all 99 comments

[–]FlanJam 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

From what I've seen, many of them go with everyone is pansexual. I've even heard some say sexuality is a social construct, and if we abolished gender, sexuality wouldn't exist either. And funny enough, they use the same examples for their arguments. According to them, since you can't tell someone's gender, then you could be attracted to anyone, hence you must be pan. If a lesbian liked ellen page before she became elliot, she must really be bi. Not all of them think this way of course, but it seems somewhat common? Not totally uncommon at least.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 15 insightful - 4 fun15 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 4 fun -  (9 children)

Sounds like this thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability

That "people have disabilities not because of disease, but because of how society is treating those people".

So their idea is - "if society will accept disabled people more, than all disabilities would dissapear and people will become healthy".

Which is obviously some post-modernistic bullshit with no sense of reality.

[–]FlanJam 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Wow I never heard of that before. I took a glance at the wiki and even if you give it a charitable interpretation it sounds kinda useless. I don't see how any of that actually accomplishes anything? I feel like a lot these kinds of things are too obsessed with sounding nice and being politically correct, but lacks concrete meaningful activism.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's your modern activism.

I remember that old meme-video when a gang of men were beating gay man, and "modern activists" came nearby and instead of helping, put their rainbow flags and badges and said "I am pro-LGBT!", stood a bit around and then walked away.

That video captured whole sould of modern activism, "liberals" and libfems. It not captured destructive part of those, thought, as those activists loving to speak over oppressed, ignoring real issues and re-focusing money and help into something that is not needed.

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (6 children)

There is a difference between a disability and a condition. I was classed as having a "specific learning disability" in school, yet most of my struggles were not due to my LD, but due to the school system discriminating against me. I was in a self-contained class FULL TIME until high school, even though my behavior wasn't disruptive. Then in high school, when I was in general ed, I had no say in my IEP. The IEP meeting at the end of sophomore was full of a bunch of adults talking about me without involving me in the conversation. They decided next year they will work on "a better understanding of social cues" without asking me if that's what I wanted to work on. Would people like it if a bunch of professionals talked about them without involving them in the conversation. I didn't write my IEP goals, they did.

I fully agree with the social model, as do many other disabled people. Disability is a result of interaction with society. For instance, if you're in a wheelchair, there will be many places not accessible to you. If you're autistic, you don't interact the way the neuro-majority interact. That's what disability is. Disability doesn't mean not healthy and it doesn't necessarily mean people will become healthy if treated better. Though the way society treats disabled people is abysmal.

For instance, a lot of disabled people have medical conditions and use healthcare but don't have access to it. I used to have a painful and rather embarrassing condition that barred me from working and not many doctors treat. The only doctors that treated it were not in our network, and I was incredibly lucky my parents paid for the treatment so I could work. If we had universal health care, I could have just made an appointment without worrying about payments. And don't even get me started on insulin prices. Many states have work requirements for Medicaid, so that means people have to work to get treatment for a condition that makes them unable to work. A paradox!

I am fortunate enough to be able to work. Yet some people just can't work. SSI pays $771 per month for an zaindividual, and that doesn't even cover rent. Most non-working people who I know living on their own had their parents pay for their home. One of my disabed friends was stuck with abusive parents because she couldn't afford to move out.

The healthcare thing is specific to the US as every other developed country has universal health care. Though other countries also segregate disabled children in schools. In France kids often don't get help for ADHD. China stigmatizes autism. Granted these things happen in the US as well.

I would not cure my LD as the real problem for me was the way society treated me and not my LD itself. I fully support the social model.

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Disability is a result of interaction with society. For instance, if you're in a wheelchair, there will be many places not accessible to you.

No, part of disability is a result of interaction(s) with society. It's not like when alone without any social contact people's disabilities suddenly recede or disappear. Many people who rely on wheelchairs don't just use or need them outside their homes.

Within their own homes, many people with disabilities find there are many places not accessible to them. For example, wheelchair users find that the inaccessible places to them in their own pads might include the kitchen sink, the toilet, the medicine cabinet, the tub or shower, upstairs, downstairs, the clothes washing machine, wall-mounted overhead kitchen cabinets, the freezer compartment of their fridge, the microwave mounted over the stove, the rods on which to hang their clothes in closets...

Many people who are disabled are homebound and have very little interactions with society. This doesn't make their disabilities any less impairing.

SSI pays $771 per month for an zaindividual, and that doesn't even cover rent.

I think you might be confusing the base payment amount for those in the US who get federal disability payments known as Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and the payments that go to adults with a history of working who are eligible for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI).

What Is Supplemental Security Income (SSI)? SSI provides minimum basic financial assistance to older adults and persons with disabilities (regardless of age) with very limited income and resources. Federal SSI benefits from the Social Security Administration are often supplemented by state programs.

What Is Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)? SSDI supports individuals who are disabled and have a qualifying work history, either through their own employment or a family member (spouse/parent).

What Is the difference between SSI and SSDI? The major difference is that SSI determination is based on age/disability and limited income and resources, whereas SSDI determination is based on disability and work credits.

In addition, in most states, an SSI recipient will automatically qualify for Medicaid. A person with SSDI will automatically qualify for Medicare after 24 months of receiving disability payments (individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis [ALS] are eligible for Medicare immediately).

https://www.ncoa.org/article/ssi-vs-ssdi-what-are-these-benefits-how-they-differ

If you are eligible for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits, the amount you receive each month will be based on your average lifetime earnings before your disability began. It is not based on how severe your disability is or how much income you have. Most SSDI recipients receive between $800 and $1,800 per month (the average for 2021 is $1,277). However, if you are receiving disability payments from other sources, as discussed below, your payment may be reduced.

https://www.disabilitysecrets.com/how-much-in-ssd.html

The new SSI federal base amount is $794 per month for an individual and $1,191 per month for a couple. The SSI payment amounts are higher in states that pay a supplementary SSI payment.

While exact Social Security retirement and disability benefit amounts depend on the lifetime earnings of the recipient, here are the average benefit amounts anticipated for 2021:

average retirement benefit: $1,543 (an increase of $20)

average disability benefit: $1,277 (an increase of $16)

average widow's or widower's benefit: $1,453 (an increase of $19).

https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/social-security-and-ssi-disability-and-benefit-amounts-for-2021.html

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

I think you might be confusing the base payment amount for those in the US who get federal disability payments known as Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and the payments that go to adults with a history of working who are eligible for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI).

I was specifically referring to SSI. SSI is for people with no work history and less than 2K. SSDI is for people who worked. Still, it doesn't cover rent and my state at one point cut Section 8 programs, but they're brought back, but there's a huge waitlist.

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, I know you mentioned SSI specifically. But all your statements pertaining to persons with disabilities in general have assumed that the typical or average person with disabilities is a very young person who still relies on parents to provide them with a home and/or financial support because they have never held a job or is of limited work experience and low earning potential:

I am fortunate enough to be able to work. Yet some people just can't work. SSI pays $771 per month for an zaindividual, and that doesn't even cover rent. Most non-working people who I know living on their own had their parents pay for their home. One of my disabed friends was stuck with abusive parents because she couldn't afford to move out.

When the fact of the matter is, most people with disabilities are adults with working histories who haven't lived with their/our parents for decades. Many are people whose parents died long ago.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You are correct that medical condition and disability are different things.

Medical condition is general term which includes big array of diseases, disabilities, disorders, lesions and even non-pathologic changes to organism which require medical attention - like pregnancy.

Disability is a medical condition which limits person's movements, senses or activities.

And it has nothing to do with society at all. I will not start see on both eyes and return my eye back if society stops stigmatizing disabilities or if we rename "disability" to something what sounds better.

Doctors not treating disabilities is absolutely another topic. And linked by me idea that "society just need to make everything more accessible" will not fix those disabilities and will not make doctors to treat it - the opposite, doctors would stop treating them completely. Many disabilities require medical treatment, so changing treatment to social model can hurt or even kill them. Instead of that model - we just need to raise inclusivity as we are doing already, and teach more doctors to treat it. It will be really hard in USA, where healthcare is not social like in Europe, so they are aiming for profit, so focusing on more profitable conditions. In Europe this problem is not as big as in USA, at least in countries where I lived.

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

I think sometimes the social model is better though instead of the medical model, especially in education and other non-medical settings. For me though I would never cure my learning disability, though I would cure other things I have. What was more disabling was discrimination in the school.

We should not replace the term disability. I and many of us in our community loathe the term special needs and handi-capable. I know the non-disabled community likes the term special needs, but to us, it's stigmatizing and othering. Due to this stigma I felt embarrassed for being disabled during my teenage years. These terms just another euphemism for disability. People are afraid of using words like disability, disabled, autistic, etc. so they invent euphemisms like special needs and handi-capable or even people first language. People first language (for those who don't know) is putting the person before the disability, i.e. saying "person with a disability" instead of "disabled person" saying "person with autism" instead of "autistic person." Some people in our community prefer it and that's OK, but many do not. Yet abled people who are often parents of disabled kids or work with disabled people insist it's the polite term and saying "autistic" is rude, even though actual autistic people don't think so and many feel autism is part of their identity. Some people are even told how to identify themselves, that they should not call themselves disabled or blind or whatever. Many people also want to emphasize someone is a person before their disability. It's almost as if being disabled and being a person is mutually exclusive. I corrected someone online for using the term handi-capable for a character. I simply said most disabled people don't the term and to use disabled instead, and that person thanked me. I wish we would stop being afraid to use the term disability and stop euphemizing it. Parents, teachers and professionals should not be afraid to tell a child they're disabled, or talk about disability with children. It's OK to use the words disability and disabled.

On another note, denying someone medical treatment is ableist. Without my SSRI, I would be lying in bed all day. Yet there are people who will insist you shouldn't take anti-depressants or any medication because it's big pharma. I think the term big pharma should apply to pharmaceutical companies because I have criticisms for them, but not the people who need these medications to function. Some people think the profession of psychiatry should be eliminated, which is ableist, because many people would suffer without psychiatry or access to medical treatment in general.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree on most part with you, but it is not what that model is proposing. That model is mainly saying that it is society which is fault in disabilities, which is not true. Society's fault is in lack of tolerance and in very able-male-centric "standart" of building everything. It has something to do with capitalistic model as well, because disabled people are minorities, so there no reason to spend time and money to design and rebuild things for disabled people. That's why government need to intervene and that's why in more "social oriented government" countries, like in Europe, disabled people have much more quality of life, as it is demanded by government from everyone. Obviously all this should be done automatically, but majority of people are measuring others by themselves - so they may not even know that someone on wheelchair can need something more. Have you read "Invisible Women" by Carez?

Some people think the profession of psychiatry should be eliminated, which is ableist, because many people would suffer without psychiatry or access to medical treatment in general.

I saw that in USA and Russia mainly. Conservatives in USA and Russia are propagating that psychiatry and (especially) psychology does not exist at all and it is like Astrology, just a way to get money from stupid people. They think it has no scientific background and they do not believe those can help anyone at all (and religious conservatives can even say that psychiatry is creating of a devil to confuse people, as god can cure any diseas of a soul and any anxiety).

[–]adungitit 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

According to them, since you can't tell someone's gender, then you could be attracted to anyone, hence you must be pan.

This is just one of those things that baffle me, like...just the logic behind it...I mean even aside from the creepy rapey parts, the idea that if you trick a person that you're something you're not and that you're actually something they prefer, that it means their preferences aren't real. It's like if a person wore a troll mask, and then took it off, and if anyone thought they were attractive, that this means either that they're lying or that they're actually attracted to trolls.

[–]FlanJam 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

My favorite is when they say since you can't tell someone's chromosomes/genitals by looking at them, attraction to sex doesn't actually exist. Its just so silly and pedantic, idk how to even respond to something like that.

[–]adungitit 12 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Respond that you can't tell anyone's DNA either, and yet people seem to consistently target their attraction to humans instead of other animals.

[–]catoborosnonbinary 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I think that, for many if not most people, sexual attraction is based on sex not gender. Those for whom sexual orientation is based on gender have no place attacking those for whom it is based on sex, or vice versa.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (70 children)

I think most QT here are more truscum so you're not going to get much debate on this point.

Steve is a 45 year-old male who everyone thinks he is very "manly"

And masculinity goes with being a man right?

I'm interested in the essentialism here. How essentialist are you?

Was Jessica masculine?

If Jane came out as a lesbian at 45 and became masculine would we doubt her? I mean I wouldn't.

[–]MarkTwainiac 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

You start off objecting to OP's claim that imaginary

Steve is a 45 year-old male who everyone thinks he is very "manly"

By snapping back with a rhetorical ask, namely

And masculinity goes with being a man right?

Which was beside the point, coz OP never said all men are manly/masculine. Just that imaginary Steve is.

But then in the next breath you directly engaged in the most regressive kind of sex stereotyping by suggesting that if Steve's wife, Jane, came out as lesbian at 45 you'd believe her if she "became masculine":

If Jane came out as a lesbian at 45 and became masculine would we doubt her? I mean I wouldn't.

Yikes. You seem to think that what makes a woman a lesbian is not being exclusively attracted to other females, it's appearing & acting in ways that sexists and sexist males especially would describe as "masculine." Which comes off to me as a very male, male supremacist and genderist POV.

Whilst some lesbians are butch or "masc," not all are. A lot of lesbians, including many who've come out in mid-life or later, are not what most people would describe as "masculine" in appearance, manner or behavior. Moreover, women who are not "masculine" do not automatically start becoming "masculine" once they've come out as lesbians. Some might, but certainly not all.

Most women as we get beyond 45 or 50 become more "masculine" particularly in the eyes of genderists. But that's due to what happens to female humans as part of the natural aging process. It can't be taken as a sign of our sexual orientation or of "gender identity."

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (21 children)

You start off objecting to OP's claim that imaginary

No I didn't. It's actually the opposite. I'm very much am accepting the person is masculine.

By snapping back with a rhetorical ask, namely

I'm pointing out the essentialism in the scenario. I'm not the one arguing against essentialism.

Which was beside the point, coz OP never said all men are manly/masculine. Just that imaginary Steve is.

But is his masculinity essential? Is it relevant? I'm very much interested in that question. I don't think it's irrelevant.

But then in the next breath you directly engaged in the most regressive kind of sex stereotyping by suggesting that if Steve's wife, Jane, came out as lesbian at 45 you'd believe her if she "became masculine":

You mean the stereotyping is linking butch with masculine or lesbian with butch?

I would link butchness with lesbianism.

I would thinking cross gender conformity is linked to same sex attraction is a human universal. Are you saying it isn't?

Yikes. You seem to think that what makes a woman a lesbian is not being exclusively attracted to other females, it's appearing & acting in ways that sexists and sexist males especially would describe as "masculine." Which comes off to me as a very male, male supremacist and genderist POV.

You don't think there is a relationship between gender conformity and sexuality.

GC routinely says gender non conformity in children is related to them growing up to be gay adults and not being trans.

I completely agree that is a common life path. Because gender norms, what you might call stereotypes are related to sexuality.

Whilst some lesbians are butch or "masc," not all are.

Oh I agree but the pattern of appearance in populations is not equal. It's just not one to one.

A lot of lesbians, including many who've come out in mid-life or later, are not what most people would describe as "masculine" in appearance, manner or behavior.

Sure. Again it doesn't need to be one to one to be a strong pattern.

Moreover, women who are not "masculine" do not automatically start becoming "masculine" once they've come out as lesbians. Some might, but certainly not all.

Absolutely.

Most women as we get beyond 45 or 50 become more "masculine" particularly in the eyes of genderists. But that's due to what happens to female humans as part of the natural aging process. It can't be taken as a sign of our sexual orientation or of "gender identity."

What are you saying here though?

Femininity is a thing and it's associated with youth and masculinity is a thing associated with age?

When you say become masculine do you mean lose youthfulness? Or do you mean their behaviour and personality change?

[–]MarkTwainiac 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (20 children)

You mean the stereotyping is linking butch with masculine or lesbian with butch?

I would link butchness with lesbianism.

I would thinking cross gender conformity is linked to same sex attraction is a human universal. Are you saying it isn't?

You keep insisting that everyone on earth who is same-sex attracted conforms to the most rigid, regressive and cartoonish sex stereotypes associated with the opposite sex. To you, all lesbians are "butch" and presumably all gay men are, excuse the offensive terms, "limp-wristed" and "swishy."

Yes, I am saying that this is not a universal truth. Only some lesbians and gay men fit your stereotypes; a vast number do not. Moreover, many women whom sexists regard as "butch" are not lesbians.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 5 fun -  (19 children)

You keep insisting that everyone on earth who is same-sex attracted conforms to the most rigid, regressive and cartoonish sex stereotypes associated with the opposite sex.

I don't and I have never said it is a one to one pattern.

I say there is an indirect correlated pattern.

Someone who is same sex attracted is more likely to be gender non conforming.

To you, all lesbians are "butch" and presumably all gay men are, excuse the offensive terms, "limp-wristed" and "swishy."

No there is a pattern.

Yes, I am saying that this is not a universal truth. Only some lesbians and gay men fit your stereotypes; a vast number do not. Moreover, many women whom sexists regard as "butch" are not lesbians.

But the majority of straight people are conforming.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I say there is an indirect correlated pattern.

It is oppositely correlated pattern, thought.

Causal relationship is opposite here. In this case it will be: some women are loving other women not because they are breaking gender stereotypes, but some women are breaking gender stereotypes because they are loving other women.

But the majority of straight people are conforming.

Majority of homosexual people are conforming as well.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

It is oppositely correlated pattern, thought.

How so?

Gender conformity is correlated with heterosexual attraction. The majority of conforming people will be heterosexually attracted.

Gender non conformity is correlated with same sex attraction. At least people who are same sex attracted are more likely to be non conforming.

In this case it will be: some women are loving other women not because they are breaking gender stereotypes, but some women are breaking gender stereotypes because they are loving other women.

That seems circular.

You are saying some women are attracted to women because they are gender non conforming?

Majority of homosexual people are conforming as well.

Possibly but that does not mean there isn't a pattern.

What is the majority of gnc people?

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

That seems circular.

You are saying some women are attracted to women because they are gender non conforming?

I am not saying that. I am saying that women who are attracted to women will be more likely gender non conforming (because of few reasons - they don't need to attract men, and they may want to signal that they want more attention from women), but gender non conformity is not the reason why they are attracted to women. While your version was the opposite - that women are attracted to women because they are gender non conforming.

What is the majority of gnc people?

Teens.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Someone who is same sex attracted is more likely to be gender non conforming.

Wait, what? No --- not apart from specific geo-cultural mediation.

And earlier:

GC routinely says gender non conformity in children is related to them growing up to be gay adults and not being trans.

It emphatically doesn't.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (14 children)

Wait, what? No --- not apart from specific geo-cultural mediation.

You think gender conformity has no pattern of expression related to same sex attraction?

It emphatically doesn't.

Isn't this the common position?

"Just because a child is gnc doesn't mean they are going to grow up to transition, they can grow up to gay."

You haven't heard that argument?

I mean I think there is some validity in it.

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Just because a child is gnc doesn't mean they are going to grow up to transition, they can grow up to gay."

You haven't heard that argument?

Yes, I've heard that argument. But the full argument is that some children who are "gnc" will grow up to be gay. Not all. Not even close to all.

Fact is, being "gnc" is very common amongst kids of both sexes and all future sexual orientations, particularly prior to puberty. Amongst girls historically, being "gnc" pre-puberty was the norm no matter which sex we'd later feel attraction to.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

You think gender conformity has no pattern of expression related to same sex attraction?

In the sprawling metro U.S. region I grew up in pre-Disney-Princess-era, no. In the unis I've attended here and abroad in the West, no. YMMV.

Isn't this the common position?

Not in GC thought. The common position is that gender is imposed and (re)enforced for a variety of longstanding reasons, the most recent being commercial profit from a captive market.

You haven't heard that argument?

No, I honestly haven't. It doesn't remotely pass (no pun) as anything with lineage to GC thought and reasoning.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (11 children)

In the sprawling metro U.S. region I grew up in pre-Disney-Princess-era, no. In the unis I've attended here and abroad in the West, no. YMMV.

To be clear you are saying in these environments there is no relationship between gender expression and sexual orientation?

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

There didn't seem to be, in terms of masc/femme attributes. This was also before the trans craze really gained momentum.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (25 children)

A man is an adult human male and a woman is an adult human female, and male and female refer to someone's sex. Meanwhile masculinity and feminity refer to the roles and stereotypes that society expects from each sex, and may vary through time and culture. I don't think there are many people who align perfectly with all the stereotypes associated with their sex in their respective cultures. Even if you're a perfect match, you may not be so in another country or time.

I don't think you can be born in the wrong body because I don't believe in the mind-body dualism. Your brain is another part of your body. I don't believe in "true trans" (and neither in "trans trenders" for that matter). I think there are people who for a variety of reasons want to be the opposite sex, and may take a variety of steps to present as such. However, they don't really become the opposite sex because such thing is not possible for humans, neither naturally nor with technogical aid. I think that trans people, deep down, understand this impossibility, and that is why they often get very angry when other people don't validate their "identities".

People don't think of Jessica as "masculine". For my examples to work, both Steve and Jessica needed to be not obviously trans. So, both Jane and Helen are shocked by these turn of events. The only reason I can think for Jane "discovering" her "lesbianism" now would be to go along with Steve's new "identity".

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (24 children)

A man is an adult human male and a woman is an adult human female, and male and female refer to someone's sex.

Sure.

Meanwhile masculinity and feminity refer to the roles and stereotypes that society expects from each sex, and may vary through time and culture.

But you essentialised masculinity to the man which is fine but that's a different argument.

People don't think of Jessica as "masculine".

How? People don't think of masculine people as masculine?

For my examples to work, both Steve and Jessica needed to be not obviously trans.

You mean obviously trans would be Steve being feminine and Jessica being masculine?

The only reason I can think for Jane "discovering" her "lesbianism" now would be to go along with Steve's new "identity".

You mean feminine middle aged married women never become lesbians and never adopt a butch lifestyle?

The only possible reason would be accommodate a husband's new "identity" ?

[–]MarkTwainiac 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

You mean feminine middle aged married women never become lesbians and never adopt a butch lifestyle?

All your characterizations of women make it clear you see us only as one-dimensional assemblages of the most regressive, sexist, misogynistic and simplistic sex stereotypes. Lots of middle-aged married women are not particularly "feminine," particularly as that word is defined by today's gender ideology vendors in Western countries. The average middle-aged married (& divorced & never married) woman has more in common with Maribeth Lacey of Cagney & Lacey fame than Kim Kardashian.

Also, lots of middle-aged and older women who once were married to men, had & raised children, end up later in life living or being primarily involved with other women in a wide variety of arrangements that sometimes involves sex and sometimes doesn't - all without "adopting a butch lifestyle."

Which begs the question: pray tell, what exactly is "a butch lifestyle"?

[–]HouseplantMaybe women who are afraid of men should stay home? #feminist 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

You buy a truck and some mechanics boots, buzz your head, and only wear flannel.

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 4 fun -  (12 children)

Oh fuck, I thought the deciding factor was wearing or owning a carpenter's belt!

[–]HouseplantMaybe women who are afraid of men should stay home? #feminist 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

If you can’t get the boots the belt is the top choice for a substitute. Definitely more lesbian whilst wearing the belt than when the belt is stored. If you can’t get a truck I’ve heard that taking up softball can still net the necessary points to meet butch lesbian standards.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Also power tools -- use early, use often. But not while playing softball. (Unless the rules have changed.)

[–]HouseplantMaybe women who are afraid of men should stay home? #feminist 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

Oh wow you’re getting into some advanced lesbianism there.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

I dunno, I know women mechanics (including one who worked on jet engines). I think it gets way more advanced.

[–]adungitit 11 insightful - 5 fun11 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

But you essentialised masculinity to the man which is fine but that's a different argument.

No. They acknowledged that men still hold onto misogyny and masculinity even when they claim they're women. This is a tired debate that GC has had countless times already: we acknowledge masculinity and femininity as social factors that the sexes are inevitably saddled with as a result of their upbringing. This does not mean that we believe there are ladybrains and manbrains making the sexes inevitably act this way any more than we believe there are Muslim-brains or Hindu-brains making people follow religion en masse. THAT is essentialist.

A person who truly felt alienated by gender norms wouldn't go out of their way to follow them. Society does begrudgingly allow a degree of flexibility in regards to gendered presentation, but male trans people usually don't make use of that at all, because it's not about freeing yourself from gender norms, it's about imitating a caricature of inferior womanhood.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

No. They acknowledged that men still hold onto misogyny and masculinity even when they claim they're women.

Well I was asking what they meant.

This is a tired debate that GC has had countless times already: we acknowledge masculinity and femininity as social factors that the sexes are inevitably saddled with as a result of their upbringing.

GC often isn't a single stable position.

There are different beliefs.

A person who truly felt alienated by gender norms wouldn't go out of their way to follow them.

Where does truly felt alienation from gender norms come from? Is it "natural" ?

Society does begrudgingly allow a degree of flexibility in regards to gendered presentation, but male trans people usually don't make use of that at all, because it's not about freeing yourself from gender norms, it's about imitating a caricature of inferior womanhood.

I'm still never clear what you're idea of "good male trans people" are.

It comes back to this issue of femininity being bad for everyone and masculine being seen as the "true natural norm."

It seems to amount to "Gender will be abolished when everyone is masculine." Seems the implied message.

What is wrong with this understanding?

[–]adungitit 10 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

GC often isn't a single stable position. There are different beliefs.

These things have been stated over and over again, they're literally basic GC tenants you can see from the most cursory overview of their sub. The fact that you can constantly act stupid and amnesia-ridden and demand the same GC 101 explanations over and over again won't change reality to match your bullshitting.

Where does truly felt alienation from gender norms come from? Is it "natural" ?

You are trying to derail again. The point was that a person claiming to be alienated and tortured by gender norms didn't do jack to actually budge said gender norms and in fact worked hard to live up to said gender norms, making their claims highly unconvincing. Whether their gendersoul was compelling them to act in paradoxical ways in irrelevant.

I'm still never clear what you're idea of "good male trans people" are.

Not believing in male supremacist ideology and objectifying women would be a good start (which goes for all men). But let me guess, poor men's dicks didn't evolve for that :,(

It comes back to this issue of femininity being bad for everyone and masculine being seen as the "true natural norm."

Because femininity exists in the first place in order to be oppressive. Masculinity exists in order to maximise privileges and entitlement for men. Hence why femininity results in demonstrable widespread damage to women, and masculinity results in huge privileges for men. Because the system has caused and continues to cause immeasurable suffering for women at the hands of men, it needs to be abolished. But let me guess, "Poor men's dicks didn't evolve for that :,("

It seems to amount to "Gender will be abolished when everyone is masculine."

Right, you're still sticking to that "only masculinity and femininity exist" horseshit. Tell me again, which is feminine and which is masculine: Pepsi or Cola? Oh, you're gonna disappear again? Bye!

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

These things have been stated over and over again, they're literally basic GC tenants you can see from the most cursory overview of their sub. The fact that you can constantly act stupid and amnesia-ridden and demand the same GC 101 explanations over and over again won't change reality to match your bullshitting.

I'm asking because some gc side people jump between the positions. To me this is a common pattern.

If some gc person says "well I don't agree with all of gc or gender abolition or the complete constructionist model" then fair enough but it's part of the debate.

It's fine not to agree with one side orthodoxy, it's part of the debate.

You are trying to derail again.

It is not derailing.

The point was that a person claiming to be alienated and tortured by gender norms didn't do jack to actually budge said gender norms and in fact worked hard to live up to said gender norms, making their claims highly unconvincing.

Are we talking about a man or woman here?

Not believing in male supremacist ideology and objectifying women would be a good start (which goes for all men). But let me guess, poor men's dicks didn't evolve for that :,(

I think this is evasive. Making male non conformity entirely about rejection an extreme male chauvinism. I don't recognise that at a reasonable position.

Because femininity exists in the first place in order to be oppressive.

The logic of this is everyone should be masculine.

You do see that?

Masculinity exists in order to maximise privileges and entitlement for men. Hence why femininity results in demonstrable widespread damage to women, and masculinity results in huge privileges for men. Because the system has caused and continues to cause immeasurable suffering for women at the hands of men, it needs to be abolished. But let me guess, "Poor men's dicks didn't evolve for that :,("

Actually I think women generally want masculine men for sexual reasons. Their sexual desire is not an invalid reason.

Right, you're still sticking to that "only masculinity and femininity exist" horseshit. Tell me again, which is feminine and which is masculine: Pepsi or Cola? Oh, you're gonna disappear again? Bye!

Pepsi or Cola aren't gendered. They could be. But they aren't.

That something isn't gendered does not mean gender isn't natural.

Just as a language might not have a name for something does not mean language isn't naturally emergent.

[–]adungitit 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

If some gc person says "well I don't agree with all of gc or gender abolition or the complete constructionist model" then fair enough but it's part of the debate.

Because that person is disagreeing with what GC is (a position that is known through basic familiarity with the movement), not because any bullshit you can think of passes for whatever you want.

If you cannot recognise basic tenants of a certain position that are spelled out to you on the sub's front page, then you have nothing to argue over. You are acting stupid and should not be allowed to debate.

It is not derailing.

And if you just say you're not, that magically makes it so!

The point was that a person claiming to be alienated and tortured by gender norms didn't do jack to actually budge said gender norms and in fact worked hard to live up to said gender norms, making their claims highly unconvincing. Whether their gendersoul was compelling them to act in paradoxical ways in irrelevant.

Are we talking about a man or woman here?

You are derailing again. The point was that a person claiming to be alienated and tortured by gender norms didn't do jack to actually budge said gender norms and in fact worked hard to live up to said gender norms, making their claims highly unconvincing.

Making male non conformity entirely about rejection an extreme male chauvinism. I don't recognise that at a reasonable position.

Just wanking out a "I disagree" is as worthwhile as wanking out that the moon is made of cheese.

The logic of this is everyone should be masculine.

The logic is that both femininity and masculinity are oppressive constructs. Masculinity facilitates abuse, femininity facilitates objectification of women and taking abuse.

Actually I think women generally want masculine men for sexual reasons

Riiight. And all the abuse, trauma and anxieties resulting from that just happen because "it's what women want". And the fact that men never gave a fuck about women's pleasure is also just because women have been secretly mind-controlling them, right? As are the orgasm gap, the dehumanisation, objectification, harassment, double standards, domestic expectations etc. After all, women were owned by men because they wanted it, right?

Their sexual desire is not an invalid reason.

It just so happens to, through pure coincidence, coincide with what men want and have been pushing onto them for centuries, and also result in high rates of dissatisfaction, anxiety and trauma. But let me guess, none of that matters because you can wank out that you "don't think so".

Pepsi or Cola aren't gendered. They could be. But they aren't.

It was you who made the claim that the patriarchy and its gender norms cannot cease to exist because everything has to be either masculine of feminine. Which one is Pepsi, and which is Cola? Feel free to reconsider your opinion if you can't answer this.

That something isn't gendered does not mean gender isn't natural.

Appealing to nature and justifying male supremacy as innate has been used by men to oppress women for as long as the patriarchy has existed. Turns out women can vote and have careers, though. So I'm afraid I don't care much for your male supremacist wanking. That's worked out marvellously for men, and has done nothing but screw women over.

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You mean feminine middle aged married women never become lesbians and never adopt a butch lifestyle?

Again: women do not become lesbians. They are or are not lesbians.

Whether they realize or accept or act on or come out or adopt/don't adopt a given social presentation associated with lesbians in any given society or subculture is secondary to their innate sexual orientation/attraction, which is the definitive qualifier of being a lesbian.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

But you essentialised masculinity to the man which is fine but that's a different argument.

I did not such thing, but I just described what is generally mean by masculine and feminine. Men and women who are break enough sex roles may be called as feminine and masculine respectively, but that doesn't change the fact the concepts are tied to what society expects from each sex.

How? People don't think of masculine people as masculine?

I'm saying that prior to her coming out, people didn't see Jessica as masculine.

You mean obviously trans would be Steve being feminine and Jessica being masculine?

I mean if Steve and Jessica were GNC, peope would not be as surprised by their coming out.

You mean feminine middle aged married women never become lesbians and never adopt a butch lifestyle?

The only possible reason would be accommodate a husband's new "identity" ?

I was talking about this particular example. Provided they don't live in a country where homosexuality is persecuted, coming out as a butch lesbian in middle age doesn't seem very likely to me. But I'm a straight woman, so I'm won't speculate any further about this.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

I did not such thing, but I just described what is generally mean by masculine and feminine. Men and women who are break enough sex roles may be called as feminine and masculine respectively, but that doesn't change the fact the concepts are tied to what society expects from each sex.

Concepts that exist in all societies.

I'm saying that prior to her coming out, people didn't see Jessica as masculine.

OK.

I mean if Steve and Jessica were GNC, peope would not be as surprised by their coming out.

I agree they'd be less surprised.

Provided they don't live in a country where homosexuality is persecuted, coming out as a butch lesbian in middle age doesn't seem very likely to me.

I think it still very much happens.

I guess people can change naturally too.

But I'm a straight woman, so I'm won't speculate any further about this.

But you posted this an invited us to debate and speculate on all this.

I'd say people here are free to debate sex and gender no matter who they are. It's very much part of the debate.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't make a thread asking about feminine women coming out as butch lesbian in middle age. You're the one who brought this topic up. Yes, this is a debate sub, but I prefer to debate about what I know. Anyway, why are YOU not answering whether sexual orientation is based in sex or "gender identity", which is what this thread was about?

[–][deleted] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

If Jane came out as a lesbian at 45 and became masculine would we doubt her?

I'd definitely doubt her motivations, being GNC and having had a front row seat to the Stockholm Syndrome that accompanies staying married to an AGP who transitions in late adulthood. Butch lesbians don't tend to suddenly appear in midlife.

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Butch lesbians don't tend to suddenly appear in midlife.

A lot of women who aren't butch have and do come out as lesbians in midlife and later. Some butch women too.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. Was replying specifically to Theory's scenario re "Jane."

(eta "Jane" is not equivalent to "Stephanie")

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (17 children)

Butch lesbians don't tend to suddenly appear in midlife.

I think they do happen.

I think they tire of not being themeselves.

So you are a Blanchardian? That is essentialist. Gender norms would be tied to sex.

But you also say you are a straight gnc woman?

[–]AlexisK 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

"Don't tend to suddenly happen" and "don't happen at all" are two different things.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly. Thank you.

(Also -- sarcasm. No humans "suddenly appear" midlife, excepting alien abduction returnees.)

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (13 children)

Well they were the ones implying it doesn't happen by doubting her motivations.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Given the circunstances, the most likely explanation is that Jane is denying her heterosexuality because not doing so would "invalidate" Stephanie.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Given the circunstances, the most likely explanation is that Jane is denying her heterosexuality because not doing so would "invalidate" Stephanie.

That's a very commonly reported reality -- Jane is pressured to "recraft" her public persona as a lesbian (which she isn't) for the comfort of Stephanie, who also now presents as a lesbian (and is not). It's a double deception.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

I wasn't meaning Steve had changed as well, I was theorising instead Jane had come out.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Coming out and transitioning are fundamentally different categories of action.

ETA "instead" is huge . . . completely changes the thought experiment.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

My statement:

Butch lesbians don't tend to suddenly appear in midlife.

They don't. They may become aware of their sexuality in midlife. They may come out of the closet in midlife. They do not appear from whole cloth in midlife as radically distinctive personae, as "Stephanie" has -- because lesbianism is a sexual orientation and therefore innate.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (7 children)

They don't. They may become aware of their sexuality in midlife.

To outward appearances they might suddenly appear.

But that can be internally be experienced as becoming aware.

I'm not sure exactly how that can happen midlife but I suspect it can for anyone. But I never think it's an active choice.

They may come out of the closet in midlife. They do not appear from whole cloth in midlife as radically distinctive personae, as "Stephanie" has -- because lesbianism is a sexual orientation and therefore innate.

But you do think a person can change gender expression midlife in a way that is unexpected to outsiders?

I think that would look like a distinctive change. A person becoming gnc, trans aside. You do think that happens? They realise how they want to live.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But you do think a person can change gender expression midlife in a way that is unexpected to outsiders?

I know a number of women who definitely changed "gender expression midlife in a way unexpected to outsiders." Coz when they were teens they became Catholic nuns. And many decades later they left the convent and became average Jane citizens. Some of them came out as lesbians after leaving the convent - and amongst those in that category, some were "butch" and some were not. But other ex-nuns came out as heterosexual women who had relationships with and married men.

My stepmother was such a woman. For 44 years she had her head shaved, wore a religious habit, adopted a dour and severe affect, and served in many high-level, authoritative roles in Catholic education where she scared the bejeezus out of the school kids and college women who attended the institutions where she was a teacher, principal, dean and president. I was fortunate to be with her in many situations in her post-nun life when she was out and about in the world looking like a bog standard woman of elder years with her (now grown-out) hair showing along with her arms, legs and figure and younger women or men with perplexed but curious looks on their faces would tentatively approach and nervously say, "Excuse me, Sister Jerome is that you?"

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

But you do think a person can change gender expression midlife in a way that is unexpected to outsiders?

Don't you know any women who've recently given birth and/or have young children? Many chop their hair off and eschew beauty and grooming routines coz they are too exhausted and overwhelmed to be bothered.

Don't you know any older women who reached a certain point in life and adopted a stance of I don't give a shit any more?

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Don't you know any older women who reached a certain point in life and adopted a stance of I don't give a shit any more?

(We should have a rite of passage for this) 😼

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

Of course but they don't seem happy about it. I don't think exhaustion is something they are embracing.

Just as I don't think men who have to give up aspects of their masculinity out of exhaustion are excited about it.

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Mothers of young children who eschew sexist beauty and grooming standards certainly suffer exhaustion. But the legions of older women who take a stance of I don't give a shit any more are not necessarily doing so out of exhaustion. At all.

And we're happy about it too! It's one of the great secrets of women's lives after menopause that male-dominated misogynistic mainstream media and society have suppressed.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not sure exactly how that can happen midlife but I suspect it can for anyone. But I never think it's an active choice.

Jane discovering she's a lesbian midlife and (let's say) having a masc makeover isn't a compulsion. There's no "butch starter kit" she needs to buy.

If she chooses to alter her appearance and presentation to mark her coming out (rock it, Jane), that's a voluntary action. It isn't compulsory, it isn't correlative of her sexual orientation, and it definitely isn't necessary.

People absolutely can change how they express themselves midlife, but, to repeat, gender expression and sexual orientation are fundamentally different. Lesbian is what Jane is. Grooming and dressing and adopting mannerisms that signal within a given gay subculture is what Jane does (or doesn't do). They're not fused realities, and there's no causal relationship.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

a) I'm not a Blanchardian. I am a keen observer with first-person experience of what I've described, including butch lesbians. Coming out (in midlife or otherwise) is not equivalent to an abrupt and distinct change in personality, nor is personality equivalent to persona.

b) I am a lifelong GNC woman. I haven't discussed my sexuality here (yet). I propose you're focused too keenly on my POV (bias-hunting?) at the expense of my critique of your thought experiment about "Jane."

Let's discuss "Jane," shall we?

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 3 insightful - 8 fun3 insightful - 7 fun4 insightful - 8 fun -  (12 children)

I believe sexuality is based on gender presentation, not gender identity. Some trans men are gay, but there was a post on r/FTM to pre-transition gay men asking who they date, because they know gay men will not be attracted to them pre-transition. Likewise, I will not date a female-presenting trans women, but I would date a passing trans man, just like I would date a cis man but not a cis woman, because I'm straight.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

You just described bisexuality with leaning towards one or another stereotypical presentation. It was one of main arguments of conservative homophobes, that lesbians are liking femininity and gay men liking masculinity. And obviously it is not true.

Majority of people are monosexual, not bisexual.

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (7 children)

That's not bisexuality. I'm straight. I personally know a trans woman who I was attracted to pre transition, even when she came out as trans. When she starting transitioning, even though she didn't pass as a cis woman, she appeared to feminized for me to be attracted to her. I'm not attracted to women because I'm straight. I am attracted to passing trans men like Buck Angel.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm straight and I'm not attracted to feminized males, either. Humans didn't evolve to be attracted to men or women who take exogenous hormones and/or undergone surgeries in order to resemble the opposite sex. These "treatments" are very new in terms of human history, after all. Really, many people, including trans identified people, aren't open to date trans people.

I am attracted to passing trans men like Buck Angel.

Do you think genital surgeries are necessary for trans people to "pass"? Because as far as I read Buck Angel didn't undergone one.

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

I am attracted to pre op trans men if they have transitioned, and I am willing to do sexual things that don't involve their vagina. They would have to be post of for me to do something with their genitals.

[–]adungitit 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

Do you realise you're being transphobic with these statements? A man's vagina is a "bonus hole" and his clit is a "penis". Why are you refusing to do anything with their trans male genitalia on the basis of not being attracted to women?

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (1 child)

Ok, then whatever terms trans men prefer for their genitals.

[–]adungitit 4 insightful - 7 fun4 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

Penis. You are refusing to do things with male bodies and male genitalia literally for no reason other than them being on a trans person. You are a transphobe. How do you justify this to yourself and your community?

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You said yourself that you will not have regular sex and will not get aroused by transman in the bed, so you are either lying (either now or before) or thinking only about visual appeal. We aren't kids, all relationship will come to a sex scenes or marriage. You can be a friend with person and like their looks, but that is not making you sexually attracted in them.

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

I will have sex with a post-op trans man, but I may be attracted to a pre-op passing trans man.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So, do you think Jane and Helen are still heterosexual and homosexual respectively after their partners' coming out? Even if their partners insist they never were? If Stephanie and Brian were to "medically transition", do you think Jane and Helen would be transphobic if they break up with them?

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So, do you think Jane and Helen are still heterosexual and homosexual respectively after their partners' coming out?

Absolutely.

Even if their partners insist they never were?

Even so. Queer Theory likes to play fast and loose with the reality of sexual orientation, or ignore it completely. But as a philosophy that challenges the veracity of categories, it's pretty efficient at assigning others to categories of its own making.

If Stephanie and Brian were to "medically transition", do you think Jane and Helen would be transphobic if they break up with them?

Not at all. But based on precedent, they could expect banishment by the most vocal portion of trans activists.

[–]GenderbenderSex-segregated spaces in public are not a right 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

So, do you think Jane and Helen are still heterosexual and homosexual respectively after their partners' coming out?

Yes.