TERFs crash London Pride

[Cleon]

I'm amused by the implied assumption that trans people (well, specifically trans women) are all trying to get in your pants.

It's a familiar conversation. The "omg gay men might hit on me" nonsense is prevalent among homophobes as well. I heard it a lot in the 90s.

 

[3point14]

So, why not just stick with that? Why get into the whole "you're not a woman" issue at all? There's literally no debating over the existence or not of the problematic cock, so why expand the discussion any further than that indisputable fact?

As I said, if I'm asked. I wouldn't volunteer anything beyond a polite 'no', but if interrogated, I'm not going to lie.

"Sorry babe, but I don't like cocks, not your fault!" Could be used by you, in both this case and if a gay man propositions you, and if a lesbian is propositioned by a transwoman. It gets you off the hook sexually, while not demeaning the transperson's whole existence. If you really "don't care" about it in any other case, why not just do it this way in this case?

Then perhaps I should lie if asked. I take it you think I should lie? I can understand that.

 

[3point14]

I'm amused by the implied assumption that trans people (well, specifically trans women) are all trying to get in your pants.

Jesus, can you tell me which of my writing you take that from, because it's not what I think I've written at all. This is a hypothetical situation being discussed, not me thinking I'm the be all and end all.

To be honest, I think you've just read that into the conversation from a basis of nothing at all, but I'd be very intrigued to know which of my writings has led you to the above conclusion. Can you quote me please.

It's a familiar conversation. The "omg gay men might hit on me" nonsense is prevalent among homophobes as well. I heard it a lot in the 90s.

FFS, really? I've been hit on by gay men more than once - it's a peril when a gay friend takes you to a gay club. In fact, I've been propositioned by gay men far more than I have by straight women. I decline, they tend to be cool, we go and dance more.

I really don't know why the hell you think you get to apply the above to me, but don't. It's not only inaccurate, it's *********** offensive.

 

[Cleon]

Jesus, can you tell me which of my writing you take that from, because it's not what I think I've written at all. This is a hypothetical situation being discussed, not me thinking I'm the be all and end all.

Yes, you're very concerned that a trans person might hypothetically hit on you. You've made that very clear.

To be honest, I think you've just read that into the conversation from a basis of nothing at all, but I'd be very intrigued to know which of my writings has led you to the above conclusion. Can you quote me please.




FFS, really? I've been hit on by gay men more than once - it's a peril when a gay friend takes you to a gay club.

"Peril." OK.

In fact, I've been propositioned by gay men far more than I have by straight women. I decline, they tend to be cool, we go and dance more.

And somehow this same process wouldn't apply to trans people because...why, exactly?

I really don't know why the hell you think you get to apply the above to me, but don't. It's not only inaccurate, it's *********** offensive.

Don't care.

 

[Horatius]

Then perhaps I should lie if asked. I take it you think I should lie? I can understand that.

First off, unless I'm seriously misreading your posts, "I don't like cocks" isn't a lie.

But even if it were, then yes, tell the lie, so that someone who is part of a seriously marginalized group, who is potentially subject to abuse every time they go to the bathroom or into a change room, who is the target of religious zealots who want to pass legislation against them, who have just recently had the President of the United States order them ejected from the US military, just might feel slightly less like crap about their lives. *********** lie.

Really, how hard is that? "Don't be a dick, even if she has one."

 

[Butter!]

Yes, you're very concerned that a trans person might hypothetically hit on you. You've made that very clear.

He didn't say that. I'm the one who sort of started this tangent, when I commented that the Tumblr-ites who claim "genital preference" is bigotry are way out of line IMO. A few of us then speculated about how prevalent this attitude is in the real world, outside of Tumblr and Twitter and such. That is what led to the current line of discussion, at least in part, and 3point14 was just following it.

 

[3point14]

Yes, you're very concerned that a trans person might hypothetically hit on you. You've made that very clear.

Where. Show me which of my words indicate that I am 'concerned'

"Peril." OK.

Yes. I'm at risk of having to turn someone down. Putting yourself out there and asking the question is hard, regardless of one's orientation. Yes, it's a peril, a concern I have, that iI'm going to have to be mean to someone and turn them down. Particularly on those occasions when I'm in an environment that's predominantly gay. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, I just want to have a good time with my friends who happen to have brought me to a gay club (cos they're mostly more fun than straight ones)

And somehow this same process wouldn't apply to trans people because...why, exactly?

It would. who said it wouldn't. Again, a quote would be really useful. As stated, and as you've no doubt read, a polite 'no thank you' is all that I would offer. If interrogated, however, I would not lie. I am reconsidering that part in the light of this thread.

Don't care.

You get to label me as some sort of transphobic hater, without any evidence, even when asked?

Can I ask if there is anything I can say or present that would change your mind? I would like to find out if your accusations are based in any sort of logic or based on my words (quote them. As I've asked, quote the actual words that have led you to this conclusion) or if you've arrived at irrationally, in which case, I'm really not going to try to reason you out of your unreasoned position.


I think, in your hurry to paint me in a very horrible light, you've utterly failed to comprehend the actual words I've been writing. I admit that I may have miswritten or phrased things badly to lead you to your conclusion, however, I can't very well defend myself from your, quite frankly horrible accusations if you can't tell me specifically which of my words you have issue with.


Go on, give it a go, we both might learn something.

 

[3point14]

First off, unless I'm seriously misreading your posts, "I don't like cocks" isn't a lie.

Fair point.

But even if it were, then yes, tell the lie, so that someone who is part of a seriously marginalized group, who is potentially subject to abuse every time they go to the bathroom or into a change room, who is the target of religious zealots who want to pass legislation against them, who have just recently had the President of the United States order them ejected from the US military, just might feel slightly less like crap about their lives. *********** lie.

Really, how hard is that? "Don't be a dick, even if she has one."

I really don't ever intend to be a dick. And, at the risk of repeating myself (for the nth time) I would not expound unless called upon to do so.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Okay guys (not to assume anyone's gender) let's take a breath, go back to ground and try to see where everybody is coming from here.

 

[Cleon]

Where. Show me which of my words indicate that I am 'concerned'



Yes. I'm at risk of having to turn someone down. Putting yourself out there and asking the question is hard, regardless of one's orientation. Yes, it's a peril, a concern I have, that iI'm going to have to be mean to someone and turn them down. Particularly on those occasions when I'm in an environment that's predominantly gay. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, I just want to have a good time with my friends who happen to have brought me to a gay club (cos they're mostly more fun than straight ones)

Alternatively, you could find a way to turn them down that isn't mean.

Instead, you're going with this line:

Someone else can define themselves as whatever they like, however, if they want me to sleep with them, then, in that one instance, I get to decide what sex/gender you are and, if it doesn't match mine then I don't care what you call yourself, you're not getting me into bed.

If you can't see the hostility to transpeople in that statement, I really can't help you.

Can I ask if there is anything I can say or present that would change your mind? I would like to find out if your accusations are based in any sort of logic or based on my words (quote them. As I've asked, quote the actual words that have led you to this conclusion) or if you've arrived at irrationally, in which case, I'm really not going to try to reason you out of your unreasoned position.

People who aren't homophobic typically don't spend a lot of time worrying about how to respond if someone of the same sex hits on them.

Similarly, people who aren't transphobic don't spend a lot of time worrying about how to respond if a trans person hits on them. I know for a damn fact that every transperson I know would see the highlighted words above and find them horribly hateful.

 

[JoeMorgue]

With respect Cleon I think you are assuming that "The other person's gender is not defined by their genitals" and "I'm still allowed to base my sexual preference on physical attributes" is a lot easier to balance in the moment when having to make a statement off the cuff then it is.

I want to stress that I do get where you are coming from, I'm not trying to start nothing or egg on an already a little too volatile discussion.

But take a step back. Is the idea that (g) my opinion that I want a sexual partner to have certain genitals and the (g) transperson's opinion that genitals don't define their gender never to come into conflict? That's there's no space in there for any reasonable misunderstanding in the moment that could take bad if either (and I mean either) side for what ever reason takes it that way?

Hopefully that made sense.

*Wow I never thought I would say "genitals" so many times in one post.*

 

[3point14]

Alternatively, you could find a way to turn them down that isn't mean.

Instead, you're going with this line:

Yeah, you're not reading what I'm writing, are you? As I have said (for the nth +1 time) I would not offer up my reasoning without first being asked. I am, as a result of this thread considering lying if the, very unlikely, situation arises where the hypothetical becomes reality

If you can't see the hostility to transpeople in that statement, I really can't help you.

Well, here, I think, is the issue. I will, as stated (and really can't believe I'm having to say this again) accede to anyone#s desire to be labelled as they wish, be it in reference to social clubs, social interaction, dress code and any other area that does not introduce my sexuality as a component.

At that point, however, we're not dealing with my thoughts, we're dealing with my libido. If my libido 'thinks' someone's a man then no amount of politically correct thinking is going to change that. Sorry. As I say, this doesn't matter in social situations one jot. When it involves the raw biochemisty of sexual attraction, my thinking bit doesn't actually get a say. Sorry.

People who aren't homophobic typically don't spend a lot of time worrying about how to respond if someone of the same sex hits on them.

Just to check, you think I raised this issue solely to proclaim how I would deal with the situation? You just need to read the thread to know that that is not the case.

Similarly, people who aren't transphobic don't spend a lot of time worrying about how to respond if a trans person hits on them. I know for a damn fact that every transperson I know would see the highlighted words above and find them horribly hateful.

That's a very, very biased sample. Given your unforgiving attitude towards anyone prepared to actually discuss the issue, I'm hardly suprised that those you choose to hang out with share the same view. It's hardly a usable statistic now though, is it?

 

[Cleon]

With respect Cleon I think you are assuming that "The other person's gender is not defined by their genitals" and "I'm still allowed to base my sexual preference on physical attributes" is a lot easier to balance in the moment when having to make a statement off the cuff then it is.

I want to stress that I do get where you are coming from, I'm not trying to start nothing or egg on an already a little too volatile discussion.

But take a step back. Is the idea that (g) my opinion that I want a sexual partner to have certain genitals and the (g) transperson's opinion that genitals don't define their gender never to come into conflict? That's there's no space in there for any reasonable misunderstanding in the moment that could take bad if either (and I mean either) side for what ever reason takes it that way?

Hopefully that made sense.

*Wow I never thought I would say "genitals" so many times in one post.*

The transphobia does not lie in how you answer the question of whether you'd be attracted to a trans person.

The transphobia lies in obsessing about the question in the first place.

This really is no different from the guys (it was always guys) who saw the gay rights movement and started obsessing about what they would do if a guy ever hit on them.

 

[3point14]

The transphobia does not lie in how you answer the question of whether you'd be attracted to a trans person.

The transphobia lies in obsessing about the question in the first place.

This really is no different from the guys (it was always guys) who saw the gay rights movement and started obsessing about what they would do if a guy ever hit on them.

This is a trap.

Anyone prepared to have the conversation is de facto transphobic or they wouldn't be having the conversation.

This allows you to dismiss any and all views contrary to your own without any of that pesky thinking about it.

 

[pharphis]

FWIW, there's a great youtoober out there by the name ContraPoints and I almost linked a particularly good video she makes about being a transwoman and kind of what the experience is like. Not only does she dismantle the 'autogynephilia' nonsense but takes on other difficult topics such as fascism as well (which is how I ran across her channel actually).

My point here is she also makes a comment about the "hairy men with genitals flopping about" BS that inevitably makes the rounds. Now salt = grain and all that... she said that she and every transwoman she knows are way more into body-hair removal than even the cis-women she knows and considers the "hairy man" line to be nothing more than negative propaganda and scare-tactics.





Every single other instance deals with society in general and not you personally. So... great! You're completely and unashamedly selfish when it comes to transgender issues! Thanks for the input! We'll take it from here, okay? Those of us who do care about how society treats one another, that is.

That's funny. I recall ContraPoints saying in a video on fascism (about 1 year ago iirc) that it is a 'white' thing. Not exactly a sound-minded individual
(no I have not seen most of her work)

 

[Horatius]

This is a trap.

Anyone prepared to have the conversation is de facto transphobic or they wouldn't be having the conversation.

This allows you to dismiss any and all views contrary to your own without any of that pesky thinking about it.

If you want to have a discussion of this topic without being labelled transphobic, it would help if you would go back to posts like this one:

No, you get to decide if you have sex with them.

That's an important distinction.

...and actually acknowledge that this is an important point, and acknowledge that you missed the target when you initially claimed that you get to choose the person's gender. Because that makes the difference between establishing legitimate boundaries for your own sexuality, and being a dick to a marginalized person.

It's not the lack of knowledge that's the problem, it's the apparent refusal to reconsider new knowledge.

 

[pharphis]

This is a trap.

Anyone prepared to have the conversation is de facto transphobic or they wouldn't be having the conversation.

This allows you to dismiss any and all views contrary to your own without any of that pesky thinking about it.

lol @ "obsessing" over the question. What? An idea can't even be entertained?

 

[3point14]

If you want to have a discussion of this topic without being labelled transphobic, it would help if you would go back to posts like this one:

No. I just don't want to be labelled as anything solely based on my willingness to discuss the issue. Which is what happened here. As I say, it's a trap - "either accept my viewpoint or the very fact you're prepared to discuss or challenge it shows you to be wrong". it's terrible thinking.

...and actually acknowledge that this is an important point, and acknowledge that you missed the target when you initially claimed that you get to choose the person's gender. Because that makes the difference between establishing legitimate boundaries for your own sexuality, and being a dick to a marginalized person.

It's not the lack of knowledge that's the problem, it's the apparent refusal to reconsider new knowledge.

I must respectfully disagree.

I can lie, if you like, but my gut instinct, my biochemical, sex-related bits that get to make all those decisions isn't subject to reasonable, rational, modern, open thinking. It sees cock, it thinks 'man'. I don't know if I can change that. I really don't think I can.

As I have been at pains to point out, in every other area of life, I will accede to the wishes of anyone who wants to be labelled anyhow. In social situations everyone gets to define their own gender and I have no issues with that - I really don't care what anyone brings into the lavatory, we're eliminating, it's irrelevant.

However, in the one and only area in which it becomes relevant in any way to me, that of my own sexuality and my compatibility with whoever it is that's propositioning me, then my actual reasons for declining are that my genitals do not think they are female.

In response to your excellent comments, I wouldn't make an issue of it. I might go with your 'I don't like cock' line. That's something I might not have come up with on my own.

However, if you want me to be honest about my deep, visceral, biological reaction, then the actual reason is that my genitals, my libido and my sexuality would see cock and think 'male'.

Sorry.

 

[pharphis]

If you want to have a discussion of this topic without being labelled transphobic, it would help if you would go back to posts like this one:





...and actually acknowledge that this is an important point, and acknowledge that you missed the target when you initially claimed that you get to choose the person's gender. Because that makes the difference between establishing legitimate boundaries for your own sexuality, and being a dick to a marginalized person.

It's not the lack of knowledge that's the problem, it's the apparent refusal to reconsider new knowledge.

Is he not allowed to see people differently than how they self-identify?
Maybe I'm being too charitable but I didn't get from his comment that he is THE arbiter of who is what gender, except in his own mind and how he will categorize others.

Is there something wrong with that?

If so, what if he just used the word "sex" instead of gender, since that seems to effectively be what his categorization is about. Is that transphobic, too?

 

[cullennz]

I never realised other people had such indepth conversations about whether to have a shag with someone or not.