This is the creepiest, rapiest shit I've read on here. u/wolverine9 is a predator who needs to be on every watch list. This comment from him has 100 fucking upvotes so far:

I disagree.

As someone who (briefly) dated a gold star who was penis averse, I really despise this narrative that she should preemptively lean into that preference because I think it's ostracizing to trans people. OP seems open to trying to make this work, and I know plenty of transbians who have never removed their underwear during sex with cis women because of this situation (for years in one case).

OP, you are open to being intimate with this person. That means you are open to being vulnerable, and it means you are open to having a vulnerable conversation about the realities of your interaction while it's happening. Your feelings within the bounds of sex are 100% valid, and how that comes up during sex is important for you to communicate.

As mentioned by a number of others here, how she wants to participate in sex is equally important - ask her if her genitalia are a part of how she would get off, and how she wants to be touched. You may feel uncomfortable at first, but because you seem open to it, it's possible that your chemical attraction will be willing to operate in more exploratory ways than one who categorically deny trans women the potential of interaction based off of genitalia.

I think the 'genital preference' narrative is ostracizing and not inclusive enough. If two people are attracted to one another on a chemical level, you can't create categorical denial [of interaction with penis] until those two people have communicated that between themselves. It is not a subject of public discussion.

Again from the same commenter. Love how he also threw in that lesbians cannot refuse to fuck people because they adhere to a homophobic and misogynistic religion:

Right, but I'm saying that I the difference is linguistic. 'Genital preference' shouldn't be a thing, because it's willful. Aversion, I get. Aversion doesn't mean you categorically deny the situation, it means you have a certain willingness to be proven wrong about your biases.

Like you said, "people will have preferences (in terms of private parts and otherwise) that they would be willing to negotiate on if the circumstances call for it." I don't think it's fair to be willful in your preference and categorically deny people your attraction, because it really means you're denying that attraction to yourself in the first place. It's equally ostracizing to say you won't sleep with someone because they're white/muslim/disabled/have a loose vagina/are fat/etc. People shouldn't have those preferences, because it's close-minded to have them.

If the language of our time is to examine our biases and rise above them, so too do we need to examine the formation of the biases used to create an arc of inclusivity for trans women into womanhood [This is why we're against your language manipulation, you dipshit, because you do so to prescribe rapey bullshit]. If trans women with penises are women, then their penises are also women's penises. Anyone who isn't including those with penises in their prescriptive sexuality of an attraction to women is denying trans women the space to call themselves equally feminine. That's why I feel like this. Genital preference continues a segregation of feminine 'types'.

Let me be clear here, though. I don't think that this means OP (or any lesbian cis woman, for that matter) should forcibly include penetrative transwomen in their sexual pantheon. I mean that people like OP, asking this question, are taking a risk of experience that people who use the language of exclusion (s/a preference) are not willing to take because of a willful exclusion.

This post and responding comments would be disturbing even if OP were a straight girl. Also, what's with the male commenters reassuring her that PIV sex won't hurt the first time. How the fuck would they know? I can't read anymore of this, but this post needs to be blasted out to everyone. You have to see this to believe it.