"Trans" identified people lying to straight/gay people in order to sex/sleep with them

submitted by Kai_Decadence from self.GenderCritical

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

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

I think it should be considered rape, but I don't know whether it would be. It's beyond contemptible at the very least, and an incredibly scary thought.

I think a person's heterosexuality or homosexuality or bisexuality is based on their awareness, on what they perceive a person to be. Whether that is through their sense of smell, sight, touch, or knowledge of the other person's biological reality, it's their awareness that defines their sexuality.

So, if a man knows a transwoman is a transwoman, and is still attracted to her, I agree with you, he is likely bisexual.

If he isn't put off by their trans status, then I wouldn't necessarily say he's bisexual, I'd say he's open minded and willing to experiment with and test his sexuality and boundaries perhaps. I think active attraction is important in defining someone's sexuality, not simply the lack of revulsion.

If a man believes a transwoman is a biological woman, he's thinking of a biological woman when he sleeps with her. So I think the man would be considered straight still. And the transwoman should be considered a selfish liar.

Lately, I've thought a lot about this from my own perspective. I'm female, and while I think women can be beautiful, I feel no attraction to them at all. I can say that in terms of aesthetics, I think the female form is more pleasing than the male form, but the male form draws me to it. Ruby Rose in Orange is the New Black was attractive to me. Her character in the show gave me a very boyish feel and I was drawn to that. So I thought, am I bisexual now? Well, the second I consider what's underneath her clothes, and it matches what's underneath mine, I lose all attraction to her. Men are different from me. Their bodies are different and mysterious and alluring because of that. It isn't just the presence of a penis or their flatter chests, but the fact that their bodies are different from mine. No matter what you change on the surface, a male body will remain different from my female body. That difference matters to me when it comes to attraction.

A transman can look as manly as possible, but knowing there's a female body there that is essentially the same as mine in the way it works, is an immediate turn off. If a transman lied about being trans and I somehow managed to not notice it either, it wouldn't make me bisexual. It would make them a liar.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

If he isn't put off by their trans status, then I wouldn't necessarily say he's bisexual, I'd say he's open minded and willing to experiment with and test his sexuality and boundaries perhaps. I think active attraction is important in defining someone's sexuality, not simply the lack of revulsion.

Eh I disagree. He's still engaging with a man and no amount of makeup, long hair, perfume, and provocative clothing or even having your penis shoved inside out is gonna change that. There is a word though and that is Gynephelia. Gynephelia is the attraction to femininity regardless of sex (And the opposite of this is Androphilia which is the attraction to Masculinity regardless of sex). These two specifics are definite things in a lot of bisexual people. for example a bisexual guy who is attracted to feminine women and feminine men ("Transwoman" included) but is not attracted to masculine men or masculine woman, that would be a case of Gynephelia at play here. Or take a Bisexual woman who is attracted to masculine men and masculine women ("Butches", "Studs", etc.) but has no interest in feminine women or feminine men, that would be a case of Androphilic bisexuality.

If a man believes a transwoman is a biological woman, he's thinking of a biological woman when he sleeps with her.

Yeah no. Again I've seen what these kinds of dudes say and they are the ones who equate femininity to define women and that is not what being a woman is. Femininity does not define woman and what you're seeing is self-internalized homophobia at work there. He's trying to justify sexing/dating a hyper feminine man but doesn't want to acknowledge it for a variety of reasons that have to do with self-internalized homophobia. Now agian, this isn't saying that the guy is gay but self-internalized homophobia is a big thing among bisexual men because they can go all their formulate years thinking they can't be attracted to other men because they're only attracted to women and haven't seen a man (feminine and I don't just mean by mannerisms, I'm talking full on feminine presenting men in addition and think about it, how many super feminine presenting boys did you see when you were in school? Most likely not all that many to even none at all. At least not as much compared to say a tomboy) until they get older and come across these kinds of men and thus they experience their what I call, "Bi Awakening". The man can "believe" all he wants that the "transwoman" he's seeing is still a woman but it doesn't change biological reality that he's with another dude.

A transman can look as manly as possible, but knowing there's a female body there that is essentially the same as mine in the way it works, is an immediate turn off. If a transman lied about being trans and I somehow managed to not notice it either, it wouldn't make me bisexual. It would make them a liar.

Right but what if the "Transman' came clean and said she was a woman all along? Would you still stay with her? Because if so, yeah you would be a bisexual but you'd most likely fall into the Androphilic Bisexual since you're attracted to masculine presentation and sensibilities.

[–]TalkToTheVoid 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I think attraction matters.

So if a man isn't immediately entirely put off by someone being trans but is curious about seeing his own response, I think I'd consider him curious. I think people can learn about their sexuality through pushing their boundaries. I think sexual attraction is very clear and definite but sometimes people do sexual things even without sexual attraction. So I suppose I'd call the behaviour bisexual, but I wouldn't consider the person bisexual if they aren't explicitly attracted to the trans person.

I was considering a scenario where a man is very dense or very naive and very unaware about female bodies and he meets a transwoman who passes and they have sex once and the transperson doesn't disclose their transness ever or for years. I think I would consider the man straight still, even though they did engage in sex with another male.

Well I've not been in the situation so I can't say for sure what I would do, but from where I am right now, yes, I would most definitely leave her. I would feel grossly lied to and violated, and incredibly stupid that I didn't notice it, and I wouldn't want to continue to engage in any sexual activity with them. Both because they lied, and because they're female and now I know.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I think I'd consider him curious.

Bi-curious sure.

I think people can learn about their sexuality through pushing their boundaries.

Oh sure, I can believe that. For example I knew I was a gay since a young age. Never found women attractive but around 20-21, I remember my brother had this one Lesbian friend who was super butch and I thought she looked attractive but when I took it a little further and tried watching adult erotica of masculine looking women, I just could not get into it because I'm not attracted to vaginas. So I mean it can go both ways. A man or woman who think they are straight until something strikes their curiosity having to do with the opposite sex or a gay or lesbian having the same only the reverse and finding that they are actually bisexual.

I was considering a scenario where a man is very dense or very naive and very unaware about female bodies and he meets a transwoman who passes and they have sex once and the transperson doesn't disclose their transness ever or for years. I think I would consider the man straight still, even though they did engage in sex with another male.

Well I mean sure if it's just once and it was just some very dense, very naive man who didn't know diddly about the female body then yeah, that would be the grey area. But if said guy found out and liked it and pursued more, yeah no lol.

Well I've not been in the situation so I can't say for sure what I would do, but from where I am right now, yes, I would most definitely leave her. I would feel grossly lied to and violated, and incredibly stupid that I didn't notice it, and I wouldn't want to continue to engage in any sexual activity with them. Both because they lied, and because they're female and now I know.

Understandable.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

but when I took it a little further and tried watching adult erotica of masculine looking women,

I think you hit on something important there. For most of human history until very recently, humans learned about sex and their own sexuality and sexual tastes principally from RL contact with other human beings in the flesh, not by "watching adult erotica." Yes, people had tons of sex fantasies, and as the human race developed, they drew and looked at "dirty pictures," told ribald stories, wrote/read fiction with graphic sex scenes, and finally after photography and film were invented, modern pornography was invented. But even so, it's only very recently that "watching adult erotica" became something that people could do in their own homes by pressing a couple of keys. And even when porn watching in the privacy of one's home became a thing after cable TV and home videos were developed in the late 1970s, most people didn't watch porn frequently (or ever) - and even for those who did watch porn, watching porn was still not the principal way people learnt about their own sexuality and sexual tastes.

For example, I have never watched any porn on film, video or online. But I've had lots of different IRL encounters and love affairs with more partners than I care to count or divulge, and a pretty wide variety of partners too. Sexual attraction is about so much more than just what someone looks like; and the experience of having sex and being in sexual relationships is nothing like the experience of watching other people playact in adult erotica or porn. Thinking you can learn about what sex is and all the dimensions and depths of your own sexuality from watching other people engage in/pretend to engage in sex acts on film or video is like thinking you can learn what food and wine tastes like by watching footage of other people cooking, eating and drinking.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think you hit on something important there. For most of human history until very recently, humans learned about sex and their own sexuality and sexual tastes principally from RL contact with other human beings in the flesh, not by "watching adult erotica." Yes, people had tons of sex fantasies, and as the human race developed, they drew and looked at "dirty pictures," told ribald stories, wrote/read fiction with graphic sex scenes, and finally after photography and film were invented, modern pornography was invented. But even so, it's only very recently that "watching adult erotica" became something that people could do in their own homes by pressing a couple of keys. And even when porn watching in the privacy of one's home became a thing after cable TV and home videos were developed in the late 1970s, most people didn't watch porn frequently (or ever) - and even for those who did watch porn, watching porn was still not the principal way people learnt about their own sexuality and sexual tastes.

Hm I suppose there is truth to this though I grew up in late 90s, 00s and I can remember having crushes on quite a few fellow students when I was a kid, I had to be around 7 or 8 when I had two of my first crushes. Of course back then I didn't know what that meant but I would always feel flustered, anxious, and "butterflies in my stomach" type of feeling when I was around them lol.I never really got that feeling towards girls.

Thinking you can learn about what sex is and all the dimensions and depths of your own sexuality from watching other people engage in/pretend to engage in sex acts on film or video is like thinking you can learn what food and wine tastes like by watching footage of other people cooking, eating and drinking.

Mmm I dunno. It's a very complicated thing for sure though...

[–]MarkTwainiac 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Of course you had crushes on fellow students when you were around 7 or 8! That's entirely normal. I had my first crush on a guy (the son of the man who was painting my family's house) when I was 3/4 - and I still can recall all the sensations that you describe about your crushes in great detail. Same as I can recall the intense pleasure and confusion I had when I was about 11 and had a session of practicing "French kissing" with a girlfriend that led to frottage, wild humping and orgasmic delight.

My point was, and is, that most humans through history had all these same feelings, and had to figure them out, without access or exposure to any erotica, and definitely no access to porn films and videos. Humans explored these matters - and "found ourselves'" - by flesh and blood close contact with our peer-age love interests, siblings, the older predators and pervs we encountered, etc - and by observing what older people did IRL, often at distances that were too close for comfort (as when whole families slept in the same room, sometimes in the same bed).

I'm not suggesting that you should or might have sexual feelings towards girls/women. Of course not. I'm just saying be leery about using responses to, and ideas obtained from, erotic films/videos and internet porn as the principal determinants of your own sexuality and the sexuality of others. Human evolution involved lots of close IRL contact, and IRL close contact is what we're wired for.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh my experiences that showed I was gay came much before I watched my first gay porn lol. I remember being in middle school and crushing on these 3 boys that I also happened to have in Physical Education class and I remember my locker was right next to one of them and I uh... Felt "excited" down there if you know what I mean lol It was so embarrassing haha.

But right right .

[–]TalkToTheVoid 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think I mostly agree with you. That one-time sex scenario is the only one I thought of where a transwoman can lie about her trans status and get away with it.

I think, or hope, it would be very hard for any man to date a transwoman and sleep with her and hang out with her regularly, and not notice that she is not a biological woman.

Although I do wonder. This thread reminded me of an episode of How I Met Your Mother. In it the lead is concerned about some secret his girlfriend has and is imagining the worst case scenarios and in one of them he's marrying her and she says "I used to be a dude." I always wondered if it was really possible for a transwoman to fool someone like that. Maybe some straight men are just so self-obsessed that they couldn't care lesser about their partner's body, or about female-kind in general. It's not a fun thought, but sadly I don't think it's impossible for straight men to be that ignorant.