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

[Poeticus]

Yeah..but apparently it seems having a preference makes one a bigot.

And, that's the problem of those that misunderstand us.

 

[Penumbra]

It reaches a point for me that you are a BIGOT basically a hater of whole groups if you do not want to have sex with them.

To be "non bigoted" you have to be emotionally and psychologically fine with having sex with anyone .If you have a problem with it you are a hater,evil and need psychiatric care to "fix" your problem why it matters who you have sex with.

That would be a straw man argument, rather than something that addresses what people have said.

No one is saying Tom has to be attracted to Shirley. Maybe her appearance or personality isn't right for him. What people are saying is that if he was attracted to her appearance, apparently didn't have a problem with her personality, but then upon learning she is trans has some issue with her that he can't articulate coherently (neither about personality or appearance), then yeah, that's into phobia territory.

But even then, Tom doesn't really have to go about this in a bad way. He could choose not to have casual sex with that person again, remaining polite, and so forth. Instead, he considers himself violated and deceived by her, because she didn't explain a medical history or chromosomal status before having casual sex with a man, because she didn't put a qualifier on her womanhood for him, and he felt entitled that she should bring it up with him rather than him bring it up with her.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Sorry to use the dictionary... but serioulsy I was wondering if I don't know the definition of bigotry...Here is one..



I do not think what little info that was provided about Tom makes him a bigot.He may be..but calling him that based on what info was provided ?Does not qualify..

Excuse me, I have to disagree. Tom wigged out and became angry, and he felt violated. You think that ought to be minimized to a simple preference?

Tom's a bigot. Plain and simple. Your definition, I think, was appropriate given the information that was given in the OP. I prefer dark-haired people over light-haired people, but I'm not going to completely freak out if I slept with somebody who isn't a real brunette.

 

[Koldo]

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 would still say ''oh poor Tom''. This does not mean he has no responsibility on it though.
You seem to neglect that even if you know someone for a considerable time, it doesn't make the chance for anything like that disappear. You just make it lower.

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.

It is up to each individual to determine what they are up to.

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.

I will repeat what i said on the top:
You seem to neglect that even if you know someone for a considerable time, it doesn't make the chance for anything like that disappear. You just make it lower.

 

[Sunstone]

I'd sure want to know someone's background before humping them. But that's only because of my insufferable curiosity. I don't think I'd be upset if a transgendered person didn't tell me until after we'd had sex. Hell, if I know myself, I'd probably write to my mom about it. "Mom! Guess who surprised me today!"

 

[Koldo]

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 don't know why you are saying this.
From my perspective, if Tom was a trans man, and Shirley a cisgender woman, and she felt mislead, i would have used the same arguments to say that Tom should have told her about it beforehand.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't know why you are saying this.
From my perspective, if Tom was a trans man, and Shirley a cisgender woman, and she felt mislead, i would have used the same arguments to say that Tom should have told her about it beforehand.

Except you really don't hear about cis-women throwing a fit over a guy who used to be a gal like you do men who sometimes are thrown into violent fits of rage and anger upon discovering they slept with a gal who used to be a guy. And again, it is the responsibility of the individual to take necessary precautions to reduce unwanted sexual encounters, not the person you decide to have sex with.

You seem to neglect that even if you know someone for a considerable time, it doesn't make the chance for anything like that disappear. You just make it lower.

And had Tom known Shirley for more than a the evening, he may have found out that she really doesn't match his image of a suitable partner. He could also be civil about ending it rather than being a little kid and pretending if he ignores it everything will go away and be better tomorrow.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

What people are saying is that if he was attracted to her appearance, apparently didn't have a problem with her personality, but then upon learning she is trans has some issue with her that he can't articulate coherently (neither about personality or appearance), then yeah, that's into phobia territory.

So personality and/or appearance are the only valid source of preferences?

There are many men i recognise as being extremely attractive, but I have no desire to enter into a homosexual relationship. There are many married women I recognise as being extremely wonderful people, but I have no desire to enter into a adulterous relationship. Or an incestuous one, or...

Ideological criteria are every bit as valid as whether or not I like the shape of a girl's rear. And one can easily and coherently point to such issues (rather than with many personality issues such as 'chemistry') and explain them in a principled and reasoned manner; I would want to know if my potential partner were transgendered, it would have a not insignificant impact on my decision of whether or not to have sex with them as I do not desire to enter into what borders (it isnt really) on a homosexual relationship, I would potentially like to have biological children, identification of whether or not they were legally classified as a woman (and thus issues such as potential for marriage etc) and so forth.

I might still enter into the relationship, but it is a relevant factor for consideration and indeed were I to decide that the benefits of the proposed relationship were insufficient to offset the detriments (opportunity costs for example) then I would not feel it warranted for such an ideological criteria to be deemed bigotry.

 

[Breathe]

How is it important?

Because she used to be a guy.
There's a high chance that isn't going to go down well if he finds out later on.

Tom may feel like he slept with a guy. Not a girl. He may feel he was deceived by this omission. He may feel deceived by not having the option of choosing it.

And yet Shirley's past apparently didn't affect Tom's perception of their night. So, he's having an issue with an invisible problem, a fear of a concept rather than a lack of attraction for an individual.

But it's not a mere concept. She is still, chromosomally, a man.

And yet, that doesn't really have any bearing on their night of casual sex. It didn't affect his perception of her appearance, nor did it affect anything about her character up until the point of his being told about it.

For transgender people, the stacks of studies point to hormones being the critical variable for forming a gender identity in a fetus. So if we're being technical, she likely always had a female gender identity, and at some point began altering her body to become female as well.

See above.

-It was not Shirley's appearance that Tom had an issue with.
-It was, as far as we can tell, not Shirley's personality that Tom had an issue with.
-Instead, Tom had an issue with invisible parts of her that do not affect him, and for casual sex. And rather than choosing not to simply have intercourse again, he felt deceived and violated by her, and considers her unethical, for not being the one to volunteer information about herself, to put a qualifier on her own womanhood for his fear of invisible information.

See above.

Even if you disagree with his opinion, Tom felt he had sex with a guy by means of lying through omission. There is a chance Tom would not have had sex with Shirley but Tom was denied that right when Shirley did not mention it to him.

As far as Tom is concerned, Shirley lied to him.

Oh, I rarely try to change anyone's opinion. Not worth it.

I debate for the audience.

Then I'd rather not debate with you further on this. I prefer discussion and debate for understanding each other's perspective, not pandering to an audience.

If I wanted to pander to an audience I'd join the drama group my wife teaches.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Because she used to be a guy.
There's a high chance that isn't going to go down well if he finds out later on.

Tom may feel like he slept with a guy. Not a girl. He may feel he was deceived by this omission. He may feel deceived by not having the option of choosing it.


But it's not a mere concept. She is still, chromosomally, a man.


See above.


See above.

Even if you disagree with his opinion, Tom felt he had sex with a guy by means of lying through omission. There is a chance Tom would not have had sex with Shirley but Tom was denied that right when Shirley did not mention it to him.

As far as Tom is concerned, Shirley lied to him.


Then I'd rather not debate with you further on this. I prefer discussion and debate for understanding each other's perspective, not pandering to an audience.

If I wanted to pander to an audience I'd join the drama group my wife teaches.

How is it Shirley's fault though that Tom did not take the time to get know his potential partner better before sleeping with her?

 

[Breathe]

How is it Shirley's fault though that Tom did not take the time to get know his potential partner better before sleeping with her?

Trans folk are a small minority.

Should Tom have assumed any different? Possibly.

Who said anything about 'fault'?

 

[Koldo]

Except you really don't hear about cis-women throwing a fit over a guy who used to be a gal like you do men who sometimes are thrown into violent fits of rage and anger upon discovering they slept with a gal who used to be a guy. And again, it is the responsibility of the individual to take necessary precautions to reduce unwanted sexual encounters, not the person you decide to have sex with.

How many times did this situation happen?
How many times a person had sex with another and only found out much later that this person is not a cisgender?

I would suspect the answer is: very few.

Are there less trans men who have undergone a gender reassignment surgery than trans women? Most certainly.
Could this situation have happened with a trans man and a cisgender woman? Most certainly.

And had Tom known Shirley for more than a the evening, he may have found out that she really doesn't match his image of a suitable partner. He could also be civil about ending it rather than being a little kid and pretending if he ignores it everything will go away and be better tomorrow.

Or, he might not have found out about it by himself even months later.
Which is exactly what i was talking about.

 

[Debater Slayer]

He probably wouldn't have had sex with her.

But he doesn't recognize that she's a transgender; why should she assume that people are going to reject her for nothing more than a medical detail? If we were talking about a long-term relationship where Tom would want to know his partner well before investing time into the relationship, you might have a point, but this hypothetical is different.

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.

You said that it was reasonable for him to assume she was not a transgender, indicating that he wasn't able to discern any difference between her and a cisgendered woman. In light of that, why should it be assumed that people wouldn't have sex with her if they found out she's a transgender? It sounds like you're expecting her to accommodate any possible irrational discrimination on his part. Do you expect that of any other group, or is it exclusive to transgenders?

And again, if Tom feels so entitled to know about such things regarding people's medical history, then he has no business having one-night stands in the first place.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Because she used to be a guy.
There's a high chance that isn't going to go down well if he finds out later on.

In other words, transfolk need to know their place. Is that correct?

Tom may feel like he slept with a guy. Not a girl. He may feel he was deceived by this omission. He may feel deceived by not having the option of choosing it.

This assumption is based on ignorance of transgendered people. It can be remedied through education about them, however.

But it's not a mere concept. She is still, chromosomally, a man.

After all this debate and you are still clinging to the notion that Shirley is a man? How do you respond to the resources linked by Penumbra and Falvlun? Are you telling Shadow Wolf she doesn't know her own gender, and is in denial about who she really is?

Even if you disagree with his opinion, Tom felt he had sex with a guy by means of lying through omission. There is a chance Tom would not have had sex with Shirley but Tom was denied that right when Shirley did not mention it to him.

There is a chance she'll be rejected...based on popular opinion about transgender people? And Shirley needs to act accordingly that she is not a "real" woman?

In other words, if that is correct, Shirley once again needs to know her place.

As far as Tom is concerned, Shirley lied to him.

As far as Tom is concerned, he is perceiving Shirley through a lens of ignorance and bigotry. People who operate from that lens are apt to take whatever actions or non-actions as some imagined threat to their security or happiness.

Then I'd rather not debate with you further on this. I prefer discussion and debate for understanding each other's perspective, not pandering to an audience.

If I wanted to pander to an audience I'd join the drama group my wife teaches.

Here's the thing though, Breathe, there are decades of research to back up what Penumbra has been saying all along. At the moment, it seems as if you only want people to feel that Tom is justified in his anger and hostility. I get that Tom is angry, but to suggest that Shirley did anything wrong for being who she is and engaging in the same activity that Tom engaged in is quite a stretch in ethics.

This is why I feel Tom is overreacting and would do well to learn more about transgendered people to realize he didn't sleep with a freak, he didn't sleep with a guy, and he didn't do anything wrong by enjoying himself. And if he has friends who are giving him a hard time about it, he can enlighten them about the reality of transgendered people too.

 

[dawny0826]

I understand. But, wouldn't that make all men that prefer cis-females transphobic then? The only prejudice I see is that he doesn't want to engage in intercourse. But, in the universe I offered, Tom and Shirley were still great friends and I am sure Tom would help her out no matter the cost. They just wouldn't sleep together. The OP's Tom is a transphobe, surely.

EDIT: I get what you are saying, never mind. I had to re-read that underlined portion quite a few times. My b. Yeah, he harbors an unexplained prejudice and fear against females that are transitioned. So, yes, there is some transphobic attitude underlying it when it comes to him not wanting to have sex with the female. I see.

Cool. A man wo would prefer a cis-female would have a preference for a particular type of female. That doens't necessarily translate to a phobia or prejudice against other women.

 

[Koldo]

But he doesn't recognize that she's a transgender; why should she assume that people are going to reject her for nothing more than a medical detail? If we were talking about a long-term relationship where Tom would want to know his partner well before investing time into the relationship, you might have a point, but this hypothetical is different.

Because she is not naive.

You said that it was reasonable for him to assume she was not a transgender, indicating that he wasn't able to discern any difference between her and a cisgendered woman.In light of that, why should it be assumed that people wouldn't have sex with her if they found out she's a transgender? It sounds like you're expecting her to accommodate any possible irrational discrimination on his part. Do you expect that of any other group, or is it exclusive to transgenders?

Do you mean to say you think that would not happen frequently?
We could make a poll about that if that happens to be case.
I doubt it would properly represent our societies but it could be interesting nevertheless. We could even agree on how the OP and title will be written before doing so.

And again, if Tom feels so entitled to know about such things regarding people's medical history, then he has no business having one-night stands in the first place.

Who are you to say such a thing?

 

[Koldo]

I get that Tom is angry, but to suggest that Shirley did anything wrong for being who she is and engaging in the same activity that Tom engaged in is quite a stretch in ethics.

It is also quite a stretch to what he is saying.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

It is also quite a stretch to what he is saying.

Orly?

What kind of responsibility do you feel Tom has in his part of the OP?

 

[Koldo]

Orly?

What kind of responsibility do you feel Tom has in his part of the OP?

What does this have to do with what you said on that quote?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Because she is not naive.

I guess one must assume everyone is irrationally prejudiced against minorities to not be "naive."

Do you mean to say you think that would not happen frequently?
We could make a poll about that if that happens to be case.
I doubt it would properly represent our societies but it could be interesting nevertheless. We could even agree on how the OP and title will be written before doing so.

No, that's not what I meant; I'm talking about that particular situation where Tom couldn't even discern anything indicating that Shirley was a transgender. Unless there is some sort of obligation on her part to accommodate potential bigotry, then there's no reason to assume she must tell him about being a transgender.

Who are you to say such a thing?

Who is anyone to say transgenders are obligated to accommodate prejudice?