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

[Wherenextcolumbus]

What makes you think Tom has gay anxiety?

why would anyone have a problem with sleeping with someone they want to sleep with who they are attracted to?

 

[vtunie]

Why would anyone think gay anxiety is to be condemned in the context of allowing bodily interpenetration?

 

[Koldo]

why would anyone have a problem with sleeping with someone they want to sleep with who they are attracted to?

Do you enjoy being mislead?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Why would anyone think gay anxiety is to be condemned in the context of allowing bodily interpenetration?

I am not following?

 

[Koldo]

Why would anyone think gay anxiety is to be condemned in the context of allowing bodily interpenetration?

I am not sure i comprehend what you mean by this...
Whan she means by 'gay anxiety' is to feel anxious about you yourself possibly being gay.

 

[vtunie]

I am not following?

I am talking about Tom's unwillingness to continue the relationship. OK, not "gay anxiety", but rather homophobia as some would put it, coming closer to the palpable wrong of condemning someone for their own straight and unmodified sexual preference. Tom's lack of tact the way the way he dumped her is NOT to be confused with his desire to end their relationship.

Now, Shirley's change of sex was done exactly to relieve her gay anxiety. It is now in the past -- if she is wise enough to less her past pass into oblivion.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I am talking about Tom's unwillingness to continue the relationship. OK, not "gay anxiety", but rather homophobia as some would put it, coming closer to the palpable wrong of condemning someone for their own straight and unmodified sexual preference. Tom's lack of tact the way the way he dumped her is NOT to be confused with his desire to end their relationship.

Now, Shirley's change of sex was done exactly to relieve her gay anxiety. It is now in the past -- if she is wise enough to less her past pass into oblivion.

He never dumped her, they weren't in a relationship it was a one night stand, he found out from a mutual friend that she is trans.

Transsexuals do not change their sex because they are afraid of being seen as gay.

 

[DallasApple]

I think maybe the problem is that Tom "thinks" he was deceived into having sex with a MAN by someone "posing" as a female and he is heterosexual.I think Tom rather than being a bigot just doesn't want to have sex with a man .He's confused.That's why I think instead of talking about how "wrong" he is how he reacted...maybe its better to try and understand he is uneducated/ignorant to what a trans sexual is.That he had sex with a WOMAN.Yeah trans woman but woman none the less.

 

[Flankerl]

No. His choice. If he doesn't want to be with a transgender, that is his choice.


Before intercourse or dating, yes.
Otherwise, I would consider it deceitful.


Short answer: no. Choice.

I agree.


So what is a man and a woman? A man impregnates the woman and they get children. These children grow older and it begins anew. Kinda like in nature. Amazing!
Of course there are defects, men who cant produce sperm or women incapable of giving birth.
But they are called defects for a reason. So using them as a point in favour of transgenderism is kinda... stupid.


Also i hate the term cis. Iam not cis. Iam a woman.

A post-op MTF is a woman.

Do i really have to quote the big lebowski?

 

[Penumbra]

Lies.

Not a lie. You asked how many women with testicles I know.

There's a trans woman at work, I don't know about her genitals and it's none of my business. I knew a trans man for quite a while, and knew one particular trans woman in college quite well who I know still did have testicles.

What makes him an homophobic?

Other than homophobia and transphobia, which are related, what could his problem be?

A phobia is defined as an irrational fear.

If a woman isn't into vaginas and doesn't want to date a trans man with a vagina (which some have), or a man isn't attracted to a particular trans woman that still has fairly masculine physical attributes (which some do), then these are rational for them. If they're not attracted to someone, then they're not attracted to someone. Not a big deal.

But in the example, Tom was clearly emotionally and physically interested in Shirley, and they apparently enjoyed sex together. It was only well after the fact that he was told about her trans history, which has no physical effect on him and doesn't really have anything to do with him. This is someone he was attracted to, yet due to invisible information, he freaks out. Probably because he thinks he "slept with a man" or something, even though that's not the case- he slept with a trans woman.

What is he afraid of after the fact? Cooties?

So it was reasonable for him to assume she was not a trans woman.

Yes, it is.

I disagree. Looks like we're at an impasse.

It is not your place to tell what what he consented on.

He was attracted to her, and it's clearly a phobia in hindsight.

his reaction, it is clear he didn't consent to have sex with a trans woman.

And she didn't give consent to have sex with a transphobic man. Turns out in hindsight, that's who she consented to.

The point is not whether it is smart, it is about whether it is reasonable.
She is not a child either, so she should have developed enough empathy to put herself into his shoes.

Why is his phobia her problem? She didn't harm him.

So?

So why is your argument valid for him?

So, whether it is right or wrong relies solely on the basis of harm?

Should you not debate people in case you might trigger irrational sadness in them? Is that your responsibility?

It's your responsibility not to harm people, up to a point. If a person is HIV positive, and sleeping with them puts someone at a risk, it's ethical to actively disclose this fact. There's a potential for actual harm. But a person doesn't have to actively disclose ethnic status or number of partners slept with or non-harmful medical history in case any of these facts, which have nothing to do with him, trigger a phobia in him.

 

[Koldo]

Other than homophobia and transphobia, which are related, what could his problem be?

A phobia is defined as an irrational fear.

If a woman isn't into vaginas and doesn't want to date a trans man with a vagina (which some have), or a man isn't attracted to a particular trans woman that still has fairly masculine physical attributes (which some do), then these are rational for them. If they're not attracted to someone, then they're not attracted to someone. Not a big deal.

But in the example, Tom was clearly emotionally and physically interested in Shirley, and they apparently enjoyed sex together. It was only well after the fact that he was told about her trans history, which has no physical effect on him and doesn't really have anything to do with him. This is someone he was attracted to, yet due to invisible information, he freaks out. Probably because he thinks he "slept with a man" or something, even though that's not the case- he slept with a trans woman.

What is he afraid of after the fact? Cooties?

Taken directly from the OP:

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.

That is his problem with this matter.

I disagree. Looks like we're at an impasse.

Except i have offered a good reason as to why you should agree with me. While you have offered none. Just read about inductive reasoning. That's all.

He was attracted to her, and it's clearly a phobia in hindsight.

It is clearly phobia, in your opinion. So what?

And she didn't give consent to have sex with a transphobic man. Turns out in hindsight, that's who she consented to.

He is transphobic, in your opinion. So what?

Why is his phobia her problem? She didn't harm him.

A loaded question is a loaded question.

So why is your argument valid for him?

Why would two wrongs make a right?

Should you not debate people in case you might trigger irrational sadness in them? Is that your responsibility?

If you have sufficient reason to believe it will trigger sadness on them, it is.

It's your responsibility not to harm people, up to a point. If a person is HIV positive, and sleeping with them puts someone at a risk, it's ethical to actively disclose this fact. There's a potential for actual harm. But a person doesn't have to actively disclose ethnic status or number of partners slept with or non-harmful medical history in case any of these facts, which have nothing to do with him, trigger a phobia in him.

I will ask again: So, whether it is right or wrong relies solely on the basis of harm?

 

[DallasApple]

[QUOTE
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.]

[/QUOTE]

See that's the thing..his "feelings " about it should not be dismissed as "wrong' or somehow bigoted or evil.Maybe they are /.But the assumption that because hes not whoa totally fine means he's a homophobe or bigot is unfair.

Seems like the tolerance level towards those who PERSONALLY have "defined" there sexuality as hetero monogomous are the ones who are under the gun.Like you are a closed minded bigoted red neck if you're sexual preference is straight hetero.And monogomous? I have been through the mill on that one..even though I have not been proven to be 100% monogomous! Im serial monog...BLAHHH!!

Sorry for the rant..

 

[Penumbra]

Taken directly from the OP:

That is his problem with this matter.

On what rational basis should he feel violated?

And what deception did she do?

They were attracted to each other and had casual sex, with no inherent harm done. She never lied about anything.

Except i have offered a good reason as to why you should agree with me. While you have offered none. Just read about inductive reasoning. That's all.

I'm familiar with inductive reasoning. I already said, he would be mathematically likely to be correct if he were to assume that a woman has XX chromosomes. If you see a man, it's likely he has XY chromosomes, and if you see a woman, it's likely she has XX chromosomes.

But would he be "reasonable" to assume that a woman has XX chromosomes, when some do not, if he's going to throw a fit if he's wrong? I'd say definitely not- if that's a hang-up of his then he can inquire about a person's chromosomes or medical history if it's important to him.

It is clearly phobia, in your opinion. So what?

Then that's his deal, not hers.

He is transphobic, in your opinion. So what?

Then that's his deal, not hers.

A loaded question is a loaded question.

Why would two wrongs make a right?

I don't think she did anything wrong.

If you have sufficient reason to believe it will trigger sadness on them, it is.

Why would she have sufficient reason to believe he will be sad about sleeping with her, given that he was attracted to her?

I will ask again: So, whether it is right or wrong relies solely on the basis of harm?

I would say a person has a responsibility to not directly harm someone, and not affect someone in a way where reasonable harm may likely come to them because of what they did. A person is not responsible for assuming the existence of and then being careful not to trigger, irrational fears.

(Examples: Sleeping with someone while being HIV positive and not telling them- thus putting them in the potential for physical harm, sleeping with someone while married and not telling them- thus getting them involved where other people might rightly be furious with them and other issues, etc.)

(Non-examples: Being 1/4th black and sleeping with someone who is racist (but not known to be) and would be distressed to learn that, being an atheist and sleeping with someone who hates atheists (but not known to) and would have a problem with that, having twelve previous sex partners and sleeping with someone who would be distressed to learn that you had any more than six (but not knowing this), being a woman with CAIS or a woman of transsexual history with someone who has a phobia about that (without knowing of their phobia), etc.)

 

[Poeticus]

Dear, Penumbra and Koldo:

Stop arguing.

 

[Penumbra]

Dear, Penumbra and Koldo:

Stop arguing.

No.

Besides, it's a debate topic.

 

[Poeticus]

OoO...what anime is that? Is it FLCL?

 

[ManTimeForgot]

If people are willing and capable of discriminating between trans-woman/man and man/woman, then that means that there is a possible issue with relations. If it were not possible to discriminate between a trans-woman and a man, then we wouldn't have different labels/different conceptions for them. And if it were not possible to discriminate, then there would be no issue in the first place (no one would ever know the difference because there isn't one).

Different conceptions for the same label is a problem endemic to all humans, and I fail to see how one can fairly point the fingers at one group or another without also pointing at yourself and your owns groups. Case in point:

One person in this problem conceives of their self as a trans-woman; the other person conceives of the same person as a man. They are both presented with nearly the same facts, but arrive at different conclusions. Is it possible that if they both had the same facts that they would be able to reconcile their emotions and deal with each other amicably/lovingly? Sure, but how often does that happen, and is it reasonable to assume that people who are dating should be required to involve others at an extraordinarily deep level right from the onset?


Tom has the right to maintain whatever feelings or ideas who deems fit. Tom considers transgenderism to be an issue. Not sure where else you can go on this point.

Shirley is NOT obligated to tell her sexual partners about her being transgender. It might be advisable so as to avoid overly negative reactions that could occur should she run into a violent bigot, but there's compelling moral statute demanding that she do so. That said, she IS obligated to tell a potential spouse (someone she intends to have a long term, personal relationship) that she is transgendered.


Should Tom feel violated as a result of sexual interaction? Perhaps not, but I fail to see how Tom can do anything about it... People's preferences are what they are, and whilst preferences are subject to change, they do not usually change over night (and that often requires a gravely traumatic experience to even get that started). So long as Tom's preferences remain what they are, and sexuality remains an important component of long term personal relationships, then Tom and Shirley are ill-suited to having a long term personal relationship.

MTF

 

[Penumbra]

Tom has the right to maintain whatever feelings or ideas who deems fit. Tom considers transgenderism to be an issue. Not sure where else you can go on this point.

Shirley is NOT obligated to tell her sexual partners about her being transgender. It might be advisable so as to avoid overly negative reactions that could occur should she run into a violent bigot, but there's compelling moral statute demanding that she do so. That said, she IS obligated to tell a potential spouse (someone she intends to have a long term, personal relationship) that she is transgendered.


Should Tom feel violated as a result of sexual interaction? Perhaps not, but I fail to see how Tom can do anything about it... People's preferences are what they are, and whilst preferences are subject to change, they do not usually change over night (and that often requires a gravely traumatic experience to even get that started). So long as Tom's preferences remain what they are, and sexuality remains an important component of long term personal relationships, then Tom and Shirley are ill-suited to having a long term personal relationship.

MTF

I agree.

 

[Koldo]

On what rational basis should he feel violated?

And what deception did she do?

They were attracted to each other and had casual sex, with no inherent harm done. She never lied about anything.

Omission. She allowed him to believe something that wasn't true and a deal breaker.

I'm familiar with inductive reasoning. I already said, he would be mathematically likely to be correct if he were to assume that a woman has XX chromosomes. If you see a man, it's likely he has XY chromosomes, and if you see a woman, it's likely she has XX chromosomes.

But would he be "reasonable" to assume that a woman has XX chromosomes, when some do not, if he's going to throw a fit if he's wrong? I'd say definitely not- if that's a hang-up of his then he can inquire about a person's chromosomes or medical history if it's important to him.

Yes, it is reasonable to assume that a woman has XX chromosomes, when very few don't, even if he is going to throw a fist if he is wrong. These are independent events.

Then that's his deal, not hers.

Then that's his deal, not hers.

You didn't get it.
Considering it is strictly your opinion: so what?

I don't think she did anything wrong.

That is clear from your posts.
Why is this relevant to this particular quote?

Why would she have sufficient reason to believe he will be sad about sleeping with her, given that he was attracted to her?

She has sufficient reason to believe many men wouldn't be interested on sleeping with her if they were aware she is a trans woman.

It is rather naive to claim that a trans woman wouldn't be aware of this.

I would say a person has a responsibility to not directly harm someone, and not affect someone in a way where reasonable harm may likely come to them because of what they did. A person is not responsible for assuming the existence of and then being careful not to trigger, irrational fears.

(Examples: Sleeping with someone while being HIV positive and not telling them- thus putting them in the potential for physical harm, sleeping with someone while married and not telling them- thus getting them involved where other people might rightly be furious with them and other issues, etc.)

(Non-examples: Being 1/4th black and sleeping with someone who is racist (but not known to be) and would be distressed to learn that, being an atheist and sleeping with someone who hates atheists (but not known to) and would have a problem with that, having twelve previous sex partners and sleeping with someone who would be distressed to learn that you had any more than six (but not knowing this), being a woman with CAIS or a woman of transsexual history with someone who has a phobia about that (without knowing of their phobia), etc.)

You didn't answer my question.

 

[DallasApple]

Dear, Penumbra and Koldo:

Stop arguing.

That baby is TOO CUTE!!
Stop posting him!!!I giggle !!!A lot!