|
On July 31 2013 07:35 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:[quote] No he didn't just define that himself. Do some reading before you start trying to tell people they are wrong when they're obviously more informed on the topic than you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones.A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? How exactly am I being an asshole? Like I said, I would consider an actually transsexual person (because there are people with mental illnesses who consider themselves of the opposite sex; afaik, you can't get a sex-change surgery based solely on your will, you have to be diagnosed as transsexual by a doctor of medicine/psychiatrist) whatever sex/gender they consider themselves. I would, however, not refer to a man who dresses as a woman a "woman" simply because he so fancies. After a certain point doing whatever is possible in order not to potentially offend someone gets absurd. If you're white I'm not going to call you white simply because that's what you identify yourself as, even if you're Eminem. whoa.... "actually" transsexual person? instead of those fake trans persons? being transexual is a mental illness?.... whoa you're scaring me man. its like you're going backwards in time. Can you actually read? Not everyone who considers himself/herself of the opposite sex does so because of a brain structure not matching his/her genitals. Sometimes it's a mental thing. and your point is that this makes them a fake transexual person or did i missunderstand? EDIT: or more directly you said that these are not "actual" transsexual persons? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. So you're an expert on trans issue ? There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever. Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide. As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria. No, I'm not an expert (neither are you, from what I can tell), but I'm knowledgable enough to know that there's a glaring difference between being actually transsexual (which has to do with brain structure) and having a mental illness that makes you identify as the opposite sex.
No I'm not a medical expert, but I've read a lot about trans issue and all that stuff. And I am trans myself.
They are different degree of transsexuality and not everybody identify themselves in the gender binary either. I guess it is possible that a person could be delusional and think they are of a different sex, but they would know very quickly by going through therapy and trying hormone.
|
On July 31 2013 07:39 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:35 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 07:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:
[quote]
Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? How exactly am I being an asshole? Like I said, I would consider an actually transsexual person (because there are people with mental illnesses who consider themselves of the opposite sex; afaik, you can't get a sex-change surgery based solely on your will, you have to be diagnosed as transsexual by a doctor of medicine/psychiatrist) whatever sex/gender they consider themselves. I would, however, not refer to a man who dresses as a woman a "woman" simply because he so fancies. After a certain point doing whatever is possible in order not to potentially offend someone gets absurd. If you're white I'm not going to call you white simply because that's what you identify yourself as, even if you're Eminem. whoa.... "actually" transsexual person? instead of those fake trans persons? being transexual is a mental illness?.... whoa you're scaring me man. its like you're going backwards in time. Can you actually read? Not everyone who considers himself/herself of the opposite sex does so because of a brain structure not matching his/her genitals. Sometimes it's a mental thing. and your point is that this makes them a fake transexual person or did i missunderstand? EDIT: or more directly you said that these are not "actual" transsexual persons? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. So you're an expert on trans issue ? There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever. Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide. As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria. No, I'm not an expert (neither are you, from what I can tell), but I'm knowledgable enough to know that there's a glaring difference between being actually transsexual (which has to do with brain structure) and having a mental illness that makes you identify as the opposite sex. by mental illness, doesnt that mean they need treatment? gay people or transgenders dont need treatment as far as i know, unless from prejudice they face for being gay, but being gay itself is not an mental illness because it does not require psychiatric intervention, unless of course by people that thinks being gay is wrong...but i dont see a wrong as long as they dont do any harm or cant function properly like rainman, which they dont afaik.
Need as in should be required to get one? No, that's not true for any mentally ill people unless they are dangerous to other people, as far as I know.
Need as in they feel miserable and want help? Yes, as long as they seek that help. I just don't think that a sex-change surgery is a valid treatment for people for whom problems with their gender/sex identification are caused by mental issues. There are people who have mental issues that make them feel e.g. their hands are not theirs and they want them removed. I don't think removing their limbs is helping them, but that's my personal opinion (I believe most doctors would agree with me, though).
|
On July 31 2013 07:45 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:35 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 07:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:
[quote]
Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? How exactly am I being an asshole? Like I said, I would consider an actually transsexual person (because there are people with mental illnesses who consider themselves of the opposite sex; afaik, you can't get a sex-change surgery based solely on your will, you have to be diagnosed as transsexual by a doctor of medicine/psychiatrist) whatever sex/gender they consider themselves. I would, however, not refer to a man who dresses as a woman a "woman" simply because he so fancies. After a certain point doing whatever is possible in order not to potentially offend someone gets absurd. If you're white I'm not going to call you white simply because that's what you identify yourself as, even if you're Eminem. whoa.... "actually" transsexual person? instead of those fake trans persons? being transexual is a mental illness?.... whoa you're scaring me man. its like you're going backwards in time. Can you actually read? Not everyone who considers himself/herself of the opposite sex does so because of a brain structure not matching his/her genitals. Sometimes it's a mental thing. and your point is that this makes them a fake transexual person or did i missunderstand? EDIT: or more directly you said that these are not "actual" transsexual persons? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. So you're an expert on trans issue ? There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever. Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide. As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria. No, I'm not an expert (neither are you, from what I can tell), but I'm knowledgable enough to know that there's a glaring difference between being actually transsexual (which has to do with brain structure) and having a mental illness that makes you identify as the opposite sex. No I'm not a medical expert, but I've read a lot about trans issue and all that stuff. And I am trans myself. They are different degree of transsexuality and not everybody identify themselves in the gender binary either. I guess it is possible that a person could be delusional and think they are of a different sex, but they would know very quickly by going through therapy and trying hormone.
Maybe they would know quickly, maybe not. Maybe they wouldn't decide to get that treatment but would still want people to refer to them as their prefered gender/sex, like some (don't know how many) transvestites do. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to refuse to restructure the whole society and the language to accommodate a small minority of people with mental issues (again, not calling truly transsexual people as such).
|
On July 31 2013 08:01 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:45 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:35 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 07:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:
[quote]
So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? How exactly am I being an asshole? Like I said, I would consider an actually transsexual person (because there are people with mental illnesses who consider themselves of the opposite sex; afaik, you can't get a sex-change surgery based solely on your will, you have to be diagnosed as transsexual by a doctor of medicine/psychiatrist) whatever sex/gender they consider themselves. I would, however, not refer to a man who dresses as a woman a "woman" simply because he so fancies. After a certain point doing whatever is possible in order not to potentially offend someone gets absurd. If you're white I'm not going to call you white simply because that's what you identify yourself as, even if you're Eminem. whoa.... "actually" transsexual person? instead of those fake trans persons? being transexual is a mental illness?.... whoa you're scaring me man. its like you're going backwards in time. Can you actually read? Not everyone who considers himself/herself of the opposite sex does so because of a brain structure not matching his/her genitals. Sometimes it's a mental thing. and your point is that this makes them a fake transexual person or did i missunderstand? EDIT: or more directly you said that these are not "actual" transsexual persons? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. So you're an expert on trans issue ? There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever. Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide. As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria. No, I'm not an expert (neither are you, from what I can tell), but I'm knowledgable enough to know that there's a glaring difference between being actually transsexual (which has to do with brain structure) and having a mental illness that makes you identify as the opposite sex. No I'm not a medical expert, but I've read a lot about trans issue and all that stuff. And I am trans myself. They are different degree of transsexuality and not everybody identify themselves in the gender binary either. I guess it is possible that a person could be delusional and think they are of a different sex, but they would know very quickly by going through therapy and trying hormone. Maybe they would know quickly, maybe not. Maybe they wouldn't decide to get that treatment but would still want people to refer to them as their prefered gender/sex, like some (don't know how many) transvestites do. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to refuse to restructure the whole society and the language to accommodate a small minority of people with mental issues (again, not calling truly transsexual people as such).
I see, but I don't think it's that big of a deal.
And how can you tell the difference anyway ? The only person that can truly tells you if you're trans or not is yourself. Similar to your sexual orientation.
|
On July 31 2013 08:07 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:01 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 07:45 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:35 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 07:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 maybenexttime wrote:
[quote]
How exactly am I being an asshole? Like I said, I would consider an actually transsexual person (because there are people with mental illnesses who consider themselves of the opposite sex; afaik, you can't get a sex-change surgery based solely on your will, you have to be diagnosed as transsexual by a doctor of medicine/psychiatrist) whatever sex/gender they consider themselves. I would, however, not refer to a man who dresses as a woman a "woman" simply because he so fancies.
After a certain point doing whatever is possible in order not to potentially offend someone gets absurd. If you're white I'm not going to call you white simply because that's what you identify yourself as, even if you're Eminem. whoa.... "actually" transsexual person? instead of those fake trans persons? being transexual is a mental illness?.... whoa you're scaring me man. its like you're going backwards in time. Can you actually read? Not everyone who considers himself/herself of the opposite sex does so because of a brain structure not matching his/her genitals. Sometimes it's a mental thing. and your point is that this makes them a fake transexual person or did i missunderstand? EDIT: or more directly you said that these are not "actual" transsexual persons? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. So you're an expert on trans issue ? There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever. Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide. As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria. No, I'm not an expert (neither are you, from what I can tell), but I'm knowledgable enough to know that there's a glaring difference between being actually transsexual (which has to do with brain structure) and having a mental illness that makes you identify as the opposite sex. No I'm not a medical expert, but I've read a lot about trans issue and all that stuff. And I am trans myself. They are different degree of transsexuality and not everybody identify themselves in the gender binary either. I guess it is possible that a person could be delusional and think they are of a different sex, but they would know very quickly by going through therapy and trying hormone. Maybe they would know quickly, maybe not. Maybe they wouldn't decide to get that treatment but would still want people to refer to them as their prefered gender/sex, like some (don't know how many) transvestites do. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to refuse to restructure the whole society and the language to accommodate a small minority of people with mental issues (again, not calling truly transsexual people as such). I see, but I don't think it's that big of a deal. And how can you tell the difference anyway ? The only person that can truly tells you if you're trans or not is yourself. Similar to your sexual orientation.
What is not a big deal? Also, I don't know. I have never met a transsexual person or someone with a gender/sex identity disorder, so it's hard for me to answer that question.
|
On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow.
I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person).
|
On July 31 2013 07:37 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:23 babylon wrote:On July 31 2013 07:19 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 babylon wrote:On July 31 2013 06:53 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:37 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:25 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:18 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:08 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
So calling people what they are and not what they feel like is being an asshole? Language evolves over time. Nowadays sex refers to biologically male or female and gender refers to gender identification. Since their gender identification is not dependent upon biological sex, telling someone they are not a particular gender when they identify with being that particular gender makes you an asshole, yes. On July 31 2013 06:09 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
Trans isn't a characteristic. It's not a thing. It just indicates a transition from one set of characteristics to another. It has absolutely no descriptive power about the current person standing in front of you. You seem to be struggling with basic definitions here.
Struggling with basic definitions? This is becoming ridiculous. If presented with two options then I have an alternative. My hypothetical situation was two identical woman but 1. is trans 2. is not 1 /= 2 Therefore I have an alternative, therefore think about what you're saying to me before you say it. How do you not understand that is there is no "is trans." There's just: 1. is woman 2. is woman I think what you're trying to do here is imply that the trans woman will have some sort of emotional baggage or surgical scars and that is what you don't prefer...but those things aren't implied by the "trans" modifier. What you're actually saying is that you prefer someone who was a certain way in the past...even though their past has no consequences for who they are now (at least in the context of just banging them). You really don't understand how "this person changed" is not actually a characteristic of them but rather a description of how a old characteristic went away and new one came to be? I'm not going to be able to explain this any better. So if you're still confused, someone else is gonna have to take over. I think you just don't understand what trans actually means. I told you that if you presented me with two identical people except one of them is trans and the other isn't trans then I want the person who isn't trans. My sexual preferences are my own. You don't need to understand them, you don't need to rationalise them, all you need to do is respect them. But you have absolutely no way of knowing if one is trans. How can you act on a preference if you can't even identify it? I have trouble respecting this because you're claiming a difference that just really doesn't exist and basing it on "preference" when in reality your hormones have absolutely no way to distinguish between the two...especially if they look identical. It sounds like veiled transphobia. Particularly if you're only looking to bang one of these chicks. Of course I can't act on a preference if I can't identify it, that doesn't mean that I don't have the preference. If you are presented with two identical women but one supports the same political party as you and the other doesn't then perhaps you would prefer the one with the same views because you have something in common. Perhaps you would prefer the other one because opposites attract. Perhaps political orientation plays no part in your sexual preferences. That's your business. You can't identify this difference at a glance but it exists and it's possible that you have a preference. Is it so difficult for you to understand that I might have a preference if the person I'm about to have sex with is a trans person or not? Conflating sexual attraction with other factors. You would be sexually attracted to both women if they are both identical (except one is trans and the other isn't, even if you can't tell), but given more information, you'd prefer to be with the cis woman for whatever reason (i.e. lack of trust, desire for children, desire for no baggage, etc.). I admittedly do not know how your brain works re: sexual attraction, but my understanding is that for most people it works on a physical level, which may/may not be augmented based on other factors (e.g. emotional, intellectual, etc.). But if you don't know the difference, then the trans factor honestly wouldn't come into play. I don't mean to dictate any of this to you -- I don't believe in telling people, oh, they should be attracted to X or Y, there are plenty of reasons why someone would not want to be with a trans person -- just trying to explain a bit. I'm not conflating anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_attractionSexual attraction is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest. Sexual attractiveness or sex appeal refers to an individual's ability to attract the sexual or erotic interest of another person, and is a factor in sexual selection or mate choice. The attraction can be to the physical or other qualities or traits of a person, or to such qualities in the context in which they appear. The attraction may be to a person's looks or movements or to their voice or smell, besides other factors. The attraction may be enhanced by a person's adornments, clothing, perfume, hair length and style, and anything else which can attract the sexual interest of another person . It can also be influenced by individual genetic, psychological, or cultural factors, or to other, more amorphous qualities of the person. Sexual attraction is also a response to another person that depends on a combination of the person possessing the traits and also on the criteria of the person who is attracted. I'm asking you, not Wikipedia. Sexual attraction is different for different people. When you see a 10/10 (on your scale, whatever that is), would you sleep with her? EDIT: I should rephrase that to "would you feel the desire to sleep with her?" Attraction is not action. You accused me of conflating sexual attraction with other factors and instead of just replying "you're wrong" I decided to quote wikipedia to back up my assertion that you're wrong. If you disagree with my interpretation of that passage or my own understanding of sexual attraction then please, explain, but there's no need to act like a smartass. Physical attraction is *part* of sexual attraction. Although I've made this abundantly clear but haven't stated it directly allow me to do so now; if I see a person who is a 10/10 on my scale and isn't identifiable as a trans person then yes obviously I would feel a desire to sleep with her, just like I would feel a desire to sleep with an attractive five dollar hooker with aids before finding out some more information about her. When I find out that the person is trans I might even still have sex with this person, I don't know as I've never been faced with this situation and I'm certainly not repulsed by trans people nor am I a transphobe, I simply have the preference that they not be trans. Faced with the choice, I prefer not trans to trans.
Sorry for giving you a hard time. Didn't mean to sound like a smartass, but apologies anyways. For some people physical attraction doesn't have anything to do with sexual attraction, for others it does, etc. Sexual attraction develops differently depending on the individual. It could be physical at first, emotional, intellectual, etc. Just trying to establish which one it is for you and to look at how it develops.
Not calling you a transphobe. There are many legitimate reasons why someone may not want to get together with a trans person (e.g. Shiori's reason, my own reason is very simply "baggage"). Klondike was just trying to root out a particular reason for why you would prefer one over the other, and to say that "I just prefer cis women to trans women" without any other explanation unfortunately sounds degrading to trans women, as if cis women are more desirable by nature of being cis -- all this in light of the fact that the movement all along has been to push the idea that trans women are just as, well, women as cis women. Whether or not people take that to be transphobic is something for others to decide. It's always better to be more explicit (even stupidly so, sometimes) than to be vague in these discussions.
|
On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept. Show nested quote +
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person).
The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia.
And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use.
There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy.
For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference.
I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it.
Babylon's reason of "I don't think I could properly deal with any emotional baggage" is more believable. Although I'd venture that there are probably trans women out there who have made the transition with minimal stress and, if there aren't many now, hopefully there will be in the future, and I'd ask how that preference holds up then.
|
On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it.
isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care?
many guys will fuck anything with tits and a hole, close your eyes and all mouths are the same, blah blah but shit...no, dude, no.
|
On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. Babylon's reason of "I don't think I could properly deal with any emotional baggage" is more believable. Although I'd venture that there are probably trans women out there who have made the transition with minimal stress and, if there aren't many now, hopefully there will be in the future, and I'd ask how that preference holds up then.
Why do you need to take a sexual preference seriously? Can you justify your own attraction to males with objective reasons, or would it come down to something rather arbitrary?
|
On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care?
It is mostly considered common sense to tell your partner your trans status before committing to a relationship for various reasons.
And trans person aren't fake either, neither is their genital. A better analogy would be paying for a certain model of Rolex but then finding out you have a different model.
|
On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. Babylon's reason of "I don't think I could properly deal with any emotional baggage" is more believable. Although I'd venture that there are probably trans women out there who have made the transition with minimal stress and, if there aren't many now, hopefully there will be in the future, and I'd ask how that preference holds up then.
Um, technically the feeling of a man giving me oral sex is equivalent to that of a woman giving me oral sex, but that doesn't mean I don't prefer one to the other... I'm not saying that trans women aren't women, btw; this is just an example and nothing more.
All sexual preferences are pretty much arbitrary at the bottom of things. As long as it's between consenting adults, who gives a fuck who we want to fuck? It's not like we're obligated to fuck anyone.
I mean, I couldn't tell you while I like women with long (head) hair; I just do. Doesn't mean I hate women with short hair.
|
On July 31 2013 08:42 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care? It is mostly considered common sense to tell your partner your trans status before committing to a relationship for various reasons.
i'd imagine so but i'd imagine same (rolex) example can be used to convince the unconvinced. people are different and i'm sure some will be convinced but not all, and theres nothing wrong with that.
|
On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care? many guys will fuck anything with tits and a hole, close your eyes and all mouths are the same, blah blah but shit...no, dude, no.
Except fake Rolex's don't work nearly as well as the real thing. They don't keep time as well, they're made of much flimsier materials, and they don't look as good or feel as comfortable on the wrist. Trans women aren't fake women dude.
And to answer Roe's question...yeah, I can. I Like strong jaws cause I think they look pretty, well groomed body hair and scruff because I like the texture, cut dick because I think it looks better. I can give you reasons for all of my preferences because I can both define a difference and tell you why that difference matters to me. And another thing to note is that none of my preferences are exclusive. Just because I like body hair doesn't mean I refuse to sleep with guys who have none. They are just that a preference, not a requirement.
If you're telling me you have two identical women, just with the completely abstract difference that one is trans and one is not...you can't actually identify a difference. You might as well not be sexually attracted to one because one of them owns a jetta and the other owns a jeep.
|
On July 31 2013 08:43 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. Babylon's reason of "I don't think I could properly deal with any emotional baggage" is more believable. Although I'd venture that there are probably trans women out there who have made the transition with minimal stress and, if there aren't many now, hopefully there will be in the future, and I'd ask how that preference holds up then. Um, technically the feeling of a man giving me oral sex is equivalent to that of a woman giving me oral sex, but that doesn't mean I don't prefer one to the other... I'm not saying that trans women aren't women, btw; this is just an example and nothing more. All sexual preferences are pretty much arbitrary at the bottom of things. As long as it's between consenting adults, who gives a fuck who we want to fuck? It's not like we're obligated to fuck anyone. I mean, I couldn't tell you while I like women with long (head) hair; I just do. Doesn't mean I hate women with short hair.
If the feeling of a man giving you oral sex is the same as a woman giving you oral sex...I recommend you find different women or rethink how you label your orientation. They ain't the same yo.
|
On July 31 2013 08:44 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care? many guys will fuck anything with tits and a hole, close your eyes and all mouths are the same, blah blah but shit...no, dude, no. Except fake Rolex's don't work nearly as well as the real thing. They don't keep time as well, they're made of much flimsier materials, and they don't look as good or feel as comfortable on the wrist. Trans women aren't fake women dude. And to answer Roe's question...yeah, I can. I Like strong jaws cause I think they look pretty, well groomed body hair and scruff because I like the texture, cut dick because I think it looks better. I can give you reasons for all of my preferences because I can both define a difference and tell you why that difference matters to me. And another thing to note is that none of my preferences are exclusive. Just because I like body hair doesn't mean I refuse to sleep with guys who have none. They are just that a preference, not a requirement.
to continue on with rolex theme, i'd give actually rats ass about feel and look but i'd rather care more for the mechanism and heritage, some people just want a woman, not a physical look but everything, all "organic grown" and all.
|
On July 31 2013 08:44 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:42 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:
[quote]
Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care? It is mostly considered common sense to tell your partner your trans status before committing to a relationship for various reasons. i'd imagine so but i'd imagine same (rolex) example can be used to convince the unconvinced.
Honestly, there isn't much difference between a vagina and a neo vagina. Only big difference is lack of reproduction. And some other difference if you're really looking for it.
Like I said, a better analogy would be paying for a particular model of a Rolex but getting a different model.
|
On July 31 2013 08:47 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:44 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:
[quote]
Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care? many guys will fuck anything with tits and a hole, close your eyes and all mouths are the same, blah blah but shit...no, dude, no. Except fake Rolex's don't work nearly as well as the real thing. They don't keep time as well, they're made of much flimsier materials, and they don't look as good or feel as comfortable on the wrist. Trans women aren't fake women dude. And to answer Roe's question...yeah, I can. I Like strong jaws cause I think they look pretty, well groomed body hair and scruff because I like the texture, cut dick because I think it looks better. I can give you reasons for all of my preferences because I can both define a difference and tell you why that difference matters to me. And another thing to note is that none of my preferences are exclusive. Just because I like body hair doesn't mean I refuse to sleep with guys who have none. They are just that a preference, not a requirement. to continue on with rolex theme, i'd give actually rats ass about feel and look but i'd rather care more for the mechanism and heritage, some people just want a woman, not a physical look but everything, all organic grown and all.
Just to play devils advocate.
What about transgender man ? If they still have a vagina, would you be ok with them, because they were assigned girl at birth ?
|
On July 31 2013 08:44 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 04:24 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 04:09 theodorus12 wrote:
I think everyone should have equal* rights. But it is also my right to find gays etc disgusting.
And I really don't get the anger about that Family Guy episode, of course a straight male would be disgusted, if he finds out the "girl" he just had sex with is actually a man....
*with the exceptions of child adoption Except the person was actually a girl, not a man. A trans woman is a woman. Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X. So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op. These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care? many guys will fuck anything with tits and a hole, close your eyes and all mouths are the same, blah blah but shit...no, dude, no. Except fake Rolex's don't work nearly as well as the real thing. They don't keep time as well, they're made of much flimsier materials, and they don't look as good or feel as comfortable on the wrist. Trans women aren't fake women dude. And to answer Roe's question...yeah, I can. I Like strong jaws cause I think they look pretty, well groomed body hair and scruff because I like the texture, cut dick because I think it looks better. I can give you reasons for all of my preferences because I can both define a difference and tell you why that difference matters to me. And another thing to note is that none of my preferences are exclusive. Just because I like body hair doesn't mean I refuse to sleep with guys who have none. They are just that a preference, not a requirement.
But the same can be said of Shiori: He likes certain things because he likes them. How are his preferences any different? He likes 'real' genitalia because he finds it pretty, and such.
|
On July 31 2013 08:49 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 08:47 jinorazi wrote:On July 31 2013 08:44 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:37 jinorazi wrote:On July 31 2013 08:33 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 08:16 Shiori wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 04:43 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 04:35 Iyerbeth wrote:On July 31 2013 04:28 DinoMight wrote:
[quote]
Technically, a trans woman is a man who has had surgery to alter the appearance/function of his sexual organs. At the chromosome level, there is nothing we can do to change an X to a Y or a Y to an X.
So while a trans woman might feel like a woman and associate with being a woman, she is still biologically different from a "real" woman (someone born a woman) even post-op.
These are just scientific facts. I'm not saying that it's good or bad or making any other opinion on the matter. No, these aren't facts. A fact is that as it turns out chromosomes don't define gender and some men and some women don't share the same chromosomes as others of their gender. A trans woman is a woman who may or may not have had surgery to correct a body issue she was born with. This "it's just science" crap is used by bigots and by people who don't realise they're supporting them. It's not the reason people define trans women as men, or vica versa, it's a post hoc bastardisation of science which draws a conclusion which science clearly can not show - as we have men and women with chromosomes that differ from the norm - which is used to say trans people aren't *real* men and women. It's segregationism hiding behind scientific jargon. though you say trans women and women are the same thing the fact is that they are not. One had their body operated to be the way it is and the other was born with it. This is the problem with any kind of debate on sexism/racism etc. People always claim that everyone is the same, black = white, trans = cis etc. Its not true. there are differences and pretending they dont exist is plain stupid. How people cant even fathom the idea that it can be disturbing to someone else that their sex partner once had a the body of a man is beyond me. Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed? Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task. And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow. I wouldn't want to have sex with a transsexual because I prefer non-artificial genitalia in my partners. I don't care much for clit/labia piercings either, but full-on transsexualism isn't physically appealing to me for similar reasons; I just don't really find artificial/not fully functional genitalia to be attractive. For me, it's kinda a deal-breaker, but I can't really help what I like sexually, can I? That aside, I'm rather skeptical of whether gender has a coherent definition, because I've never been able to locate one that isn't ultimately circular. I mean, I know that transgender people are legitimate, and I'm not trying to undermine that, but I don't "identify" as being a male in some way that extends beyond my penis and basic anatomy, so I can't really imagine what people mean by gender as an abstract concept.
You can justify your preference any way you want. I'm just explaining to you that "surgery" isn't really a good way to differentiate bodies since everyone has probably had it and that being weirded out by this theoretical body is rather irrational.
You act like there aren't varying degrees of surgery. I don't want to marry someone who has slept with 100000 men; that doesn't mean I have a problem with them sleeping with people in general (i.e. if they slept with one person). The genitalia aren't plastic. Technically they're artificial but they're still functional flesh that appears no different than naturally developed genitalia. And don't use ludicrous examples. You don't want to have sex with a woman who's had 10,000 partners because of the behavior that implies, the risk it poses to you for STD's, and the fact that her vagina probably just doesn't feel good with that much constant use. There are consequences of her sleeping around that much and things you can actually identify you don't like. There aren't any consequences to sex inherent in being trans and other than the fact that they are trans...you can't identify anything you don't like. That's what I don't buy. For every preference people can list reasons. But in this thread the "non trans" preference is justified with "just because ok!!" and that's why I'm not taking it seriously as a preference. I don't buy it when Reason says it, and I don't buy it when you say it. isnt that like if i buy a rolex and later i found out that its fake, but i paid for real price...then you telling me, it looks the same, feels the same, works the same so why care? many guys will fuck anything with tits and a hole, close your eyes and all mouths are the same, blah blah but shit...no, dude, no. Except fake Rolex's don't work nearly as well as the real thing. They don't keep time as well, they're made of much flimsier materials, and they don't look as good or feel as comfortable on the wrist. Trans women aren't fake women dude. And to answer Roe's question...yeah, I can. I Like strong jaws cause I think they look pretty, well groomed body hair and scruff because I like the texture, cut dick because I think it looks better. I can give you reasons for all of my preferences because I can both define a difference and tell you why that difference matters to me. And another thing to note is that none of my preferences are exclusive. Just because I like body hair doesn't mean I refuse to sleep with guys who have none. They are just that a preference, not a requirement. to continue on with rolex theme, i'd give actually rats ass about feel and look but i'd rather care more for the mechanism and heritage, some people just want a woman, not a physical look but everything, all organic grown and all. Just to play devils advocate. What about transgender man ? If they still have a vagina, would you be ok with them, because they were born girl ?
ok, i do shop with looks, perhaps i should have left part out 
i dont swing that way nor do i look down on those that do. who knows i might fall in love with a transgender, my point is that trangender man or woman, some people just arent attracted to it and its perfectly fine imo, but people try to justify it saying there is no difference and it should be perfectly fine even after knowing the truth. varies by people but i think its moot trying to convince otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
