Poll: Would you date a transgendered person?

[iLikeHippos]

I believe I fall into the same preferences of sexual appetite, but I would not, unlike half of these Escapists (Who, I am disappointed in) discriminate against any MtF; they shall fall under the exact same category of females I tend to look out for.

Why exactly is it discriminatory to be unattracted to them because of their body's past history as the sex I am unattracted to?

Because it's just that: history, and nothing else. People change, and should be accepted for their present, just as I expect no one will treat me like the uneducated, dumbass-idiot I was four years ago. When their sex and gender is the exact same per their definition with no flaw, I see no reason they stand out from anyone else.

Moreover, that is one of their wishes. To be accepted as who they've chosen to be. I respect that.

So what if it is history? Why is that unacceptable to factor in, in regards to attraction?

Their wishes are irrelevant to how attracted I am to them.

Because said 'history' is painting you a false picture of who they are presently and should not factor into it; it's not like they're hiding an extra penis under those panties or out to get you into a hoax.

It isn't painting a false picture because it isn't about what they look like now. You're making assumptions.

The fear is fictional, unlike their physique and mentality.

The fear you made up is fictional of course.

And it simply isn't fair to disregard what is real when confronted by the fictional fears. It's all in your head when nothing real is wrong.

What's in your head is the idea that there is some fear at work as opposed to a lack of attraction.

So you suppose it isn't a fear in fact, but simply a lack of attraction, because of history?
If you found them attractive to begin with, than found out their secret, and suddenly have the interest-level drop, then I have to ask, if not fear, on what grounds? Why is history important and decisive?

That is why I was confused, seeing as there obviously is a certain social stigma at work (that doesn't need or is forced to be there). They aren't different physically, so a sudden lack of attraction to fall on its own naturally is just absurd.

 

[PinochetIsMyBro]

No, because I don't consider them to be actual women and never will. I'm phrasing this nicely, but in my mind they'll always be men with a mental disorder who've been taken advantage of by a combination of greedy plastic surgeons and medicine companies, combined with "progressive" psychologists who belong in an asylum themselves - because that's exactly what they are.

 

[nekoali]

@PinochetIsMyBro That may be what you believe we are, but your opinion does not make it fact. Your statement is factually untrue on all points.

 

[Scorpid]

I don't find it to be discriminatory to not be attracted to someone because they are transgender. The same as it isn't if you aren't attracted to someone who is say, black, or asian, or Jewish, or a certain age, height, weight or anything else. Discrimination is treating everyone of a certain group poorly just because they are of that group. Or most everyone.. the 'but I've got a gay friend, so I'm not a bigot even though I hate fags' doesn't count.

Everyone has their tastes and preferences in partners. As a transgender woman I don't get offended if someone pulls the 'Well I like you, but you were once a guy so I don't want to date you.' A little misinformed, but I am not offended any more than if someone said "I like you, but you have red hair and I don't date redheads.'

Everyone has their preferences in partners. I don't get upset if I don't fit someone's preferences, and I know there are more people out there who I do fit.

Eww you have red hair, go blond or gtfo.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

No. I would not. A "mTf" transgender is just a man with an unfortunate gender confusion who, instead of being given psychiatric help by his society was set lose to surgically mutilate himself.

Transgender is a different thing from homosexuality or bisexuality entirely despite what political correctness would have you believe. The only negative effects of sexual orientation are those stigmas created by bigoted members of society. For that reason, though they are abnormal (statistically out of the ordinary) mental states, they are in no way mental disorders, hurt nobody, and should be accepted. However, transgender is an abnormal mental state which causes the sufferer to hire a person to physically mutilate them. Ultimately, yes, it is their choice and if we took no actions to hinder people's choices: sure. However, a person suffering from documented depression is not allowed to purchase firearms because society has taken it upon themselves to stop them from doing what they want to do (end their life). Why would it be so wrong for society to stop transgenders from doing what they want (mutilate themselves irreparably)?

However, I guess this is a bit of a digression from the exact topic at hand but before I get back into a concise answer I will say this: I don't dislike transgender people. They have an unfortunate condition and I feel sorry for them.

However, first of all, an "mTf" is just a man who had his dick and balls lopped off and as a heterosexual male I would not be with another man, and second, I have dealt with too many mentally unstable people in my life up to this point. Not taking on another one.

I normally would not touch a post like this with a 40 foot pole, wwwwaaayyyyy to many opportunities for me to get in trouble so I won't outright argue with you about how I feel your viewpoint is incorrect...

That said, I just sincerely need to know the answer to this, because this is the sole reason I found your particular post so interesting... You do realize to a self-accepting trans-person the most inflammatory thing you said was "I feel sorry for them.", right?

in all serious, not flame bait, I probably won't even respond to your reply, but I gots to know this.

I don't particularly care what is inflammatory. I say what I believe is the truth and I express my own feelings and emotions. I do not do so in an intentionally inflammatory manner. However, if in the expression of what I think is true (in the case of the need for therapy) or of my emotions (sympathy for people whose psychological state forces them to need surgery to fundamentally alter their physical state) in a reasonable manner people are still inflamed that is of little consequence to me.

I would hope people are not offended, and I will try not to put my emotions offensively. But, if the thoughts in my mind are viewed as offensive in the mind of another, that is an issue for them to deal with unless they can explain to me why my thoughts are objectively wrong.

I'm just asking, you're aware it's like a Christian going up to an atheistic teenage Bruce Wayne saying to him that they pity him for not believing in God. Please tell me you're at least aware how a TransWoman, having dealt with the obstacles in her life, would react poorly to your pity more then your opposing opinion.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

No. I would not. A "mTf" transgender is just a man with an unfortunate gender confusion who, instead of being given psychiatric help by his society was set lose to surgically mutilate himself.

Transgender is a different thing from homosexuality or bisexuality entirely despite what political correctness would have you believe. The only negative effects of sexual orientation are those stigmas created by bigoted members of society. For that reason, though they are abnormal (statistically out of the ordinary) mental states, they are in no way mental disorders, hurt nobody, and should be accepted. However, transgender is an abnormal mental state which causes the sufferer to hire a person to physically mutilate them. Ultimately, yes, it is their choice and if we took no actions to hinder people's choices: sure. However, a person suffering from documented depression is not allowed to purchase firearms because society has taken it upon themselves to stop them from doing what they want to do (end their life). Why would it be so wrong for society to stop transgenders from doing what they want (mutilate themselves irreparably)?

However, I guess this is a bit of a digression from the exact topic at hand but before I get back into a concise answer I will say this: I don't dislike transgender people. They have an unfortunate condition and I feel sorry for them.

However, first of all, an "mTf" is just a man who had his dick and balls lopped off and as a heterosexual male I would not be with another man, and second, I have dealt with too many mentally unstable people in my life up to this point. Not taking on another one.

I normally would not touch a post like this with a 40 foot pole, wwwwaaayyyyy to many opportunities for me to get in trouble so I won't outright argue with you about how I feel your viewpoint is incorrect...

That said, I just sincerely need to know the answer to this, because this is the sole reason I found your particular post so interesting... You do realize to a self-accepting trans-person the most inflammatory thing you said was "I feel sorry for them.", right?

in all serious, not flame bait, I probably won't even respond to your reply, but I gots to know this.

I don't particularly care what is inflammatory. I say what I believe is the truth and I express my own feelings and emotions. I do not do so in an intentionally inflammatory manner. However, if in the expression of what I think is true (in the case of the need for therapy) or of my emotions (sympathy for people whose psychological state forces them to need surgery to fundamentally alter their physical state) in a reasonable manner people are still inflamed that is of little consequence to me.

I would hope people are not offended, and I will try not to put my emotions offensively. But, if the thoughts in my mind are viewed as offensive in the mind of another, that is an issue for them to deal with unless they can explain to me why my thoughts are objectively wrong.

I'm just asking, you're aware it's like a Christian going up to an atheistic teenage Bruce Wayne saying to him that they pity him for not believing in God. Please tell me you're at least aware how a TransWoman, having dealt with the obstacles in her life, would react poorly to your pity more then your opposing opinion.

I'm aware that some would as some transgender people I have expressed my opinions to have been offended by my pity. Others have disagreed with my position but at least accepted my sympathy for the difficult situation which they have.

It all depends on the preferences of the person in question. For example, I personally am more likely to want to deal with a Christian who feels sorry for my lack of belief than one who hates me for it. The first, at least, retains recognition of me as a full human being with whom he can sympathize whereas the second sees me as something less than human.

 

[nekoali]

Eww you have red hair, go blond or gtfo.

No thanks. I tried blonde once in high school, I look terrible as a blonde. I'm quite happy with my red hair.

In regards to the pity issue: I don't want to be pitied. I don't mind and even appreciate sympathy or empathy. But pity usually implies a certain amount of superiority from the person doing the pitying.

I have had physically disabled friends before, and they feel much the same way as I do on the issue. Just because we have some birth defect or disability doesn't mean we should be looked down on. Yes, we have issues and problems that the average person doesn't have to deal with and often doesn't even think of. But we are people, just the same as anyone else. We want the same things, we feel the same things and we can live our lives the same as anyone else. A little bit of medicine and science helps smooth matters out of course.

 

[Kurea]

I love accidentally hitting F5 after churning out paragraphs of insight. Thanks again, human error.

I'll instead offer a (loaded) summary of what I was hoping to say before I screwed my dumb self over.

To those who dismiss gender dysphoria and transgenderism in general as "mental disorders": Unless you WANT to make babies, right now, why do you need a fully functional vagina on your girl? Maybe you're threatened by the thought of being "gay"? It's an understandable fear, albeit an irrational one. And furthermore, what makes it a mental disorder rather than a physical one? How do you (and not, I dunno... a scientist maybe?) decide that? Trying to make an MtF into a straight up M or an FtM into an F smacks of trying to "pray the gay away", and we all know how well that works (at least, I hope you do, otherwise you've got a lot of reading to do). Nature makes mistakes, it happens all the time, it's how we get (physical) deformities like elephantiasis, and sometimes nature really is to blame rather than the nurture. Whether or not each and every case of gender dysphoria is or isn't the result of "unresolved issues" rather than a genuine mistake on the part of genes or fetal development isn't for me to decide, but nor is it for you, wouldn't you say? Let's hear it for science.

 

[MyFooThurTS]

I'm a bisexual guy (pansexual if you like, but it's such a fucking ridiculous word), and I'm dating an asexual woman. I've pretty much tried everything but MTFs, so sure, I'd be happy to tick that off the list as well, as long as she's attractive enough and doesn't expect me to be entertained by her mere uniqueness.
And suddenly I realize I'm talking about sex. I wouldn't date her, unfortunately. It would conflict with my reputation and lose me a number of social benefits if I did.

 

[MyFooThurTS]

I love accidentally hitting F5 after churning out paragraphs of insight. Thanks again, human error.

I'll instead offer a (loaded) summary of what I was hoping to say before I screwed my dumb self over.

To those who dismiss gender dysphoria and transgenderism in general as "mental disorders": Unless you WANT to make babies, right now, why do you need a fully functional vagina on your girl? Maybe you're threatened by the thought of being "gay"? It's an understandable fear, albeit an irrational one. And furthermore, what makes it a mental disorder rather than a physical one? How do you (and not, I dunno... a scientist maybe?) decide that? Trying to make an MtF into a straight up M or an FtM into an F smacks of trying to "pray the gay away", and we all know how well that works (at least, I hope you do, otherwise you've got a lot of reading to do). Nature makes mistakes, it happens all the time, it's how we get (physical) deformities like elephantiasis, and sometimes nature really is to blame rather than the nurture. Whether or not each and every case of gender dysphoria is or isn't the result of "unresolved issues" rather than a genuine mistake on the part of genes or fetal development isn't for me to decide, but nor is it for you, wouldn't you say? Let's hear it for science.

Distinct difference, dude. Same-sex attraction has uses in the reproductive cycle as observed in the mating habits of many fauna, that coupled with its tendency for life-long persistence and the frequency with which it occurs implies very strongly that it is not in any regard a disorder.
Transgenderism lacks this evidence, and so the possibility that it is a disorder, genetic or psychological, is not to be dismissed, likewise with the possibility that it is an entirely healthy condition. Yet, because of this lack of a definitive inclination, it becomes unfair to categorize it with basic same-sex attraction. It doesn't matter what it "smacks of", only what it's the same as.

 

[JayElleBee]

I don't think I could. I don't have any issue with transgendered people, I really don't, but recent events have led me to be a little... a little more cautious around them. While I know it's not true for every transgender person, some of them can be a little... over-sensitive, and I'm not the type of person who'd ever feel comfortable in a relationship were I felt like I had to tip-toe around my partner.

On the off-chance I ever did end up in a relationship with a transgender person however, if I ever heard the term 'cisgender privilege' aimed at me, I'd be out of the door so fast, you have no idea. I would do my best to make them feel comfortable with me, but if they even once tried to make me feel guilty about being born with a sex that matches my gender, it would be over.

 

[Natasha_LB]

Okay, I was going to post a long reply this morning as I've been away from this thread for about 4 pages, and I'm sure some new issues have come up. However I lost my glasses last night - some asshole took a swing at me on the way home from clubbing. So I really can't be doing with trying to read much(It also might make my spelling a little off, as proof reading is hard when you can't read).

What I will say though is that I am very confused by the moderation (Or severe lack of) that's going on in this thread. I normally feel that the escapist mods are very good, although perhaps at times little too "trigger happy", but I guess that's a good thing as it ensures the community is full of polite individuals looking for intelligent discussion. I certainly take no issue with the mods in general, and I thank them for the hard work they do to keep this community running.

However in this case I am appalled by some of the things that have been left un-moderated. "Tranny" and "shemale" are very hateful slurs, and it is not okay for people to be using these words, why on earth have people not revived infractions for using thee words? Calling a transexual a "tranny" is no different to using "******" to refer to a colored individual, or using "fag" to refer to a gay person. I'm sure that both those examples would get moderated pretty damn quickly.

These are hateful words, and in my opinion by not moderating their usage, The Escapist is endorsing it. In my country, discriminating against a trans person is illegal, and the use of these slurs would constitute a "hate incident". In your code of conduct, you specifically mention "Sexist, Racist or Perverted Remarks" as examples of behavior that will not be tolerated, while these are just examples and do not need to be comprehensive, I find it interesting that homophobia and transphobia are not mentioned here. I'm not suggesting that The Escapist staff are in any way homophobic or transphobic themselves, simply that they have overlooked this area.

You modded someone earlier in this thread because "Insults are not a valid way of getting your point across.", (Which makes perfect sense), so why are you letting other insults remain undealt with?

As for the misgendering of trans people through out this thread, and all the talk of "fixing" us, or "marking" us, I have no idea how this has not been counted as hate speech. I suppose a topic like this was always going to get controversial, and healthy debate is generally a good thing,... but talking about tattooing our genitals is where I draw the line. If I posted a thread suggesting that all homosexuals should have "gay" tattooed on their forehead, or that people below the average IQ required an "Idiot" tattoo, I imagine I would be banned before anyone even commented in such a thread.

I am okay with having a debate about this, and I am okay with people disagreeing with me, but there is a line that should not be crossed, and when it is crossed, the moderation is supposed to step in and clean things up. Disagree and argue with me all you want, but don't be hateful about it.

I'd like an answer as why the moderators feel that these acts of hate speech are not grounds for a warning, I'd also like to point out to the people using the words "tranny" and "shemale", that once I read them, I ignore anything further that you post, as I lose all respect for your opinion once you feel the need to use hateful words.

 

[Satosuke]

I am appalled by some of the things that have been left un-moderated. "Tranny" and "shemale" are very hateful slurs, and it is not okay for people to be using these words, why on earth have people not revived infractions for using thee words? Calling a transexual a "tranny" is no different to using "******" to refer to a colored individual, or using "fag" to refer to a gay person. I'm sure that both those examples would get moderated pretty damn quickly.

Okay, sorry for the semi-threadjack, but I need to make a point here.

Making blatant threats and being an overall disruptive presence is one thing. But flat-out banning of words is complete and utter bullshit in my mind.

The simple truth is that WORDS ARE ONLY AS POWERFUL AS WE LET THEM BE.

Take the term 'paddywagon' for example. In the turn of the century in the US, the term paddy was a SEVERELY derogatory term for Irish immigrants, comparatively socially offending as words like '******' and '******' are today. Old police trucks were called paddywagons because of how often they rounded up Irish immigrants. Nowadays, the term means nothing. No one pays it any heed as an insult. Houdini routinely called 'humbug' on the charlatan mystics and psychics of his day, and humbug was as bad as 'bullshit' is today. But there were no big calls for bans on these words; 'humbug' maybe, but I can't recall learning of any Irish anti-defamation leagues or National Association of Irish Persons symbolically burying the word paddy. It just fell out of favor when the majority accepted these immigrants as Americans.

Calling for bans on words only gives them more power and more gravitas. The only way to truly destroy offensive speech is to treat it like it's nothing. Make fun of it. Laugh at the mental midgets who try to use such words to piss you off.

Now, I know the owners of The Escapist can do whatever the hell they want in terms of banning words, as it is their private property, so to speak. But people who wish to clean up the discourse in our society are doing it all wrong. Those words have power because YOU give them power. Don't let them have that power over you.


Now...as for the actual question in the thread, I don't really have any sense of romantic love, to be honest. I don't know why, but I'm just not interested in dating, let alone having a girlfriend. So I really can't answer the question posed.

 

[Satosuke]

The simple truth is that WORDS ARE ONLY AS POWERFUL AS WE LET THEM BE.

So if i ran down the street yelling the N-word (especially in MY neighborhood) no one would take offense to it? We are getting derailed a bit, but i have had friends who heard that (t-word) yelled at them, right before being assaulted. I understand some people aren't offended or hurt by anything, but when a word has a history of ONLY being hateful, it IS hard to shake that. That's fine that the N-word is used in hip hop constantly, but have you noticed they don't mind it among each other, but if someone who was not black said it, suddenly it's a no no (unless they have crazy cred)

In a perfect world, your friends would have put a few 9mm slugs in the people that would have assaulted them. I know, circumstances might have been different, some people are afraid of using guns and other considerations...just saying what would happen in a perfect world. And going into the insane double-standards involving the N-word is a headache I'd rather not try airing out here for fear of derailing everything.

Either way, I do get that being called something like that with malicious intent behind it can be hurtful. But the key is not to try and not to be offended or emotionally hurt. The key is not to give them the satisfaction of letting them know they hurt you. Laugh at something evil, and you can demoralize it in the blink of an eye. Just look up Superman vs. the KKK or Mel Brooks blasting Al Jolson music at the battle of the bulge.

 

[twohundredpercent]

So if i ran down the street yelling the N-word (especially in MY neighborhood) no one would take offense to it?

You should do that.
I'm pretty sure at that point it's so nonsensical that it ceases to be offensive and just becomes kind of funny.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I know this may sound a bit shallow but what relationship would last if one person has total absence of attraction for the other?

That doesn't sound shallow at all.

I'm really not sure why you think it would.

 

[t3h br0th3r]

Honstly, I haven;t grown up around any so I don't have any fram of referance to go on but from a gut level i would say no.

I am sexually atrracted to CIS and bi sexual women, thats just how i'm programed.

even if she had Betrice's wit and Nikki Manjah's body, knowing she was born male would turn me off. we would have to stay friends.

 

[Zoomy]

All depends on one question; are they attractive? And do they find me equally attractive?

Okay, so that's two questions. Point's the same really. As long as there's the whole mutual attraction jazz going on, hell why not?

 

[217not237]

Well, my philosophy is "Why not?" Transgendered people, as human beings, deserve equal rights as a non-transgendered person, and, as such, deserve equal oppurtunity to have a relationship with another person. Transgendered people tend to go through a sex change because they don't feel comfortable as a man/woman, which isn't a choice. It seems to me like asking a white man in pre-civil rights movement America if he would date a black woman. While the answer would likely be "No," the answer would likely change in the future when black people, or, in this case, transgendered people, become more accepted.

 

[Jake the Snake]

I think I'd be able to see past the whole "I was a dude and now I'm not" thing with time. But it's the lack of being able to reproduce that would tear it for me. I want to have a family when I'm older. It would be too painful to be with someone, I knew right from the start, would never be able to give me that. (Granted I don't know if the same thing could be said if I married a woman who ended up being sterile...hm this issue is a big moral grey area for me...)