HomophobiaWhat trans people don't get is that homosexuals were NEVER attracted to them.

submitted by 7874 from self.LGBDropTheT

For clarity here, I'm speaking specifically about trans individuals of the opposite sex: females who are trans chasing after gays and vice versa.

They are convinced that homosexuals are initially attracted to them, and then "lose" attraction when they find out they're trans. That's not accurate. Homosexuals may be attracted to the illusion of the trans person, but they were never actually attracted to that person to begin with.

A gay who sees a well-passing trans chick (female) like Laith Ashley is attracted to the image he has in his mind of her as a male. If he were to imagine having sex with "Laith Ashley", he'd actually be imagining having sex with a man who looks like her, not actually the model herself.

So no, homosexuals aren't "attracted to trans people until they find out about their trans status", at which point, the attraction magically dissipates. They were never attracted. They may feel attracted to the illusion of who the trans person is, and then once they see reality, they realize that person they were "attracted" to never existed and was nothing but an illusion, and they don't feel attraction to this actual person who they now realize is a member of the opposite sex.

all 27 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 41 insightful - 2 fun41 insightful - 1 fun42 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

They think that initial attraction is some fundamentally important thing that gets locked in forever the moment it happens. It's such a ridiculous argument.

You can find all kinds of videos on the internet of men being tricked by other men. Like this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcX5Q84JcAg

Initial attraction is basically meaningless since it's based on incomplete information with your brain filling in the blanks. Our brains do this subconsciously all the time in all aspects of life. Our brains love filling in patterns, sometimes it's right, sometimes it's wrong.

[–]dilsencySame-sex community 30 insightful - 1 fun30 insightful - 0 fun31 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Losing attraction based on new information is very normal. Especially if it's conflicting.

[–]7874[S] 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, but I think it's a little different when the attraction is based on an actual lie that makes attraction to them a physical impossibility as opposed to something you just didn't know about their personality.

[–]shveya 21 insightful - 3 fun21 insightful - 2 fun22 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

A few weeks ago a bisexual man wrote a post on one of the Gayden subreddits asking them if it was normal for him, as a "gay man", to not care whether or not his partner was transgender. All of the Aidens were like "No, that's normal, that's what everyone who isn't a bigot is like!" They unironically think that same-sex attraction is transphobic. They can't grasp the concept of homosexuality.

[–]RaspberryTea 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Bi people who act like this are frustrating to me. I'm not exclusively attracted to one sex, but I'm still capable of comprehending that other people are and respecting that. And yet, I can also see where having a "gay" identity (and therefore a place to belong) becomes so important a person does all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify holding on to it, probably not even thinking of the harm this causes. Internalized biphobia is one helluva drug.

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

They frustrate the hell out of me too. They make life harder on actual gay people who cannot be attracted to the opposite sex.

[–]IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

I would argue that this line of thinking leads to an inevitable conclusion that all attraction (even with so-called cisgendered individuals) is ultimately based on illusion. That's kind of a Buddhist perspective and as such is very attractive to me (not to mention consistent with my experience). However it's not very practical. The more pragmatic perspective is closer to this one, basically that attraction has an evolution over time. Even in the case of an LTR attraction can wane for a variety of reasons, often (in the long term) having nothing to do with physical attributes.

One of the things I find so triggering about the "genital preferences" line of argumentation is the idea of locking in attraction at the earliest possible time. I have had a personal and very negative experience with somebody who tried to do this to me -- argue why I should have been attracted him based on signals I may or may not have given at an early point in time -- and when it was clear the argument was going nowhere proceeded to attempt covertly to damage my reputation. It's because so many outspoken trans people communicate a willingness to do this exact very thing that I hate them so much.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 18 insightful - 4 fun18 insightful - 3 fun19 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

They don't attract people—they take hostages. Their behavior is the best argument for avoiding them and considering them deeply unattractive. "Love me or I will try to destroy you" is not a successful mating strategy.

[–]AugustiJade 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Like I've said before; the fastest way to peak more people is to just let them speak. They send off so many red flags by their personalities alone that would be massive signs for a toxic relationship, let alone their trans identification.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Indeed, if you presented people with these behavior scenarios without mentioning the trans identity angle, they'd get it right away.

[–]7874[S] 19 insightful - 1 fun19 insightful - 0 fun20 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I think there's a difference between feeling attracted to someone, and then having the attraction dissipate because you learned they are actually an asshole or something, and feeling attracted to a front someone is intentionally putting on, an actual lie, and truly feeling zero attraction for that actual, real human being. They're not just a person who you didn't know was rude to waiters, it's someone who is lying about their actual physical body. They are lying about their sex, which attraction is contingent upon for anyone who isn't bisexual.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

which attraction is contingent upon for anyone who isn't bisexual.

And for most of us here who are, who generally dislike the presumptive "if you're bi you'll be attracted to trans people" propaganda that is spewed elsewhere.

Did you happen to see the Superstraight/gay/bisexual/lesbian movement / moment go by? That's how it happened: Those of us who know what words mean getting exasperated with all the ways that they have been misused. Being bisexual is no exception. I require the natural configurations in both cases. If someone has started swapping parts, etc. then I am not attracted to them for the same reason gay men and lesbians aren't.

[–]7874[S] 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I never said "if you're bi you'll be attracted to trans people". I just said that non-bisexuals are incapable of being attracted to more than one sex.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Okay, I think it's a word-choice glitch. Let me try to clarify:

I am not sure how much you are aware of this, so: By implication in statements like yours, bisexuals are relentlessly misidentified as the folks who will of course want to date TQ+ people when that is not true at all for many of us, so I am making that distinction explicit here so you'll understand if you get irritated responses from bisexuals here when we get rhetorically forced into a role that has nothing to do with our orientation. It's a common TRA refrain. Let's review this again in that light to see why I responded as I did:

They are lying about their sex, which attraction is contingent upon for anyone who isn't bisexual.

My attraction is 100% contingent on the other person 1. knowing what sex they are and thus being okay with it (and thus, being okay with their sexual orientation as well without any transition or declaring of NB status, etc.), and therefore 2. not lying about their sex. So we don't actually need to bring bisexuals into this as if we'd feel otherwise. That's what I am saying. Leave us out if it isn't relevant to the point you are making. You implied that bisexuality would equal being okay with deception about sex. Maybe that was unintentional, but that's how it is coming across. I am immovable about this point because so many people play fast and loose with this term and as someone who doesn't want to play along with the distortion of word meanings, I hope you will understand why I don't want to and won't do the same regarding being bisexual. Once people start changing / expanding / distorting the meanings of important words they start changing the lives of the people who use them in reference to themselves. Ask any lesbian who keeps being stalked and harassed by trans women (men) who call themselves lesbians.

So the baseline assumption I expect people to maintain is that being bisexual still means the same thing it always has meant: Attracted to biological males and biological females who accept biology and reality and thus their own bodies. (We didn't used to have to make the distinction about them also needing to accept reality, but here we are. That was assumed as part of the deal.)

Lesbians and gay men have the same expectations, they are just dealing with a subset rather than both sexes.

If that doesn't clear up why I will quickly offer a clarification about the use of the word "bisexual" then we'll have to agree to not understand one another for a bit longer and sort it out as time permits.

I'm trying to tell you there's a minefield here for bisexual people just like there is for gay men and lesbians, about how we are talked about and how we are treated and what we are assumed to want.

[–]7874[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My attraction is 100% contingent on the other person 1. knowing what sex they are and thus being okay with it (and thus, being okay with their sexual orientation as well without any transition or declaring of NB status, etc.), and therefore 2. not lying about their sex.

And those are preferences, not sexual orientation, and not every single bisexual feels that way. However, every single homosexual is unable to feel sexual attraction to the opposite sex.

And sorry I mentioned bisexuals, but it is relevant because trans people are being homophobic by expecting homosexuals to somehow override their homosexuality and date them. The reason homosexuals aren't attracted to trans people of the opposite sex is because they're homosexual and these trans people are being homophobic by trying to pressure them to be with the opposite sex. Bisexuals are not attracted to trans people not because they're bisexual, but because trans people are undesirable partners for 9999999 other reasons, and no one should be pressured to date someone they're not interested in of course. I'm just pointing out the different mechanisms and the distinct homophobia in play when they target homosexuals.

I'm trying to tell you there's a minefield here for bisexual people just like there is for gay men and lesbians, about how we are talked about and how we are treated and what we are assumed to want.

And people who say you should date trans people are filthy incels, but what bisexuals face on this front is a bit different from what homosexuals face. Homosexuals have their own homosexual-only spaces they've created that are infiltrated by homophobic incels. These spaces are the only places they have. They have zero other options for dating other than homosexual-only spaces like apps, bars, cafes.

Attracted to biological males and biological females who accept biology and reality and thus their own bodies.

That isn't a sexual orientation. Sexual orientation only describes the sex one is attracted to. I don't date white people (no offense lol sorry to anyone reading this, I'll be friends but I'm simply not interested for physical reasons) because I don't feel attraction to them, but that doesn't make it part of my sexual orientation. There are no qualifiers in sexual orientation. Homosexuals like the same sex, heteros the opposite, and bisexuals both. If bisexuals think a person with breasts and a dick is unattractive because that's weird, more power to them and they have zero obligation to date anyone. However, said person is still male, and therefore falls within the bounds of a bisexual orientation, but is excluded by preferences.

I notice you brought up political reasons why you're arguing this point and I get it. But also consider the implications if we start adding preferences into sexual orientation. That's part of the reason we have ridiculous new "orientations" nowadays like "pansexual" or "cupiosexual" or any number of others. And if we say that orientations are not exclusively sex-based, that messes with the definitions we have now of "gay" and "lesbian". Who's to say we can't just start adding qualifiers like the TRAs? "Gay means attracted to males except there are exceptions for certain women." No! Gay just means homosexual male. If homosexuals have qualifiers or exceptions, what do they need the right to be homosexual for? If orientation is not sex-based, they can just find some very specific person of the opposite sex to be with. No. Sexual orientation is defined exclusively by the sex(es) on is attracted to.

[–]7874[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Gays and lesbians aren't attracted to trans people of the opposite sex because they are attracted to the same sex only. It's not because they find the whole mishmash of parts thing unsettling, which it definitely is and probably the majority of bisexuals have a problem with that, but they aren't not attracted by the same mechanism.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's exactly the same mechanism. If someone presents me with a config that would also not be of interest to a lesbian or a gay man (given their subset of interest, male OR female depending), I won't be interested either. My acceptance / rejection criteria regarding the other person's understanding of their biological sex and their mental health and comfort with being that sex are the same.

[–]7874[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hypothetically, gays can be attracted to trans-id guys (males) and lesbians can be attracted to trans-id women (females), and while they're probably not that common, they definitely exist.

My acceptance / rejection criteria regarding the other person's understanding of their biological sex and their mental health and comfort with being that sex are the same.

These are just preferences, and while very important, are not the same thing as an orientation.

Here's an example of what I mean: a lesbian is a female homosexual, only attracted to women.

  1. She can't be attracted to a trans-id guy (male) because he's male and she is only attracted to females; in this case, she is not attracted on the basis of her sexual orientation.

  2. She could possibly be attracted to a trans-id woman (female) since she's female, but would most likely find any masculinized features such as removed breasts, extreme body hair, etc. to be a turn-off, because they remind her of males, which she's completely unattracted to as a female homosexual. In this case, she is not attracted on the basis of her sexual orientation.

  3. Now, this isn't the only reason this lesbian is bothered by the trans-id woman. She is also turned-off because the woman is delusional and self-hating. In this case, she is not attracted because of her (completely normal and standard) preference for non-delusional, non-self-hating partners.

Case 3 is the one that bisexuals and lesbians have in common. There are a million other reasons not to be attracted to trans people. But the reason that homosexuals are not attracted to trans people is because of their sexual orientation, while the reason that bisexual people are not attracted to trans people is because of the 99999999 reasons other than their sexual orientation. Some bisexual people are attracted to trans people. But no one has to date them! I'm glad you're not lol you're dodging a bullet, seriously. But some bisexual people are attracted to trans people because the lack of attraction isn't based on: "these traits are the traits of the sex I am not attracted to" or "this person is not the sex I am attracted to", which are the orientation-based disqualifiers.

edit: Made a mistake on case 3, but it's fixed.

edit2: It wasn't fixed last time lol.

[–]IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's fair - the lie is monumental in this case. However I think the idea applies to all attraction in general, at least philosophically. It's just more subtle in other cases.

[–]lovelyspearmintLesbeing a lesbian 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Whatever happened to 'consent can be withdrawn at any time'? The same should be said for attraction. Just because someone sent you signals doesn't mean they have no out if their mind changes.

[–]pacmanla 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This is accurate on so many levels & as a heterosexual male, this applies to HSTS as well. The idea that because someone "passes" & a person being attracted to that "presentation" (illusion/lie), should still be okay with hooking up or dating a trans individual is silly. Yeah, they may "present" well, but when it comes time for physical intimacy, they're not compatible sexually. This automatically causes loss of attraction. Sure, Laith Ashley "passes" well & may get some attraction from gay males, but she's still female who will not have the "tools" for gay men to be sexually attracted to her.

[–]lovelyspearmintLesbeing a lesbian 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There's still something very female about her, especially in the way she poses. Not to mention there's Photoshop and makeup at play which could change her appearance drastically.

[–]tu_jode_mucho 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

She's like 99.9% of trans people--once you get a good look and see different angles the illusion falls apart.

Ngl she's a very handsome person but still her face is still very uncanny valley and her eyes are female af and not intense or piercing like how typically men's eyes are.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

A comment I made last night on another thread: https://saidit.net/s/LGBDropTheT/comments/8hoh/they_really_are_coming_for_us_and_trying_to_make/vjh8

[–]7874[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I like this explanation.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think your post here helps flesh out more angles to this, along with the comments. They think "other person's initial attraction" = a kind of currency that will always be spendable.

Plus it is inherently narcissistic to think you could never do anything that would dilute or dissipate someone else's attraction to you. But, plenty of narcissistic adults had upbringings in which they were taught they could do no wrong. (Or a similarly-damaging negative series of parenting experiences that leaves them extremely defensive and fragile.)

[–]ishutmyeyestosee 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This is what I don't get either.

If a woman has a passing attraction to Buck Angel, sure I wouldn't call her a lesbian. That would be ridiculous.

If a woman went home with Buck Angel and spent the night eating Buck out, well....