An interesting discussion on transgendered men/women

@Buttermilk,

Buttermilk wrote:

"It feels to me like he's trying to find ways to support his original statement rather than thinking about what people like engineer are saying to him."

Um, no. My opinion hasn't changed.

that is exactly what I said. Your opinion (as expressed in your original statement) has not changed.

You do not appear to be thinking about what people are saying to you/asking you.

1 Reply

As I said early, to be discriminating is human; it is a reasoning trait our brains have. To make people lesser for some reasons (probably too long to list, at least right now since I'm following USA-Portugal) and to keep them from fair treatment is not good.

I'm not arguing that Buttermilk doesn't get to discriminate in his own life choices.
I'm saying that as time goes by he and many may come to terms that trans women get to be the women they knew they were . He's already somewhat there with the important part of acceptance. Maybe there is distaste in there, but I don't pick up hate at all.

What this has to do with liberals, Finn, I don't know, except that some libs may be more open to understanding earlier. I wouldn't say or even think that is across the board.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Personally I think the only "correct" behavior in this case is to treat the woman as you would treat any other woman for whom you felt no sexual attraction, and this would include your reaction to any romantic or sexual overtures. Probably safe to say that if an unattractive woman flirted with you or asked you out you wouldn't say something like "Are you kidding you ugly cow?" so you shouldn't respond to the transgendered woman with "Are you kidding? You're a goddamned man!"

The transgendered can reasonably only expect to be treated as the sex they believe themselves to be and in the same civil manner we all expect.

The only quibble I have with this (I think it's quite well-stated and agree with it), is that it seems that the OP feels he would never be attracted to a transwoman - while it appears he has little or no experience of them. It's like a kid saying they hate spinach without ever having actually been served spinach.

Again, I don't think there is any upside to the OP spending any time with trans people. Just feels like one of those protesting too much situations.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Lest anyone feel the need to explain, I understand that many if not most of these people believe they are a member of the gender to which they convert and have done so all of their lives. I also understand that for a group of people, gender identification is not a simple matter. I don't think they are all kooks expressing some bizarre mental health problem. Their lives must be very rough and if they feel there is a need to undergo the demanding process of sex change, I'm glad medical science can accommodate them. I have not met any, that I know of, but somehow I suspect that they are less demanding about how people think of them than many of those who feel the need to speak for them.

other than the last sentence fragment that gets a big bravo from me

1 Reply

@Buttermilk,

Buttermilk wrote:

You're really ultra-sensitive aren't you.

nope

not ultra-sensitive

I look at how people use language - and once in a while I feel like pointing out what I see.

If it's upsetting to you - you consider yourself mmmm sensitive Laughing

1 Reply

@Buttermilk,

Quote:

Now I realize the term "biological woman" may be controversial due to the fact that many people who are transgender feel they are biologically their gender they are/feel, but I'm trying to make a less pejorative distinction between my perception of what a woman is to me versus someone who believes they are a woman just assigned the wrong sex.

The less pejorative antonym to transgender is cisgender. Why is that confusing? We have a word for not gay, a word for not trans is useful. For this matter cisgender gives a better description than biological.

Quote:

Women do this all the time. I'm 6'0 230 muscular, and to some I may have a very nice shape and physique but to a lot of women would reject me and say I'm short for my height. In my experience, a lot of women have this "damsel in distress" mentality that one's height equates to strength and protection so a lot of men even men my height get rejected by women who prefer tall men. I used to think this is discriminatory but in actuality I've accepted this as a preference due to their mental complex conditioning. To regurgitate what I've said previously, I prefer to not romantically involve myself with someone who is transgender, however on a platonic level I have no qualms befriending someone who is. But yes, women do/have rejected men for not being a specific height.

If a woman would brush you off because they only date men that are 6'1 or taller before getting to know you then I would consider that discrimination. I'll admit that maybe height might not have been the best parallel here, but my point is still the same.

Quote:

Please forgive my misspellings and typos but what I meant to say was that in my experiences dealing with the women I have dated and the transsexuals, gays, and lesbians I've encountered, I do see distinct differences in behaviors. I used to work in Long Beach which has a large LGBT community outside of San Francisco (along with North Hollywood), so I've come into contact with quite a few. But it sounds like you're denying my experiences, are you?

What is this distinct difference of behavior you see and how can you apply it to the whole LGBT population? I have had a quite bad experience with most of the French people I've interacted more than once but it would wrong of me to expect that behavior from all French people that I meet.

Quote:

So for a lot of men, a man born as a man that transitions to a woman may face scrutiny for not disclosing that fact because a lot of men believe that by being with a transwoman they are in fact engaging in homosexuality.

In this case, it wouldn't be the woman's fault.

Quote:

As far as disclosing medical history on the first date is concerned, there is fine line of do's and don'ts. If two people are hot for each other on the first date (as one night stands happen) and if one person has herpes, HIV or Syphilis then there is indeed an obligation medically to inform the other person that they have such STI's. I'm not saying this is the same as being transgender, but I believe that in the environment that we live in, and as previously mentioned, often times men may believe being with a transwoman is the same as being homosexual and that may be an icebreaker. I know for me, it would. If I make it clear especially on the first date what I look for in a woman I would assume that would be a clear indication of my preference.

Anyone should disclose STDs before sexual activity, be it on the first or tenth date.
You're right in that there is a fine line on what to disclose at the start of a relationship and I believe it should vary depending on each case basis. Does a man have the obligation to tell a potential partner he had to get a testicle removed because of cancer? Does anyone have to disclose that they had to get dental implants?

Quote:

If we're speaking of the same woman I'm seeing now and she told me she was a transwoman, I would not deal with her anymore. The clear reason would be deception because as the personal things we've shared thus far, I would think that, that pertinent information would be disclosed to me. Our society clearly has not accepted the LGBT community fully, and despite progressive actions, I think people ought to proceed with caution and not assume that everyone is going to be as accepting. We don't live in that kind of world where gender is a blurred line.

I meant any woman but let's say it's the same woman but before you started dating her. If she came out to you now would understand ending the relationship based on deception.
People do proceed with caution, that is why many trans people choose to not disclose their status on the first dates, it is a cautionary decision.

======================

To quote something you need to put the text between two tags:

Code:

So for example [quote] this would be quoted [/quote] and the rest would not be.

If you want to quote someone in particular you can put their name in quotations like this

[quote="Pantalones"] this is an example [/quote] I would be quoting myself

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

I am thinking of others opinions here, but they're just that, opinions no more valuable to me than a stranger telling me my red shirt is the wrong color for my skin. You often are insinuating that indirectly I'm closed minded.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

A transwoman can be who they are but I have a right to determine for myself what is best for me....See now it seems you ladies are forcing me to continually validate myself or, forcing me to agree with you by your judgmental tones of "oh eventually he will open his mind." THAT ALONE is judging me. Cause you're insinuating that I'm closed minded.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

Who cares what you think? You really keep pushing the issue. You don't know what I've experienced and it seems no matter how often I use the phrase "In my experience," you are willfully overlooking that.

How about being smart and asking me "Buttermilk, what were your experiences with transsexuals?" Instead of being annoying with your judgments?

0 Replies

@Buttermilk,

I didn't say you don't have that right.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

Well your analytical logic is faulty to say the least and your inability to look at repetitive phrases I've used and your continuance of denying my own experiences are annoying at best. No sensitivity here just annoyed. It's like your a fly in my house a I keep hearing a buzzing sound near my ears. This is how I view judgmental people.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

But your post is reeking with being judgmental just because I don't see as you do.

0 Replies

@Pantalones,

Pantalones wrote:

chai2 wrote:
That is utter bullshit.

This would hold water if you were hiring the person to do a job. In affairs of the heart/looking for someone that you want to spend your life with (or long term at least) you get to be very particular with what you will and will not accept.

We have to play in the sandbox of the world day in and day out. On my own time, if I want to be with someone that has or has not got certain qualities, that's my pursuit of happiness.

I am not saying that you don't get to be selective on what you do or do not accept. All I'm saying is that if someone bases the acceptance of a potential partner on the sole fact that a person was born with a different body than what they have now, then it is no different than not accepting someone because they used to be overweight.

So....you get to be selective in saying you won't date a transgender.

Pretty cut and dry to me.

1 Reply

@Buttermilk,

It removed the inherent contradiction that was present before, but my point wasn't to accuse you of a contradiction, just to point what I think was behind it: a concern that you might be seen as intolerant for not wishing to date a transgendered woman. I could be completely off base, but I don't think so.

I've no reason to doubt that you respect the choice of a transgendered person and wouldn't do or say anything to deliberately offend one. Based on other posts you've made in this forum I'm pretty sure you would be as tolerant of their choice as is required by simple decency (and certainly any law).

0 Replies

@Buttermilk,

Preference implies discrimination. You are discriminating between different versions of the same thing, because of certain recognizable characteristics of each version.

You may prefer brunettes to blondes and therefore you have identified a distinction (hair color) that informs your selection of one of the two versions. You are discriminating, between hair colors. If your preference for brunettes is strong enough you will not ask blondes out on a date. Your dating practices will then be discriminatory based on your preference.

If you have absolutely no preferences about anything, then you will not discriminate, but who can be said to be with preferences?

If you have a preference for women from Germany over China because you find more in common with German culture than Chinese culture, and you won't date Chinese women, or will only date German women as a result, then you are certainly discriminating based on culture. You might be missing out on a great relationship because you are assuming that all Chinese women will personify the aspects of Chinese culture that you find too alien or which you don't appreciate, but that's not hurting Chinese women. I would hope no one might argue that Chinese women have a right to be asked out on a date by you and that your cultural preference is depriving them of this right.

If you won't date Chinese women because you think that their culture is inherently immoral or that the Chinese are in some way sub-human than your preference to not date Chinese women will still be discriminatory, but it will be based on ignorance and/or bigotry. It still will not deprive Chinese women of any reasonably recognizable right so any argument that your discriminatory dating practice is "wrong" in the sense that it is harmful to the subject of your discrimination, would not hold water. An argument that you were ignorant and/or bigoted would hold up, but that's something different than judging the effect of your discrimination.

Discrimination is only legally wrong if it deprives someone of a legally protected right. The law says it is illegal not to sell a house to someone is black, simply because they are black. The law hasn't established a right that all black people must be sold houses. The right is to not be denied buying a house solely on the basis that you are black. Black women don't have a legally protected right to date while men. So if a white man doesn't ask a black woman out on a date solely because she is black, he is discriminating but not illegally. It may be that his reason for discrimination is bigotry, but this shouldn't be assumed, and in any case having a bigoted attitude towards blacks is not, in and of itself, illegal.

Selling someone a house is an economic transaction, not a matter of personal sentiment. Some people may have a sense of personal attachment to their house and only want someone they like to purchase it, but if the person is black and the only reason the seller has for refusing to sell it to a black buyer is "I don't think they are right for the house" the discrimination will likely be found illegal, even if the person truly doesn't care about the color of the buyer's skin. As long as the black buyer can meet the seller's price, whether or not the seller thinks he is "right for the house" won't matter, and it shouldn't. It's far too vague and could easily be used to avoid a sale that is truly based solely on the buyer's skin color.

Dating someone is a far different matter, the law may be able to prove that a white man didn't ask a black woman out on a date solely because she is black but it can't reasonably assert that the reasons a man asks a woman out will essentially be satisfied by any woman dating him and that a woman's skin color doesn't justify a man's refusal to ask her out. Again black women don't have a legally protected right to date white men, but if they did the basis for it would have to essentially treat a date like an economic transaction. This would be absurd.

The bottom line is that you, for whatever reason, prefer not to date transgendered women and so if you won’t ask one out, your dating practices are discriminatory. The discrimination clearly isn’t illegal, and it isn’t even wrong.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

I tend to agree which is why I suggested it might be interesting to see what his reaction would be if he found himself sexually attracted to a transgendered woman, but didn't know she was transgendered until after they had sex, or, to extend it now, after some time in a romantic relationship.

Of course this wouldn't be a perfect test because there would be the whole issue of deceit (not to mention pro-creation if the relationship got serious) to deal with.

I understand where he is coming from, but I have no idea if one could be "fooled" by a transgendered person. I think knowing the woman had once been a man would affect my ability to find her sexually attractive and that seems to be a condition of the hypothetical.

We'll have to ask Buttermilk if he believe his aversion is inviolate, or if he thinks it might ever be possible to find himself being attracted to a transgendered woman after a long enough period of time enjoying her company. Unless there was some obvious physical reminder that she was once a man, I tend to think more men, then some think, could get over the reality of her biological past.

This is one of those things though that I just don't see losing its strangeness anytime soon, no matter how much the level of education or propaganda (depending on your point of view). The incidence of actual intersex people seems far too low for that. I think it would require a wave of people changing gender just for the sake of the experience, but this isn't going to happen unless and until medical science makes it a whole lot easier, cheaper and reversible.

0 Replies

@Pantalones,

Pantalones wrote:

The less pejorative antonym to transgender is cisgender. Why is that confusing? We have a word for not gay, a word for not trans is useful. For this matter cisgender gives a better description than biological.

If I find myself in a situation where I'm concerned about offending a transgendered person, I will try to recall the term "cisgender." If it is confusing to anyone it is because it is a word that is very seldom used outside of discussion or situation with a very specific set of circumstances.
It's not going to "catch on" without widespread repetition or coercion, and there's too much of the latter already.

Quote:

If a woman would brush you off because they only date men that are 6'1 or taller before getting to know you then I would consider that discrimination. I'll admit that maybe height might not have been the best parallel here, but my point is still the same.

I keep returning to this point because I have no confidence that we are all using the term discrimination in the same way. It is very clear that the woman would be discriminating. The question is whether or not that discrimination would in some way be "wrong."

Quote:

What is this distinct difference of behavior you see and how can you apply it to the whole LGBT population?

Your point is valid in the sense that it not often reliable to project the behavior of a few over an entire group, but if it were more reliable in some instance than others I would think it would be with any one group calling itself a "community," Of course you referred to the entire population, but I just get a kick out of the "community" label. What, if you know, makes the LGBT Community a community? I can appreciate that all of it's members might feel united by a sense of persecution, but beyond that it seems the commonality is limited to the shared practice of self-identification based on sexuality, and even this isn't entirely accurate because the T's of the group are not laying claim to an alternative or non-conventional sexual orientation (neither word being used with the intent to offend. If there is a preferred term please let me know). They seem to have a somewhat ill fitting membership in the community. Are their any statistics concerning the sexual orientation of the transgendered? I've tended to assume that someone who undergoes surgery and chemical therapy to be able to better self-identify as a women would have the sexual orientation of a female heterosexual, but I could easily be wrong. A lesbian transgendered woman is clearly not an impossibility although it would probably lead some to conclude that the woman somehow still remained a man, but some also probably conclude that a heterosexual transgendered woman is simply a more committed homosexual transvestite. To the extent that there can be no generalization about T's it would seem that the possibility of any manifestation exists.

Quote:

I have had a quite bad experience with most of the French people I've interacted more than once but it would wrong of me to expect that behavior from all French people that I meet.

Me too and it's amazing how often I hear this so maybe it's not so wrong to generalize about the French Smile

Quote:

In this case, it wouldn't be the woman's fault.

Touching again on the discussion above.

I've missed the prior exchange that led to this, but it seems that Buttermilk was responding to a explanation as to why (or at least one of the reasons why) a transgendered woman might not want to reveal her status to man in advance of a relationship. If so, I can understand her recluctance to make the revelation (for a number of reasons) but putting aside any issue of relationship ethics, I think it would be a big mistake. The chance of it eventually being revealed and the impact it might have are too great not to start the relationship off with full disclosure. Of course if the woman is only interested in a one night stand the question reverts back to ethics.

Quote:

Anyone should disclose STDs before sexual activity, be it on the first or tenth date.
You're right in that there is a fine line on what to disclose at the start of a relationship and I believe it should vary depending on each case basis. Does a man have the obligation to tell a potential partner he had to get a testicle removed because of cancer? Does anyone have to disclose that they had to get dental implants?

I think Buttermilk meant "deal breaker" not "ice breaker"

I don't think having one time been a member of the opposite sex is quite the same as having had dental implants.

I think the ethics are pretty clear. If the disclosure can reasonably be expected to have a material influence on the decision of the other party to proceed with the relationship (whether intended as a one night stand or the possibility of something more extended exists) then it should be made. If the disclosure can reasonably be expected to have a material impact on the other party's assessment of the experience at some point after it has begun or been concluded, it should be made. If the party with something to disclose is not willing to make the disclosure for fear of rejection, the relationship should not be started.

It's not reasonable to expect that a person will refuse a relationship or afterwards view it in a materially different way if dental implants are disclosed. I don't think the same thing can be said for the fact that someone has undergone a sex change.

I can sympathize with a women or man who has endured much in terms of the lead up to the transformation process and the process itself, desperately wanting to have the process put an end to all of it and allow them to live the life they have long believed they should have. I truly hope they will be lucky and find someone, right away, who will make that desire a reality, but selfishness is selfishness no matter how much you have suffered, and happiness can't be obtained without consideration for the feelings of others.

Quote:

I meant any woman but let's say it's the same woman but before you started dating her. If she came out to you now would understand ending the relationship based on deception.
People do proceed with caution, that is why many trans people choose to not disclose their status on the first dates, it is a cautionary decision.

But ultimately a selfish one and it's still a deception regardless.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Thanks but why do you have any difficulty with

Quote:

I have not met any, that I know of, but somehow I suspect that they are less demanding about how people think of them than many of those who feel the need to speak for them.

1 Reply

@Pantalones,

Really quick according to your link from Wikipedia how do you explain the criticisms behind the idea of cisgender upon the following?:

"Prominent gay activist John Aravosis considers the term "a slur against non-trans people."[26]

Other people oppose the use of "cisgender" on the basis that introducing more labels diverts attention from the real issues trans people face.[27]

Christine Sisto in the National Review asked "Why is the transgender community creating words for what I should call myself? So that the trans community will feel better about themselves? " She quoted a blogger who had written "Do not call me cisgender. That is offensive to me. I am offended that you consider that you have power over me, and can name me."[28]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender#Opposition

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Then this whole thread (and the discussion between my friend and I) can be divulged into a discussion of the philosophical principle of positive and negative discrimination. Since in fact being discriminatory is impossible to avoid (especially if a person is not going at the expense of their own will).

1 Reply

An interesting discussion on transgendered men/women

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know