|
Even if I grant the assumption that there is an imperceptible difference between a cis woman I would be interested in sleeping with and a trans woman (which I'm skeptical of), it doesn't change the reality that they were born a man.
And this, right here, is the transphobic attitude that you have. No matter how identical a trans and cis woman are to one another, no matter how many overlapping qualities they have, none of that matters, because she was assigned male at birth, and that bothers you. You just admitted it - it's not about her body, it's about her history. And you treat her differently from other women because of this, in the same way that you'd be treating a biracial woman who passes as white differently from white women.
|
On August 04 2013 06:55 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:32 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:14 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 05:07 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:04 Wheats wrote:On August 04 2013 04:58 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 04:54 shinosai wrote:On August 04 2013 04:48 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 04 2013 04:41 shinosai wrote:
[quote]
I concede that the difference between a white woman and a biracial woman who appears white is less than or equal to the difference between a trans woman and a cis woman. It's a rather easy concession to make, since I don't think that there's a meaningful difference between trans women and cis women. I think ideally in a future where the actual scientific transformation process is much more refined and thorough, you might be right. Currently though, I see a significant enough difference between cis and trans women to warrant not wanting to sleep with a trans woman. Going into where the line is drawn is where the paradox arises. I definitely don't see how that makes me a transphobe. Further, I don't see how I am being inconsistent for thinking that in the situation regarding race, one actually might be somewhat racist for not wanting to sleep with someone who appears white but is actually biracial purely for the reason that they are biracial. This is the hidden transphobic attitude that motivates your inconsistency. Do you consider it a phobia if they simply get a feeling of disgust when they ponder the fact that their sexual partner used to be a man? Fantasy comes along and all of a sudden they picture sucking cock. IE it makes them feel gay by proxy. Is that a phobia in your opinion? Uhh, that is exactly transphobia. Just like being uncomfortable around people of other races is racism, just like being uncomfortable around gay people is homophobia, no matter how much you try to hide it. Is one not an arachnophobe as long as they have a fear and disgust of spiders, even if they put on a brave face around spiders? Or braving your fear of heights doesn't make you not afraid of them. You have to recognize that you are phobic of the things that make you scared or disgusted, and you have to accept that and try to move beyond your fears. Thats not what I asked. I didnt ask what if a person feels disgusted around transexuals in general, I asked specifically what if a person feels gay by proxy by having sex with one. Unless you consider me fatophobic simply for feeling disgusted by the notion of having sex with an extremely fat person, I fail to see the difference. By the way I dont feel that way. I wanna answer this one too. The idea coming to the person that their partner is actually a man (and thus gay) is practically the definition of transphobia. I wouldn't call that person tranphobic and I wouldn't even discount them from my potential friends, but that feeling, whether by social conditioning or whatever, is still transphobic in nature. Fair enough. Would you then also consider a person fatsophobic simply because they feel some level of discomfort when they picture having sex with a very fat person? If yes, ok. If not, please explain. I do appologize for the analogy, its only relevant as it relates to what constitutes a phobia. Just curious. I think the main reason some people are made uncomfortable by the notion of having sex with a transexual is either what I mentioned, being gay by proxy, and/or that it wouldnt look and feel the same once the clothes come off. Would you consider both transphobic or only the first? For the first one, it would depend. If the person were attracted to them but then began to feel worried about what it would mean to sleep with a "disgusting creature like a fat person" or some specific trauma, then it would be a phobic response. If the person just doesn't find an overweight person attractive, then no. To the second, the first reason is (with the same disclaimer that I don't think it makes the person themselves transphobic), the second one no. The second one was harder than I first thought to explain why because it is essentially a fear specifically about trans women that could be founded in just not knowing about something, but I think if there is legitimate reason to think you wouldn't find them attractive then it's not. ok thanks for the answer. Lets say you dont find a transwomans past as a man an attractive notion, in the same vein that a christian may consider past promiscuity a dealbreaker (even if the woman now is monogamous). Still a phobia?
Yes, but both are.
|
On August 04 2013 06:55 shinosai wrote:Show nested quote +Even if I grant the assumption that there is an imperceptible difference between a cis woman I would be interested in sleeping with and a trans woman (which I'm skeptical of), it doesn't change the reality that they were born a man. And this, right here, is the transphobic attitude that you have. No matter how identical a trans and cis woman are to one another, no matter how many overlapping qualities they have, none of that matters, because she was assigned male at birth, and that bothers you. You just admitted it - it's not about her body, it's about her history. And you treat her differently from other women because of this, in the same way that you'd be treating a biracial woman who passes as white differently from white women.
How does noting this objective, impartial fact make me transphobic?
Are you going to dispute the fact that they were born a man?
I never said it bothered me at all. Why would someone being born a man bother me?
I didn't admit anything because I'm still skeptical about your assumption that there is no difference between the body of a cis-woman and a trans-woman.
Are you serious? You brought up that hypothetical example. I never said I would treat a biracial woman differently, that was your example.
|
On August 04 2013 06:58 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:55 shinosai wrote:Even if I grant the assumption that there is an imperceptible difference between a cis woman I would be interested in sleeping with and a trans woman (which I'm skeptical of), it doesn't change the reality that they were born a man. And this, right here, is the transphobic attitude that you have. No matter how identical a trans and cis woman are to one another, no matter how many overlapping qualities they have, none of that matters, because she was assigned male at birth, and that bothers you. You just admitted it - it's not about her body, it's about her history. And you treat her differently from other women because of this, in the same way that you'd be treating a biracial woman who passes as white differently from white women. How does noting this objective, impartial fact make me transphobic? Are you going to dispute the fact that they were born a man?
No. I don't dispute the fact that the biracial woman isn't white, either.
|
On August 04 2013 06:55 shinosai wrote:Show nested quote +Even if I grant the assumption that there is an imperceptible difference between a cis woman I would be interested in sleeping with and a trans woman (which I'm skeptical of), it doesn't change the reality that they were born a man. And this, right here, is the transphobic attitude that you have. No matter how identical a trans and cis woman are to one another, no matter how many overlapping qualities they have, none of that matters, because she was assigned male at birth, and that bothers you. You just admitted it - it's not about her body, it's about her history. And you treat her differently from other women because of this, in the same way that you'd be treating a biracial woman who passes as white differently from white women.
Not because she was assigned male at birth, but because she used to have a male body. If a cis woman changed her sex and then changed back to female, I would feel the same as if she were a trans woman.
|
Just wanted to repost this.
On August 03 2013 20:18 Iyerbeth wrote:
I was thinking about this after I logged off last night, and it seems the problem entirely comes down to the flawed belief that even many supporters have, that a trans woman 'used to be a man'. I think tackling that might just be the biggest thing which would make life easier for trans women.
To explain what I mean, I didn't suddenly change who I was when I transitioned I merely stopped pretending to be someone else. I was a girl at age 5, I just hadn't told anyone and then when I did tell people I just sought medical help to correct some issues. As a person I was never less of a girl/woman than anyone else.
Technically speaking, for me personally, I wasn't old enough to be considered a man at that point either, and my testosterone levels were half that of an unhealthy 80 year old (and hugely lower than expected for my age) so I literally have no idea what it means to be a man. I don't think those two things are what is meant, but I mention them only to highlight what's wrong with the thinking.
|
Also, forgive me for what will probably be perceived as annoying political correctness, but the correct terminology in queer discussions is typically AMAB or AFAB (assigned male or female at birth). It's actually pretty offensive to some people to say that they were born a man.
|
On August 04 2013 06:59 shinosai wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:58 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 04 2013 06:55 shinosai wrote:Even if I grant the assumption that there is an imperceptible difference between a cis woman I would be interested in sleeping with and a trans woman (which I'm skeptical of), it doesn't change the reality that they were born a man. And this, right here, is the transphobic attitude that you have. No matter how identical a trans and cis woman are to one another, no matter how many overlapping qualities they have, none of that matters, because she was assigned male at birth, and that bothers you. You just admitted it - it's not about her body, it's about her history. And you treat her differently from other women because of this, in the same way that you'd be treating a biracial woman who passes as white differently from white women. How does noting this objective, impartial fact make me transphobic? Are you going to dispute the fact that they were born a man? No. I don't dispute the fact that the biracial woman isn't white, either.
Neither would I. You seem confused about my position.
|
On August 04 2013 07:02 shinosai wrote:
Also, forgive me for what will probably be perceived as annoying political correctness, but the correct terminology in queer discussions is typically AMAB or AFAB (assigned male or female at birth). It's actually pretty offensive to some people to say that they were born a man.
I'm sorry but that's a little absurd.
How is "assigned a male/female at birth" any better than "born a male/female"?
The latter seems less accurate anyways as it seems to imply some cosmic force that chose how they would be born as an assumption.
"I wasn't born Irish, I was assigned Irish at birth!"
Really? How could that ever be offensive?
|
On August 04 2013 07:00 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:55 shinosai wrote:Even if I grant the assumption that there is an imperceptible difference between a cis woman I would be interested in sleeping with and a trans woman (which I'm skeptical of), it doesn't change the reality that they were born a man. And this, right here, is the transphobic attitude that you have. No matter how identical a trans and cis woman are to one another, no matter how many overlapping qualities they have, none of that matters, because she was assigned male at birth, and that bothers you. You just admitted it - it's not about her body, it's about her history. And you treat her differently from other women because of this, in the same way that you'd be treating a biracial woman who passes as white differently from white women. Not because she was assigned male at birth, but because she used to have a male body. If a cis woman changed her sex and then changed back to female, I would feel the same as if she were a trans woman.
I can actually sympathize with that position as well.
|
On August 04 2013 07:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 07:02 shinosai wrote:
Also, forgive me for what will probably be perceived as annoying political correctness, but the correct terminology in queer discussions is typically AMAB or AFAB (assigned male or female at birth). It's actually pretty offensive to some people to say that they were born a man. I'm sorry but that's a little absurd. How is "assigned a male/female at birth" any better than "born a male/female"? The latter seems less accurate anyways as it seems to imply some cosmic force that chose how they would be born as an assumption. "I wasn't born Irish, I was assigned Irish at birth!" Really? How could that ever be offensive?
I think it was more about "man", aka "gender identity" (although a newborn doesn;t really have any identity, so I don't see how that's offensive, but whatever).
|
On August 04 2013 07:09 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 07:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 04 2013 07:02 shinosai wrote:
Also, forgive me for what will probably be perceived as annoying political correctness, but the correct terminology in queer discussions is typically AMAB or AFAB (assigned male or female at birth). It's actually pretty offensive to some people to say that they were born a man. I'm sorry but that's a little absurd. How is "assigned a male/female at birth" any better than "born a male/female"? The latter seems less accurate anyways as it seems to imply some cosmic force that chose how they would be born as an assumption. "I wasn't born Irish, I was assigned Irish at birth!" Really? How could that ever be offensive? I think it was more about "man", aka "gender identity" (although a newborn doesn;t really have any identity, so I don't see how that's offensive, but whatever).
"Assigned male at birth" is literally the same thing.
Unless you're for some odd reason exclusively assuming "man" is a gender and not a sex while "male" is a sex and not a gender".
|
On August 04 2013 07:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 07:02 shinosai wrote:
Also, forgive me for what will probably be perceived as annoying political correctness, but the correct terminology in queer discussions is typically AMAB or AFAB (assigned male or female at birth). It's actually pretty offensive to some people to say that they were born a man. I'm sorry but that's a little absurd. How is "assigned a male/female at birth" any better than "born a male/female"? The latter seems less accurate anyways as it seems to imply some cosmic force that chose how they would be born as an assumption. "I wasn't born Irish, I was assigned Irish at birth!" Really? How could that ever be offensive?
Some trans women, from as early as the age of a toddler, identify and experience the world as a girl. Their gender was incorrectly assigned to them as male.
It's also not very helpful to tell minorities what they should and should not find offensive.
|
The difference between being assigned male at birth and being a man is quite wide. I have never been a man, for instance.
|
On August 04 2013 06:58 Iyerbeth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:55 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 06:32 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:14 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 05:07 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:04 Wheats wrote:On August 04 2013 04:58 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 04:54 shinosai wrote:On August 04 2013 04:48 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
[quote]
I think ideally in a future where the actual scientific transformation process is much more refined and thorough, you might be right. Currently though, I see a significant enough difference between cis and trans women to warrant not wanting to sleep with a trans woman. Going into where the line is drawn is where the paradox arises.
I definitely don't see how that makes me a transphobe. Further, I don't see how I am being inconsistent for thinking that in the situation regarding race, one actually might be somewhat racist for not wanting to sleep with someone who appears white but is actually biracial purely for the reason that they are biracial. This is the hidden transphobic attitude that motivates your inconsistency. Do you consider it a phobia if they simply get a feeling of disgust when they ponder the fact that their sexual partner used to be a man? Fantasy comes along and all of a sudden they picture sucking cock. IE it makes them feel gay by proxy. Is that a phobia in your opinion? Uhh, that is exactly transphobia. Just like being uncomfortable around people of other races is racism, just like being uncomfortable around gay people is homophobia, no matter how much you try to hide it. Is one not an arachnophobe as long as they have a fear and disgust of spiders, even if they put on a brave face around spiders? Or braving your fear of heights doesn't make you not afraid of them. You have to recognize that you are phobic of the things that make you scared or disgusted, and you have to accept that and try to move beyond your fears. Thats not what I asked. I didnt ask what if a person feels disgusted around transexuals in general, I asked specifically what if a person feels gay by proxy by having sex with one. Unless you consider me fatophobic simply for feeling disgusted by the notion of having sex with an extremely fat person, I fail to see the difference. By the way I dont feel that way. I wanna answer this one too. The idea coming to the person that their partner is actually a man (and thus gay) is practically the definition of transphobia. I wouldn't call that person tranphobic and I wouldn't even discount them from my potential friends, but that feeling, whether by social conditioning or whatever, is still transphobic in nature. Fair enough. Would you then also consider a person fatsophobic simply because they feel some level of discomfort when they picture having sex with a very fat person? If yes, ok. If not, please explain. I do appologize for the analogy, its only relevant as it relates to what constitutes a phobia. Just curious. I think the main reason some people are made uncomfortable by the notion of having sex with a transexual is either what I mentioned, being gay by proxy, and/or that it wouldnt look and feel the same once the clothes come off. Would you consider both transphobic or only the first? For the first one, it would depend. If the person were attracted to them but then began to feel worried about what it would mean to sleep with a "disgusting creature like a fat person" or some specific trauma, then it would be a phobic response. If the person just doesn't find an overweight person attractive, then no. To the second, the first reason is (with the same disclaimer that I don't think it makes the person themselves transphobic), the second one no. The second one was harder than I first thought to explain why because it is essentially a fear specifically about trans women that could be founded in just not knowing about something, but I think if there is legitimate reason to think you wouldn't find them attractive then it's not. ok thanks for the answer. Lets say you dont find a transwomans past as a man an attractive notion, in the same vein that a christian may consider past promiscuity a dealbreaker (even if the woman now is monogamous). Still a phobia? Yes, but both are.
Thanks for the answers. Correct me if Im wrong, but is this the gist of how you and others in this thread reason around phobias as it relates to sexual activity:
present physical or non-physical quality being a turnoff = not (necessarily) a phobia
quality that relates to the past (ie having the present quality of having had a certain quality in the past whether physical or non-physical) being a turnoff = always a phobia.
Would that be a fair summation? by non-physical I mean anything from political ideology to being presently promiscuous
|
On August 04 2013 07:11 shinosai wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 07:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On August 04 2013 07:02 shinosai wrote:
Also, forgive me for what will probably be perceived as annoying political correctness, but the correct terminology in queer discussions is typically AMAB or AFAB (assigned male or female at birth). It's actually pretty offensive to some people to say that they were born a man. I'm sorry but that's a little absurd. How is "assigned a male/female at birth" any better than "born a male/female"? The latter seems less accurate anyways as it seems to imply some cosmic force that chose how they would be born as an assumption. "I wasn't born Irish, I was assigned Irish at birth!" Really? How could that ever be offensive? Some trans women, from as early as the age of a toddler, identify and experience the world as a girl. Their gender was incorrectly assigned to them as male. It's also not very helpful to tell minorities what they should and should not find offensive.
Okay that's fine. But "born a male" is literally saying the same thing about identity as "assigned a male at birth".
The only difference in those two phrases is the metaphysical assumptions of the latter that seem to imply a higher power. Both are making the same statements about identity.
It's helpful to anyone if they're mistakenly offended about something and you help them not get offended by it anymore.
edit: nevermind I was interpreting "assigned" as coming from some other source. I wasn't reading it as "assigned by humans"
I misunderstood how it was phrased. I can see how the other form might be considered offensive, in a sense.
I don't see how you could think your sex isn't a male though if you were born with every physical trait the average male has.
|
On August 04 2013 07:13 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:58 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:55 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 06:32 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:14 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 05:07 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:04 Wheats wrote:On August 04 2013 04:58 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 04:54 shinosai wrote:
[quote]
This is the hidden transphobic attitude that motivates your inconsistency.
Do you consider it a phobia if they simply get a feeling of disgust when they ponder the fact that their sexual partner used to be a man? Fantasy comes along and all of a sudden they picture sucking cock. IE it makes them feel gay by proxy. Is that a phobia in your opinion? Uhh, that is exactly transphobia. Just like being uncomfortable around people of other races is racism, just like being uncomfortable around gay people is homophobia, no matter how much you try to hide it. Is one not an arachnophobe as long as they have a fear and disgust of spiders, even if they put on a brave face around spiders? Or braving your fear of heights doesn't make you not afraid of them. You have to recognize that you are phobic of the things that make you scared or disgusted, and you have to accept that and try to move beyond your fears. Thats not what I asked. I didnt ask what if a person feels disgusted around transexuals in general, I asked specifically what if a person feels gay by proxy by having sex with one. Unless you consider me fatophobic simply for feeling disgusted by the notion of having sex with an extremely fat person, I fail to see the difference. By the way I dont feel that way. I wanna answer this one too. The idea coming to the person that their partner is actually a man (and thus gay) is practically the definition of transphobia. I wouldn't call that person tranphobic and I wouldn't even discount them from my potential friends, but that feeling, whether by social conditioning or whatever, is still transphobic in nature. Fair enough. Would you then also consider a person fatsophobic simply because they feel some level of discomfort when they picture having sex with a very fat person? If yes, ok. If not, please explain. I do appologize for the analogy, its only relevant as it relates to what constitutes a phobia. Just curious. I think the main reason some people are made uncomfortable by the notion of having sex with a transexual is either what I mentioned, being gay by proxy, and/or that it wouldnt look and feel the same once the clothes come off. Would you consider both transphobic or only the first? For the first one, it would depend. If the person were attracted to them but then began to feel worried about what it would mean to sleep with a "disgusting creature like a fat person" or some specific trauma, then it would be a phobic response. If the person just doesn't find an overweight person attractive, then no. To the second, the first reason is (with the same disclaimer that I don't think it makes the person themselves transphobic), the second one no. The second one was harder than I first thought to explain why because it is essentially a fear specifically about trans women that could be founded in just not knowing about something, but I think if there is legitimate reason to think you wouldn't find them attractive then it's not. ok thanks for the answer. Lets say you dont find a transwomans past as a man an attractive notion, in the same vein that a christian may consider past promiscuity a dealbreaker (even if the woman now is monogamous). Still a phobia? Yes, but both are. Thanks for the answers. Correct me if Im wrong, but is this the gist of how you and others in this thread reason around phobias as it relates to sexual activity: present physical or non-physical quality being a turnoff = not (necessarily) a phobia quality that relates to the past (ie having the present quality of having had a certain quality in the past whether physical or non-physical) being a turnoff = always a phobia. Would that be a fair summation? by non-physical I mean anything from political ideology to being presently promiscuous
I wouldn't be quite happy with that, but close enough. It's really about having an irrational fear of something because of a perceived piece of meta data.
|
On August 04 2013 06:58 Iyerbeth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:55 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 06:32 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:14 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 05:07 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:04 Wheats wrote:On August 04 2013 04:58 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 04:54 shinosai wrote:On August 04 2013 04:48 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
[quote]
I think ideally in a future where the actual scientific transformation process is much more refined and thorough, you might be right. Currently though, I see a significant enough difference between cis and trans women to warrant not wanting to sleep with a trans woman. Going into where the line is drawn is where the paradox arises.
I definitely don't see how that makes me a transphobe. Further, I don't see how I am being inconsistent for thinking that in the situation regarding race, one actually might be somewhat racist for not wanting to sleep with someone who appears white but is actually biracial purely for the reason that they are biracial. This is the hidden transphobic attitude that motivates your inconsistency. Do you consider it a phobia if they simply get a feeling of disgust when they ponder the fact that their sexual partner used to be a man? Fantasy comes along and all of a sudden they picture sucking cock. IE it makes them feel gay by proxy. Is that a phobia in your opinion? Uhh, that is exactly transphobia. Just like being uncomfortable around people of other races is racism, just like being uncomfortable around gay people is homophobia, no matter how much you try to hide it. Is one not an arachnophobe as long as they have a fear and disgust of spiders, even if they put on a brave face around spiders? Or braving your fear of heights doesn't make you not afraid of them. You have to recognize that you are phobic of the things that make you scared or disgusted, and you have to accept that and try to move beyond your fears. Thats not what I asked. I didnt ask what if a person feels disgusted around transexuals in general, I asked specifically what if a person feels gay by proxy by having sex with one. Unless you consider me fatophobic simply for feeling disgusted by the notion of having sex with an extremely fat person, I fail to see the difference. By the way I dont feel that way. I wanna answer this one too. The idea coming to the person that their partner is actually a man (and thus gay) is practically the definition of transphobia. I wouldn't call that person tranphobic and I wouldn't even discount them from my potential friends, but that feeling, whether by social conditioning or whatever, is still transphobic in nature. Fair enough. Would you then also consider a person fatsophobic simply because they feel some level of discomfort when they picture having sex with a very fat person? If yes, ok. If not, please explain. I do appologize for the analogy, its only relevant as it relates to what constitutes a phobia. Just curious. I think the main reason some people are made uncomfortable by the notion of having sex with a transexual is either what I mentioned, being gay by proxy, and/or that it wouldnt look and feel the same once the clothes come off. Would you consider both transphobic or only the first? For the first one, it would depend. If the person were attracted to them but then began to feel worried about what it would mean to sleep with a "disgusting creature like a fat person" or some specific trauma, then it would be a phobic response. If the person just doesn't find an overweight person attractive, then no. To the second, the first reason is (with the same disclaimer that I don't think it makes the person themselves transphobic), the second one no. The second one was harder than I first thought to explain why because it is essentially a fear specifically about trans women that could be founded in just not knowing about something, but I think if there is legitimate reason to think you wouldn't find them attractive then it's not. ok thanks for the answer. Lets say you dont find a transwomans past as a man an attractive notion, in the same vein that a christian may consider past promiscuity a dealbreaker (even if the woman now is monogamous). Still a phobia? Yes, but both are.
How are those phobias?
You're literally expecting someone to ignore everything about an individual's past. If an individual ever had anything in their past that you find a dealbreaker, you suddenly have a phobia?
I don't see how having personal aesthetic rules or standards in determining one's partner translates into a phobia about anything excluded.
|
On August 04 2013 07:22 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:58 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:55 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 06:32 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:14 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 05:07 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:04 Wheats wrote:On August 04 2013 04:58 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 04:54 shinosai wrote:
[quote]
This is the hidden transphobic attitude that motivates your inconsistency.
Do you consider it a phobia if they simply get a feeling of disgust when they ponder the fact that their sexual partner used to be a man? Fantasy comes along and all of a sudden they picture sucking cock. IE it makes them feel gay by proxy. Is that a phobia in your opinion? Uhh, that is exactly transphobia. Just like being uncomfortable around people of other races is racism, just like being uncomfortable around gay people is homophobia, no matter how much you try to hide it. Is one not an arachnophobe as long as they have a fear and disgust of spiders, even if they put on a brave face around spiders? Or braving your fear of heights doesn't make you not afraid of them. You have to recognize that you are phobic of the things that make you scared or disgusted, and you have to accept that and try to move beyond your fears. Thats not what I asked. I didnt ask what if a person feels disgusted around transexuals in general, I asked specifically what if a person feels gay by proxy by having sex with one. Unless you consider me fatophobic simply for feeling disgusted by the notion of having sex with an extremely fat person, I fail to see the difference. By the way I dont feel that way. I wanna answer this one too. The idea coming to the person that their partner is actually a man (and thus gay) is practically the definition of transphobia. I wouldn't call that person tranphobic and I wouldn't even discount them from my potential friends, but that feeling, whether by social conditioning or whatever, is still transphobic in nature. Fair enough. Would you then also consider a person fatsophobic simply because they feel some level of discomfort when they picture having sex with a very fat person? If yes, ok. If not, please explain. I do appologize for the analogy, its only relevant as it relates to what constitutes a phobia. Just curious. I think the main reason some people are made uncomfortable by the notion of having sex with a transexual is either what I mentioned, being gay by proxy, and/or that it wouldnt look and feel the same once the clothes come off. Would you consider both transphobic or only the first? For the first one, it would depend. If the person were attracted to them but then began to feel worried about what it would mean to sleep with a "disgusting creature like a fat person" or some specific trauma, then it would be a phobic response. If the person just doesn't find an overweight person attractive, then no. To the second, the first reason is (with the same disclaimer that I don't think it makes the person themselves transphobic), the second one no. The second one was harder than I first thought to explain why because it is essentially a fear specifically about trans women that could be founded in just not knowing about something, but I think if there is legitimate reason to think you wouldn't find them attractive then it's not. ok thanks for the answer. Lets say you dont find a transwomans past as a man an attractive notion, in the same vein that a christian may consider past promiscuity a dealbreaker (even if the woman now is monogamous). Still a phobia? Yes, but both are. How are those phobias? You're literally expecting someone to ignore everything about an individual's past. If an individual ever had anything in their past that you find a dealbreaker, you suddenly have a phobia?
Nope, but in that example the person had a problem with someone who in the past was promiscuous. It might weigh in on your decision of whether you want a long term relationship, or if it's something which has real impact now (in the example, it didn't) but if it's just you worrying about something for no reason, yeah.
|
On August 04 2013 07:22 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 06:58 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:55 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 06:32 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 06:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:14 Iyerbeth wrote:On August 04 2013 05:07 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 05:04 Wheats wrote:On August 04 2013 04:58 Snusmumriken wrote:On August 04 2013 04:54 shinosai wrote:
[quote]
This is the hidden transphobic attitude that motivates your inconsistency.
Do you consider it a phobia if they simply get a feeling of disgust when they ponder the fact that their sexual partner used to be a man? Fantasy comes along and all of a sudden they picture sucking cock. IE it makes them feel gay by proxy. Is that a phobia in your opinion? Uhh, that is exactly transphobia. Just like being uncomfortable around people of other races is racism, just like being uncomfortable around gay people is homophobia, no matter how much you try to hide it. Is one not an arachnophobe as long as they have a fear and disgust of spiders, even if they put on a brave face around spiders? Or braving your fear of heights doesn't make you not afraid of them. You have to recognize that you are phobic of the things that make you scared or disgusted, and you have to accept that and try to move beyond your fears. Thats not what I asked. I didnt ask what if a person feels disgusted around transexuals in general, I asked specifically what if a person feels gay by proxy by having sex with one. Unless you consider me fatophobic simply for feeling disgusted by the notion of having sex with an extremely fat person, I fail to see the difference. By the way I dont feel that way. I wanna answer this one too. The idea coming to the person that their partner is actually a man (and thus gay) is practically the definition of transphobia. I wouldn't call that person tranphobic and I wouldn't even discount them from my potential friends, but that feeling, whether by social conditioning or whatever, is still transphobic in nature. Fair enough. Would you then also consider a person fatsophobic simply because they feel some level of discomfort when they picture having sex with a very fat person? If yes, ok. If not, please explain. I do appologize for the analogy, its only relevant as it relates to what constitutes a phobia. Just curious. I think the main reason some people are made uncomfortable by the notion of having sex with a transexual is either what I mentioned, being gay by proxy, and/or that it wouldnt look and feel the same once the clothes come off. Would you consider both transphobic or only the first? For the first one, it would depend. If the person were attracted to them but then began to feel worried about what it would mean to sleep with a "disgusting creature like a fat person" or some specific trauma, then it would be a phobic response. If the person just doesn't find an overweight person attractive, then no. To the second, the first reason is (with the same disclaimer that I don't think it makes the person themselves transphobic), the second one no. The second one was harder than I first thought to explain why because it is essentially a fear specifically about trans women that could be founded in just not knowing about something, but I think if there is legitimate reason to think you wouldn't find them attractive then it's not. ok thanks for the answer. Lets say you dont find a transwomans past as a man an attractive notion, in the same vein that a christian may consider past promiscuity a dealbreaker (even if the woman now is monogamous). Still a phobia? Yes, but both are. How are those phobias? You're literally expecting someone to ignore everything about an individual's past. If an individual ever had anything in their past that you find a dealbreaker, you suddenly have a phobia? I don't see how having personal aesthetic rules or standards translates into a phobia.
Well, one of the requirements for phobias is that they have to be irrational. This is why phobia examples relating to race and trans status are more relevant to the discussion than say, obesity or promiscuity. We might say that you have negative attitudes toward obesity and promiscuity, but in order to have a phobia, it'd have to be at least somewhat irrational. For the purposes of this discussion, finding someone unattractive is not irrational. Finding someone unattractive solely and exclusively because of their race (*not* how they look, but their race) probably is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
