Dating Preferences: Bigotry or a Right?

[Buttercup]

Did they say or indicate to you, "I refuse to be with _____ type of people?" Or refuse to work with them, date them, etc?

I've implied that I may (or may not) refuse to date women. You called it prejudicial and light bigotry. If a gay man refuses to date women, I assume you'd say the same thing. I don't understand this line of thinking and I'm very open minded.

 

[Revoltingest]

I've implied that I may (or may not) refuse to date women. You called it prejudicial and light bigotry. If a gay man refuses to date women, I assume you'd say the same thing. I don't understand this line of thinking and I'm very open minded.

It appears that gay men who date only men are bigots because of this.
And straight men who won't date gay men are bigots for the same reason.

 

[Buttercup]

It appears that gay men who date only men are bigots because of this.
And straight men who won't date gay men are bigots for the same reason.

That's the logic I'm understanding. I don't get it but it seems to follow in that pattern.

 

[Acim]

Example:
A Jewish co-worker said he'd never marry a Jewish girl.
So there's both religious & gender discrimination.
Example:
A friend stated he only dates attractive women.
There's both lookism & gender discrimination.

The first example strikes me as mild bigotry, the second as discrimination. I'm interested in more examples if you have them since everyone you've ever known is a bigot (in your words).

 

[Acim]

I've implied that I may (or may not) refuse to date women. You called it prejudicial and light bigotry. If a gay man refuses to date women, I assume you'd say the same thing. I don't understand this line of thinking and I'm very open minded.

Because I think a date may involve things that have nothing to do with sexual orientation. I recognize a date could have activities that have everything to do with sexual preferences. But because dating or being on a date with someone has a wide variety of activities that it includes, then it seems prejudicial to rule out (via refusal) a whole group of people whom you might enjoy those activities with. Being on a date, may be anticipated as 'seeking lifelong romantic partner' or it may be 'seeking friends/companionship' or it might mean 'seeking one night stand' or it might mean....(other things which convey that there are no hard fast rules, sound bite definition for what all dates entail).

 

[Revoltingest]

The first example strikes me as mild bigotry, the second as discrimination. I'm interested in more examples if you have them since everyone you've ever known is a bigot (in your words).

More examples won't change anything.
We'll have to agree to disagree about what constitutes bigotry,
& what is merely a normal & acceptable personal preference in a mate.

 

[Buttercup]

Because I think a date may involve things that have nothing to do with sexual orientation. I recognize a date could have activities that have everything to do with sexual preferences. But because dating or being on a date with someone has a wide variety of activities that it includes, then it seems prejudicial to rule out (via refusal) a whole group of people whom you might enjoy those activities with. Being on a date, may be anticipated as 'seeking lifelong romantic partner' or it may be 'seeking friends/companionship' or it might mean 'seeking one night stand' or it might mean....(other things which convey that there are no hard fast rules, sound bite definition for what all dates entail).

We had already established it was a hypothetical date with romantic intent. I told you I had many female friends and did not consider my times spent with them to include romantic interest. There is a large difference. I love women, just not romantically.

 

[Revoltingest]

We had already established it was a hypothetical date with romantic intent. I told you I had many female friends and did not consider my times spent with them to include romantic interest. There is a large difference. I love women, just not romantically.

Bigot!

I wonder about people who claim to not be bigots about dating.
Do they date everyone who doesn't turn them down?
If not, then they discriminate in some way, thereby being hoist by their own petard.
(That's a fancy way of saying they're in denial of their own bigotry.)

 

[Sees]

Equal Opportunity Employer Lover?

I think the fear of preferences in regards to people has been taken way too far in some of these posts...especially when people are lumping in the wholesale horrible treatment of groups not remotely related to personal discrimination in dating/mating partners.

To me it is always interesting how your likes/preferences/favs in regards to clothing, ice cream flavor, wall color, music, etc. are always just fine - when it comes to people in anyway, there can be none without some degree of backlash and shaming. It seems like taking principles, which are designed for folks to simply get along peaceably and productively in a pluralistic society, all the way to extreme exaggeration.

 

[Acim]

We had already established it was a hypothetical date with romantic intent. I told you I had many female friends and did not consider my times spent with them to include romantic interest. There is a large difference. I love women, just not romantically.

Yeah, it's that last part that I don't see a large difference between. Kudos to you for seeing a vast difference between the two.

"Romantic intent" in way you are using it, reads to me like "sexual intent."

 

[Buttercup]

Yeah, it's that last part that I don't see a large difference between. Kudos to you for seeing a vast difference between the two.

Do you not believe there are different types of love? In my life so far, I've had a Philia (affectionate regard between equals) type of love for my women friends. There has been no Eros (sexual passion or intimate love) between us. To me, that is a large difference between two forms of love.

"Romantic intent" in way you are using it, reads to me like "sexual intent."

A possible romantic connection is the motivation for going out on a date with a person you're attracted to, is it not?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Basically, @Shadow Wolf, what I've been asking in this thread is what's wrong with good, old fashioned communication?

Nothing. However, being trans isn't something that needs to be disclosed, and we shouldn't be expected to disclose it.
Even for long term relationships, ideally even if someone is in a serious and committed relationship and disclosure doesn't happen, it's taken lightly, no different than someone not disclosing to a partner they played sports in high school. We will never achieve that if we are to remind the world we are different.

 

[Acim]

Do you not believe there are different types of love? In my life so far, I've had a Philia (affectionate regard between equals) type of love for my women friends. There has been no Eros (sexual passion or intimate love) between us. To me, that is a large difference between two forms of love.

I mostly do not think there are different types of love. I think of understanding love as a lifelong process. In another thread I have said that God = Love, and stand by that. The way humans are attracted to each other and form relationships that may be sexual continually strikes me as a distorted version of love. But because I believe all humans are gods/extension of God, then I also think we are all Love... so I do feel any relationship we are in can achieve Love.

That would be my first response and the one that I'm most prone to respond with. As I do feel like I am or have been a romantical person, I feel I understand eros version of love. Also seems like a life long learning process. Does seem like a vast difference between the other version of Love. Also seems like the two are blurred, routinely in most relationships I've had, heard of, seen in fictional tales, as if the (greater) Love is always present and being filtered (or blocked) through the other (or lesser) version which is generally fleeting, changing in so many ways it is very challenging to keep up with. It truly seems elusive at times.

I do believe most heterosexual males I've met have a really tough time with expressing 'love' for their male friends. Not always and not all males. Whereas it seems to me that most females (regardless of sexual orientation) have no issues expressing love for, or about, people they feel close to.

Because of my chosen path, I tend to focus on Agape Love, and just call that Love. The eros, phillia and other forms are items I know I embrace from time to time, but Agape tends to trump them and/or embrace them within any relationship I've ever had or can conceive of.

A possible romantic connection is the motivation for going out on a date with a person you're attracted to, is it not?

It's an interesting question. I feel like the romantic connection comes first and then grows and/or helps establish a closer level of intimacy. It then helps if each partner is clear on what they desire (i.e. casual sex, companionship, long term relationship). For all of these, the romance can find diverse ways to express itself, but is usually fleeting. And that's okay, or is what it is.

Anyway, you asked about what I believe and feel I address that. Not exactly sure how it relates to the topic at hand. But I'll try to relate it. I strongly believe that (Agape) Love would never rule out anyone, refuse to be shared with anyone. So, there's that. That I equate to actual Love. The type(s) of love that somehow manages to take preferences into account and are employed via personal selections are the type that I think can be changed, on a whim. Perhaps that could be read as choice, but I recognize it may not show up that way depending on what is the focus of the topic. As this topic is partially about dating, then I really do feel it gets convoluted because dating is about so many diverse things to so many different people.

But to rule out a whole group of people based on say eros love, and exercise discrimination in selecting partners to mate with (by employing refusal of whole sub-sections of society) really does strike me as something along lines of prejudice / mild bigotry. Whereas if just sticking to preferences without the need for expressing exclusion statements, does not strike me as prejudice/mild bigotry. That it may be implied, is plausible. And is partially to mostly why I would have a very challenging time equating this to (actual) Love. I think if the relationship lasts in a 'til death do us part' fashion, that it is likely eros love left that relationship or is trivial consideration while phillia and/or agape has survived and become the foundation of that relationship.

 

[Thana]

Nothing. However, being trans isn't something that needs to be disclosed, and we shouldn't be expected to disclose it.
Even for long term relationships, ideally even if someone is in a serious and committed relationship and disclosure doesn't happen, it's taken lightly, no different than someone not disclosing to a partner they played sports in high school. We will never achieve that if we are to remind the world we are different.

You are different, whether you like it or not, and that is something you should disclose.
You have no ovaries, no vagina and no mammary glands and any that you do gain will be artificial. Your potential partner should know this about you, if you cared at all about honesty and about their feelings.

Look, I have PCOS which can affect my fertility, do you not think I will disclose that in a relationship I expect to become serious? Because I have something different about me, different from other women, and I respect people too much to ever hide that difference from them. I don't tell it to strangers, but someone I'm dating? Hell yeah, because they should know those things about me before we take any steps towards a future.

You are different. But guess what? We're all different. And hiding those things, especially when they can effect your relationships, is a deception.

You're just too idealistic for your own good, imo.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You are different, whether you like it or not, and that is something you should disclose.

No, it's not. There is absolutely no reason we need to wear a sign that marks and labels us.

You have no ovaries, no vagina and no mammary glands and any that you do gain will be artificial. Your potential partner should know this about you, if you cared at all about honesty and about their feelings.

Ovaries no (we haven't quite reached that point yet), breast development even sometimes happens in men, and I actually do have them, and even lots of cis-women have vaginal surgeries.

And hiding those things, especially when they can effect your relationships, is a deception.

Hiding what? Being deceptive about what? It certainly isn't being a woman.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

If I may...

There is profound bi-phobia and erasure with both straights and homosexuals. Lesbians have shared repeatedly, candidly, and smugly that they would never date a bisexual woman because we aren't trustworthy at all.

Straight men will mention candidly and smugly that they would LOVE to date a bisexual woman because of the chance to fulfill the dudebro hot threesome sex fantasy.

I have received complaints from men and women who are monosexuals that I need to disclose my orientation to them so they can "choose" to either reject me outright or to feel more giddy about hotter sex.

The complaints are NOT coming from a sexual preference at all. But from their own biases on myself and how I qualify as a human being based on bisexual women as a whole in mating.

I'm supposed to cater to the bias of the dominant class of monosexual men and women so they don't have to face their own biases and prejudices by disclosing my orientation up front, by making them feel like I was leading them on, like I've deceived them...I think this is where I understand where trans and non-binary people are saying just with dating, though I have the privilege of not having to worry about trans panic violence as a legal defense.

Honestly, every time I hear somebody say that I might be deceptive by not disclosing my orientation so they can feel like they're on a higher moral ground by rejecting me outright, I want to give them the middle finger.

But please, keep suggesting that there is no such thing as phobia or dehumanization in these excuses. And please keep saying that I need to suck it up and cater to their assumptions and feelings by offering myself up as a stereotype. How dare I insist these people get to know me as a whole person first.

I may be wrong in my parallels in life experiences, but that's roughly similar to what I'm seeing in this thread directed toward non-cis people. The cavalier attitude of dismissing them outright, and the insistence that cis people's feelings are just as important as the lives themselves of non-cis people is an insidious but typical tactic. I've seen and played witness to it largely thanks to my daughter's ability to educate me as well as my own involvement in local trans-focused activism here.

How many times are trans people told their objections and hardships are ridiculous and trite before they either pushback or internalize deeply the shame? I mean, come on now. The casual dismissiveness coupled with the cavalier attitude of "I know what REAL bigotry is for your kind" perpetuates a whole hell of a lot of the same attitudes that ends in violence. Not cool. Not cool at all.

 

[illykitty]

I think someone should tell someone else of who they are @MysticSang'ha and @Shadow Wolf . Would you rather have a partner who loves you for who you are or someone who might have a prejudice and you don't know about it? How is being with someone who dislikes part of you, but doesn't know this part of you, better than being upfront and finding someone who actually accept it? I really don't understand this line of thinking at all.

I was upfront with my husband about my orientation and it wasn't a problem for him. I'd much rather be married to someone who is ok about these things about me than not. Why be with someone who hates what you are? That makes ZERO sense. If he had a problem with it, I would know straight away he isn't someone I want to spend the rest of my life with. Heck even a dating potential, it would turn me off to know my date doesn't like people of my sexual/romantic orientation. It wouldn't be someone I'd want to be with.

To me, it seems like the fear of what reaction you might get is a reason to withhold the information, and having someone, regardless of how they truly feel about you is better than being alone. No thanks, I'll never subscribe to this line of thought. I don't feel dehumanised, I feel in control of who I date/have sex with/marry.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I may be wrong in my parallels in life experiences, but that's roughly similar to what I'm seeing in this thread directed toward non-cis people.

I would say it is roughly similar in that you are being expected--and unfairly so--to disclose something that should be a non-issue and there also seems to be the level of mistrust as well as objectification just for being bisexual, even denial that someone can even actually be bisexual. Two different issues, but the expectation of disclosure to label yourself to the world as other, shaming, mistrust, denial, and objectification is the same.

How many times are trans people told their objections and hardships are ridiculous and trite before they either pushback or internalize deeply the shame?

I hope I'm not being overly optimistic, but I think we may be on the eve of a massive pushing back. It actually surprised me when Indiana's "round 2" of RFRA included a bill that granted civil liberties and protections to all except for gender identity and expression, and the bill was rejected because of that, as it was seen by opponents as not going far enough. But, then again, while acceptance has risen sharply even since I was just a young kid and dealing with these issues for the first time, it's still not too hard to find examples in mainstream media where even just our very existence and presence is a punch line, and the masculinity of men is degraded by being with us.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

To me, it seems like the fear of what reaction you might get is a reason to withhold the information, and having someone, regardless of how they truly feel about you is better than being alone. No thanks, I'll never subscribe to this line of thought. I don't feel dehumanised, I feel in control of who I date/have sex with/marry.

I wouldn't want to be with someone who would hate me either. But the reluctance to withhold information is not a fear of any reaction, it's the expectation that I be accepted and treated normally. As I said earlier, a committed and long-term relationship is one thing, but casual dating and sex is an entirely different issue, and I should not be expected to disclose my history. It includes a part of me that is becoming a past and non-existant person. And, as I have been stating, this expectation to disclose only serves to perpetuate that we cater to the majority, which ultimately balks any progress towards acceptance if we are not allowed to live as who we are and basically telling the majority they are right, we aren't who we are. That is basically all this expectation to disclose is. People don't want to see, acknowledge, or accept us as who we are, and they expect us to follow suit.

 

[illykitty]

I wouldn't want to be with someone who would hate me either. But the reluctance to withhold information is not a fear of any reaction, it's the expectation that I be accepted and treated normally. As I said earlier, a committed and long-term relationship is one thing, but casual dating and sex is an entirely different issue, and I should not be expected to disclose my history. It includes a part of me that is becoming a past and non-existant person. And, as I have been stating, this expectation to disclose only serves to perpetuate that we cater to the majority, which ultimately balks any progress towards acceptance if we are not allowed to live as who we are and basically telling the majority they are right, we aren't who we are. That is basically all this expectation to disclose is. People don't want to see, acknowledge, or accept us as who we are, and they expect us to follow suit.

Well, I suppose it's a difference in perception then. I just feel that even if I was in a short-term non-committed relationship I would be turned off by being with someone who isn't accepting or wanting me. That is power in my hands. I don't want to do anything with someone who doesn't want me. Why would I desire such a person, even just sexually?

But I won't pretend to know how you should live your life, and I can't even know what you're going through since with me, it's only an issue of orientation. It's just what I personally do.