big Monarch butterfly on the front, that I got on Woot.com. Woot sells all their T-shirts in all sizes. They have "baby doll" sizes, which are undoubtedly popular primarily with the girls, but girls can get the male fit if they want, and the same designs are available in all of the sizes. They make it work.

Anyway, I got the monarch butterfly shirt because it has a broad appeal, and dangit, I like butterflies. There are many beautiful things in the world that a male should be able to enjoy without his masculinity being questioned.... hell, being emasculated shouldn't even be something guys are AFRAID of. Women aren't terribly worried about having a lack of masculinity, so why should a male be so afraid of it?...

I would like to live in a world where transgender folks don't even feel the NEED to undergo SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery, which some people call a "sex change operation"). Most transgenders who undergo SRS do it because they believe they must transition completely to feel at home in society. If society weren't telling them that their body is at odds with their personality, perhaps this sort of barbaric alteration wouldn't be necessary. Your sex could be seen as similar to the difference between having an "innie" or an "outie" belly button.

[Fabbrizio]

Personally, I don't even like seeing this kind of distinction. It still draws a very distinct line between the genders, even if it encourages people to permanently cross the line if they feel more comfortable on the other side.

It may be an uncomfortable thought in our current society, but I think the world would be better off if the distinction between male clothing and female clothing were blurred much more than it is.

During one of the cultural revolutions -- perhaps in the 60s, I dunno -- it became much more acceptable for women to wear clothing that was once restricted to men (e.g. PANTS). However, if you go shopping, you'll still see a very clear line between men's clothing and women's clothing. There is a clear division between "pants for guys" and "pants for girls." One of the main excuses is sizing -- girls and guys need different fits, and the respective sizes are more likely to buy clothing that fits the stereotypes for their gender -- but there are women who are big and tall enough that they end up wearing men's clothing sometimes, and there is women's clothing that MIGHT be accepted/popular as men's clothing, but it's not available in men's sizes.

For instance, at this moment I'm wearing a black T-shirt with a big Monarch butterfly on the front, that I got on Woot.com. Woot sells all their T-shirts in all sizes. They have "baby doll" sizes, which are undoubtedly popular primarily with the girls, but girls can get the male fit if they want, and the same designs are available in all of the sizes. They make it work.

Anyway, I got the monarch butterfly shirt because it has a broad appeal, and dangit, I like butterflies. There are many beautiful things in the world that a male should be able to enjoy without his masculinity being questioned.... hell, being emasculated shouldn't even be something guys are AFRAID of. Women aren't terribly worried about having a lack of masculinity, so why should a male be so afraid of it?...

I would like to live in a world where transgender folks don't even feel the NEED to undergo SRS (Sexual Reassignment Surgery, which some people call a "sex change operation"). Most transgenders who undergo SRS do it because they believe they must transition completely to feel at home in society. If society weren't telling them that their body is at odds with their personality, perhaps this sort of barbaric alteration wouldn't be necessary. Your sex could be seen as similar to the difference between having an "innie" or an "outie" belly button.

If I had more time and energy, I'd 100% agree with you on that - but my point was that if (this is just in a simplified hypothetical) if someone deliberately made their secondary features match the opposite sex in hopes of fitting in, it defeats the purpose to refer to them or consider them by their biological sex.

[Radien]

If I had more time and energy, I'd 100% agree with you on that - but my point was that if (this is just in a simplified hypothetical) if someone deliberately made their secondary features match the opposite sex in hopes of fitting in, it defeats the purpose to refer to them or consider them by their biological sex.

Yeah, I see your point. Not sure what you mean by needing more time and energy, though. I understand what you're getting at even in just that short post.

It sorta leads into the question of language... English really lacks a traditional grammatical method for respectfully referring to a single person without specifying their gender. The word "it" is considered insulting when used to refer to a person. The word "they" is commonly used as a gender-neutral pronoun, but it is awkward, because you're using a plural word to refer to a singular person.

There are other languages that deal with it just fine. Japanese, for instance, often uses the words "kono hito," which mean "this person," or they simply remove the noun from the sentence entirely. English doesn't traditionally allow for nouns to be removed outright without the sentence falling apart (we usually replace them with pronouns), so we lack the words needed to be gender-neutral in a natural-sounding way.

Anyway, if it WEREN'T for all of that, I'd suggest that we just ditch gender-specific pronouns completely. Unfortunately, it's just harder to do that English.

[Geoffrey]

To be honest, I've never heard of someone who wouldn't be intimate with a trans person that didn't have their reasoning amount to some degree of transphobia; I've never heard any reason that didn't ultimately boil down to some variation of 'eww trans icky!'

I could not acquiesce to romance with a transgendered person, but it is not as you think it to be.

Considering people who have had a sex-change operation: I have no desire to be emotionally tied to any person who has undergone cosmetic surgery, as the wish to change one's appearance represents insecurity in oneself. By definition, those without functioning genitalia are without a sex, and I simply do not find that attractive. Moreover, I want to have children, and in the context provided, that would be an impossibility.

Considering people who have not had a sex-change operation: Since ones sex is defined by the presence of functioning reproductive organs, and of which ones they have, this kind of romantic interest would make me definitively homosexual. I am personally not sexually attracted to those of the same sex, and therefore would not want to be romantically involved with a male cross-dresser. Furthermore, as stated above, having children would be an impossibility.

I'm straight - I love my girlfriend and I will still love her even when she stops loving me - but so many of the guys in my area are so loud, obnoxious and rude that I may one day think to myself that I don't want to be a guy anymore. I may be driven to start dressing like a girl, and consciously acting like a girl. And if and when that day comes, I can only hope that my girlfriend will accept my decision and won't stop being the best friend I have.

I would advise that you not to change yourself because of the actions of others; only change if you know it is what you truly want, regardless of how others act or feel.

Edited by Ornlu, 08 January 2012 - 08:04 PM.

[DashSim]

Still, if you are trans and keep it secret, by not telling them, you are imposing your own morality on them without their knowledge. It's not right.

Don't get me wrong: the homophobic people who become violent in the face of trans partners is even WORSE. But still, trying to trick those people into following a "higher" set of morals is not right, either.

I don't at all think of it as a moral or ethical issue, but I do think keeping one's trans status secret in a relationship is an unfathomably bad idea.

I have no desire to be emotionally tied to any person who has undergone cosmetic surgery, as the wish to change one's appearance represents insecurity in oneself.

It doesn't necessarily. Case in point: Many trans people!

Moreover, I want to have children, and in the context provided, that would be an impossibility.

That's a valid reason, though again, one day it won't be impossible.

Considering people who have not had a sex-change operation: Since ones sex is defined by the presence of functioning reproductive organs, and of which ones they have, this kind of romantic interest would make me definitively homosexual.

There are people in relationships with non-op trans people who are definitely not gay, regardless of any pedantic reading of dictionary definitions.

[Geoffrey]

It doesn't necessarily. Case in point: Many trans people!

If they undergo sex-change surgery, they did likely feel insecure in themselves; if they did feel secure in their own bodies, they would likely feel no reason to change so drastically.

There are people in relationships with non-op trans people who are definitely not gay, regardless of any pedantic reading of dictionary definitions.

No. If a person is sexually attracted to someone of the same sex, then said person is definitively homosexual (or bisexual, depending on the exact context). In the case of transsexual people, it is a specific version of homosexuality, but it is still homosexuality.

EDIT:

I have another reason:
Sex-change surgery is paid for by taxes where I live. That is specifically taking funds and care from people who likely need it more. I could not be in a relationship with someone who thought their own happiness to be more important than the well-being of others.

Edited by Ornlu, 09 January 2012 - 03:25 PM.

[Beefster]

This post made absolutely no sense. If someone wants to hide their primary characteristics, and their secondary characteristics contradict their primary characteristics, chances are they want to be treated exactly how they appear. If anything, crossdressing is a reference point for how out OUGHT to treat someone.

It's not 'a man dressing like a woman' it's 'a woman in a man's body'. Now if you're talking about intimate relationships...well, that's an entirely different issue.

Crossdressing is just awkward for me to deal with.

Also, you're mixing up characteristics.
Primary: genitals
Secondary: breasts/broad shoulders
Tertiary: clothing, accessories

I'm sorry, it's just difficult for me to take a stance on what's very much a gray area as far as my religious beliefs go. I don't necessarily believe it's okay, but I really don't care what people do. That's really what tolerance is because tolerance =/= support.

On the other hand, I'm completely against people making ridiculous assumptions about one's sexuality because of interests. By definition, the only thing that defines "gay" is a man who loves men.
Why don't women have this problem? Because "lesbian" means only what it's supposed to mean.

In retrospect, I probably should have posted this in mature discussion. Oh well.