born a man, now a woman [Archive]

Black Dagger

2nd July 2007, 18:49

Originally posted by marxist rev+--> (marxist rev)I know we are accepting of gays here, but come on. That's a bit irrational.[/b]

What's irrational about not being transphobic? I don't understand what you're trying to say.

And moreover, what does this discussion have to do with gay people?

Originally posted by marxist rev+--> (marxist rev)
You say it's prejudicial to not want to be with someone of the same gender? Ummm.... that just makes you straight.[/b]

Except that a woman who's had gender reassignment surgery is a woman... not a man, that's the point.

Originally posted by MR

I would definitely have to break up with them.

Why? Besides the lack of reproductive abilities (although of course infertility is fairly common among women generally) a woman who has had gender re-assignment surgery is a woman.

Your position is also irrational given that to be at this point in a relationship entails that you are attracted to this person on a variety of levels. The knowledge that said person has had gender reassignment surgery doesn't change any of the things about them that you've found attractive; so really your position just boils down to irrational prejudice/transphobia.

Originally posted by MR

Doesn't mean we can't still have a relationship, just not an intimate one.

Why not? It's not like she'd have a penis, infact unless she told you you probably wouldn't even know, so what are you afraid of?

[email protected]

And besides, if the person has been dishonest with you, about something that big, since the beginning of the relationship, then why should you trust them?

What exactly is dishonest about not telling every person you just meet that you've had gender reassignment surgery? What an insensitive position!

Given the prejudice and ignorance that 'post-op' trans people are subjected to (of which this thread is a good example), it's entirely rational to be guarded about such an important, and personal piece of information. If someone feels comfortable with telling their partner, they will - but this obviously takes time and is their choice.

So why is a 'post-op' trans person obligated to inform every potential partner that they meet about their past? It's not like it has any bearing on the relationship; it all just reeks of close-mindedness and bigotry.

MR

I wouldn't want to be with someone who would keep something so big from me (no pun intended, haha).

You don't seem to be aware of the widespread stigma attached to being trans ('post op' or otherwise); there's nothing dishonest about trying to avoid humiliation, insult, abuse and so forth. It's really not anyone else's business, why should it be?

Sentinel

2nd July 2007, 19:28

I can't imagine why someone would terminate a relationship on the grounds of what the person physically 'has been' -- and no longer is. Especially if they had no initial objections but instead liked the person, the sex life was functioning well, etc? I mean, which rational person gives a flying fuck about what 'has been', if they like what 'is now'? What else can the reason in such a case then even be, than either personal prejudices or a fear of those of the society? Something worth fighting, not getting defensive over!

obviously we all here do not discriminate against gays and lesbians. and even transsexuals. we respect them.

I'd like to say a few words about transphobia here. It is a both weird and sad fact that many selfidentified leftists appear to have not given a thought to trans people and the discrimination they face. They constitute a minority in an extremely, perhaps the most, vulnerable position in most societies and both require and deserve our unconditional support and solidarity. Yet even many who identify with the radical left without a second thought expose totally unacceptable, and prejudicial, opinions regarding transgender people. It completely escapes me why transphobia is not automatically by everyone considered exactly as worthy of condemnation as sexism and homophobia are?

But it isn't! :( See especially this thread (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=57099&st=0) to understand what I mean (remember your own comment in it, RPAS?). Just something for all involved in these discussions to keep in mind; remember that these are actual people we are discussing and they are watching us -- several post on this board.

Entrails Konfetti

2nd July 2007, 23:22

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 11:51 pm
what do you do?

walk? or stay with her? or "him"
Hope that the doctors did a good job on their bits, so they can actually enjoy sex with you.

Not saying thats what its all about. I'm just saying thats all you should worry about-- if their equiptment works.

If you want a kid, adopt!

If you family disowns you-- then who the fuck needs them!

Iron

3rd July 2007, 03:58

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 11:51 pm
I got a question for the straight guys here.

obviously we all here do not discriminate against gays and lesbians. and even transsexuals. we respect them. that being said do you think is discrimination if for example you meet who you think is a woman. you have a physical attraction as well as emotional...

yet a few days later she tells you that she was actually born a man and has had all the operations to turn him self into a woman..

what do you do?

walk? or stay with her? or "him"
I would attept to stay with her, though call me a bigot but the idea of trans-gender just weirds me out alittle. not that i don't support them its just something different that makes me alittle uncomfortable, though i bet if i knew a someone who was trans-gender in real-life and sat down and had a chat with them this would disapear quickly. but staying with her would be akward at first "for me atleast" but if you had a clear atraction on the physical and emotional levels, you can make it work. rember all relationships have there bumps.

good luck mate.

midnight marauder

3rd July 2007, 11:17

a woman who has had gender-reassignment surgery is a woman.

yeah. keep that in mind as you develop you relationship with this woman. before she became transexual biologically, she was transgender. it's not as if she went from being a male to being a female, but rather, she went from being a female trapped in a males body to being her real self, comfortable in her body and with her sex.

but I don't think it makes anyone prejudiced at all to feel 'iffy' about having an intimate relationship with a post-op individual. I feel like I'd probably be in the same boat with Iron on this one. I know the problem with that 'iffy' feeling, I know that it arises out of prejudice, and I know that it's something that I can combat and eliminate if I work through it by spending more time with and getting to know this person on a more deeper level.

afterall, we should never forget that what we're fighting isn't the people who have qualms about getting romantically involved with transexual persons, but rather the culture around sexuality which places men and women in their own respective roles and attacks them for trying to be true to themselves.

good luck as well, i hope it works out

Dimentio

3rd July 2007, 11:23

bloody_capitalist_sham

3rd July 2007, 13:35

denying someone else sex is not bigoted, but stopping being their friend is, because well its pretty conservative for 2007.

Comrade J

3rd July 2007, 15:22

Breaking up a relationship with a transgendered woman who used to be a man is like breaking up with them upon finding out they were once a child, and saying "sorry, but I'm not a paedophile."

As Sentinel said, what has been, has been, get the fuck over it, some people just aren't born in the body that suits their mentality.

Black Dagger

3rd July 2007, 15:28

Originally posted by BCS
denying someone else sex is not bigoted,

Huh? That was never brought up in the discussion/suggested it was.

Avtomat_Icaro

3rd July 2007, 15:39

Well no offense, but I wouldnt feel 100% comfortable when finding out that the girl I love and have tons of sex with used to be a dude. Its not like "oooh you used to be a guy, but now you are a girl! Ooooh thats totally fine because they turned your former penis into a vagina! Totally cool! I feel so rightious and liberal for being totally comfortable with this!!! " <_<

Besides it being a trust thing (its not the same argument as a person being a child in the past since thats a totally different ballgame) I would feel pretty deceived if I find out my long term girlfriend (if I would ever have one) used to be some dude. I dont know if I would immediatly dump him/her but its not like I would be totally fucking happy about it :blink:

Things like that can totally fuck up the mental picture you have of that person. I used to date this girl who ended up telling me she got pregnant a few years back and put the baby up for adoption...and well, it freaked me out because afterwards everything she did or said felt all maternal to me and I just couldnt take it anymore and well...we broke up. But yeah...its not immediatly transphobic as some of our more political correct and self rightious comrades would like us to believe if we arent 100% happy with this. <_<

bloody_capitalist_sham

3rd July 2007, 16:07

Originally posted by bleeding gums malatesta+July 03, 2007 03:28 pm--> (bleeding gums malatesta @ July 03, 2007 03:28 pm)
BCS
denying someone else sex is not bigoted,

Huh? That was never brought up in the discussion/suggested it was. [/b]
Okay i just thought sentinels post seemed to say it was wrong to stop a sexual activity with someone when you found out they were trans, and as far as i know stopping sexual activity is not bigoted.

there is a chance im wrong though.

apathy maybe

3rd July 2007, 16:25

Avtomat_Icaro: Tell me this, why are you so bigoted?

There are three things here,
One, the original thread starter asked about someone saying they were trans a few days after the relationship "started", not years or even months, thus trust isn't an issue (well, she is trusting him...).
Two, if you have a good relationship, including physical and mental, why would something that you never notice suddenly matter? What if your GF told you she used to be a man, but was lying? You wouldn't fucking know, so what difference does it make?
Three, it sounds more like you have a personal problem with your self-confidence or something. Now, I'm not a psychologist or any thing similar, but maybe you should think about talking to someone about that.

Avtomat_Icaro

3rd July 2007, 17:02

@apathy maybe: why do you only read certain parts of my posts and come with these pathetic conclusions?

Three, it sounds more like you have a personal problem with your self-confidence or something. Now, I'm not a psychologist or any thing similar, but maybe you should think about talking to someone about that.
I probably do have problems with that, but talking about that with who? And what does that have to do with the fact that I would get a mental picture of a girl being a guy if she tells me she used to be a dude.

Does that make me bigotted? If so...then being a bigot isnt such a big crime since you would be a bigot pretty damn quickly...its like saying Im a bigot because I dont want to date a transsexual :blink:

Sentinel

3rd July 2007, 20:10

sentinels post seemed to say it was wrong to stop a sexual activity with someone when you found out they were trans

Except, the fact that I didn't say that at all. I said, that doing so in a situation: when in your opinion the relationship (including sexual life) was functioning just fine, and you suddenly found out who your partner 'had been', was stupid and irrational. If you like her, which rational human being gives a shit about her past?

Black Cross

3rd July 2007, 20:52

It won't let me post with all those quotes, so bear with me.

Quote (Marxist-Rev): I know we are accepting of gays here, but come on. That's a bit irrational.

Quote (BGM): What's irrational about not being transphobic? I don't understand what you're trying to say.
And moreover, what does this discussion have to do with gay people?

Response: Uhhh... What? When did I say anything about gays. And this has nothing to do with phobias. Don't bring that psychological babble into this argument.
All I said was, just because he looks like a girl, doesn't make him a girl. You're still dating a guy. Why should a straight guy have to stay with a man just because he was tricked. If you want to date a transsexual, then that's your deal. Don't condecend to me just because I don't want to date a guy.

Quote (Marxist-rev): You say it's prejudicial to not want to be with someone of the same gender? Ummm.... that just makes you straight.

Quote (BGM): Except that a woman who's had gender reassignment surgery is a woman... not a man, that's the point.

Response: Okay, you're helping my arguement. Thanks. I think you meant to say a man who has had gender reassignment surgery to become a woman is now a woman. If that's your argument, then that's completely untrue. They still have the same bodily functions as a man, they don't have ovaries or womb, and they don't get a period... sounds like a man to me.

Quote (Marxist-Rev): I would definitely have to break up with them

Quote (BGM): Why? Besides the lack of reproductive abilities (although of course infertility is fairly common among women generally) a woman who has had gender re-assignment surgery is a woman.
Your position is also irrational given that to be at this point in a relationship entails that you are attracted to this person on a variety of levels. The knowledge that said person has had gender reassignment surgery doesn't change any of the things about them that you've found attractive; so really your position just boils down to irrational prejudice/transphobia.

Response: That was never a part of the argument, that you are attracted to the person on many levels. Just that you happen to be dating them. Once again, a fear of transsexuals has nothing to do with it. If anything, you would call it homophobia; it's not.

Quote (Marxist-rev): Doesn't mean we can't still have a relationship, just not an intimate one.

Quote (BGM): Why not? It's not like she'd have a penis, infact unless she told you you probably wouldn't even know, so what are you afraid of?

Response: Just the fact that they would keep something like that secret means the relationship is already flawed; there is a lack of honesty. And the penis is still there, they just make it look different.

Quote (marxist-rev): And besides, if the person has been dishonest with you, about something that big, since the beginning of the relationship, then why should you trust them?

Quote (BGM): What exactly is dishonest about not telling every person you just meet that you've had gender reassignment surgery? What an insensitive position!
Given the prejudice and ignorance that 'post-op' trans people are subjected to (of which this thread is a good example), it's entirely rational to be guarded about such an important, and personal piece of information. If someone feels comfortable with telling their partner, they will - but this obviously takes time and is their choice.

Response: What do you mean someone you just meet? You just said in your last post that this is theoretically someone you are attracted to on many levels. That doesn't happen with people you just meet.
And ya, it's a personal subject, but there is no reason to keep that from someone, from what I gather you are theorizing based off this thread, whom you love. You are assuming this is a serious relationship; that's just not something that you keep from someone who you might spend the rest of your life with.

Avtomat_Icaro

3rd July 2007, 21:11

I would probably also be considered homophobic if I dont want to have sex with other men if we follow the logic of some people here :P

midnight marauder

3rd July 2007, 22:36

I would probably also be considered homophobic if I dont want to have sex with other men if we follow the logic of some people here

That has nothing at all to do with the issue, and I think you know that.

You're not transphobic because you don't want to have sex with transexuals, you're transphobic because you persistently define people by their biology by birth, even when that biology is not an accurate measure of that person and has nothing to do with their own personal identity. And then hold them to that biology, factoring it into your social relations with them as if there's something wrong and unnatural about them.

Faux Real

3rd July 2007, 23:06

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 04:51 pm
I got a question for the straight guys here.

obviously we all here do not discriminate against gays and lesbians. and even transsexuals. we respect them. that being said do you think is discrimination if for example you meet who you think is a woman. you have a physical attraction as well as emotional...

yet a few days later she tells you that she was actually born a man and has had all the operations to turn him self into a woman..

what do you do?

walk? or stay with her? or "him"
Personally, if I can't tell the difference between a natural woman's body and a surgically modified one, then I would stay with her if the spiritual bond is there. However, if later down the road I feel the need to have a natural born child with someone, our sexual relationship must come to a halt. Of course I would try to keep in touch with them and not outright desert them.

Avtomat_Icaro

3rd July 2007, 23:38

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 09:36 pm

I would probably also be considered homophobic if I dont want to have sex with other men if we follow the logic of some people here

That has nothing at all to do with the issue, and I think you know that.

You're not transphobic because you don't want to have sex with transexuals, you're transphobic because you persistently define people by their biology by birth, even when that biology is not an accurate measure of that person and has nothing to do with their own personal identity. And then hold them to that biology, factoring it into your social relations with them as if there's something wrong and unnatural about them.
Hmm...when are you speaking of person, or identity...is this like a soul or spirit, because the impression Im getting from this is that its not very materialist and not very Marxist. I believe it could be very possible for a person to believe to be in the wrong body. (as in a male wanting to be female or the other way around) However when Im in an intimate relationship with a person and I found out they used to be something completely different. I dont know, in theory I wouldnt/shouldnt have a problem with this. However I will all of a sudden see how "manly" this woman would act. And I dont think that would be for the better in an intimate/sexual relationship since I would eventually freak out I guess. Im not saying there is something wrong and unnatural about them, Im just saying that I dont want to be in a sexual relationship with a transsexual.

Coprolal1an

4th July 2007, 01:01

Does anyone know why I keep getting 403 messages whenever I post paenis?

EDIT:
The root of this argument seems to be that it is difficult to put a pen down and draw a clear line to separate what makes a woman a woman, and a man a man.

Now, it is quite possible that someone truly believes and feels that they are of the wrong gender. Surgery can make them feel better about themselves, however the change is only skin deep. They can never make a man a woman, at least, not now. The most they can do is plastic surgery. Postop transsexuals (for the sake of the argument a man -> woman) both feel like a woman and look like a woman (to a degree, there will probably still be traits that can be used to identify them as previously a man), however biologically they are still a man (with a p3n1s made to look different).

This type of contradiction makes it extremely difficult (if not impossible) to definitively come up with an answer to this question. It is logical to say that if you are genuinely attached to this person on multiple levels (physical, emotional, etc) and you learn after that they used to be a man, that nothing should change, because nothing has changed since the start of the relationship. However, some problems can arise from this--as one person has brought up, this violates trust (though you could argue that the transsexual individual would only give the information to people they become attached to, in order to avoid persecution, which is understandable.). Another problem is that even though nothing has changed about the other person, your understanding of them has changed. You now know that they are biologically a man (minus the ability to reproduce, and with some added hormones and such to make them look more closely like a woman than a man), and others have said that they are a woman minus the ability to reproduce.. With those two arguments, at face value, it would seem that they are closer to woman than man (since they now look like a woman and have hormones), however you also need to take into account that they once had male organs (and still do to some degree) and won't ever get female organs.

Black Dagger

4th July 2007, 04:07

Originally posted by AI+--> (AI)Its not like "oooh you used to be a guy, but now you are a girl! Ooooh thats totally fine because they turned your former penis into a vagina! Totally cool! I feel so rightious and liberal for being totally comfortable with this!!! "[/b]

Except that it's not about being 'liberal', it's about not being an irrational bigoted arsehole. But yeah, feel free to mock progressives and embrace the reactionary transphobic position :rolleyes:

Originally posted by AI+--> (AI)
Besides it being a trust thing (its not the same argument as a person being a child in the past since thats a totally different ballgame) I would feel pretty deceived if I find out my long term girlfriend (if I would ever have one) used to be some dude. I dont know if I would immediatly dump him/her but its not like I would be totally fucking happy about it[/b]

I've already addressed this argument- it's non-sense, a cover for bigotry really:

Originally posted by me
What exactly is dishonest about not telling every person you just meet that you've had gender reassignment surgery? What an insensitive position!

Given the prejudice and ignorance that 'post-op' trans people are subjected to (of which this thread is a good example), it's entirely rational to be guarded about such an important, and personal piece of information. If someone feels comfortable with telling their partner, they will - but this obviously takes time and is their choice.

So why is a 'post-op' trans person obligated to inform every potential partner that they meet about their past? It's not like it has any bearing on the relationship; it all just reeks of close-mindedness and bigotry.

Originally posted by MR

I wouldn't want to be with someone who would keep something so big from me (no pun intended, haha).

You don't seem to be aware of the widespread stigma attached to being trans ('post op' or otherwise); there's nothing dishonest about trying to avoid humiliation, insult, abuse and so forth. It's really not anyone else's business, why should it be?

------------------------

[email protected]
But yeah...its not immediatly transphobic as some of our more political correct and self rightious comrades would like us to believe if we arent 100% happy with this

What is politically correct about opposing transphobia? (it's not exactly a 'hot button' issue in the so-called 'mainstream') The, 'you're just being PC!' crap is really a lazy (and cliched) response; what do you even mean?

The objections of many people here to your (and similar posts) is not about being insensitive to your happiness, it's more about your immature hang-ups, 'ewwwww, you used to have a dick! I mean, it's not like i could even tell or anything, and i was attracted to you on many levels... but seriously i'm not gay!!!' :rolleyes: Or something along those lines, just really insecure with your sexuality.

AI
Im just saying that I dont want to be in a sexual relationship with a transsexual.

Except that you would be having a relationship with a woman... :unsure:

Entrails Konfetti

4th July 2007, 04:31

Originally posted by BGM
Except that you would be having a relationship with a woman...

A women with a hystorectomy-- kinda.

Black Dagger

4th July 2007, 04:46

Originally posted by MR+--> (MR) Uhhh... What? When did I say anything about gays. [/b]

I guess it was the bit where you mentioned gay people?

I.E.

Originally posted by you+--> (you)I know we are accepting of gays here, but come on. That's a bit irrational.[/b]

So again i ask, why exactly did you bring that up? It has no bearing on this thread at all.

Originally posted by MR

And this has nothing to do with phobias. Don't bring that psychological babble into this argument.

:mellow: I'm not talking about 'phobias', but about social prejudice; that's what is meant by words like homophobia or transphobia - it's not 'psycho babble', they're common terms to describe people who have prejudiced attitudes towards queers or trans people.

Originally posted by MR

All I said was, just because he looks like a girl, doesn't make him a girl.

Right, so how do you define what a 'girl' is? Coz it seems not even having a vagina is enough for you :rolleyes:

Originally posted by MR

You're still dating a guy.

Right, what exactly makes such women, 'guys'? I mean your dubious position on this subject even trails behind bourgeois law (which legally recognises status of women who've had GRS, as women)! And given just how conservative bourgeois law is, that's pretty embarrassing for a 'marxist'.

Originally posted by MR

Why should a straight guy have to stay with a man just because he was tricked.

I'm sorry, who's tricking what now? I wasn't aware that it was the responsibility of every woman who's had GRS to explain this to every guy she meets... after all, she's a woman, and that's what hetero guys want right? :unsure:

Originally posted by MR

If you want to date a transsexual, then that's your deal.

Why is this so hard for you to understand? A woman (or man) who's had GRS is not a transsexual; there really isn't any logical way to make that argument (given the nature of GRS)... but feel to try.

Originally posted by MR

Don't condecend to me just because I don't want to date a guy.

I never suggested that you should date a guy...

Originally posted by MR

I think you meant to say a man who has had gender reassignment surgery to become a woman is now a woman.

Nah, what i said is what i mean; no re-wording necessary.

Originally posted by MR

They still have the same bodily functions as a man

Which are these exactly?

Originally posted by MR

they don't have ovaries or womb

Right. So if a woman had ovarian cancer or cancer of the cervix, and subsequently her ovaries or 'womb' was removed or rendered non-functional, such women are now men?

Originally posted by MR

and they don't get a period...

Lot's of women don't get periods, that doesn't make them men.

Originally posted by MR

sounds like a man to me.

Well given you're exceptionally superficial criteria, you'd probably classify a woman with very small breasts as a 'man' too, so what 'sounds like a man' to you isn't really worth a whole lot, sorry.

Originally posted by MR

That was never a part of the argument, that you are attracted to the person on many levels. Just that you happen to be dating them.

LOL, i mean... yes yes <_<

Coz you know really? Its makes perfect sense to date a person you don't find emotionally, intellectually or physically attractive... really, i'm sure it happens all the time :lol:

Originally posted by MR

Once again, a fear of transsexuals has nothing to do with it. If anything, you would call it homophobia; it's not.

Why would i label a prejudice that has nothing to do with gay people 'homophobia'? :unsure:

Well maybe i would if i was was ignorant enough to equate being trans to being 'gay' <_<

Originally posted by MR
Just the fact that they would keep something like that secret means the relationship is already flawed; there is a lack of honesty.

Cool, don't worry about responding to my reply to this point, just repeat what you've already said, it sure does require less critical thinking on your part!

Originally posted by MR

And the penis is still there, they just make it look different.

Yeah... like a vagina...

Originally posted by MR

What do you mean someone you just meet? You just said in your last post that this is theoretically someone you are attracted to on many levels. That doesn't happen with people you just meet.

Right, my bad; again i was obviously wrong when i assumed that people usually initiate relationships with others that they're attracted to on some level, i'm such a loon!

I mean, i thought i was maintaining the context provided by the topic post, but what do i know really?

Originally posted by topic post

that being said do you think is discrimination if for example you meet who you think is a woman. you have a physical attraction as well as emotional...

yet a few days later she tells you that she was actually born a man and has had all the operations to turn him self into a woman..

Sorry again.

Originally posted by MR

And ya, it's a personal subject, but there is no reason to keep that from someone

Why not?

You're also ignoring the fact that in the hypothetical (???) that RPAS proposed, the woman in question DID inform the guy that she'd had GRS. His question was whether or not him/the hypothetical guy, should in turn break up with this woman because of that knowledge.

Your response was that he SHOULD break up with them:

[email protected]
I would definitely have to break up with them. Doesn't mean we can't still have a relationship, just not an intimate one.

This is despite the fact that the woman had been completely 'honest' with you.

So yeah, your objections are really redundant (and hypocritical) in the context of the thread. First you say you'd break up with someone even if they were completely up front with their past, then you defend this by saying that this position is justified because the woman in question is being 'dishonest' or 'tricking' you.

In short, that's a rather odd circular argument/rubbish.

MR

You are assuming this is a serious relationship; that's just not something that you keep from someone who you might spend the rest of your life with.

Well, again, that's not really relevant to this thread given that in the hypothetical RPAS proposes the woman has informed the guy.

But regardless of that specific context, you still haven't provided a rational/logical argument as to why it's the responsibility of someone who's had GRS to inform anyone? If someone is attracted to/falls in love with them, why should it matter? Indeed, once the relationship has become more serious, there's a good chance that this kind of personal information will be shared (as happens in any long-term relationship); it's just not something that one blurts out straight away - nor should it be an obligation.

Avtomat_Icaro

4th July 2007, 12:56

Except that it's not about being 'liberal', it's about not being an irrational bigoted arsehole. But yeah, feel free to mock progressives and embrace the reactionary transphobic position
With you it seems that its either wanting to date transsexual women and assume that they are fully women (or men, depending which direction they changed in), and yes they might look and feel like that gender, but in reality they are only that by appereance and feeling, not in biology. I might view them as that gender, and I have no problems with it. Ist just that FOR ME its impossible to be in a relationship with a transsexual. If that makes me a reactionary transphobic...well it shows how short sighted you yourself are in reality.

What is politically correct about opposing transphobia? (it's not exactly a 'hot button' issue in the so-called 'mainstream') The, 'you're just being PC!' crap is really a lazy (and cliched) response; what do you even mean?

The objections of many people here to your (and similar posts) is not about being insensitive to your happiness, it's more about your immature hang-ups, 'ewwwww, you used to have a dick! I mean, it's not like i could even tell or anything, and i was attracted to you on many levels... but seriously i'm not gay!!!' Or something along those lines, just really insecure with your sexuality.

Hmm, maybe it gets you off, but I dont get off from it. Its not my problem you are having such a hard time with all this and resort to calling us transphobic and immature. :rolleyes:

Except that you would be having a relationship with a woman...
Uhm...in your opinion perhaps. If you considered a transsexual to be fully 100% of that new gender. If that would be the case, you wouldnt even view them as transsexual I assume right?

Entrails Konfetti

6th July 2007, 00:16

Off topic, do women who had GRS have muscles at the base of their vagina that tighten up during orgasm?

Can they have vaginal orgasms? I know they can have clitoral.

Black Cross

6th July 2007, 03:35

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 05, 2007 11:16 pm
Off topic, do women who had GRS have muscles at the base of their vagina that tighten up during orgasm?

Can they have vaginal orgasms? I know they can have clitoral.
Haha, I wouldn't know. I'm not so well read on transsexual orgasms.

I guess it was the bit where you mentioned gay people?
Okay, I realize now what you were talking about when you said "what do gays have to do with this?" (or something like that).
Well, I just assumed that this "woman" you are dating started off as a gay man. If he wasn't gay before the operation, why would he date you (in general), a man, after the operation. GRS just makes you look different, it doesn't make you magically attracted to the other sex. So that's what gay people have to do with it.

I'm sorry, who's tricking what now? I wasn't aware that it was the responsibility of every woman who's had GRS to explain this to every guy she meets... after all, she's a woman, and that's what hetero guys want right?
I never said he had to tell anyone about his GRS. But if you aren't up front and honest about it, it's not likely your relationship will end well.

Why would i label a prejudice that has nothing to do with gay people 'homophobia'?

Because you're dating a guy with with a penis that's been cut in half and shaped to make a psuedo vagina.

I don't have time to reply to the rest of your argument, so i'll say this. If you are so accepting, and would date, guys and girls who would rather be girls or guys, respectively, then that's your decision. Don't preach to me because I don't feel comfortable dating someone who, whether or not he is still the same gender, definitely started off the same.

kelly-087

6th July 2007, 19:52

Except that you would be having a relationship with a woman...
You would not have a relationship with a woman you would have a relationship with a guy who looks like a woman. It doesnt matter if she mentally is female she is still physically male.

Janus

7th July 2007, 22:12

Does anyone know why I keep getting 403 messages whenever I post paenis?
The spam filter is designed to filter out key phrases not individual words.

apathy maybe

7th July 2007, 22:37

Originally posted by kelly-[email protected] 06, 2007 08:52 pm

Except that you would be having a relationship with a woman...
You would not have a relationship with a woman you would have a relationship with a guy who looks like a woman. It doesnt matter if she mentally is female she is still physically male.
But if she looks like a women, and is mentally a women...

How the fuck are you going to know otherwise? Oh wait, she told you.

So my question again (to people attracted to women only, the situation is slightly different for men), if your current partner (who is a women, born a women even...) tells you that she was born a man, what are you going to do?

You don't know that she's lying, but she is. You can't tell the difference either.

What do you do if she then says that she was lying to see your reaction?

Basically, if you can't tell if a person was born a man or a women, then what the fuck does it matter?

kelly-087

7th July 2007, 23:05

Originally posted by apathy maybe+July 07, 2007 09:37 pm--> (apathy maybe @ July 07, 2007 09:37 pm)
kelly-[email protected] 06, 2007 08:52 pm

Except that you would be having a relationship with a woman...
You would not have a relationship with a woman you would have a relationship with a guy who looks like a woman. It doesnt matter if she mentally is female she is still physically male.
But if she looks like a women, and is mentally a women...

How the fuck are you going to know otherwise? Oh wait, she told you.

So my question again (to people attracted to women only, the situation is slightly different for men), if your current partner (who is a women, born a women even...) tells you that she was born a man, what are you going to do?

You don't know that she's lying, but she is. You can't tell the difference either.

What do you do if she then says that she was lying to see your reaction?

Basically, if you can't tell if a person was born a man or a women, then what the fuck does it matter? [/b]
Chances are you can tell the difference or can spot something different for someone to perfectly pass off as the other sex they would have to start their hormones at prepubsent. Also there are the biological differences they still are genetically a man.

Think of it like this there is a bar of pure gold and another bar made of iron with an outer layer of gold. The actual female is the pure gold bar while the transexual is the iron bar with a golden outer layer.

If someone doesnt feel comfortable with someone who still has some biology of his or her own sex he or she should have the right to break it off.

condor

7th July 2007, 23:07

Surely, what's really decadent is an outdated aesthetic dogma of sexual bipolarity. If you are afraid of having sex with someone because of some hollow idealistic bullshit about what people once were, you're the decadent one.

Marxism is meant to be materialistic and eliminate alienation; people may dislike their body or their gender and become alienated from it. People won't come to love their body just because it's theirs. Bodies can represent (vaguely I know) what type of person one is. Having a body representing the total opposite of your inner self is alienating. No idealistic brainwashing about loving your body, no matter what, (about as stupid as loving your oppression) will change anything. The "it's all in your head" and "society's pressures" are wrong and condescending, respectively.

People who think of a u-shaped curved (male characteristics to female characteristics v attractiveness) are living out society's fantasy. Aesthetics simply doesn't work that way. There are many types of beauty in both men and women.

Can't we find people simply attractive as people rather than as men and women, a dichotomy already destroyed? Why evaluate people towards some arbitrary criteria that serves no purpose what so ever?

Whenever Marxists stray off politics and into morality and aesthetics, all the unthought out baseless idealist rubbish of ages returns. Personal instincts, morality and aesthtics change like everything else. They are not obvious, common sense, or fixed, what so ever.

People are only inclined to heterosexuality monogamy because it is ingrained in our society as an enjoyable "ultimate aim" (married with children); sheer wheight of numbers presents itself as instinct. People simply take this route beacuse it is easiest and presented as enjoyable while taboo and stigma surrounding homo and bi-sexuality presents it as a friction filled, repelling route. People base their actions on others' reactions, not just their own attractions so many choose the easier route, rather than having to battle against moral authoritatrians throughout their lives.

bombeverything

8th July 2007, 09:51

bombeverything

8th July 2007, 10:03

Whoa, alright; I know we are accepting of gays here, but come on. That's a bit irrational. You say it's prejudicial to not want to be with someone of the same gender? Ummm.... that just makes you straight. I would definitely have to break up with them. Doesn't mean we can't still have a relationship, just not an intimate one.

We are "accepting" of gays? That statement implies that homosexuality is something that it should be "tolerated" rather than embraced.

Never Give In

8th July 2007, 18:51

If you liked her when you thought she was always a woman, then there's no reason why you would leave her, in my book. Just because you know a new fact of somebody doesn't mean you have to freak out and leave.

For me, it would depend if it was a REAL emotional bond that is worth knowing that this person was once a man, and staying with them.

kelly-087

8th July 2007, 19:31

Originally posted by Never Give [email protected] 08, 2007 05:51 pm
If you liked her when you thought she was always a woman, then there's no reason why you would leave her, in my book. Just because you know a new fact of somebody doesn't mean you have to freak out and leave.

For me, it would depend if it was a REAL emotional bond that is worth knowing that this person was once a man, and staying with them.
If you found out your lover was a serial killer and a rapist would you still love her or him? Some people prefer something that is genuine like my gold bar vs iron bar with golden layer example.

Jazzratt

8th July 2007, 19:46

Originally posted by kelly-087+July 08, 2007 06:31 pm--> (kelly-087 @ July 08, 2007 06:31 pm)
Never Give [email protected] 08, 2007 05:51 pm
If you liked her when you thought she was always a woman, then there's no reason why you would leave her, in my book. Just because you know a new fact of somebody doesn't mean you have to freak out and leave.

For me, it would depend if it was a REAL emotional bond that is worth knowing that this person was once a man, and staying with them.
If you found out your lover was a serial killer and a rapist would you still love her or him? Some people prefer something that is genuine like my gold bar vs iron bar with golden layer example. [/b]
What the fuck is this prejudiced shit? So you're comparing tans people to rapists and murderers and you still believe you deserve to use the moniker "leftist"? You make me physically ill.

There is nothing "fake" about a woman who was born in a man's body claiming to be a woman.

kelly-087

8th July 2007, 20:06

Originally posted by Jazzratt+July 08, 2007 06:46 pm--> (Jazzratt @ July 08, 2007 06:46 pm)
Originally posted by kelly-[email protected] 08, 2007 06:31 pm

Never Give [email protected] 08, 2007 05:51 pm
If you liked her when you thought she was always a woman, then there's no reason why you would leave her, in my book. Just because you know a new fact of somebody doesn't mean you have to freak out and leave.

For me, it would depend if it was a REAL emotional bond that is worth knowing that this person was once a man, and staying with them.
If you found out your lover was a serial killer and a rapist would you still love her or him? Some people prefer something that is genuine like my gold bar vs iron bar with golden layer example.
What the fuck is this prejudiced shit? So you're comparing tans people to rapists and murderers and you still believe you deserve to use the moniker "leftist"? You make me physically ill.

There is nothing "fake" about a woman who was born in a man's body claiming to be a woman. [/b]
No one here is comparing transexuals to murders but he clearly stated that "because you know a new fact of somebody doesn't mean you have to freak out and leave." which I brought out my point.

If this new knowledge of this person disgusts you and takes away your appeal to him or her you have the right to end your relationship with that person and no one has the right to force you to stay with them.

And i'm sorry to tell you but as unfortunate as these people are they will never become the opposite sex. They're biology and genes say otherwise a mtf transexual will still die sooner then an actual women even if she looks like a women.

And sorry to not fit into your narrow view of the left which is a very wide spectrum of politics. :rolleyes:

Never Give In

8th July 2007, 20:17

Originally posted by kelly-087+July 08, 2007 07:06 pm--> (kelly-087 @ July 08, 2007 07:06 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 06:46 pm

Originally posted by kelly-[email protected] 08, 2007 06:31 pm

Never Give [email protected] 08, 2007 05:51 pm
If you liked her when you thought she was always a woman, then there's no reason why you would leave her, in my book. Just because you know a new fact of somebody doesn't mean you have to freak out and leave.

For me, it would depend if it was a REAL emotional bond that is worth knowing that this person was once a man, and staying with them.
If you found out your lover was a serial killer and a rapist would you still love her or him? Some people prefer something that is genuine like my gold bar vs iron bar with golden layer example.
What the fuck is this prejudiced shit? So you're comparing tans people to rapists and murderers and you still believe you deserve to use the moniker "leftist"? You make me physically ill.

There is nothing "fake" about a woman who was born in a man's body claiming to be a woman.
No one here is comparing transexuals to murders but he clearly stated that "because you know a new fact of somebody doesn't mean you have to freak out and leave." which I brought out my point.

If this new knowledge of this person disgusts you and takes away your appeal to him or her you have the right to end your relationship with that person and no one has the right to force you to stay with them.

And i'm sorry to tell you but as unfortunate as these people are they will never become the opposite sex. They're biology and genes say otherwise a mtf transexual will still die sooner then an actual women even if she looks like a women.

And sorry to not fit into your narrow view of the left which is a very wide spectrum of politics. :rolleyes: [/b]
Thats what I kind of meant. You have to kind of weight the odds. "Do I still have an emotional bond with this person, in spite of this new, and shocking, information?"

You have every right to leave, but your excuse cant be 'That's nasty, eww" because You liked it fine when you didn't know.

kelly-087

8th July 2007, 20:20

I agree and understand.

Never Give In

8th July 2007, 20:58

Black Cross

8th July 2007, 21:48

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 09:03 am

Whoa, alright; I know we are accepting of gays here, but come on. That's a bit irrational. You say it's prejudicial to not want to be with someone of the same gender? Ummm.... that just makes you straight. I would definitely have to break up with them. Doesn't mean we can't still have a relationship, just not an intimate one.

We are "accepting" of gays? That statement implies that homosexuality is something that it should be "tolerated" rather than embraced.
Don't put words into my mouth. I didn't imply anything with that statement. I was just making an overall generalization about the leftist outlook on gays. And this hardly has any place in your rebuttal. This argument is over whether or not you would continue to date someone who was born a man and got a GRS; it is not about what you think my opinion on gays is.

Either way, I will humor you with an answer that should suffice (if not, sorry). Tolerate is a lot different than accept. Tolerate would mean that I'm just putting up with it because I have to; whereas accept means you know that gays are who they are, and should be allowed to live the lifestyle they want (This includes,but is not limited to, getting a GRS).

All you did was take a word that you thought didn't describe our overall disposition towards gays well enough, and turned it around to make me seem bigotted; when in truth I was just using the word accepting because I was reiterating what RPAS had said, and making a generalization (not in depth) as well as putting the argument into context. Don't use semantics to turn my own words against me.

Black Cross

8th July 2007, 22:05

[QUOTE=Bomb Everything]
We are "accepting" of gays? That statement implies that homosexuality is something that it should be "tolerated" rather than embraced.

[QUOTE=Never Give In]
I agree. That's obscene. We are not accepting. We are respectful and friendly towards all homosexuals. If you are a true Leftist, any type, then you don't just "tolerate" or "accept".

We're not accepting? Poor way to word that, but I see your point. Acceptance is the minimum. You can be accepting, respectful and friendly towards all homosexuals. Just because I said accepting, doesn't mean that we don't go further than that. And by taking it as far as you are, it sounds like you are saying we should be friendly towards gays just because they're gay. Discrimination is a two-way street. If you are being friendly to gays just because they are gay, they are once again being treated differently. You're not friendly with every straight guy because some of them are, excuse my language, ass-holes.

I know i went a bit off topic, but the reply from NGI was, as well, a bit off topic.

bombeverything

9th July 2007, 14:12

Marxist-rev> I was simply pointing out the implications of your comment, which I felt were important within the context of what you were saying. But I was not accusing you of anything.

bombeverything

9th July 2007, 14:17

Originally posted by Marxist-[email protected] 08, 2007 09:05 pm
And by taking it as far as you are, it sounds like you are saying we should be friendly towards gays just because they're gay. Discrimination is a two-way street. If you are being friendly to gays just because they are gay, they are once again being treated differently. You're not friendly with every straight guy because some of them are, excuse my language, ass-holes.

Um no not quite. You wouldn't say that leftists "accept" hetrosexuality. It is not even a consideration really. For this reason discrimination is not as simple as you seem to be making out (ie. a "two way street" where all parties are on equal footing).

Black Cross

9th July 2007, 17:11

Originally posted by bombeverything+July 09, 2007 01:17 pm--> (bombeverything @ July 09, 2007 01:17 pm)
Marxist-[email protected] 08, 2007 09:05 pm
And by taking it as far as you are, it sounds like you are saying we should be friendly towards gays just because they're gay. Discrimination is a two-way street. If you are being friendly to gays just because they are gay, they are once again being treated differently. You're not friendly with every straight guy because some of them are, excuse my language, ass-holes.

Um no not quite. You wouldn't say that leftists "accept" hetrosexuality. It is not even a consideration really. For this reason discrimination is not as simple as you seem to be making out (ie. a "two way street" where all parties are on equal footing).[/b]
I wasn't so careful with my word choice because i had no idea people were so sensative about it. I'm sorry if i offended anyone, i just didn't think that it was a big deal. My bad; now can we stick to the original debate?

bombeverything

10th July 2007, 03:20

Originally posted by Marxist-[email protected] 06, 2007 02:35 am
Don't preach to me because I don't feel comfortable dating someone who, whether or not he is still the same gender, definitely started off the same.

No one would force you to stay with this person, the issue is simply about why this would be a problem for you, given that you would have obviously been attracted to them before you found out this news. What would have changed? It is just interesting that all of a sudden people are so sure that they would freak out if put in this situation. If you are no longer attracted to them, fine. This is not the issue. It is a personal decision. Who cares? My issue with your posts is the question of why you would so much effort into defending his position. Why do you care about this so much? I think it is because you somehow feel a need to defend the rights of these oh so oppressed heterosexuals. :rolleyes:

And I ask again, why would anyone would decide to post a thread such as this one in the first place? I mean, work it out for yourself. Although I guess it isn't my place to comment given that I am not a straight male. :D

Never Give In

10th July 2007, 18:49

Meoweth

11th July 2007, 21:04

Transexuals can't have children...this might be a factor in long term relationships, just throwing it out there. And I would leave, but that's a matter of taste. In my opinion, to deny your natural gender is something very insecure, maybe even pathetic! How can they stand the balls to be clipped off too!! thats crazy!!

Black Cross

11th July 2007, 21:25

No problem NGI.

I appreciate your tact.

Bad Grrrl Agro

12th July 2007, 07:58

My ex *shudders* was transgendered so I have BAD EXPERIANCES with transgendered people.

kelly-087

12th July 2007, 18:00

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 06:58 am
My ex *shudders* was transgendered so I have BAD EXPERIANCES with transgendered people.
That what pisses me off as well. People who are transgendered or transexual should reveal to their partner they are so before any relationship you are lieing to them if you dont.

Would you like it if you had a girlfriend and then later found out that she has fake breasts?

Pirate Utopian

12th July 2007, 18:29

If I can squeeze them I'm good...

Avtomat_Icaro

12th July 2007, 18:41

Meh...quality over quantity dude!

Mujer Libre

13th July 2007, 02:11

Originally posted by kelly-087+July 12, 2007 05:00 pm--> (kelly-087 @ July 12, 2007 05:00 pm)
[email protected] 12, 2007 06:58 am
My ex *shudders* was transgendered so I have BAD EXPERIANCES with transgendered people.
That what pisses me off as well. People who are transgendered or transexual should reveal to their partner they are so before any relationship you are lieing to them if you dont.

Would you like it if you had a girlfriend and then later found out that she has fake breasts? [/b]
The thing is petey didn't say that that was what happened- you're just putting words into his mouth and revealing your own preconceptions and prejudices while you're a it. "Oh noes, all transpeople are out to 'trick' their partners!"

Of course people should be honest with their partners, but looking at this thread I could understand why you would be anxious about it...

Also, you cannot seriously be comparing breast implants to 'gender reassignment' of any kind... I think the keyword in that sentence is "fake"- from reading this thread you seem to have an obsession with how transpeople are "faking" gender. It's those attitudes that allow th persistence of transphobia.

bombeverything

13th July 2007, 03:03

Originally posted by Mujer Libre+July 13, 2007 01:11 am--> (Mujer Libre @ July 13, 2007 01:11 am)
Originally posted by kelly-[email protected] 12, 2007 05:00 pm

[email protected] 12, 2007 06:58 am
My ex *shudders* was transgendered so I have BAD EXPERIANCES with transgendered people.
That what pisses me off as well. People who are transgendered or transexual should reveal to their partner they are so before any relationship you are lieing to them if you dont.

Would you like it if you had a girlfriend and then later found out that she has fake breasts?
The thing is petey didn't say that that was what happened- you're just putting words into his mouth and revealing your own preconceptions and prejudices while you're a it. "Oh noes, all transpeople are out to 'trick' their partners!"

Of course people should be honest with their partners, but looking at this thread I could understand why you would be anxious about it...

Also, you cannot seriously be comparing breast implants to 'gender reassignment' of any kind... I think the keyword in that sentence is "fake"- from reading this thread you seem to have an obsession with how transpeople are "faking" gender. It's those attitudes that allow th persistence of transphobia. [/b]
I completely agree ML. These two things are very different. People should be honest with their partners, obviously, but this is the case with any issue in the relationship. The issue here is not honesty, but transphobia. I don't think anyone here would think that is is ok to lie to your partner.

Never Give In

13th July 2007, 04:30

Originally posted by bombeverything+July 12, 2007 10:03 pm--> (bombeverything @ July 12, 2007 10:03 pm)
Originally posted by Mujer [email protected] 13, 2007 01:11 am

Originally posted by kelly-[email protected] 12, 2007 05:00 pm

[email protected] 12, 2007 06:58 am
My ex *shudders* was transgendered so I have BAD EXPERIANCES with transgendered people.
That what pisses me off as well. People who are transgendered or transexual should reveal to their partner they are so before any relationship you are lieing to them if you dont.

Would you like it if you had a girlfriend and then later found out that she has fake breasts?
The thing is petey didn't say that that was what happened- you're just putting words into his mouth and revealing your own preconceptions and prejudices while you're a it. "Oh noes, all transpeople are out to 'trick' their partners!"

Of course people should be honest with their partners, but looking at this thread I could understand why you would be anxious about it...

Also, you cannot seriously be comparing breast implants to 'gender reassignment' of any kind... I think the keyword in that sentence is "fake"- from reading this thread you seem to have an obsession with how transpeople are "faking" gender. It's those attitudes that allow th persistence of transphobia.
I completely agree ML. These two things are very different. People should be honest with their partners, obviously, but this is the case with any issue in the relationship. The issue here is not honesty, but transphobia. I don't think anyone here would think that is is ok to lie to your partner. [/b]
I also believe there should be no secrets in a relationship, but here's a thought.

If you didn't know your partner was transgender and you were having a great time in the relationship, and everything was perfectly fine, and then the transgendered partner informs you, and you leave them because they're transgender. If you liked the relationship fine when you didn't know, why would it stop there? That obviously means they believe you care about them enough to understand, accept, and hopefully embrace. It is understandable for a transgendered person to not tell someone at first because it's a pretty dark secret unless you know the person and love them.

It's very transphobic to leave, especially if the relationship was fine when you didn't know.

kelly-087

13th July 2007, 05:23

The thing is petey didn't say that that was what happened- you're just putting words into his mouth and revealing your own preconceptions and prejudices while you're a it. "Oh noes, all transpeople are out to 'trick' their partners!"

Of course people should be honest with their partners, but looking at this thread I could understand why you would be anxious about it...
I didnt put words in his mouth I was just stating my opinion and that is if you dont tell your partner something that he or she should know you are decieving him or her. I never stated transexuals were out to trick and fool people.

Also, you cannot seriously be comparing breast implants to 'gender reassignment' of any kind... I think the keyword in that sentence is "fake"- from reading this thread you seem to have an obsession with how transpeople are "faking" gender. It's those attitudes that allow th persistence of transphobia.
They're condition may be real, I am not stating that gender dysphoria/GID is fake. I know its a real condition that people are born into, but do realize this that they after transition, surgery etc they are still the same sex they were born into but cosmetically they look like the opposite sex. Its sad that we do not have the ability to genuinelly transform them into the opposite sex but guess what we cant. And while we cant they never will physically become the opposite sex just appear as one. Just like I stated a MTF transexual will still die younger then an actual female, a MTF transexual will still have the health risks of a male when older etc so in essensce this is almost like plastic surgery the difference is the former needs it.

To state they are physically completely the opposite sex because they mentally are and only appear to be of the opposite sex is just foolish going back to my golden bar vs iron bar example. This isnt prejudice its biological fact, I would say stating that they are physically genuinelly the opposite sex is the real prejudice.

Bad Grrrl Agro

13th July 2007, 05:45

I had no problem with transgendered people. I knew she was transgendered but she lied about a shit load of other stuff. For example she cheated on me...

She also was violent and abusive.

bombeverything

14th July 2007, 02:03

I had no problem with transgendered people. I knew she was transgendered but she lied about a shit load of other stuff. For example she cheated on me...

She also was violent and abusive.

I don't think that you do. You made it clear that the thought of it made you shudder because of a personal experience. Anyway I am sorry to hear that. It is good your out of the relationship. No one should be treated like that. Thanks for posting that. But some people in here do have a problem with transgendered people and none of them have really responded to any of the questions posed.

They're condition may be real, I am not stating that gender dysphoria/GID is fake. I know its a real condition that people are born into, but do realize this that they after transition, surgery etc they are still the same sex they were born into but cosmetically they look like the opposite sex. Its sad that we do not have the ability to genuinelly transform them into the opposite sex but guess what we cant. And while we cant they never will physically become the opposite sex just appear as one. Just like I stated a MTF transexual will still die younger then an actual female, a MTF transexual will still have the health risks of a male when older etc so in essensce this is almost like plastic surgery the difference is the former needs it.

To state they are physically completely the opposite sex because they mentally are and only appear to be of the opposite sex is just foolish going back to my golden bar vs iron bar example. This isnt prejudice its biological fact, I would say stating that they are physically genuinelly the opposite sex is the real prejudice.

The thing is that there is a difference between sex and gender. Sex is biological whilst gender is socially constructed. I don't think sex is that important in defining ones identity. I don't think this matters. How is this prejudice? Against whom?

Bad Grrrl Agro

14th July 2007, 04:40

It is all good now. That relationship is over. But at the same time, the abuse still haunts me. She deserves the worst.

counterblast

24th July 2007, 06:40

Originally posted by Marxist-[email protected] 02, 2007 05:07 pm
Whoa, alright; I know we are accepting of gays here, but come on. That's a bit irrational. You say it's prejudicial to not want to be with someone of the same gender? Ummm.... that just makes you straight. I would definitely have to break up with them. Doesn't mean we can't still have a relationship, just not an intimate one.

And besides, if the person has been dishonest with you, about something that big, since the beginning of the relationship, then why should you trust them? I wouldn't want to be with someone who would keep something so big from me (no pun intended, haha).
But if this person has a personality you find attractive, and her body parts are female, how does this make you any less heterosexual?

Are you suggesting that something besides social behaviors and anatomy dictate social orientation? If so, I would REALLY like to know what it is.

Also, "not wanting to be with someone who would keep something so big from you " seems transphobic to me, when this is personal information that is in no way endangering your health. Would you break up with someone who didn't reveal to you they had an artificial hip or someone that didn't reveal they were naturally brunette? I would assume not.

counterblast

24th July 2007, 06:56

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 08:04 pm
Transexuals can't have children...this might be a factor in long term relationships, just throwing it out there. And I would leave, but that's a matter of taste. In my opinion, to deny your natural gender is something very insecure, maybe even pathetic! How can they stand the balls to be clipped off too!! thats crazy!!
There is a difference between gender and sex! Please look the two words up.

Masculinity isn't a natural characture of men, its a man-made stereotype.

EDIT: In response to your hypothetical "children" situation... Millions of biological-women can't have children. If you found out your girlfriend (who had been born a woman) couldn't have children, would you break up with her over it? If so, then I would argue that makes you sexist for using your girlfriend as a machine to produce babies.

Comrade Rage

1st August 2007, 23:31

I suppose if she had the emotions of a female I would stick around because I would hate having to keep things secret about myself that I would tell a woman I love. Otherwise I would not treat her differently. Anyone who would is just an a-wad.

BlackSun

2nd August 2007, 02:07

I'd definitely step-off!!!

I'm not one for gay-bashing but, to be honest, I don't care for same-sex relationships. Even looking at two girls doin' the wild-thang together, no matter how beautiful they both are, is a turn-off for me.

Black Dagger

2nd August 2007, 04:50

Originally posted by BlackSun+August 02, 2007 11:07 am--> (BlackSun @ August 02, 2007 11:07 am) I'm not one for gay-bashing but,
[/b]
Never start a sentence like this, it gives the WORST possible impression.

BS
to be honest, I don't care for same-sex relationships.

What do you mean by this?

Is that just a very unfortunate way of saying that you're hetero?

Also, to clarify for the nth time, trans people are not gay. A trans person who has GRS does not do so in order to have a same-sex relationship (unless of course they happen to be gay as well), but rather the opposite - after all, that is the point of gender reassignment surgery.

bloody_capitalist_sham

2nd August 2007, 12:30

Look at this bbc article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6923912.stm)

It say a radical feminist opposes transsexualism.

because its ideological opposed?

how come? i thought radical feminists would be the most supportive?

counterblast

5th August 2007, 10:22

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 11:30 am
Look at this bbc article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6923912.stm)

It say a radical feminist opposes transsexualism.

because its ideological opposed?

how come? i thought radical feminists would be the most supportive?
That one article doesn't speak on behalf of all radical feminists.

To them, the claim that someone can be "born into the wrong sex" is a deeply threatening concept.

Many feminists believe that the behaviours and feelings which are considered typically masculine or typically feminine are purely socially conditioned.

There is a broad difference between gender and sex. Gender is a non-fixed, social casting; while Sex is a fixed, biological one.

Sex-changes are simply that.

But if, as some in the transsexual lobby believes, the tendency to feel masculine or feminine is something innate then it follows that gender stereotypical behaviours could well be "natural" rather than as the result of social pressures and male oppression.

Most people in the "transexual lobby" don't believe gender to be innate. That is why the genderqueer and transexual movements are so closely knit.

Claudia says she was referred for surgery after a single 45 minute consultation.

"At no time did I say to that psychiatrist that I felt like a woman. In my opinion what happened to me was all about money."

She is one of a small number of trans people who have publicly expressed their regrets about having had sex change surgery.

Another is Charles Kane who, as Sam Hashimi, was the subject of a BBC documentary One Life: Make me a Man Again, televised in 2004.

This showed Sam, a transsexual woman, undergoing surgery to become a man again.

She told the BBC that her desire to become a woman had developed following a nervous breakdown.

And as for her stories of "regret"; I find this laughable coming from a FEMINIST. Does she not realise that the rightwing movement has done the same thing regarding abortion? It's taking isolated cases and using them as though they were representative of such individuals as a whole.

14th August 2007, 21:59

Originally posted by BCS+--> (BCS)
It say a radical feminist opposes transsexualism.

because its ideological opposed?

how come? i thought radical feminists would be the most supportive? [/b]

I think feminism in general, not just radical feminism, is incompatible with the theoretical premise of transsexualism.

Its obvious that although there is considerable overlap, biological sex has a strong predictive correllation to social status, role and behavior...but these roles are not constant, they might be more rigidly defined and further apart in feudal societies, more diverse in capitalist and hunter gatherer societies and minimal in culturally advanced socialist societies. The parameters of gender identity, behavior and roles ascribed to each sex differ considerably over time and geography, as does the degree to which people adhere to the gendered expectations ascribed to their sex.

Feminism holds that gender identity and role is a social construct imposed on people by patriarchal conditions according to their biological sex; when someone finds their traditionally expected gender role alienating, feminists see it as coming from a conflict between patriarchal institutions and individual, human aspirations that don't conform with them.

The feminist solution to this conflict of interests is to change society to liberate people from social expectations imposed on them according to their sex.

The ideological justification for transsexualism is that gender is neurological, so when someone finds the gender role ascribed to their sex alienating, the theoretical justification behind transsexualism argues that the problem isn't with patriarchal society, its with their brains.

Their solution to end this conflict is to is to just try to change an individual's sex so they would be able to conform.

But thats completely different from being unsympathetic to transsexuals as individuals or saying that they shouldn't be able to modify their bodies as they choose even if the ideological reasons behind it are clearly flawed, the right to personal sovereignty is always the right to make decisions for yourself seen as unreasonable by others (or its totally meaningless). Radical "Feminists" dislike transsexuals (rather than merely disagreeing with their ideology) for more complicated, ultimately chauvinist reasons, they think men who want to be women are 'invading women's space' and women who want to be men are 'betraying the sisterhood' or some such stupidness, in addition to the fact that it amounts to rejecting the feminist (and Marxist) view of gender.

If you're interested, it was discussed on the radical "feminist" blog "I Blame the Patriarchy" (which i read purely for entertainment value not because i agree with *anything* they say except for the occasions when I do by pure coincidence) here:

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/0...ug-of-the-week/ (http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/05/26/thyreocorid-bug-of-the-week/)

Originally posted by [email protected]

BBC Article cited by BCS

To them, the claim that someone can be "born into the wrong sex" is a deeply threatening concept.

Many feminists believe that the behaviours and feelings which are considered typically masculine or typically feminine are purely socially conditioned.

There is a broad difference between gender and sex. Gender is a non-fixed, social casting; while Sex is a fixed, biological one.

Sex-changes are simply that.

I'm not really sure what your point is. The BBC article's suggestion that being "born into the wrong sex" is a "deeply threatening concept" seems like it was written with a patronizing intent, but its absolutely true. You can't be "born into the wrong sex" because there isn't a "wrong sex" for anything.

To suggest that someone is the "wrong sex" to think or feel or behave or act a certain way or to want or do certain things is inherently sexist. It amounts to saying that there are certain ways that women can't act, ways its not acceptable for women to feel, things that women aren't able to do, etc, or vice versa with men. It wouldn't be hard to recognize that as sexism in any other context i don't think.

And as for her stories of "regret"; I find this laughable coming from a FEMINIST. Does she not realise that the rightwing movement has done the same thing regarding abortion? It's taking isolated cases and using them as though they were representative of such individuals as a whole.

I agree, trying to make broader theoretical conclusions from anecdotes and individual case studies is clearly bullshit and any isolated example is likely to have a counter-example...but keep in mind that this is the level of “data” that people espousing the 'gender differences are innate' theory thats used to justify transsexualism use as well; they cite individual cases where someone to feel better as ‘proof’ that their theory is correct.

Red Puppy

10th December 2007, 06:29

To all those people saying that they would feel hurt by the untruthfulness of the person in question not telling you right away about their situation, I have a few words to say.

If you dated someone and on the first day, they said "I used to be a man/woman." Are you going to judge them on their character after that? Are you going to give them a chance and not just cut the relationship before it has a chance to bud?

Its more than likely (from what I'm seeing in responses here) that you wouldn't look far beyond that fact.

You have to see it well from their perspective so that you can understand one can't simply spill the beans on your whole life story to someone you barely know. If you can't take the truth once it is revealed, if at all, then get out of the relationship early, there was no faith there to begin with.

You undergo a while of therapy, then you must blend in, pretend to be that gender, which means having to dress/act/etc., 24/7 for a year (if I remember correctly) before you can even get close to the surgery. The surgery itself is risky. A simple word to your boss about what you are can and will get you fired. Discovery can ruin your life.

Most of all, let me reiterate, you must understand how much trust is put into you when a tranny tells you of their past gender, and how much they put on the line for you. If anything, be thankful for that.

Comrade Puppy

synthesis

10th December 2007, 09:18

Its more than likely (from what I'm seeing in responses here) that you wouldn't look far beyond that fact.

Would people call me gerontophobic if I broke off a relationship with a woman who claimed to be far younger on the Internet than she was in real life? (i.e. if she claimed to be 25 yet was 55 in real life?)

Would people call me ephebiphobic if I would not engage in a relationship with someone who told me she was 20 and I then discovered that she was actually 15?

A great deal of what I see here is people trying to replace one form of socially encouraged sexuality with another. It's not as cut and dry as saying that all of people's sexual preferences are socially constructed.

Red Puppy

10th December 2007, 12:17

A great deal of what I see here is people trying to replace one form of socially encouraged sexuality with another. It's not as cut and dry as saying that all of people's sexual preferences are socially constructed.

You're putting words in my mouth. I was just making a generalized observation on the responses I have seen so far and calling to those who responded so to look at it from a different perspective.

RevMARKSman

18th December 2007, 22:37

You can't be "born into the wrong sex" because there isn't a "wrong sex" for anything.

To suggest that someone is the "wrong sex" to think or feel or behave or act a certain way or to want or do certain things is inherently sexist. It amounts to saying that there are certain ways that women can't act, ways its not acceptable for women to feel, things that women aren't able to do, etc, or vice versa with men. It wouldn't be hard to recognize that as sexism in any other context i don't think.

Yes. I agree.

But transgender/transsexual people generally don't say that. They say they are the wrong sex, period. It's not about wanting to do something that would only be supported by a sexistl society in a certain sex. It's just wanting to be that sex, regardless of what feedback would come from patriarchy. That desire doesn't have a motive, it just exists, and that's one of the things everyone's trying to find out - what really causes GID.

counterblast

19th December 2007, 03:04

Originally posted by TragicClown+August 14, 2007 08:58 pm--> (TragicClown @ August 14, 2007 08:58 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected]

BBC Article cited by BCS

To them, the claim that someone can be "born into the wrong sex" is a deeply threatening concept.

Many feminists believe that the behaviours and feelings which are considered typically masculine or typically feminine are purely socially conditioned.

There is a broad difference between gender and sex. Gender is a non-fixed, social casting; while Sex is a fixed, biological one.

Sex-changes are simply that.

I'm not really sure what your point is. The BBC article's suggestion that being "born into the wrong sex" is a "deeply threatening concept" seems like it was written with a patronizing intent, but its absolutely true. You can't be "born into the wrong sex" because there isn't a "wrong sex" for anything.

To suggest that someone is the "wrong sex" to think or feel or behave or act a certain way or to want or do certain things is inherently sexist. It amounts to saying that there are certain ways that women can't act, ways its not acceptable for women to feel, things that women aren't able to do, etc, or vice versa with men. It wouldn't be hard to recognize that as sexism in any other context i don't think.
[/b]
You're absolutely right that getting a sex change to avoid gender discrimination, or to avoid a prescribed gender role is sexist.

I'm speaking of biological sex. I see nothing anti-feminist about wanting a penis or a vagina.

FireFry

9th January 2008, 11:50

You know, because you say "you're a woman" it doesn't make you one..

If I dressed like Napoleon Bonaparte and began trying to invade Prussia, would everybody follow to my support and give the appropriate rank?

There are BIOLOGICAL standards that have to be met before anybody is considered a female, scientifically. Or else, fuck, anybody could be a woman, we ALL could be women (secretly) for a we know.

I think it sounds whacko.

Elly

1st February 2008, 16:23

Hi, haven't been on this forum for a long time, and am sorry to raise an old topic, but I wanted to give my vision :)

So, yeah, to start from the last comment, having a male or female sex is a biological fact, more or less. (Some intersex people who were mutilated at birth so they could be 'male' or female' might object, but on the other hand they are less than 1%, who cares ?socialism is for large proletarian crowds)

Being a man or a woman, on the other hand, has pretty much nothing to do with biology. Being called "he" or "she" is social. Human cells aren't blue or pink. .

Some people feel better in the gender that is supposedly not the one corresponding to their biological sex. I don't know why. I think it's somewhat linked to gender repression : a man must be like this, a woman like that. After years of being told that men behaved a different way than you, it doesn't seem irrational to feel better being a man. Now wether that does transform into "feeling a man" or if "feeling a man" is something which was caused by hormones at birth, or even if it was caused by the apparition of Jesus in a dream, I don't know. And I don't think it's particularly important to know, actually.

Now if you could just say "ok, now I am a woman" it would be easy. Even if you could actually not say that but you could behave like a woman, I think it would be easier.

The real world is that there are asses who say "you have a penis so even if you say you're a woman, you're a man". There are different levels : it goes from saying that they are tolerant, but still trans(wo)men are not (wo)men, to torturing and murdering trannies that "tricked" them. At the end, it's the same result: there is some very heavy social pressure on trans people so they have a sex which match their gender, or vice-versa.

Hormones and surgery are a solution. It's not the only one (doing your best to be in your assigned gender is another one, as is suicide), but it's a solution. I personnally think it is a bad one.

It's not perfect, it has its limits and so on, but it has the advantages that less people are prone to try to insult or murder you.

And it's then that, instead of analysing why transpeople need to go into surgery, why it becomes so important to them, and, more importantly, what could be done to supress this social pression, we have some lefty or feminist movements that either take a condescending look and explain that it's anti-feminist to have surgery, that it's reactionnary and all this, or are completely enthusiast and say that transpeople are subversive per se.

I'm not a marxist orthodox or even a big reader but I would think that I could use the term "dialectical materialism". Because, well, globally there is an oppression, and the answer to opression is submission and resistance. Some transpeople submit and try to be "more (wo)man than a (wo)man", actually reinforcing sexist stereotype ;some resist and struggle. Actually, many do both, as do workers, homosexual people, women, people of colour or every opressed group.

There is little sense in trying to judge whether it is progressive or reactionnary to work at macdonald to have some bucks, to undergo surgery to have an ID matching your visible gender so you can work at macdonald, to use a name and haircut which sounds and look less "maghrebin" so you can also work at macdonald, or to wear short dress and lipstick so the manager finds you pretty and you can still work at macdonald.

The fact is, all of this are bad solutions. Now judging people from this is just patronizing, specially when you are respectively rich, cisgender, white or male.

I think the role of revolutionnaries is to show that there are bad solutions, and that there is only a good one : revolution.