RantTired of bisexuals being expected to be open to dating trans people by default because we like both biological males and females

submitted by UnapologeticMisandry from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]emptiedriver 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

No, I'm saying the "real parts" are the parts that match. A lesbian can be attracted to a trans man - a woman who identifies as a man - as easily as a bisexual person could. It is nothing to do with how they identify, it's do with what is actually the case.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Personally I could never as that point even if they're female, the hormones have changed secondary sex characteristics, but I'm someone who doesn't like masculinity in general, someone who does, could, that truth.

[–]emptiedriver 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

a) not all trans people are on hormones these days with "self ID" but more importantly b) that was the whole point of the original poster. Bisexuals are also sexually attracted to people. They are attracted to women as women, and men as men. If a lesbian is not going to be attracted to a trans man because she has altered her body with weird hormones, don't assume a bisexual person would have any more interest, just because they like both sexes.

The question is just whether you can be attracted to a person who has taken hormones, had surgeries or has weird fantasies. But, orientation-wise, it's open to anyone (and some people might enjoy the presentation but the real attraction is going to be to the actual sex, so a man attracted to trans women is gay or bi, etc)

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[removed]

    [–]emptiedriver 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    but for the masculinity and male secondary traits . A bisexual shouldn't have problem with it.

    why? Or, why should a lesbian have a problem with "masculine" traits?

    If we're in agreement that there are only two sexes, then whatever traits a person has are just their individual traits. If someone has short hair, that doesn't make them masculine or feminine. If someone has a mastectomy, that's just their individual body. A lesbian could still love a woman with a mastectomy - that's not a masculine trait. There are women who naturally grow beards, and lesbians who'd be happy to date them.

    A trans person is just a deluded person who thinks certain traits make them male or female. But they don't. They simply are male or female. And then they have whatever traits they have. A lot of people would not be attracted to someone who amputates parts of their body or takes unnecessary drugs to try to achieve cosmetic effects, but that is not because those outcomes make them too masculine or feminine. It's because they're mentally unwell.

    The point is, everyone might have their particular preferences, but by definition any orientation could date a trans person of the physical sex they are oriented toward. A woman dating a trans man (woman who identifies as male) is in a lesbian relationship.

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

    Agree on the mentally unwell part. We often find physically fit people to be more desirable, why not mental fitness? Maybe that's saying the quiet parts out loud, but it is true.

    You're picking apart the male and female, with hair and mastectomies, etc. in the same way that trans people try and pick apart the sexes. This strikes me as the same nature of argument.

    If I were capable of taking a man and making him indiscernibly anatomically, psychologically female, then our hitherto man could be an erotic target for other, heterosexual men. Perhaps if the secret were revealed, then the attraction would vanish--and I think this is the salient part of the conversation. Not one well had with LGB folk--because of the obvious emphasis on sex--but is it not just the discerned sex, but other conceptualizations we have of people that make them appealing or not, to us? Have any of us beyond our teenage years broken up a relationship with the correct sex for us, why?

    I think we have to concede this point to the transgender crowd. Were the medical technology sufficient...

    However, that is not where we are. We can't have this argument on the basis of what-ifs? So, I agree with you practically, but not philosophically. It seems to me you're making philosophical points, and you're stuck here because we can't all agree on the painfully obvious fact that it is not just the sex of a person that strikes our desire, or or dislike.

    Please, do not get me wrong. I think gender ideology is complete horseshit. I'm not interested in people because of some gendered soul they have. It's not a religious interaction. Yet, can you see how they may rightfully be accusing the trans detractors of genital fetishism? Because we can't say out loud that we like fit people, or tall people, or women with long, curly brown hair who know how to turn a wrench, drive trucks, and ain't afraid of having a bit of dirt and grease on their face? Okay, oddly specific example... but damn...

    EDIT:

    I was thinking of the criticism I could get for this post, and you're right. That's a "bisexual thing to say." So, let's deal with that.

    Perhaps this is where we missed the mark. Maybe bisexuality isn't an interest in both sexes, where heterosexuality and homosexuality is an interest in just one. Perhaps they're entirely different experiences and we can't put our fingers on it. Maybe the monosexuality of heterosexuals is different from the monosexuality of homosexuals, which is different from the plurisexuality of bisexuals. Each being its own thing, the sexes not regarded. We think we're just dealing with our sex, their sex, but we've actually got two, maybe three very different phenomena and we can't see it. It's these endless fights between those that like both sexes and those that like their same sex, in particular, that's leading me to this intuition.

    I maintain that while bisexuals and homosexuals have same-sex attraction in common, they are both very different. Bisexuals have opposite-sex interests. Homosexuals do not, and this is what makes them special. I don't understand homosexuals as people with same-sex attraction. I understand homosexuals as people lacking opposite-sex attraction.

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

    You're picking apart the male and female, with hair and mastectomies, etc. in the same way that trans people try and pick apart the sexes. This strikes me as the same nature of argument.

    what? But I'm doing the exact opposite! I'm saying, a woman with a mastectomy is still a woman. TRAs would say that would make her a man. How is that the same at all? My entire point is that all those little details have no impact on what sex a person is. They're just individuated traits of a person. A bearded lady is still a lady. You are what sex you are, no matter what surgeries and specifics you try to change.

    If I were capable of taking a man and making him indiscernibly anatomically, psychologically female, then our hitherto man could be an erotic target for other, heterosexual men. Perhaps if the secret were revealed, then the attraction would vanish--and I think this is the salient part of the conversation.

    well, to me this does not make sense. How do you make someone "indiscernibly anatomically, psychologically female" but then not actually female? What does that even mean? To me, a person is what they materially are. If it were possible to turn someone female, then they'd be female, but it's not possible. At very least they would always have the psychology of having been male to start with (meaning, having had a male anatomy) but I simply do not think creating an entirely new human body to replace who you already are is a realistic or worthwhile enterprise.

    Injecting hormones and doing cosmetic surgery is superficial, and ultimately when you get to know a person and get to know their body, you get to know their sex. That's part of intimacy and while you may hide your sex from acquaintances or aloof coworkers, you are not going to keep it from those you get to know better, and you are certainly not going to keep a partner in the dark.

    I think we have to concede this point to the transgender crowd. Were the medical technology sufficient...

    If the technology were sufficient to turn myself into a bat, I could be a bat. But it's not, and I'm not, and I don't know what it's like to be a bat. You can't just cut a few things off to turn into a woman or to stop being a man. There is a whole different layout, you are born with every egg that you will menstruate... and a boy is aware of his penis from a young age and that affects how he thinks too. They are two different paths.

    it is not just the sex of a person that strikes our desire, or or dislike

    I never said it was, but for those who have a limitation based on sex, that limitation applies in the same way to trans people - based on their sex, not their self identity.

    Bisexuals have opposite-sex interests. Homosexuals do not, and this is what makes them special. I don't understand homosexuals as people with same-sex attraction. I understand homosexuals as people lacking opposite-sex attraction.

    This is a very interesting thought, but I still think it's too sweeping. Some homosexuals specifically seek out "opposite sex presenting" members of their own sex, as in the butch-femme or big daddy/ bear to sissy type relations that have often been considered typical. Our stereotypes of gay men and lesbians have always been the GNC ones. If anyone was naturally going to look like they landed in the middle, they'd have been accused of being gay in the past. Now, we think they must be trans, and all too often, they will push the natural non-conformity all the way to the other side, so that at least they can conform with something even if it is now the wrong sex. Someone who would have been a masculine lesbian can now be a straight-appearing man! Except, of course, that she is not actually a man and might be caused health problems by any medical interventions.

    But would you say she is more likely to be dating straight women or lesbians? Or would only bisexual women give her the time of day?

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Stop telling bisexuals what we are attracted to. You have no right.