TERFs crash London Pride

cullennz said:
Do trans people think people who are clearly not attracted to them sexually (They have said it) can be magically attracted to trans people if trans people moan enough?

Or do they just not want the people to say it out loud?
Click to expand...

Different reasons for different people. How many cis hetro ladies and gentlemen do exactly that as well?

I've never encountered someone who actually made the argument in meatspace. I've only seen it even online linked to.

What I have seen is someone complaining about how it sucks not being able to have the romantic and/or sexual relationships they desire without even implying any specific person owed them a damn thing straw manned into the 'cotton ceiling' argument.

This is much the same thing as guys who express disappointment in not being able to have a romantic relationship after another person they were pursuing decided to remain friends is often told they are being dickheads who are making the 'friendzone' argument, even when their complaint is clearly over the situation and not the specific person who declined. That isn't to say that there are not people who genuinely make the bad 'cotton ceiling' or 'friendzone' argument, but that it is easy to make disappointment in the general situation and strawman it.

Or, as you are hostile to my points in general in trans treads, it is like people not making TERF arguments being told that they are. Of course the people who are making TERF arguments have also come to view their arguments being disagreed with meaning the term itself is a slur, even though this isn't the direction of the insult. It is only an insult the way 'Trump supporter' or 'liberal' are to some people. When a descriptive term is for a group that hold views many people find abhorrent, the term itself starts to get employed as an insult. (This is a more understandable confusing than the whining over 'cis'.)
 
JoeMorgue said:
Nope, nope.

Money on the table, right now says in 5-10 years that will be considered a transphobic opinion.

I have a strong, strong suspension that within a decade or so the idea that not being sexually attracted to transgender people who "identify" as your preferred sex will be seen by some (not all, probably not even many, hell probably not even a lot but enough so it's not statistically meaningless) will be seen as transphobic.
Click to expand...


I doubt this. But even granting it, it doesn't matter. If that opinion is transphobic, it's transphobia that cannot be acted against. It's in the shadowy (but typically rather extensive) zone between intolerance and delighted approval. A society can sustain a position against intolerance; it cannot sustain a position against lack of delighted approval.

The argument will be you're attracted to X, they identify as X, ergo you cannot be non-attracted to them specifically because you don't consider them X. That will be seen as transphobic, denying their identity, or some other similar concept.

ETA: Suspicion, not suspension stupid auto-correct...
Click to expand...


"Don't consider them X" is not the same as "don't experience them as X." The latter is a matter of individual experience, and therefore sacrosanct. (Because if it's not, then their being X by virtue of identifying as X is also in jeopardy.)
 
OK, I haven't read the whole thread but I'll try to catch up and meanwhile I wanted to post this. It seems to me there is a silver lining in this TERF-trans conflict. I have a friend who identifies as bisexual, and is quite attracted to (pardon me if this is offensive, which it probably is) "chicks with dicks."

This leads me to believe there are potential partners for people who identify their gender as "female" but have not been surgically altered. They are a good fit for what I'm (pretty) sure is a fairly broad spectrum of attractions.

So that's nice, I think. If the point is that everyone is entitled to sex, or at least the hope of sex, there is a reasonable chance that people with penises who consider themselves women will find male bisexuals who want them, even if they strike out with the hard-core lesbians.

I'll read the thread to see who I might have offended and offer amends if they are owed.
 
I meant to address this earlier. I'm quite stunned by the level of misogyny in this thread, and the routine dismissal of women's concerns as unjustified and unjustifiable.

I now await you to turtle up behind "But you just don't understand what it's like to be a poor widdle scared defenseless woman."
Click to expand...


I note we're not hearing anything equivalent to "I now await you to turtle up behind "But you just don't understand what it's like to be a poor widdle scared defenseless six-foot-two 200-lb transwoman.""
 
tyr_13 said:
Different reasons for different people. How many cis hetro ladies and gentlemen do exactly that as well?

I've never encountered someone who actually made the argument in meatspace. I've only seen it even online linked to.

What I have seen is someone complaining about how it sucks not being able to have the romantic and/or sexual relationships they desire without even implying any specific person owed them a damn thing straw manned into the 'cotton ceiling' argument.

This is much the same thing as guys who express disappointment in not being able to have a romantic relationship after another person they were pursuing decided to remain friends is often told they are being dickheads who are making the 'friendzone' argument, even when their complaint is clearly over the situation and not the specific person who declined. That isn't to say that there are not people who genuinely make the bad 'cotton ceiling' or 'friendzone' argument, but that it is easy to make disappointment in the general situation and strawman it.

Or, as you are hostile to my points in general in trans treads, it is like people not making TERF arguments being told that they are. Of course the people who are making TERF arguments have also come to view their arguments being disagreed with meaning the term itself is a slur, even though this isn't the direction of the insult. It is only an insult the way 'Trump supporter' or 'liberal' are to some people. When a descriptive term is for a group that hold views many people find abhorrent, the term itself starts to get employed as an insult. (This is a more understandable confusing than the whining over 'cis'.)
Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think Trump is the new Godwin.
 
tyr_13 said:
Different reasons for different people. How many cis hetro ladies and gentlemen do exactly that as well?

I've never encountered someone who actually made the argument in meatspace. I've only seen it even online linked to.

What I have seen is someone complaining about how it sucks not being able to have the romantic and/or sexual relationships they desire without even implying any specific person owed them a damn thing straw manned into the 'cotton ceiling' argument.

This is much the same thing as guys who express disappointment in not being able to have a romantic relationship after another person they were pursuing decided to remain friends is often told they are being dickheads who are making the 'friendzone' argument, even when their complaint is clearly over the situation and not the specific person who declined. That isn't to say that there are not people who genuinely make the bad 'cotton ceiling' or 'friendzone' argument, but that it is easy to make disappointment in the general situation and strawman it.

Or, as you are hostile to my points in general in trans treads, it is like people not making TERF arguments being told that they are. Of course the people who are making TERF arguments have also come to view their arguments being disagreed with meaning the term itself is a slur, even though this isn't the direction of the insult. It is only an insult the way 'Trump supporter' or 'liberal' are to some people. When a descriptive term is for a group that hold views many people find abhorrent, the term itself starts to get employed as an insult. (This is a more understandable confusing than the whining over 'cis'.)
Click to expand...
Actually

Do you mind pointing out where I have been hostile

Thanks
 
Myriad said:
A society can sustain a position against intolerance; it cannot sustain a position against lack of delighted approval.
Click to expand...

And with respect it's naive to think that distinction wasn't thrown to the wolves a long, long time ago.

I actually do seriously think that within a moderate time frame not being sexually attracted to someone who identifies as your preferred gender will be... problematic. It will be seen as, roughly, equivalent to not being attracted to a certain race. Maybe not "transphobic" on some literal sense but in much the same way I'd wager most people now would see a statement like "I'm not attracted to black women" as, if not racist, at least... racially problematic.

We can't act like there isn't an expectation that acceptance will follow tolerance.

"Don't consider them X" is not the same as "don't experience them as X."
Click to expand...

I don't see that distinction being respected to the degree you do.
 
JoeMorgue said:
And with respect it's naive to think that distinction wasn't thrown to the wolves a long, long time ago.

I actually do seriously think that within a moderate time frame not being sexually attracted to someone who identifies as your preferred gender will be... problematic. It will be seen as, roughly, equivalent to not being attracted to a certain race. Maybe not "transphobic" on some literal sense but in much the same way I'd wager most people now would see a statement like "I'm not attracted to black women" as, if not racist, at least... racially problematic.
Click to expand...

I don't think it'll ever be more problematic than not liking fat/skinny/old/young/blonde women.

Perhaps it might rise to the level of 'problems' people who are only attracted to a certain race experience. I.E. nothing much really as long as they don't make a point of the other races not being good enough for them and don't talk about their racial preferences to people who aren't already good friends to avoid pissing off a random stranger with an axe to grind... And most people won't care either way.

It's not that hard to turn down a black woman's advances without having to justify it with 'I just don't dig black chicks'... Same goes for trans folks.
If the other party not the type to make a stink, be polite to them in return, and if you think they're spoiling for a fight, don't give them a reason.
 
Porpoise of Life said:
I don't think it'll ever be more problematic than not liking fat/skinny/old/young/blonde women.
Click to expand...

Because of how it's conceptualized. Being fat, skinny, young, old, etc are just characteristics they aren't part of your (pause for dramatic effect) "identity."

Saying "I prefer blondes over brunettes" is not going to be seen as denying the identity of the blondes.

Since the argument is that transgenders are that gender I see no way in which "I am attracted women, but not transwomen" wouldn't be seen as some as a denial of that.

Perhaps it might rise to the level of 'problems' people who are only attracted to a certain race experience. I.E. nothing much really as long as they don't make a point of the other races not being good enough for them and don't talk about their racial preferences to people who aren't already good friends to avoid pissing off a random stranger with an axe to grind... And most people won't care either way.
Click to expand...

And "It's okay if you think this, you just have to hide" is both unfair and impossible these days. That might have been a reasonable standard in the long, long ago but this is 2018. Everything you do is somebody else's business.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Because of how it's conceptualized. Being fat, skinny, young, old, etc are just characteristics they aren't part of your (pause for dramatic effect) "identity."

Saying "I prefer blondes over brunettes" is not going to be seen as denying the identity of the blondes.

Since the argument is that transgenders are that gender I see no way in which "I am attracted women, but not transwomen" wouldn't be seen as some as a denial of that.



And "It's okay if you think this, you just have to hide" is both unfair and impossible these days. That might have been a reasonable standard in the long, long ago but this is 2018. Everything you do is somebody else's business.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't attraction depend on whether they're passing or not? I'm gay so in theory I'm only interested in other dudes. But there's a woman at my work who looks like a really pretty boy. I know she's a girl and therefore icky, but while my brain may think that some other organs didn't get the memo. I can guarantee I'll never act on it, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't attracted.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Because of how it's conceptualized. Being fat, skinny, young, old, etc are just characteristics they aren't part of your (pause for dramatic effect) "identity."

Saying "I prefer blondes over brunettes" is not going to be seen as denying the identity of the blondes.

Since the argument is that transgenders are that gender I see no way in which "I am attracted women, but not transwomen" wouldn't be seen as some as a denial of that.
Click to expand...

I'm attracted to women not black women. Is that problematic or not?

That is the thing it is not about the appearance of the person, but more like saying you find them creepy and wrong for something historical.

I refuse to date women raised catholic, is that bigoted or not?

It is the sweeping nature of the statement and how it is not about the individuals current body that is the issue.

The statement isn't I want a partner with breasts and a vagina(ruling out cis women who have had cancer for example), but even deeper than that to you can never have been like X. So why is that so different from say refusing to date women who have slept with blacks?

By its nature you are saying your attraction is based on things you know but can not even necessarily perceive.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Wouldn't attraction depend on whether they're passing or not? I'm gay so in theory I'm only interested in other dudes. But there's a woman at my work who looks like a really pretty boy. I know she's a girl and therefore icky, but while my brain may think that some other organs didn't get the memo. I can guarantee I'll never act on it, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't attracted.
Click to expand...

Which is the real point of showing what it is. Now if you would or wouldn't date a transman would be more telling, and if the deciding factor was if they had bottom surgery or not.

But the people making the statement seems to often have nothing at all to do with the current body of the person in question and if they are attracted to them, but based on their history.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Because of how it's conceptualized. Being fat, skinny, young, old, etc are just characteristics they aren't part of your (pause for dramatic effect) "identity."

Saying "I prefer blondes over brunettes" is not going to be seen as denying the identity of the blondes.

Since the argument is that transgenders are that gender I see no way in which "I am attracted women, but not transwomen" wouldn't be seen as some as a denial of that.



And "It's okay if you think this, you just have to hide" is both unfair and impossible these days. That might have been a reasonable standard in the long, long ago but this is 2018. Everything you do is somebody else's business.
Click to expand...
Oh well, in my experience most people are quite willing to accept it when people aren't attracted to a certain demographic.
(and a large minority of people would actually think 'of course you don't like women of race X, they look weird!')
I agree that it's unfair to have to keep quiet about a preference you have for fear of being judged. But I don't think we'll ever get to the point where lesbians are actually going to face social repercussions for not being attracted to penises...
 
Porpoise of Life said:
Oh well, in my experience most people are quite willing to accept it when people aren't attracted to a certain demographic.
(and a large minority of people would actually think 'of course you don't like women of race X, they look weird!')
I agree that it's unfair to have to keep quiet about a preference you have for fear of being judged. But I don't think we'll ever get to the point where lesbians are actually going to face social repercussions for not being attracted to penises...
Click to expand...

Even if they do not have penises. They had a penis at one point and that makes them permanently gross, like a bisexual man no real woman would want them.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Even if they do not have penises. They had a penis at one point and that makes them permanently gross, like a bisexual man no real woman would want them.
Click to expand...

Oh well, if that's how they feel... I'm still not going to hate them for that.
The heart wants what it wants, and so do the genitals...

As long as they treat trans people like people, and don't rebuke their advances more rudely than they would those of any other person they're just not interested in, I don't care. Everybody has feelings, and I'm not going to shun people for thought crimes. I'll reserve that for people who act like ********.
 
Whether or not a hypothetical person should be attracted to some hypothetical "Perfect post-surgical person of their preferred gender" is not the issue though.

The base idea that if I say/conceptualize it as "I'm attracted to women" and another person conceptualizes it as "Women aren't defined as having a vagina" the idea that this is going to come into some conflict isn't being paranoid.

How we phrase and conceptualize things now is going to matter later. And I've always been a little critical of the transgender movement in specific basically going "Well we're just going to conceptualize it this way in this one instance" and that's not how this works.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom