Is it wrong if you want to know a partners or potential partner's biological/original gender?

[Koldo]

Out of curiosity, for people who don't think that Shirley should have told Tom that she is a trans woman:

If Tom happened to mention that he wouldn't ever have sex with a trans woman, but still didn't properly ask her whether she is one, should Shirley, in this case, have told him that she is a trans woman? If yes, why? If not, why not?

EDIT: Consider that Shirley still wanted to have sex with him after he said that.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Out of curiosity, for people who don't think that Shirley should have told Tom that she is a trans woman:

If Tom happened to mention that he wouldn't ever have sex with a trans woman, but still didn't properly ask her whether she is one, should Shirley, in this case, have told him that she is a trans woman? If yes, why? If not, why not?

I think if she had any respect for herself she wouldn't have sex with him

 

[Koldo]

I think if she had any respect for herself she wouldn't have sex with him

I have made a slight edit to that post, because, and i think everyone can agree on this, there is no need for Shirley to tell Tom that she is a trans woman if she is not willing to have sex with him.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I have made a slight edit to that post, because, and i think everyone can agree on this, there is no need for Shirley to tell Tom that she is a trans woman if she is not willing to have sex with him.

she should flirt with him like mad, and then when he invites her home to have sex, she should say sorry I'm trans, and make him think

 

[McBell]

Consider the following situation:

Two people are at a social gathering. One, call her Shirley, is an transgender woman, the other is a straight cis-male, call him Tom. Tom approaches Shirley, believing that she is a cis-female. They flirt and Tom takes Shirley back to his place where they end up in bed together, and eventually consent to intercourse.

Later on, Tom learns through a mutual friend, John, that Shirley is in fact a transgender woman, and was assigned male gender at birth. After that, Tom is angry, and refuses to approach Shirley. He claims he feels "violated" and was was “deceived”, and it was “unethical”, because if he’d known she was trans, he would not have consented to intercourse.

My questions:

1. Was Tom wrong to suddenly reject Shirley on the basis that she is transgender?
2. Should Shirley be obligated to tell Tom her birth gender before consent?
3. Is it wrong for cisgender individuals to only prefer other cisgender individuals, to the exclusion of transgender people?

If you could explain why you answered the way that you did, that would be helpful.

Also you could imagine the situation mentioned above in reverse, but I don't think the answer should be different.

One wonders why Tom is so upset in finding out his one night stand was not what he wanted her to be...

 

[Penumbra]

Penumbra i think you really need to get over the fact that he doesnt have a phobia.

What else would you call it? He was attracted to her, but due to her medical history and chromosome status, neither of which affected their night or tangibly affect him at all, he feels violated and deceived.

He simply likes women, as in biological real women.

If he slept with her without realizing, then she was a biological woman- physically, hormonally, etc. He apparently liked her enough to finish that night without being aware of anything.

You think that he/she is a real woman. But guess what thats just your opinion. Biologically he/she isnt. Now dont go that road that some biological women cant get children because of defects. They are called defects for a reason.(hint: Its because its not supposed to be that way)

Then it's just your opinion that biologically she isn't. I've already linked to physician statements about how chromosomes are but one of several variables for determining sex.

Our guy in question is just the regular guy. He probably thinks that over 95% of all women he sees everyday are real biological women. So why should he/she differ?

How does she differ? Chromosomes? Internal organs?

I mean if she has a penis, it's going to affect their night, and she really should get that fact out there early on.

Was he sexually attracted to him/her? Who knows. There are those stories that some heterosexual men land in the sack with homosexual men and later regret it. They arent homophibic. It probably simply happened in a certain moment under a certain condition. Such is life. Like in the story of this thread.

So you're saying Tom maybe sleeps with people he's not attracted to? Who's mistake would that be?

If this happens often to him/her then he/she should probably be more open about his/her history. You cant expect every guy on this planet to ask his potential date if he or she is a biological woman. Thats just crazy.

Why wouldn't I expect Tom to ask his date about her chromosomal status or medical history if it's a major dealbreaker for him for casual sex, yet expect Shirley to initiate facts about her chromosomal status or medical history which will have no impact on their night at all?

Not to mention that would probably be quite insulting to a large chunk of women out there.

Imagine just before, er, that, and your partner says, "Now, I just want to make sure: you WERE born female, right?"

Yeah, we wouldn't want to burden Tom at all about his own hang-ups...

I have this crazy, outlandish belief that someone who isn't attracted to men isn't necessarily homophobic, someone who isn't attracted to transgender folk isn't necessarily transphobic, someone who isn't attracted to black, White, Latino, or Arabic people isn't necessarily racist.

I don't think if someone isn't attracted to trans people they're transphobic either. Like, if there was a trans guy that to me still looked very feminine, I may simply not be physically attracted to him.

However, I do think it's transphobic to be attracted to someone enough to have intercourse with them, only to later find out something about them that did not affect their night at all or bring Tom any harm or potential harm, to the point of Tom feeling violated or deceived, rather than simply deciding not to have sex with her again.

 

[Penumbra]

The OP doesn't state he has an issue with trans people.

It has an impact on him. Because he wouldn't have had sex with her if he knew it.

I already stated one.
He felt being mislead.

I believe it was you that brought up inductive reasoning, correct?

For what reason would Tom feel mislead or violated about an invisible and non-harmful aspect of her body, other than due to trans/homophobia?

Would he feel mislead if she wasn't a natural blonde, but didn't tell him? Should we care if he did?

Something is only immoral if it is wrong. That much is obvious.

If someone were to break into your house and sleep on your couch, has he done anything wrong? Would your answer change depending on whether you were aware of him doing it?

Yes, I think it would be wrong, in a similar way that sleeping with someone while having HIV and not telling them is wrong, even if they don't get HIV from the activities. It put them at risk without consent.

If someone breaks into my house, there may be damage, they probably didn't follow my no shoe rule and got some nature in, I'd have to spend time to see if anything was stolen, they risked getting caught being there when I come back (and if I unexpectedly catch someone in my place who shouldn't be there and looks like he may be a threat, injury may occur with one or both of us getting hurt), and so forth. Even if I didn't find out about it, he still risked getting caught and getting hurt, potentially getting me hurt, etc. Having an unidentified man in my house is a tangible threat rather than an invisible, non-harmful aspect of a situation.

 

[Koldo]

I believe it was you that brought up inductive reasoning, correct?

For what reason would Tom feel mislead or violated about an invisible and non-harmful aspect of her body, other than due to trans/homophobia?

Whether it is harmful isn't irrelevant to determine whether he was mislead in the first place.

Would he feel mislead if she wasn't a natural blonde, but didn't tell him? Should we care if he did?

Is it reasonable for him to assume that she wasn't a natural blonde? There is a fairly big number of non-natural blondes.

Is it reasonable for her to assume that he wouldn't sleep with a non-natural blonde? I have yet to hear about a man that wouldn't sleep with a woman because of that.

Yes, I think it would be wrong, in a similar way that sleeping with someone while having HIV and not telling them is wrong, even if they don't get HIV from the activities. It put them at risk without consent.

If someone breaks into my house, there may be damage, they probably didn't follow my no shoe rule and got some nature in, I'd have to spend time to see if anything was stolen, they risked getting caught being there when I come back (and if I unexpectedly catch someone in my place who shouldn't be there and looks like he may be a threat, injury may occur with one or both of us getting hurt), and so forth. Even if I didn't find out about it, he still risked getting caught and getting hurt, potentially getting me hurt, etc. Having an unidentified man in my house is a tangible threat rather than an invisible, non-harmful aspect of a situation.

But the act itself caused no harm. The harm could only be caused by other actions that could possibly arise in this scenario.

 

[dawny0826]

Consider the following situation:

Two people are at a social gathering. One, call her Shirley, is an transgender woman, the other is a straight cis-male, call him Tom. Tom approaches Shirley, believing that she is a cis-female. They flirt and Tom takes Shirley back to his place where they end up in bed together, and eventually consent to intercourse.

Later on, Tom learns through a mutual friend, John, that Shirley is in fact a transgender woman, and was assigned male gender at birth. After that, Tom is angry, and refuses to approach Shirley. He claims he feels "violated" and was was “deceived”, and it was “unethical”, because if he’d known she was trans, he would not have consented to intercourse.

My questions:

1. Was Tom wrong to suddenly reject Shirley on the basis that she is transgender?
2. Should Shirley be obligated to tell Tom her birth gender before consent?
3. Is it wrong for cisgender individuals to only prefer other cisgender individuals, to the exclusion of transgender people?

If you could explain why you answered the way that you did, that would be helpful.

Also you could imagine the situation mentioned above in reverse, but I don't think the answer should be different.

1. If Shirley identifies as a female and physically presents as female and Tom was comfortable enough to sleep with her, I find his actions incredibly insenstive, particularly since he and Shirley are not in a committed relationship. If they were in a committed relationship where openness was important to them, I would think differently.

With this said, I do feel that Tom is entitled to his feelings, whether fair or not.

2. Personally, I am of the opinion that this should be Shirley's choice. If Tom and Shirley are only going to have casual sex or casually date, she may not want to share that detail about her past, particularly if painful.

I would hope that she would share that about herself if the two decided to commit to a mutualy exclusive relationship, as honesty is important.

But, Shirley, in my opinion, doesn't owe Tom anything other than an honest explanation as to whether or not she could possibly place him at risk for a sexually trasmitted disease.

3. Is this not personal choice?

 

[Penumbra]

Whether it is harmful isn't irrelevant to determine whether he was mislead in the first place.

Is it reasonable for him to assume that she wasn't a natural blonde? There is a fairly big number of non-natural blondes.

Is it reasonable for her to assume that he wouldn't sleep with a non-natural blonde? I have yet to hear about a man that wouldn't sleep with a woman because of that.

But he was mislead, is what you're arguing. You keep saying there's no indication that it's a phobia, it's about being mislead. Hair color would be another non-harmful example of not initiating information about herself that had no impact on the night, but there's no problem there, because Tom doesn't have a phobia of hair dye but does freak out about other invisible non-harmful information, rather than just choosing not to sleep with her again.

But the act itself caused no harm. The harm could only be caused by other actions that could possibly arise in this scenario.

The guy would be in my place, unexpectedly. The difference between a fear and a phobia is that a fear is generally of something rational, while a phobia is an irrational or disproportionate fear.

It's reasonable fear and reaction, if one sees a poisonous snake, to freak out and get away from it. It's a phobia of snakes if a tiny pet snake is known to be harmless, and a person is nonetheless totally freaking out about it despite knowing it's harmless, because it's a disproportionate reaction.

Catching someone in your house that shouldn't be there is a legitimately frightening situation, because there's a significant chance of stuff getting stolen, getting raped, getting murdered, and so forth.

 

[Koldo]

But he was mislead, is what you're arguing. You keep saying there's no indication that it's a phobia, it's about being mislead. Hair color would be another non-harmful example of not initiating information about herself that had no impact on the night, but there's no problem there, because Tom doesn't have a phobia of hair dye but does freak out about other invisible non-harmful information, rather than just choosing not to sleep with her again.

Now you want to reduce all of my reasoning to a single sentence even though you acknowledge the reasoning behind this sentence.

Please do not ignore the reasoning.

The guy would be in my place, unexpectedly. The difference between a fear and a phobia is that a fear is generally of something rational, while a phobia is an irrational or disproportionate fear.

It's reasonable fear and reaction, if one sees a poisonous snake, to freak out and get away from it. It's a phobia of snakes if a tiny pet snake is known to be harmless, and a person is nonetheless totally freaking out about it despite knowing it's harmless, because it's a disproportionate reaction.

Catching someone in your house that shouldn't be there is a legitimately frightening situation, because there's a significant chance of stuff getting stolen, getting raped, getting murdered, and so forth.

Do you consider fear to count as 'harm'?

 

[Penumbra]

Now you want to reduce all of my reasoning to a single sentence even though you acknowledge the reasoning behind this sentence.

Please do not ignore the reasoning.

What reasoning? You don't like the fact that I'm referring to the way Tom is behaving as having a phobia, and keep saying that it's about being "mislead".

The only reason to freak out and consider oneself to be mislead, deceived, violated, and so forth, rather than simply choosing to not to have sex with her again (or choosing to continue to have sex with her), is due to a disproportionate emotional reaction about invisible, non-harmful aspects of her chromosomes or medical history.

Do you consider fear to count as 'harm'?

I think deliberately causing rational fear would be.

In a movie once, these guys threw a de-fanged cobra at another man. He of course responded with fear and panic- he might have gotten hurt and the snake might have gotten hurt, even though the snake wasn't really a threat. If the man or the snake was hurt, their actions would take a big part of the blame.

But if we lie in a racist society, and a man sleeps with a woman who is 1/4th black, and freaks out about it after finding out, she didn't harm him- that's his thing. He's freaking out. Similarly, if we live in a homophobic or transphobic society, a man sleeps with a woman who has XY chromosomes and no uterus, and freaks out about it after finding out, she didn't harm him- that's his thing. He could just choose not to sleep with her anymore if it's a dealbreaker to him.

 

[Breathe]

Yeah, we wouldn't want to burden Tom at all about his own hang-ups...

But should he have to ask people?

However, I do think it's transphobic to be attracted to someone enough to have intercourse with them, only to later find out something about them that did not affect their night at all or bring Tom any harm or potential harm, to the point of Tom feeling violated or deceived, rather than simply deciding not to have sex with her again.

Then we have vastly different opinions on what transphobic is.

Maybe Tom is only sexually attracted to "cis" women. Some people are that way inclined. It doesn't make sense to call him a transphobe. Not everyone will consider a transwoman as the same as a ciswoman. It doesn't mean they hate them or want their rights stripped away, it doesn't mean they want to date them.

I don't see how Tom feeling violated or deceived makes him a transphobe.

You simply can't decide on someone's sexuality and decide that if they don't want to date someone, they're a phobe or bigot; that's downright insulting. I don't want to date a man, even a feminine looking one, but that does not mean that I am a homophobe.

 

[Penumbra]

But should he have to ask people?

If it's a dealbreaker to him, and enough to make him freak out even if he founds out later, then yeah, I'd say that's his responsibility.

Then we have vastly different opinions on what transphobic is.

Maybe Tom is only sexually attracted to "cis" women. Some people are that way inclined. It doesn't make sense to call him a transphobe. Not everyone will consider a transwoman as the same as a ciswoman. It doesn't mean they hate them or want their rights stripped away, it doesn't mean they want to date them.

I don't see how Tom feeling violated or deceived makes him a transphobe.

You simply can't decide on someone's sexuality and decide that if they don't want to date someone, they're a phobe or bigot; that's downright insulting. I don't want to date a man, even a feminine looking one, but that does not mean that I am a homophobe.

Let's propose, for the sake of discussion, that I'm not going to sleep with any Asian people. In fact if I found out I did sleep with one, I'm going to be horrified about it.

Now it could be said that I'm just not attracted to them, for some physical reason or due to aspects of their culture or who knows what. I can't control what I'm attracted to, really.

But suppose I sleep with a guy, and I like his physical characteristics and personality and all of that, who I later find out is 1/4th Asian, and then freak out about being violated and deceived by him. That's no longer about my sexual attraction or lackthereof- that's about me having some deep issues with Asian people- we'd call it racist. To the point where if he's even a little bit Asian, previously unnoticed to myself, I'm freaking out. It's because facts about his race, not relating to his looks or the way we interacted personally, triggered some deep reaction to him. I really better take it upon myself to ask someone if they're Asian at all, even if it might offend them or make me look racist, rather than blame them if they don't tell me their ancestry before having casual intercourse. And I don't think the ethics for disclosure greatly change if it turns out that there are a lot of people like me, in this example, that have some disproportionate problem with Asian people.

Tom, rather than being physically turned off by Shirley before they even make it to casual intercourse, or simply choosing not to have any more sexual interaction with Shirley after learning about her past, is responding disproportionally with statements of violation and deception.

 

[Flankerl]

What else would you call it? He was attracted to her, but due to her medical history and chromosome status, neither of which affected their night or tangibly affect him at all, he feels violated and deceived.

The OPs story tells us that they spent a night together. Nowhere does it say that he enjoyed or hated it. So wether or not it affected him is pretty much just guessing.

If he slept with her without realizing, then she was a biological woman- physically, hormonally, etc. He apparently liked her enough to finish that night without being aware of anything.

So if a man only has anal sex it should be alright if he had sex with another man. After all the rear exit of a man is just like the one of a woman.

Then it's just your opinion that biologically she isn't. I've already linked to physician statements about how chromosomes are but one of several variables for determining sex.

I work in a scientific field and just because a doctor thinks that its like this doesnt mean that its like this.
Most of the time there is an agenda so obviously one is right while everyone else is wrong.

How does she differ? Chromosomes? Internal organs?

I mean if she has a penis, it's going to affect their night, and she really should get that fact out there early on.

Iam really not up for a basic biology lesson.

So you're saying Tom maybe sleeps with people he's not attracted to? Who's mistake would that be?

Toms.
Never claimed something else.

Why wouldn't I expect Tom to ask his date about her chromosomal status or medical history if it's a major dealbreaker for him for casual sex, yet expect Shirley to initiate facts about her chromosomal status or medical history which will have no impact on their night at all?

Of course it has no impact on the TS. He wants to be a woman afterall. So telling guys that he is in reality not a real women would result in him not having sex. Which is of course egoistical. But thats just how humans roll.




Personally i dont want to have sex with asian men. Am i asian-men-phobic?

 

[Penumbra]

The OPs story tells us that they spent a night together. Nowhere does it say that he enjoyed or hated it. So wether or not it affected him is pretty much just guessing.

The OP did say that Tom only found out from a friend; he didn't derive it from the event itself.

So if a man only has anal sex it should be alright if he had sex with another man. After all the rear exit of a man is just like the one of a woman.

They might have had vaginal intercourse. It doesn't specify what kind of intercourse they had.

There's more to a person than what hole is being used. If a man has anal sex with someone who is actually a man, then that man has testosterone in him and all the effects that come from it.

I work in a scientific field and just because a doctor thinks that its like this doesnt mean that its like this.Most of the time there is an agenda so obviously one is right while everyone else is wrong.

It's not just "a doctor".

In that other thread, Falvlun quoted a good source for the thread, the World Health Organization:

Humans are born with 46 chromosomes in 23 pairs. The X and Y chromosomes determine a person’s sex. Most women are 46XX and most men are 46XY. Research suggests, however, that in a few births per thousand some individuals will be born with a single sex chromosome (45X or 45Y) (sex monosomies) and some with three or more sex chromosomes (47XXX, 47XYY or 47XXY, etc.) (sex polysomies). In addition, some males are born 46XX due to the translocation of a tiny section of the sex determining region of the Y chromosome. Similarly some females are also born 46XY due to mutations in the Y chromosome. Clearly, there are not only females who are XX and males who are XY, but rather, there is a range of chromosome complements, hormone balances, and phenotypic variations that determine sex.
The biological differences between men and women result from two processes: sex determination and differentiation.(3) The biological process of sex determination controls whether the male or female sexual differentiation pathway will be followed. The process of biological sex differentiation (development of a given sex) involves many genetically regulated, hierarchical developmental steps. More than 95% of the Y chromosome is male-specific (4) and a single copy of the Y chromosome is able to induce testicular differentiation of the embryonic gonad. The Y chromosome acts as a dominant inducer of male phenotype and individuals having four X chromosomes and one Y chromosome (49XXXXY) are phenotypically male. (5) When a Y chromosome is present, early embryonic testes develop around the 10th week of pregnancy. In the absence of both a Y chromosome and the influence of a testis-determining factor (TDF), ovaries develop.

Females with XY and males with XX...

Plus there's the fact that women with CAIS (XY chromosomes) are assigned female by doctors practically everywhere, even when they know about the chromosome situation.

Iam really not up for a basic biology lesson.

Toms.
Never claimed something else.

Of course it has no impact on the TS. He wants to be a woman afterall. So telling guys that he is in reality not a real women would result in him not having sex. Which is of course egoistical. But thats just how humans roll.

What makes her not a woman?

Personally i dont want to have sex with asian men. Am i asian-men-phobic?

It depends, why not?

 

[Ouroboros]

My questions:

1. Was Tom wrong to suddenly reject Shirley on the basis that she is transgender?
2. Should Shirley be obligated to tell Tom her birth gender before consent?
3. Is it wrong for cisgender individuals to only prefer other cisgender individuals, to the exclusion of transgender people?

I think Tom was too quick to jump in bed with Shirley. Perhaps he should have dated a little longer to figure things out and give Shirley a chance to open up and explain?

Btw, what is "cis" that you're using? I haven't seen that before.

 

[Koldo]

I think Tom was too quick to jump in bed with Shirley. Perhaps he should have dated a little longer to figure things out and give Shirley a chance to open up and explain?

Btw, what is "cis" that you're using? I haven't seen that before.

Cisgender - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Aquitaine]

I think Tom was too quick to jump in bed with Shirley. Perhaps he should have dated a little longer to figure things out and give Shirley a chance to open up and explain?

Btw, what is "cis" that you're using? I haven't seen that before.

I believe it refers to the majority of non-trans people.

 

[Koldo]

What reasoning? You don't like the fact that I'm referring to the way Tom is behaving as having a phobia, and keep saying that it's about being "mislead".

The fact? Now your view is a fact?
That he was mislead is only relevant if it was reasonable for him to make the assumption he made, and if it was reasonable for her to know that many men would be unwilling to have sex with her if they knew she was a trans woman. I have already stated this reasoning long ago.

The only reason to freak out and consider oneself to be mislead, deceived, violated, and so forth, rather than simply choosing to not to have sex with her again (or choosing to continue to have sex with her), is due to a disproportionate emotional reaction about invisible, non-harmful aspects of her chromosomes or medical history.

On what standards are you passing this judgment that it is disproportionate? I think you might be putting yourself too much into the situation and ignoring that different people are... well... different.

I think deliberately causing rational fear would be.

In a movie once, these guys threw a de-fanged cobra at another man. He of course responded with fear and panic- he might have gotten hurt and the snake might have gotten hurt, even though the snake wasn't really a threat. If the man or the snake was hurt, their actions would take a big part of the blame.

But if we lie in a racist society, and a man sleeps with a woman who is 1/4th black, and freaks out about it after finding out, she didn't harm him- that's his thing. He's freaking out. Similarly, if we live in a homophobic or transphobic society, a man sleeps with a woman who has XY chromosomes and no uterus, and freaks out about it after finding out, she didn't harm him- that's his thing. He could just choose not to sleep with her anymore if it's a dealbreaker to him.

Did this hypothetical person who broke into your house deliberately cause fear on you?