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

[DallasApple]

Also, if someone wants to have that much entitlement and is so picky about the details, why does he have a one-night stand to begin with?

This is the one thing (even though I would not say that detail is "picky") I agree with.As far as a one night stand goes.Just like he "assumed" she was not a trans woman or never even gave it a single thought she may have assumed it wouldn't make any difference or maybe not even given it a single thought. Because they JUST met each other !

 

[Shadow Wolf]

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?

He is not wrong, although it makes no since to suddenly reject someone for such an issue over casual sex. It's usually a good idea to get to know someone before you have sex with them, because anyone can share needles, shoot up between the toes, and claim they are DDF. Really he has only himself to blame for not taking the most basic precautions with sex.
No, she shouldn't. If she still has a penis she will need to proceed with caution. If she has a vagina, she should still proceed with caution because it is a risk that some men will blow-up and turn violent over the idea of sleeping with a woman who used to be a man. It's illogical, it makes no real attack on their masculinity (after all it's not like they stuck there weiner in a dude's butt-hole), but it's how people are.
Really it depends. Is it wrong for people to have attractions and to be turned-off by certain things? Absolutely not. But for many people the focus is solely on that fact, and many times they had no problem at all with someone like Shirley until they found out, which makes it a narrow-minded and is more ways in which transsexuals are socially still often times deeply excluded from the normal crowd of the sex they identify as. It's also skin-deep, shallow, immature, and dumb. As for what should be revealed to a potential partner, should I mention it to any potential partners that I can pick locks or that I used to know how to hack into computers?

 

[Koldo]

"Felt mislead" makes it sound like he was tricked into something harmful against his will. How does her being a transgender matter in the first place if he doesn't notice it and enjoys having sex with her?

He probably wouldn't have had sex with her.

Okay, I have a question, now that you brought this up: Do you think any two people who are about to have sex with each other are obligated to share their entire medical history with each other? If they are, then why? And if not, then why are you arguing differently in the case of the transgendered person in the hypothetical?

I have talked about it much earlier on this topic.
But i don't mind saying it again:

1) It was reasonable for him to assume she was not a trans woman.
2) She knew that many people wouldn't have sex with her if she told them she is a trans woman.

You don't need to tell anyone you are going to have sex with about your medical history unless you know its particular content is a deal breaker to many people and that it is reasonable for the other person to assume you don't have this particular medical history.

 

[Poeticus]

You don't need to tell anyone you are going to have sex with about your medical history unless you know its particular content is a deal breaker to many people and that it is reasonable for the other person to assume you don't have this particular medical history.

Bingo.

Everyone on this thread has been afraid so far with pointing that out. Thanks for being the one to point it out. This is something that must be talked about.

 

[Penumbra]

Bingo.

Everyone on this thread has been afraid so far with pointing that out. Thanks for being the one to point it out. This is something that must be talked about.

I've already addressed that point, repeatedly.

I'll ask you the question that I've asked other people.

In a white racist society, is a woman with partial black ancestry ethically in the wrong (not just potentially unwise for her own safety or anything like that) if she has casual sex with a white man, who may be racist, without mentioning her ancestry, in the chance that he will feel violated and deceived if he finds out?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He probably wouldn't have had sex with her.

He did have the sexual attraction though. If he had slept with someone and had caught HIV, do we say "oh poor Tom," or do we not sugar-coat the fact he should have gotten to know someone before hand, especially if he has such strong turn-offs. If you are turned off by sexually dominate women, or "weird, unusuall, or perverted things" then it's a good idea to try to not put yourself into that situation.

I have talked about it much earlier on this topic.
But i don't mind saying it again:

1) It was reasonable for him to assume she was not a trans woman.
2) She knew that many people wouldn't have sex with her if she told them she is a trans woman.

That's the point of a fling though. They are for the rush, the thrill, the excitement. Sometimes you'll even do someone you normally wouldn't.

You don't need to tell anyone you are going to have sex with about your medical history unless you know its particular content is a deal breaker to many people and that it is reasonable for the other person to assume you don't have this particular medical history.

Again, if you have strong turn-offs and insecurities then you need to get to know people. If you was pokin' a girls vagina and later learned that vagina used to be a penis, then it is only your own fault for not protecting yourself.

 

[Poeticus]

In a white racist society, is a woman with partial black ancestry ethically in the wrong (not just potentially unwise for her own safety or anything like that) if she has casual sex with a white man, who may be racist, without mentioning her ancestry, in the chance that he will feel violated and deceived if he finds out?

After spending way too much time trolling the horrid site known as Stormfront, I believe that racists (particularly white racists) will always make sure that the person of interest that they wish to have a sexual relationship with will have white genes many generations back. No "ifs" and no "buts". So, the scenario you give, is probably unlikely. But, it depends on what your vision of a white racist is like and what my vision of a white racist is like.

I also asked you earlier if racism is an appropriate metaphor for this situation. Do you think it is an appropriate metaphor?

And, when you say "a woman with partial black ancestry"....do you mean a cis-woman or trans-woman? I just want to be sure. If a cis-woman didn't mention her black ancestry to the white racist - that would be funny. Why? Because that is not as serious as the situation of Tom and Shirley. Skin color is skin deep. This, on the other hand, is much deeper than that and more complex. I believe (and please, it's just my belief, don't hang me) using race-issues as a metaphor for this event of the OP is downplaying the seriousness of this issue of Tom and Shirley.

 

[Penumbra]

After spending way too much time trolling the horrid site known as Stormfront, I believe that racists (particularly white racists) will always make sure that the person of interest that they wish to have a sexual relationship with will have white genes many generations back. No "ifs" and no "buts". So, the scenario you give, is probably unlikely. But, it depends on what your vision of a white racist is like and what my vision of a white racist is like.

I'm sure plenty of people that were not 100% caucasian have slept with racist caucasions, in history.

I also asked you earlier if racism is an appropriate metaphor for this situation. Do you think it is an appropriate metaphor?

Sure, I think it's appropriate.

And, when you say "a woman with partial black ancestry"....do you mean a cis-woman or trans-woman? I just want to be sure. If a cis-woman didn't mention her black ancestry to the white racist - that would be funny. Why?

I meant any woman, statistically probably not a transsexual woman.

Because that is not as serious as the situation of Tom and Shirley. Skin color is skin deep. This, on the other hand, is much deeper than that and more complex. I believe (and please, it's just my belief, don't hang me) using race-issues as a metaphor for this event of the OP is downplaying the seriousness of this issue of Tom and Shirley.

What is makes this issue so serious?

 

[Poeticus]

I'm sure plenty of people that were not 100% caucasian have slept with racist caucasions, in history.

In history, yes. But, I see what you did there.

What is makes this issue so serious?

Really? Race vs trans? Two different universes. We can address the Tom and Shirley issue because it is serious enough to be addressed. Racism is something that children and adults need to grow out of.

 

[Penumbra]

In history, yes. But, I see what you did there.

Really? Race vs trans? Two different universes. We can address the Tom and Shirley issue because it is serious enough to be addressed. Racism is something that children and adults need to grow out of.

I think you know that wasn't an answer to what I asked.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Personally I think the whole debate is related to the "blame the woman" attitude our society has. If she didn't want to get raped, she shouldn't have work that outfit and she shouldn't have been drunk. If she didn't want abused she shouldn't have flirted with him. If she didn't want to get beaten, she should have told him about her past. Because after all we all know that men cannot control themselves, cannot think for themselves, require constant supervision, and cannot be held liable for their own actions; women OTOH are the ones who are supposed to account for it all.

 

[DallasApple]

After that, Tom is angry, and refuses to approach Shirley.

This is the reason is keep saying "refusing to go further in the relationship".What was he refusing to approach her for? If it was an over and done one night stand and neither one was interested in going any further .Even if only just for more sex what was he supposed to be approaching her for?

 

[Poeticus]

To Penumbra:

Oh, my b. I meant that:
Both are two complicated and different things that have a variety of variables that need to be understood before using one or the other to explain the absurdity of Tom's freaking out on Shirley.

 

[Poeticus]

Personally I think the whole debate is related to the "blame the woman" attitude our society has. If she didn't want to get raped, she shouldn't have work that outfit and she shouldn't have been drunk. If she didn't want abused she shouldn't have flirted with him. If she didn't want to get beaten, she should have told him about her past. Because after all we all know that men cannot control themselves, cannot think for themselves, require constant supervision, and cannot be held liable for their own actions; women OTOH are the ones who are supposed to account for it all.

Oh no you just didn't, gurrrrl!

opcorn:

EDIT: So, instead of rape myth acceptance. Tom is guilty of "trans-women-are-not-women-acceptance"?

 

[DallasApple]

Personally I think the whole debate is related to the "blame the woman" attitude our society has. If she didn't want to get raped, she shouldn't have work that outfit and she shouldn't have been drunk. If she didn't want abused she shouldn't have flirted with him. If she didn't want to get beaten, she should have told him about her past. Because after all we all know that men cannot control themselves, cannot think for themselves, require constant supervision, and cannot be held liable for their own actions; women OTOH are the ones who are supposed to account for it all.

I agree with all that..except what did Tom do wrong to her?Refusing to "approach her" is not a violation against her rights .Contrary to being raped or beaten .

That he was angry and felt deceived and the action he took because of it was to what sounds like never speak to her again ...can not be compared to a man raping or beating a woman and blaming it on her.

 

[Poeticus]

That he was angry and felt deceived and the action he took because of it was to what sounds like never speak to her again ...can not be compared to a man raping or beating a woman and blaming it on her.

I am beginning to get the feeling that Tom is guilty of "trans-women-are-not-women-and-a-man-that-doesn't-sleep-with-them-is-transphobic-acceptance". Your thoughts?

 

[DallasApple]

Most people on this thread even if they think hes a jerk..pretty much agree on the question was he 'wrong' to reject her that the answer is no .Hes not 'wrong". Its ALWAYS wrong to rape and beat a woman(or anyone for that matter).That's not even a question .

 

[Poeticus]

Most people on this thread even if they think hes a jerk..pretty much agree on the question was he 'wrong' to reject her that the answer is no .Hes not 'wrong". Its ALWAYS wrong to rape and beat a woman(or anyone for that matter).That's not even a question .

Yes. I am surprised that Shadow Wolf used such a metaphor in order to compare the situation of Tom and Shirley. Tom didn't rape Shirley. He didn't beat her up after he was told that she is a trans-woman. Tom just ignored her from there on.

Shadow, why did you use rape as a metaphor to compare Tom's reaction to Shirley? Tom didn't blame it on women or anything like that. As far as we know, he may have ignored her because he was angry with himself for thinking she was a female and didn't realize earlier that she wasn't a cis-female.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Yes. I am surprised that Shadow Wolf used such a metaphor in order to compare the situation of Tom and Shirley. Tom didn't rape Shirley. He didn't beat her up after he was told that she is a trans-woman. Tom just ignored her from there on.

Shadow, why did you use rape as a metaphor to compare Tom's reaction to Shirley? Tom didn't blame it on women or anything like that. As far as we know, he may have ignored her because he was angry with himself for thinking she was a female and didn't realize earlier that she wasn't a cis-female.

No, SW brought it up because of the reaction in this thread that places responsibility onto Shirley if Tom is so distressed.

Listen, Tom felt "violated" by Shirley because he didn't know Shirley is a trans-female. I'm not that surprised that suddenly NOW people are arguing against a rape metaphor when from the beginning Tom's feeling "violated" was glossed over as either a non-issue, or even that he really was legitimately violated by Shirley.

Where's the arguments against that? Tom was violated? Please.

Try being attacked and left by the side of the road to die. Try being threatened with your life. Try being held hostage and tortured. But finding out one had sex with a transgendered person on a one night stand and calling that being violated?

Not. Even. Close.

 

[DallasApple]

Yeah that's what I was thinking Mystic .But rather the part about him (or some posters I guess) believing she was obligated to tell him therefore its her fault now he has these feelings.

And yes I agree he wasn't "violated" just because he 'felt" like he was I only wanted to speculate as to WHY he might feel that way.My best guess is due to ignorance he honestly believed that Shirley was a man that posed as a woman and he fell for it .

I didn't gloss over that word for one second.I know what its like actually BE violated myself and the feelings that come with it as a result.Again I was trying to "guess" why he would feel that way.