LGBTAI+ Question and Discussion Thread III: Third Time's A Charm

[Lycunadari]

Hello!
Welcome to the LGBT+ information thread. This thread is meant to answer all sorts of questions one may have about the community, and have a casual atmosphere.
As such, this is an education thread, not a support thread (which you can conveniently find there (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?493711-LGBTAI-58-Infinity-2-0-The-Darth-Arminius-Apology-Thread) instead). Why the split? Because the main thread is mostly populated by LGBT people who are seeking, well, support, and some questions or misunderstandings can be causes of additional stress. You can ask these questions here instead, and receive answers from LGBT people or allies. They can be as general or as precise as you want.

A couple things you need to know before browsing the rest of this thread:
- if you are LGBT+ but do not wish to educate people, or are likely to be offended by the lack of knowledge of some people, you're probably better off not reading this thread.
- if you have questions, go ahead! But try to stay polite and open-minded. If your question has an element of support (like “I think I might be transgender, how do I know for sure?” or “my LGBT friend has problems with their parents, how could I help?”), the support thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?493711-LGBTAI-58-Infinity-2-0-The-Darth-Arminius-Apology-Thread) may also help, so try there as well.
- avoid misinformation. If you don't know the answer, don't intentionally pull stuff out of your backside. If you do so repeatedly, I will hunt you down, and GM your next game, which will include Drizz't and a Kender as GMPCs. (Theoretically unenforceable? You can never be 100% sure. Don't tempt your luck.)
- mind the forum rules and avoid the subjects of politics or religion (or sexually-explicit content for that matter). Otherwise, there is no subject that is preemptively banned, and we'd like it to stay this way; therefore, if a discussion upsets or angers you, report the offending posts (if a forum rule has actually been infringed) and/or step away from the computer until you calm down, instead of starting a flame war. This is the Internet. We're physically stuck behind your screen. The worst we can do is send stupid PMs until the inbox is full – and you don't even have to acknowledge their content before deleting them! We can't follow you and force you to keep arguing.
- no one here should be shunned here for unfortunately lacking some knowledge but desiring to learn. Nothing is self-evident, and that's even more true where gender and sexuality are concerned. (Now, if you request to be educated but act deliberately obtuse when replied to, you're gonna have a bad time. Don't be deliberately obtuse. Nobody likes morons.)

And, for reference, here is a list of commonly used words and definitions by our community. Please understand that this list is currently undergoing construction right now. Any contributions to the list are appreciated.
LGBT: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans*

LGBTAI: LGBT+Asexual/Allies+Intersex+All Inclusive

QUILTBAG:
Q - Queer and Questioning
U - Unidentified
I - Intersex
L - Lesbian
T - Transgender, Transexual
B - Bisexual
A - Asexual, Agender, Aromantic
G - Gay, Genderqueer

Where a word below is in italics, that means it has it's own entry on the list.

A note on labels: many of these labels are seemingly interchangeable, and for some people they are. However, please do not presume to correct or judge another person's use of a label. Bisexual and Pansexual are especially tricky in this regard, as are transgender and transsexual to a lesser degree.
Often the difference in why one person feels one label is appropriate and not another is deeply personal. If you wish to know more it is probably a topic to seek private advice on, from one of the people listed in the next section.


AFAB/AMAB: Assigned Female/Male at Birth

Agender(ed): Someone who lacks a gender.

Androgyne: Gender Identity with male and female aspects.

Androsexual: A person who is attracted to men.

Aromantic: A person who does not feel any romantic feeling toward anyone, independently of sexual attraction.

Asexual: A person who does not feel any/some sexual attraction, independently of any romantic feeling.

Binary, The: See: Gender Binary.

Bisexual: 1. attracted to two genders; 2. attracted to one's own gender and another gender; 3. attracted to various genders; 4. attracted to people regardless of gender; 5. ask the person who says they're bi what exactly they mean by that. See also Pansexual

Cis: See: Cisgender

Cisgender (CG): Somebody whose gender and sex align.

Demisexual: A person who is sexually attracted to someone(s) only after they have formed an intense emotional relationship with.

Dysphoria: The disassociation Trans* people feel with their own body.

Male-to-Female (MtF): Someone who was assigned male at birth, but is female. (AKA: trans woman)

Female: See: Woman

Female-to-Male (FtM): Someone who was assigned female at birth, but is male. (AKA: trans man)

FAAB: Female Assigned at Birth.

Feminine: Something generally associated by society with women.

FFS: Facial Feminization Surgery: Surgery to reduce chin/nose/cheekbones. Associated primarily with MAAB Trans people

FtM: See: Female to Male

Gay: A man who is attracted to men.

Gender Binary: The commonly held notion that there are only men and women on two extremes, with nothing in between.

Gender Expression (GE): How one expresses their Gender Identity to society.

Gender Identity (GI): How one feels inside society's idea of "man, woman, or other".

Genderfluid: Someone who fluctuates between different genders.

Genderqueer (GQ): Someone who is not of a binary gender; someone who is not male or female.

Gynosexual: A person who is attracted to women.

Heterosexual: A person who is attracted to members of the opposite gender.

Homosexual: A person who is attracted to members of their gender.

HRT: Hormone replacement therapy. MtF's tend to progestrogens, oestrogens and androgen blockers, while FtM's take testosterone almost exculsively.

Lesbian: A woman who is attracted to women.

MAAB: Male Assigned at Birth.

Male-to-Female (MtF): Someone who was assigned male at birth, but is female. (AKA: trans woman)

Man/men: A cis man or trans man. Male.

Masculine: Something generally associated by society with men.

Pansexual: A person who is attracted to people regardless of gender. See also Bisexual

Polyamorous: A person who is interested in a relationship with more than one person.

Presenting: Trans* shorthand for appearing as their preferred gender, regardless of any HRT, SRS or other changes.

Trans*: Transsexual and Transgender primarily, with the asterisk denoting that the trans- prefix could be followed by any number of appropriate words. It also includes other labels, and is a catch-all term for people who identify as something other than their biological sex at birth.

Transgender: Used in reference to a person whose sex(body) and gender(mind) are at odds or do not match. A transgender person can also identify as genderqueer, transsexual, or may use transgender as their only identity.

Transitioning: The process a Trans* person undergoes to move to their preferred gender. Often includes HRT, SRS, FFS.

Transsexual: In common terms the same as transgender above. In medical terms refers specifically to people who wish to transition from male to female or female to male, not accommodating any other options.

SRS: Sex Reassignment Surgery: Surgery to replace/transform a vagina into a penis, or vice versa. Mastectomies or plastic surgery may be used on breasts.

Sexual Orientation (SO): How one identifies who they are attracted to.

Significant Other(s) (SO): Person(s) you are in a relationship with.

Third-gendered: Someone who fits in a local society's third gender, usually male performing female tasks, occasionally vice versa. Also a person who feels they do not identify with any other gender identity.

Woman: A cis woman or trans woman. Female.

Allies: Hetereosexual-Cisgender people who support equality for sexual, gender, and romantic minorities.


-Philemonite (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?74642-Philemonite), for gay-related subjects.
-Mono Vertigo (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?59794-Mono-Vertigo), for asexuality-related subjects.
- Rain Dragon (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?66585-Rain-Dragon), for trans-related subjects (particularly trans men/FtM).
-Miriel (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?66396-Miriel), for feminism, gender, asexuality, and trans-related subjects (particularly trans women/MtF).
-Golentan (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?39657-golentan) for bisexuality, genderfluidity/questioning-related subjects, and issues of childhood abuse.
-Irish Musician (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?62949-Irish-Musician) for cis/straight point of view on general LGBT+ subjects.
-Jormengand (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?71090-Jormengand) for bisexuality, trans, polyamory, and genderfluidity-related subjects.
-Arachu (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?41049-Arachu) for trans (particularly trans women/MtF), hormones, bisexuality, pansexuality, and polyamory-related subjects.
-Astrella (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?40288-Astrella) for trans (particularly trans women/FtM), LGBT+ rights, and lesbianly subjects. (Lesbianly is totally a word, shut up.*)
-Eldest (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?58767-Eldest) for bisexuality, pansexuality, polyamoury, and kink-related subjects (still keep it PG-13 please).
-Kesnit (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?251-Kesnit) for trans-related subjects (particularly trans men/FtM).



*this is why savvy people don't usually let me manage a thread.




Last thing: knowledge is power. You might be one of the lucky 10,000 (http://xkcd.com/1053/) today.



First thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?356522-LGBTAI-Questions-Information-and-Discussion-thread!)
Second thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?386745-LGBTAI-Questions-and-Discussion-thread-II-Make-It-Double)

[Lycunadari]

Continued discussion from the support thread:


Yeah, I know. I used "validity" for lack of a better term, and just that the artist doesn't make any comment or opinion on that subject either way. Most of the definitions seem to come straight from a specific person, often someone who coined the term themselves. My own opinions on it don't go any further than the tip of my own nose. One of the harder lessons I've had to learn (and still am) is you don't have to agree with or understand something to respect someone's application of it. If anyone ever tells me they're nyxgender or whatever it was (I'm not being flippant, I just can't remember what it was), I might ask for clarification on what that means to that person, and otherwise respond with a shrug and "okay" and maybe "so what pronouns does that come with?" even if I think [opinion redacted, because it's not relevant past the tip of my own nose]
Heck, I even felt an affinity with some of the hyper-specific terms, and was even kinda bummed out that "gender apathetic" wasn't included (though "gendermeh" is probably close enough).
Yes, exactly, that's what I meant. One doesn't have to understand something to be respectful and accepting of it.

Yeah, that's why I question whether the hyper-specific labels are "necessary" and not whether the underlying identities are valid. But necessity is subjective. For me, I feel like there can be a point between coining enough new words to improve communication and coining too many new words and confusing communication. I generally identify as asexual or just avoid the topic because I don't even want to explain asexuality or demisexuality to cishet people, forget anything more complicated.
Honestly, I doubt the people using hyper specific labels expect people to know what these lables mean, and for a many it's probably enough to have a word that feels right for themselves, without needing other people to know about it. I don't use very specific labels myself (though "bi grey ace and genderfluid" is probably seen as hyper specific by some...), but depending on who I'm talking to I just say bi or genderqueer/nonbinary/trans, because yeah, explaining that is already complicated enough.



This works the other way too. If you keep automatically accepting the "validity" of those with increasingly obscure identities, eventually it'll pass that anything goes and LGBTAI+ will end up (seen as) some sort of nutjob group. I'm not saying that people with non-cis-etc. identities/sexualities are nutjobs, after all we're all tolerant here, it's just that others aren't as much and given current events, it's clear that those who aren't as much are more likely to judge a group based on those on the edge of its bell curve. Even if we ourselves are free of lines, others aren't, and if they see a line cutting through this group it'll taint the perception of the group as a whole. Hyper-specific labels are at best confusing and at worst alienating and exclusive, not inclusive (I didn't know what some of those terms meant, people not in this group won't know even more).

Are you aware that in this case "devil's advocate" is actully just the mainstream cis/straight opinion?
Anyway, I think you are missing the point I was trying to make - if we allow ourself to have lines that throw people out because they are too wierd, then of course cis people will also dismiss them ("if not even trans people see them as valid, we don't need to accept them either"), and then the group of "acceptable" people will get smaller and smaller.
And because people will look at the edges of the bell curve, we need to include everyone who wants to be included - because by including fringe identities, we are normalising other queer identities. Trying to assimilate to straight people by saying "hey, at least we are not weird like those people, please accept us" doesn't work, and has been tried before (see: the black bi trans women who started the stonewall movement being thrown under the bus by white cis gay people).
I feel like I'm doing a bad job explaining this, so I'll quote some of the things that have been written elsewhere on this topic:

We get the idea that all orientations exist in small boxes with rigid walls that cannot coexist within a space comes from Straight people, because Straightness constructs itself as a small box with rigid walls that cannot coexist with other orientations (this is how it maintains its exclusivity and therefore its social capital). Heteronormativity teaches us that, because it’s what Straightness does, this is the only correct way to construct orientation.

(there is not a little bit of colonial thinking tied up in this framework, as well, because heteronormativity also teaches us that this is how we must construct other people’s orientations for them, in order to better reshape their experiences into something more easily catalogued and consumed)

I wish I were naïve enough to say, “Hey, maybe let’s not cling to heteronormative frameworks, there’s nothing in them for us,” and leave it at that. Because I know, for a lot of people, buying into things like non-fluid sexuality, or toxic monogamy, or conflating sex and romance, really is just a matter of, “we never learned better.” Heteronormativity is, well, normative. It makes itself invisible so that it can’t be contested, so that for the most part, we only ever recognize and unlearn the aspects of it that directly harm us. Anywhere else, all the other arenas where we still “fit in,” we never think to look for the writing on the wall.

The problem arises when people are shown these systems and choose to ignore, erase, or even embrace them. That’s when it turns into respectability politics: by adopting all of the heteronormative frameworks that do not directly conflict with one’s own identity, one hopes to “switch sides,” to reposition one’s own identity into the privileged social class by promising not to rock the boat—at the expense of anyone who doesn’t fit the new mold.

But what happens when these respectability politics backfire? What happens when someone invested in pushing this new framework realizes that there’s still no room in it for them, that once the borders are redrawn they’ll still be standing on the wrong side of them?

Here’s the thing: when you try to infiltrate normative structures, when you try to reposition Gay™ as Normal™, then other deviations from normative structures (that would otherwise be branded “queer” by heteronormativity) also get repositioned—as Less Gay.

You can imagine this didn’t sit well with people who thought they were on their way in. So now, even while we still deal with respectability politics that appeal to heteronormativity, we can see a new brand of respectability politics crop up, designed specifically to appeal to the first:

“Of course we know that sexual orientations are non-fluid, and can never intersect or overlap with other orientations. That’s why our asexuality isn’t an orientation, it’s just a modifier (or maybe it’s even a kink!). We promise it won’t threaten your normative framework if you take us with you.”

By all rights, this should be taken as an omen by everyone who engages in respectability politics: it will always backfire. Normative structures can only elevate so many people before they collapse under their own weight; they need to find as many ways as possible to cut people out of the paradigm. And no matter how safe you think you are in your framework, someone else will find an excuse to write you out of it.

You will never be able to guarantee your own inclusion in an exclusionary politics.


Respectability politics is a phrase that describes two very closely linked principles:
First, it blames a marginalized community for its own oppression, and second, it says, “if you just behaved in the way the oppressor class behaves, you would have social freedom and capital as well.”

This results in members of the marginalized group treating anyone they see as not adhering properly to the oppressor class’s values as inferior and unworthy of association.

And since one part of the oppressor class’s values is the violent expulsion and mistreatment of those who do not conform, respectability politics inevitably leads to exclusionary gatekeeping, to the tune of, “look how good we are, because we’re nothing like those people you associate us with.”

This happens in almost every oppressed group. It is most vibrantly researched and understood in terms of Black american communities, but it’s everywhere.

It happens when the mentally disabled distance ourselves with the physically disabled, claiming that we’re nothing like those people because at least they can still work. It happens when the physically disabled distance ourselves form the mentally disabled, because we’re nothing like those people, because they’re not crazy. It happens when non-muslim Arabs distance ourselves from islam, because we’re nothing liek those people, we’re good christian folk who would never hurt you.

In all cases, instead of saying to overlapping oppressed groups, “you are valuable people, even if your needs are different from my own, and I would be proud to band together to create a stronger force working towards a better world for all of us,” the respectability politician say to the oppressor, “You see? I am not like them. I am safe to elevate to your status. I will not force radical revolution. Let me into your class, and I will make sure the classes still exist by engaging in oppressive behaviour with you.”

Respectability politics is ignoring your own history and culture in favour of the oppressor’s, so that the oppressor will consider assimilating you and you will have the power and safety of being in that oppressive class, rather than abolishing the power structure in its entirety.


Both quotes are from intersex-ionality (http://intersex-ionality.tumblr.com/) who has written a lot on this topic (mostly discussing the question if asexual and aromantic people are a part of the LGBT+ community, but I think it's aplicable here as well.)

And another one, from robotbisexual (robotbisexual.tumblr.com):

But to answer, its the idea of respectability politics, pushing away more laughable or “embarrassing” identities so that you don’t get associated with them, trying to appeal to your oppressors by conveying yourself as “really the same as you,” rather than realizing the community as a whole is radically different and that some people are incapable of conforming.

The act of assimilation among the community has manifested in sacrificing certain members of the community in order to ascertain rights/support for what are considered “gold star” members, and creating a separation in the community by refusal to associate with ideas, language, and identities that are deemed too radical, too hard to sell to the Straights to get them accept the community (eg. Queer, pansexuality, nonbinary genders, and yes, asexuality.)

Its all the “pick a side, you can’t be bisexual"s, all the "special snowflake gender"s, all the "you can’t identify as queer because its evil"s, and all the "asexuality isn’t a real orientation stop trying to be special"s. All the identities and movements that are considered a hindrance to mainstream Gay respectability politics and the effort to assimilate the smaller community into "Normal” society, stomping on people that can’t be “acceptable” in the same way and thus cutting them off to gain limited rights for a section of the community.

That’s assimilation.

Alright, I've never heard of these, so I decided to look them up.

Magigender sadly doesn't mean 'I identify as a magical being' but rather 'I identify as mostly _____'. Couldn't that be just as easily summed up by genderqueer (somebody who identifies as more than one gender to some extent)?

Lithsexual and frayromantic apparently refer to somebody who experiences sexual or romantic attraction (respectively) but that attraction abates if reciprocated or as they get to know a person better. That doesn't sound like an orientation. That just sounds like a personal thing in the former case, and in the latter... Well, frankly, lots of people experience romantic attraction to a person that goes right out the window as they get to know them better. That's just infatuation.

The definition I found for 'maverique' was 'characterized by autonomy and inner conviction regarding a sense of self that is entirely independent of male/masculinity, female/femininity or anything which derives from the two while still being neither without gender nor of a neutral gender'. Except, well, that sounds exactly like a neutral gender. If you identify as a specific gender that's independent of maleness or femaleness (and don't identify as one of the third genders that exist amongst numerous peoples outside the standard Western binary) then that's neutral gender. 'Maverique' just sounds like a word for one who is neutral gender but wants a mildly more exciting word for it.
While genderqueer can be used as a specific identity, it is also an umbrella term that covers everything that's not 100% male or female, e.g. agender, bigender, genderfluid, noitrois etc. Magigender is way more specific, so while someone who is a magigirl/magiboy could also identify as genderqueer, it isn't the same.

Lith/fraysexuality isn't losing attraction when you get to know someone better, it's losing attraction when the attraction is reciprocated. Also, aren't all orientations just personal things in that case? Where is the difference between "only attracted to people of my gender", "not attracted to anyone" and "only attracted to people who are not attracted to me" that makes two of the orientations and one just a personal thing?

No, it's not the same. If you think of gender not as a linear spectrum, it makes more sense. Think if it like colours - if male is blue, and female is yellow, a neutral gender would be white (or black), while maverique would be red - not a mix of the two, and not neutral, but completely different.

Also, I'm sure you didn't mean it like that, but saying "sounds like a word for one who is neutral gender but wants a mildly more exciting word for it" sound a lot like "you're just a special snowflake", which is extremely disrespectful to say to anyone, but especially to nonbinary people, because that's one of the favourite insults from transphobes, antifeminists etc for everyone who doesn't exactly fit into the acceptable identities. So yeah, not cool.

I don't really see how that's analogous (and I think it's a stretch to connect that statement to prejudice against asexual people). Somebody earlier requested this discussion stop, so if you want it can be moved to the other thread (which I think is more amenable to such discussion) or PM.
The reason this line sounds aphobic is that asexuality is often called "just a preference", a "modifier (it doesn't say who you are attracted to, but how), a personal quirk, or even a kink, all dismissing it as a real sexuality (often coupled with denying the experiences of asexual people). Lith-/fraysexuality falls on the asexual spectrum (and lith-/frayromanticism on the aromantic spectrum), so saying Lith-/fraysexuality isn't a sexuality comes awfully close to saying asexuality isn't a sexuality - which is aphobic.

[Knaight]

Honestly, I doubt the people using hyper specific labels expect people to know what these lables mean, and for a many it's probably enough to have a word that feels right for themselves, without needing other people to know about it. I don't use very specific labels myself (though "bi grey ace and genderfluid" is probably seen as hyper specific by some...), but depending on who I'm talking to I just say bi or genderqueer/nonbinary/trans, because yeah, explaining that is already complicated enough.

On top of this, the whole idea that more labels and more specificity deligitimizes something only works for some people. Other people will look at it and come to the conclusion that as something is studied in more depth the field of study adopts more jargon. There's no reason that human gender or sexuality should be exempt, it's just something much more personal to a lot of people so the knowledge base ends up much less concentrated in academic theorists.

I'll grant that this comes from someone in a jargon heavy field, and as such someone who is really tired of the "this set of concepts has a large vocabulary, it must be BS" argument, but still.

[WarKitty]

Question for you guys:

A lot of people try to say that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to transition by comparing it to Body Integrity Identity Disorder - where people think an otherwise healthy limb doesn't belong to their body and want it amputated. How would you respond to that?

[Knaight]

A lot of people try to say that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to transition by comparing it to Body Integrity Identity Disorder - where people think an otherwise healthy limb doesn't belong to their body and want it amputated. How would you respond to that?

The end result of transitioning is having a physical body with particular primary and secondary sexual characteristics. The end result of a comparable hypothetical surgery for BIID would be missing a limb. Missing a limb is a demonstrably bad thing, having particular primary and secondary sexual characteristics isn't.

[Serpentine]

The end result of transitioning is having a physical body with particular primary and secondary sexual characteristics. The end result of a comparable hypothetical surgery for BIID would be missing a limb. Missing a limb is a demonstrably bad thing, having particular primary and secondary sexual characteristics isn't.
This, and also I think the issues of "First, do no harm" and treatability.

Current understanding of trans people is that it's an intrinsic feature of their brains. We currently cannot treat this in the brains of those people who want to transition, and it seems likely we never will (and if we could, there would be a whole barrelload of ethical issues to deal with re. identity, self, etc). But we can treat the body. Treating the body is risky and can go wrong, like any other surgical procedure, but the evidence I've seen suggests that most of the time the net result is much more benefit than detriment. The result of transitioning for a trans person is a whole, healthy person. Not treating the body and insisting on treating the brain, even though we know that doesn't work, can and often does result in significant, even catastrophic, physical and/or emotional harm.
For BIID, I don't know how much we know about it, but there's a fair chance it's not intrinsic and inextricable to the brains of the people who have it like transness is. It is likely that it can be treated in the brain without having to treat the body, and the result of treating the body, which is a risky procedure like any other surgery, is a non-whole person stuck with many significant disadvantages. Not treating the body and treating the brain, instead, may result in a whole, healthy person.
If it turns out that BIID is an intrinsic feature of a person's brain, and/or we don't currently have the means to treat it in the brain, and/or a person's BIID is so extreme that they are at substantial risk of causing significant damage to their bodies, then it may be that amputation is, in fact, the best method of treatment for that person - not treating the body, in that case, would cause more harm than treating it, as with trans people.

Disclaimer: I am not trans, I don't have BIID, and I am no form of medical professional. This is therefore just a fairly uninformed opinion of a person not directly affected by any part of the subject.

[Inevitability]

Question for you guys:

A lot of people try to say that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to transition by comparing it to Body Integrity Identity Disorder - where people think an otherwise healthy limb doesn't belong to their body and want it amputated. How would you respond to that?

That argument only works if one assumes that allowing BIID-patients amputation is wrong. That's a very debatable notion.

Even if one does, there's still a number of other arguments. Chief amongst them is probably the fact that losing a limb or sense significantly restricts a person's freedom and autonomy, while hormone therapy and SRS simply don't harm the body in the same way.

Having BIID is only similar to being transsexual in that a change to the body is desired. The extent of such a change, as well as the specific conditions' traits, are in no way comparable.

[Asmodean_]

Continued discussion from the support thread:

Are you aware that in this case "devil's advocate" is actully just the mainstream cis/straight opinion?
Anyway, I think you are missing the point I was trying to make - if we allow ourself to have lines that throw people out because they are too wierd, then of course cis people will also dismiss them ("if not even trans people see them as valid, we don't need to accept them either"), and then the group of "acceptable" people will get smaller and smaller.
And because people will look at the edges of the bell curve, we need to include everyone who wants to be included - because by including fringe identities, we are normalising other queer identities. Trying to assimilate to straight people by saying "hey, at least we are not weird like those people, please accept us" doesn't work, and has been tried before (see: the black bi trans women who started the stonewall movement being thrown under the bus by white cis gay people).
I feel like I'm doing a bad job explaining this, so I'll quote some of the things that have been written elsewhere on this topic:


Things in spoilers disappeared for some reason. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -asmo

Both quotes are from intersex-ionality (http://intersex-ionality.tumblr.com/) who has written a lot on this topic (mostly discussing the question if asexual and aromantic people are a part of the LGBT+ community, but I think it's aplicable here as well.)

And another one, from robotbisexual (robotbisexual.tumblr.com):



I didn't phrase my argument that well, looking back on it. My point wasn't that we need to be accepted, it's that having these hyper-specific labels isn't conducive to being understood, and being understood is a base requirement for tolerance. From my (admittedly limited) experience in this world, most of these are obscure to the point where I need to google them. Personally, I'm pan. But saying I'm bi is so much easier since it's immediately understood by so many more people. It's inaccurate, but it's close enough and generally more convenient. Having more and more labels only alienates you from the non-LGBTAI+ community, since all you're doing is confusing them. It's not our duty to make everything nice and easy for them, but doing so is also easier for us. All we're doing by having hyper-specific labels is telling them that you're not good enough because you don't understand our labels, and that we're superior because we do. All we're doing is pushing them further away.
And isn't tolerance supposed to do the opposite?

[noparlpf]

One common argument I've heard when people start debating amputating an arm vs. transitioning is that a lot of people consider genital surgery and loss of fertility to leave the patient similarly "incomplete" or "damaged" as if they had lost a limb.

Personally I don't consider genitalia or gonads to be equivalent to limbs, but I've heard that argument a lot of times as an attempt to delegitimise gender dysphoria.

[lio45]

Magigender
Lithsexual

Gotta hand it to Rich for including some of these more extreme boutique queerness concepts in his works. Vaarsuvius, a character whose libido is nil and whose only passion is magic, who isn't a male nor a female, and who is a mage, is clearly as magigendered as can be. And Tsukiko is a perfect example of lichsexual.

:P

[Ursus the Grim]

I got kind of a weird one for you.

First, full disclosure. Despite the whole 'bear' thing, I'm a heterosexual cismale.

Anyway. I've been watching All in the Family (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_in_the_Family) for the first time, and I've kind of been pleasantly surprised by how it took on some pretty controversial stuff. Specifically, as it relates to this thread, how Archie and his family deal with LGBT issues.

From my perspective, Archie's portrayed as a well-intentioned, if older and somewhat ignorant guy. His ignorance and age aren't meant to portray him as a bad person, per se, just to explain why he's so befuddled and vexed by members of subcultures and alternative lifestyles. A lot of what he says and does are offensive. He often learns something of a lesson at the end (ie, the episode when he realizes that his super-butch bar buddy is gay) but that doesn't necessarily absolve him of the things he's said, nor does it completely change his outlook.

I know this is probably going to vary from person to person, but I'm really interested in how the show (and Archie) look through the lens of an LGBT+ individual. Do you see a good-hearted but out of touch Archie in some of your own family members? Does Archie just come across as a lot less sympathetic than he does to me?

I have been ruminating on it because this seems like it might be a simple-ish, shared experience with which I can compare perspectives.

[Coidzor]

Question for you guys:

A lot of people try to say that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to transition by comparing it to Body Integrity Identity Disorder - where people think an otherwise healthy limb doesn't belong to their body and want it amputated. How would you respond to that?

I'd say I run into the other way around more often, people arguing that they should have their desire to amputate various parts of their bodies be accepted without question by others because otherwise one must be invalidating trans people who seek SRS.

At any rate, I find them to be uniformly intellectually dishonest and bankrupt, so I've stopped engaging with such people as a pointless exercise, like any other internet troll, really.

[Serpentine]

One common argument I've heard when people start debating amputating an arm vs. transitioning is that a lot of people consider genital surgery and loss of fertility to leave the patient similarly "incomplete" or "damaged" as if they had lost a limb.

Personally I don't consider genitalia or gonads to be equivalent to limbs, but I've heard that argument a lot of times as an attempt to delegitimise gender dysphoria.
I'd say that, in that case, in order to be consistent that person must also be against hysterectomies, vasectomies and so on.

[Troacctid]

Question for you guys:

A lot of people try to say that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to transition by comparing it to Body Integrity Identity Disorder - where people think an otherwise healthy limb doesn't belong to their body and want it amputated. How would you respond to that?
I would say that those people have no idea what they're talking about. Then I would ignore them and stick with the actual consensus of modern medical science, which is that transition is a safe and effective treatment for gender dysphoria, and that it has a proven track record of both improving and saving patients' lives.

[Raistlin1040]

I didn't phrase my argument that well, looking back on it. My point wasn't that we need to be accepted, it's that having these hyper-specific labels isn't conducive to being understood, and being understood is a base requirement for tolerance. From my (admittedly limited) experience in this world, most of these are obscure to the point where I need to google them. Personally, I'm pan. But saying I'm bi is so much easier since it's immediately understood by so many more people. It's inaccurate, but it's close enough and generally more convenient. Having more and more labels only alienates you from the non-LGBTAI+ community, since all you're doing is confusing them. It's not our duty to make everything nice and easy for them, but doing so is also easier for us. All we're doing by having hyper-specific labels is telling them that you're not good enough because you don't understand our labels, and that we're superior because we do. All we're doing is pushing them further away.
And isn't tolerance supposed to do the opposite?

I think the fundamental disconnect here is between "understanding" and "accepting", and I'm not sure that being understood is the floor for tolerance. I don't need people to understand me, necessarily, but I do need them to accept me.

I've come around to the idea, and this is certainly arguable and just my opinion and anyone can give their thoughts on it, that in some ways, we just can't understand other people the way we want to all the time. A former partner of mine recently began thinking of her identity, and decided to identify herself as asexual. We had a long talk about it, and I walked away with a lot of intellectual knowledge of what she was talking about, but basically no understanding of what it's like. So much of my life has revolved around love and sex, for so long, that I find the idea that someone doesn't feel any strong interest in those things, or might outright not want them at all, completely foreign. But I'm thinking that's okay, because I can still accept that when someone says "I am asexual" or "I am aromantic", I know what those words mean, and I believe the person. I don't know if I can UNDERSTAND it, I can't put myself in that position, but I can accept that it's real and accept that being asexual or aromantic is valid and doesn't mean anything negative for the person.

On the other side of the conversation, I recently spoke with a girl who felt the need to tell everyone that she didn't "believe" in third gender, or agender, or bigender people. If you were trans, she said, that was fine, but no one could be both or neither or something separate altogether. She was very kind about it, but she didn't believe it and was firm. We spoke for a while, and I don't know if she ever reached a point of understanding, but she did eventually end up conceding that someone else's identity doesn't affect her at all. It takes her no effort to respect someone's pronouns, or accept their identity. I assume she still doesn't understand why someone would identify as something other than male or female, but she did seem to understand that her lack of understanding doesn't matter. When faced with someone who identifies that way, her options are to be combative and invalidate them, or accept that they are what they say they are and react appropriately.

There is merit to the argument that the social queer movement must be conscious of its presentation, and in some ways, that means "packaging" ourselves in a way that makes people see us as normal and standard and not weird pervert freaks, and in that essence, you're probably right, that simple is best. We've just reached the point, maybe, where there is some degree of trans awareness, for example, in mainstream culture, and if you go to the young, liberal areas, there are people who have some knowledge of genderqueer or nonbinary, labels like that. To "add" new labels feels like pulling the rug out from under people who might be on-board, this idea that as soon as they get comfortable, we change it up. That's not a bad argument.

I think the more convincing argument, though, is that if you denigrate someone based on your opinion of their identity, you're being a jerk. In nearly any scenario, if someone says "I am this thing," and your response is "No you're not, get over yourself," you're being a jerk in that situation. It's true, if you label yourself pansexual, fewer people will immediately know what that means relative to bisexual, but if you are confident in that label for yourself and comfortable explaining it, that's something you can do. You can define it, you can explain it, you can educate. It's not your "duty", but if you care enough to use a nonstandard label, then hopefully you're comfortable enough explaining it, and then the ball is in the other person's court as to whether they want to say "Okay, if that's what you say you are, then I support that," or to recoil and go "whoa whoa, it used to just be gay or straight, what's all this new stuff?"

Appealing to understanding works in a sort of simplistic way where you can say things like "Well, you know how you like boys? Well I like girls in the same way, so it's sort of like that, understand?", but I think the further you get away from that, the harder it is to understand. I don't know that it's so simple to make people understand what it's like to be trans, or nonbinary, or asexual, or whatever, but I'm not sure complete understanding is a reasonable goal, nor do I think it needs to be. Understanding places a strong emotional and intellectual burden on the other person, while acceptance allows you to ask, "I know this may not be something you can empathize with, but I am asking you to respect me, validate me, support me, and love me even if you don't completely understand," which I think is both easier, and maybe closer to what we want, and if that's the case, then I don't see why we would exclude "alternative" labels from that.

[Serpentine]

@^ Yes, that's what I was saying. You don't have to understand something to accept it. But it is a very hard lesson to learn.

[Asmodean_]

There seems to be a disconnect in what we mean by" "understand". I said it in the sense of "oh I know what this means" instead of "I've been there and/or know how you feel".
My point was that knowing what the terms mean is, if not absolutely required, at least very helpful in the path to acceptance, and having increasingly more terms isn't going to help that.

[The Succubus]

I'd say that, in that case, in order to be consistent that person must also be against hysterectomies, vasectomies and so on.

Or even trimming their fingernails, for that matter. I would very much like to see the medical data for BIID, particularly relating to morbidity. I strongly suspect that transgenderism is a much more common condition by at least one or two orders of magnitude.

EDIT: My google searches have found very little concrete medical information. A lot of internet discussion but only found a short wiki article and a paper from the University of Amsterdam which wasn't able to draw any concrete conclusions. It does note that BIID doesnt have an established entry in the DSM and no morbidity data is available.

[Heliomance]

<snip>

But if you're accepting all that, then do you also allow self-identification as a dog? As a unicorn? As an Apache helicopter?

[The Succubus]

The thing is, no-one has ever genuinely known themselves to be an attack helicopter, a tree or a Shoggoth because there is no physiological overlap between humans as a species and these beings. There is a massive overlap between male and female identity. My personal belief is that trying to see transgenderism as a mental issue ultimately doesn't work as it as doesn't have anything to do with conciously thinking "I am a girl" or "I am xyz". The feeling of dysphoria, as I understand from what people have described, is a disconnect from much deeper within the body. Its the reason why conversion therapy is the miserable failure it is - that sense of identity comes the layout of nerves in the body mismatching a mental map that passively exists in the brain independantly of our normal thought processes, like the parts of our brain that handle skin sensation, digestion, kidneys and sex cell production. We cannot change that part of the brain (nor should we, I believe) so instead, we change the body to match that map. Its the reason why HRT and gender affirmation surgery have the high success rates they do.

[Lycunadari]

But if you're accepting all that, then do you also allow self-identification as a dog? As a unicorn? As an Apache helicopter?

If you're talking about otherkin, then yes, I do. If it makes you happy to identify as a dog, why should I mind? It's not like you're hurting anyone. Also, a lot of otherkin a mentally ill kids, often abuse survivors, who use their kin as a way to cope - and I think any thing that helps you to cope and isn't actively harmful to you or others is a good thing.
Also, from what I've read being otherkin is less like being trans and more a spiritual belief, like believing you used to be a certain animal in a former life, or just having a really strong connection to something to the point where you identify with it, so to me it isn't any more strange than other believes and religions.
Most otherkin people are also either trans themselves, unrelated to their kintype, or are not trans, but are aware that being kin is not the same as being trans. The people who make a big deal out of it, saying stuff like picking flowers is offensive to flowerkin, claming they are oppressed for being kin, or those who use identities like apache helicopter are usually trolls who are transphobic and just want to make fun of otherkin.
Generally, the argument "but what if people want to ID as X?" is a pretty transphobic argument that has been used for ages not just against unusual nonbinary identities, but also against binary trans people. So I'm pretty tired of hearing it over and over again, especially from people who are not 4chan trolls (because I just ignore them and don't bother explaining it to them).

[Ursus the Grim]

If you're talking about otherkin, then yes, I do. If it makes you happy to identify as a dog, why should I mind? It's not like you're hurting anyone. Also, a lot of otherkin a mentally ill kids, often abuse survivors, who use their kin as a way to cope - and I think any thing that helps you to cope and isn't actively harmful to you or others is a good thing.
Also, from what I've read being otherkin is less like being trans and more a spiritual belief, like believing you used to be a certain animal in a former life, or just having a really strong connection to something to the point where you identify with it, so to me it isn't any more strange than other believes and religions.

I'm going to sidestep the comparison to religion for a minute and ask this instead.

If you believe many other kin are mentally ill, the victims of abuse. . . Do you not also see parallels between that attitude and some rather ignorant and outdated assumptions about homosexuality and other LGBT+ lifestyles?

I would be interested in reading any studies you have regarding mental illness in the other kin community.

Edit: realized how accidentally aggressive this sounds. Didn't intend it to be. :smalleek:

[Lycunadari]

I'm going to sidestep the comparison to religion for a minute and ask this instead.

If you believe many other kin are mentally ill, the victims of abuse. . . Do you not also see parallels between that attitude and some rather ignorant and outdated assumptions about homosexuality and other LGBT+ lifestyles.

I would be interested in reading any studies you have regarding mental illness in the other kin community.

Ah, I think I phrased that badly, I didn't mean to say that being kin is necessarily related to being mentally ill - I just have seen many otherkin people state that being kin helps them with coping with metal illness or abuse, and I think that invalidating something that people use to cope, regardless of cause, is bad. I admit that it's only based on what I've personally observed, not on actual studies (are there even studies on being otherkin? If there are, I'd be interested in them as well). Also, I'm not otherkin myself and am not very knowledgable about kin stuff in general, so if someone who is kin themseves wants to correct me, I'm happy to listen and change my opinion. :smallsmile:

[Knaight]

But if you're accepting all that, then do you also allow self-identification as a dog? As a unicorn? As an Apache helicopter?
I'll get to this as a whole, but to start with take this post:


The thing is, no-one has ever genuinely known themselves to be an attack helicopter, a tree or a Shoggoth because there is no physiological overlap between humans as a species and these beings. There is a massive overlap between male and female identity. My personal belief is that trying to see transgenderism as a mental issue ultimately doesn't work as it as doesn't have anything to do with conciously thinking "I am a girl" or "I am xyz". The feeling of dysphoria, as I understand from what people have described, is a disconnect from much deeper within the body. Its the reason why conversion therapy is the miserable failure it is - that sense of identity comes the layout of nerves in the body mismatching a mental map that passively exists in the brain independantly of our normal thought processes, like the parts of our brain that handle skin sensation, digestion, kidneys and sex cell production. We cannot change that part of the brain (nor should we, I believe) so instead, we change the body to match that map. Its the reason why HRT and gender affirmation surgery have the high success rates they do.

This. Looking at the subset of otherkin that would say something like "I am a bear in a literal sense" while using a standard definition of bear*, it's not even vaguelly comparable. The underlying reality needed for one person specifically to have been a bear is that humans in general are capable of having bears as children. Meanwhile the underlying reality needed for one person specifically to be trans or have a non-binary gender or sexuality is for that humans in general be capable of having children who don't neatly fit into two large categories that were constructed as imprecise models for an incredibly complicated and messy biological process that demonstrably produces humans who don't fit in said model for other reasons even when you completely ignore the mental side. One of these is a pretty outlandish claim. For the other, the outlandish claim is the opposite. There's some amount of digging into specifics that can be done, but

But lets put the staggering ignorance it takes to deny that trans people exist aside for a moment. Lets even put aside those cis supremacists who are somehow convinced that biology is on their side and their god awful understanding of human biology. What exactly is meant by "accept" and "allow" in this context? Accept could mean "take to be factually accurate", or it could mean "consider inaccurate but respect inasmuch as using chosen pronouns and the like". Allow usually just means "not-prohibit", but that just pushes the question to what prohibition looks like. Using the "take to be factually accurate" definition, with atypical genders and sexualities I'd accept it to about the standard amount, which is that they can generally be assumed to be true with caveats about how all of the labels are imperfect models over a very complicated set of concepts we don't understand. That caveat actually applies less to the hyper specific ones than something like "straight"; I'd argue that the hyper specific ones are likely a better model of the truth for people who fit in them. That doesn't extend to otherkin, and there's no real reason to think that it would given the biological side. The slippery slope just doesn't fit here. There's also a whole bunch of definitions of accept that basically work out to "you think that way and I won't respond with hostility to it", and at that point otherkin are in. They have a belief that I think is factually incorrect, whoop de doo. Everyone I know has at least one belief that I think is factually incorrect, I can point to a whole bunch of beliefs I had that turned out to be factually incorrect (while I can't point to any that I currently have on account of how I would thus no longer believe them I obviously still think that they're there and still try to find them). Factually incorrect is not the metric that a belief needs to meet to warrant hostility in response. As for allowing, that's a can of worms I'm not going to get into.

*Which by all indications is a pretty tiny subset.

[Astrella]

Question for you guys:

A lot of people try to say that transgender people shouldn't be allowed to transition by comparing it to Body Integrity Identity Disorder - where people think an otherwise healthy limb doesn't belong to their body and want it amputated. How would you respond to that?

Well, there are a few differences between being trans and say having anorexia or BIID; one of them is that trans people's perception of their own bodies tends to be pretty accurate, it just cause them distress, contrary to say anorexia where there is a shifted perception of the self; but the main argument is really a partical one, BIID / anorexia whathavit respond very well to psychotherapy, while actually losing wait, doing amputations and such tends to not actually achieve relief; the distress just continues afterwards. For trans people psychotherapy essentially does nil, while transitioning helps out a ton and reduces distress and increases wellbeing a lot. We might not perfectly understand the underlying mechanics, but we do know what works.

[The Succubus]

Well, there are a few differences between being trans and say having anorexia or BIID; one of them is that trans people's perception of their own bodies tends to be pretty accurate, it just cause them distress, contrary to say anorexia where there is a shifted perception of the self; but the main argument is really a partical one, BIID / anorexia whathavit respond very well to psychotherapy, while actually losing wait, doing amputations and such tends to not actually achieve relief; the distress just continues afterwards. For trans people psychotherapy essentially does nil, while transitioning helps out a ton and reduces distress and increases wellbeing a lot. We might not perfectly understand the underlying mechanics, but we do know what works.

From what I understand, good trans-centric psychotherapy is mainly to undo the damage done by forced negative perceptions from others. If all people were accepting of trans folks, there would be considerably less need for it, save one or two sessions if help is needed for exploring gender identity, or possibly with paediatric trans people.

[Ifni]

Well, there are a few differences between being trans and say having anorexia or BIID; one of them is that trans people's perception of their own bodies tends to be pretty accurate, it just cause them distress, contrary to say anorexia where there is a shifted perception of the self; but the main argument is really a partical one, BIID / anorexia whathavit respond very well to psychotherapy, while actually losing wait, doing amputations and such tends to not actually achieve relief; the distress just continues afterwards. For trans people psychotherapy essentially does nil, while transitioning helps out a ton and reduces distress and increases wellbeing a lot. We might not perfectly understand the underlying mechanics, but we do know what works.

This seems true for anorexia (where as you say there's an incorrect self-image involved, although a very quick google does indicate that a non-negligible fraction of people don't respond well to therapy); I don't think it's true for BIID though?

This page (http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/psychpedia/biid) says there's no cure and some people continue to experience symptoms after years of psychotherapy, and that amputation has a 70% success rate in resolving symptoms (which is a long way from high enough for it to be uncontroversial, but isn't "fails to work most of the time", either). This paper (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3326051/), referenced in that article, says that "Surgery is found helpful in all subjects who underwent amputation and those subjects score significantly lower on a disability scale than BIID subjects without body modification", although their sample size is very small.

This obviously does not come close to the evidence that transition is helpful for trans subjects, and amputation-as-a-treatment-for-BIID seems to be extremely controversial in a way that gender-affirming surgery is not, probably for very good reasons. But I'm not sure we can say yet that amputation is clearly not the right treatment for BIID, or that there is a substantially better approach. It wouldn't be particularly surprising to me if humans could have a range of disorders relating to mismatches between the body and the brain's body map, and that those disorders would be resistant to treatment with therapy.

But yeah, the reason BIID sufferers are a bad comparison group for trans people is that we understand BIID even less than we understand gender dysphoria, and in particular I agree that in the case of gender dysphoria we have good, clear evidence that transition is a helpful treatment. You shouldn't need to understand an unrelated problem in order to say "if it's helpful - that is, of all the options we know about, this approach generally leads to the best outcomes with the minimum of harm - then we should support it".

[The Succubus]

You shouldn't need to understand an unrelated problem in order to say "if it's helpful - that is, of all the options we know about, this approach generally leads to the best outcomes with the minimum of harm - then we should support it".

The best outcomes with the minimum of harm....a noble statement that very often can twisted. The appalling practice known as a conversion therapy can be said to have the best outcomes for transphobic relatives pressuring a trans person. "It's for your own good" is an excuse often deployed by people harming someone for a best outcome. Ignore what a patient says is best for them at your peril.

"But Succubus, what about suicidal people and schizophrenic people? Should we encourage them to do potentially harmful things if they feel it is in their best interests?" Personally, I believe not although it greatly depends on circumstance. The problem is you are trying to compare mental illnesses (severe depression, etc) with a physiological condition (transgenderism). It doesn't work.

[golentan]

The best outcomes with the minimum of harm....a noble statement that very often can twisted. The appalling practice known as a conversion therapy can be said to have the best outcomes for transphobic relatives pressuring a trans person. "It's for your own good" is an excuse often deployed by people harming someone for a best outcome. Ignore what a patient says is best for them at your peril.

"But Succubus, what about suicidal people and schizophrenic people? Should we encourage them to do potentially harmful things if they feel it is in their best interests?" Personally, I believe not although it greatly depends on circumstance. The problem is you are trying to compare mental illnesses (severe depression, etc) with a physiological condition (transgenderism). It doesn't work.

Honestly? I feel like listening to schizophrenic people more would do a lot of good. Not to the extent of humoring "this clearly nonexistent thing is real," but maybe listening to the fears and emotions that the stuff engenders, not telling people it's all in their head, accepting coping mechanisms even if they're kind of out of the ordinary or outside your comfort zones because the person tells you they need them. The times I've gone off my antipsychotics it was usually because I felt like they were pushing an agenda on me without caring about what I wanted out of life. The times I've been highest functioning and least depressed have been the times when the people who had authority over me listened to and accommodated the quirks that are part of "life as me" like "My memory gets jumbled sometimes, a list helps me stay focused during routine tasks," rather than trying to push "you must act this neurotypical to keep your job."

Cuz I gotta be honest. I'm really scared these days that any would be employers and most of the people outside my family would rather I go away forever than have to deal with the fact that my mind is a bit broken. And that makes it really hard to trust that the people who are making a thousand dollars a month of money I can't afford without a job that nobody will give me cuz I'm too weird and too much of a risk have my best interests at heart when they push psychoactive medications on me and tell me to suck up the pain, it's all in your head, your attempts to live a little more like what makes you comfortable are an illness.

[The Succubus]

Honestly? I feel like listening to schizophrenic people more would do a lot of good. Not to the extent of humoring "this clearly nonexistent thing is real," but maybe listening to the fears and emotions that the stuff engenders, not telling people it's all in their head, accepting coping mechanisms even if they're kind of out of the ordinary or outside your comfort zones because the person tells you they need them. The times I've gone off my antipsychotics it was usually because I felt like they were pushing an agenda on me without caring about what I wanted out of life. The times I've been highest functioning and least depressed have been the times when the people who had authority over me listened to and accommodated the quirks that are part of "life as me" like "My memory gets jumbled sometimes, a list helps me stay focused during routine tasks," rather than trying to push "you must act this neurotypical to keep your job."

Cuz I gotta be honest. I'm really scared these days that any would be employers and most of the people outside my family would rather I go away forever than have to deal with the fact that my mind is a bit broken. And that makes it really hard to trust that the people who are making a thousand dollars a month of money I can't afford without a job that nobody will give me cuz I'm too weird and too much of a risk have my best interests at heart when they push psychoactive medications on me and tell me to suck up the pain, it's all in your head, your attempts to live a little more like what makes you comfortable are an illness.

I 100% agree with you - I may have phrased it incorrectly in my last post, so I apologise for any offence caused. I often work with people that have problems with tinnitus and the dismissive attitude of a lot of doctors really annoys me. When you take the time to truly listen and absorb what they're telling you, even that simple act can make a world of difference.

[golentan]

I 100% agree with you - I may have phrased it incorrectly in my last post, so I apologise for any offence caused. I often work with people that have problems with tinnitus and the dismissive attitude of a lot of doctors really annoys me. When you take the time to truly listen and absorb what they're telling you, even that simple act can make a world of difference.

Yeah, sorry. It's just kind of a reflex at this point: feels like I only hear people mention mental health and especially psychotic illness as a scapegoat (I.E. mass shootings are all about "psychos"), a threat/derision (Think about how most people talk about homeless guys by the bus stations who talk to themselves, or how often the "psycho is the murderer on television), or a "don't lump me in with those people" because... we're all subhuman monsters, I guess.

I know that's not what you meant, but closing on a year after I lost my dream job because of a mental health breakdown it's been eating at me a lot, and I'm tired of being hurt and scared so often, tired of seeing people who are like me maligned, mocked, and treated as subhuman, and desperately afraid that nobody will give me another chance.

[Troacctid]

The best outcomes with the minimum of harm....a noble statement that very often can twisted. The appalling practice known as a conversion therapy can be said to have the best outcomes for transphobic relatives pressuring a trans person. "It's for your own good" is an excuse often deployed by people harming someone for a best outcome. Ignore what a patient says is best for them at your peril.

"But Succubus, what about suicidal people and schizophrenic people? Should we encourage them to do potentially harmful things if they feel it is in their best interests?" Personally, I believe not although it greatly depends on circumstance. The problem is you are trying to compare mental illnesses (severe depression, etc) with a physiological condition (transgenderism). It doesn't work.
How can conversion therapy be said to have the best outcomes with a minimum of harm when it does absolutely nothing to help the transgender person, and in fact is almost universally harmful, often driving the patient to suicide?

[golentan]

How can conversion therapy be said to have the best outcomes with a minimum of harm when it does absolutely nothing to help the transgender person, and in fact is almost universally harmful, often driving the patient to suicide?

I think if you parse again, the Succubus was giving that as an example of how people claiming to be aiming for best outcomes but refusing to listen to their "patients" are taking a good sentiment (at heart, the hippocratic oath), and twisting it into a nefarious use (convincing themselves that the harm they inflict is less real than their own perceived best benefit for the person they victimize, regardless of what the victim or evidence of outcomes tells them).

[The Succubus]

I think if you parse again, the Succubus was giving that as an example of how people claiming to be aiming for best outcomes but refusing to listen to their "patients" are taking a good sentiment (at heart, the hippocratic oath), and twisting it into a nefarious use (convincing themselves that the harm they inflict is less real than their own perceived best benefit for the person they victimize, regardless of what the victim or evidence of outcomes tells them).

Golly is right - that's exactly what I meant. A long while ago, I did a google search for conversion therapy and found a website with a list of victims, showing what they were subjected to and what the....outcomes...were. Even as a cis, straightish guy, I found it utterly horrifying to read and the list never seemed to end. I never found that website again but I have been vehemently and passionately opposed to conversion therapy ever since.

[Inevitability]

I think if you parse again, the Succubus was giving that as an example of how people claiming to be aiming for best outcomes but refusing to listen to their "patients" are taking a good sentiment (at heart, the hippocratic oath), and twisting it into a nefarious use (convincing themselves that the harm they inflict is less real than their own perceived best benefit for the person they victimize, regardless of what the victim or evidence of outcomes tells them).

I suppose a 'hypocritic oath' pun would be inappropriate here? I'm very, very sorry.

[Asmodean_]

I suppose a 'hypocritic oath' pun would be inappropriate here? I'm very, very sorry.

I'm fairly sure they both stem from the greek philosopher Hippocrates so ::shrugs::

[golentan]

I suppose a 'hypocritic oath' pun would be inappropriate here? I'm very, very sorry.

I can't think of a situation where it would be more appropriate, and I like puns!


I'm fairly sure they both stem from the greek philosopher Hippocrates so ::shrugs::

Actually, hypocritical means "below" (hypo) "judgement" (critic). -al is basically "pertaining to."

As I understand it it's basically saying "You fall below the bar to be a critic because of your flawed, myopic judgement."

Whereas Hippocrates despite the similar sound in english breaks down to Hippo (horse) and krates (power) which... I guess his legacy lives on in the form of the internal combustion engine? Also, Hippopotamus means "river horse."

[Inevitability]

Also, Hippopotamus means "river horse."

It's also that way in Dutch: we call hippos 'nijlpaarden', which means something akin to 'Nile horses'.

[Prof. Maple]

I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:

[Troacctid]

I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:
Yes, that's a thing.

[Heliomance]

I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:

I generally think of myself as bisexual homoromantic when I bother to get that specific. Guys are hot and all, but I'm fairly sure I don't want a boyfriend.

[noparlpf]

I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:

Sure, it just generally seems less common for whatever reason so you don't hear about it as often. Bisexuality/-romanticism is a spectrum, too, so you can be more or less interested in one gender than another or more or less interested in certain things regarding one set of body parts vs. another set of body parts. Whatever works for you, both in terms of labels and what you do with any hypothetical partners.

[Cizak]

I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:

Humans' various levels of need for intimacy are complicated. I think society as a whole would benefit more from separating sexual and romantic orientation. It's probably mostly talked about regarding asexual people because people feel a need to understand what sort of intimacy they are okay with.

[Coidzor]

I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:

Yes, it just significantly complicates relationships to pursue one with someone romantically of interest but not sexually, and this is exacerbated if the person is sexually interested in others but not one's partner. So you'll mostly find people who are biromantic but homosexual or heterosexual living their lives in such a way that you couldn't tell them from a straight or gay person.

As I recall, people with completely conflicting romantic and sexual orientations are significantly rarer than people who are bi in one regard but not the other, but it's not like we have exhaustive studies with reliable figures, or a cultural situation without incentive to hide that sort of fact about one's self, either. I'm sure some of the men who cheat on their wives and are dismissed as closeted bi or gay men are more precisely termed as heteroromantic homosexuals, but good luck trying to estimate a percentage.

[Troacctid]

As I recall, people with completely conflicting romantic and sexual orientations are significantly rarer than people who are bi in one regard but not the other
Excluding aces, of course.

[TheDarkLord]

Wow, as a trans youth, and a new member of the forum, it really is amazing that you guys have a thread like this. I am really happy with the level of acceptance here. I am just so happy that there is a place like this. I am a HUGE fan of OOTS, and it is really great that there are other members of "the community" in this community. I have had lots of trouble with people accepting me in my life, and this thread is so cool!!! I just recently came out to my closest friends, and most people in my life don't know about/respect my gender identity. My whole life, though that doesn't seem like a very long time to some of you out there, I haven't fit into the ideas of classical gender. I have always pushed against gender stereotypes and have always felt different than everybody else. I personally used to use they/them pronouns, and for some reason, people seemed to really have a hard time with using those pronouns. I eventually gave up with trying to convince my friends to use proper pronouns, and settled with anything they wanted to call me. But seeing this thread, wow, I can't believe I'm saying this, but has given me the balls to start being true to who I am. Thank you so much, everybody on this thread. I realize I should care about how people see me and how they treat me. I am done with people disrespecting me. I am going to stand up for myself. Its crazy, but this internet forum is actually going to change my life. Wow. You guys can call me Phi, like the greek letter. They/Them pronouns please. Thank you all so much. I am going to start frequenting this forum from now on.

-Phi

[TheDarkLord]

To all those people who work on the website out there...
The only Options I could pick from when registering were:
M2F, F2M, Male, Female and Intersex

Why is the gender selection so limited for registering? Couldn't you have written in genders, or have a "none of the above" option at least? Most trans people I know wouldn't want to out themselves as M2F or F2M, so why have that as an option? Its kind of insulting that you would put that as a separate option than Male or Female. Idk it just frustrates me. There should definitely be more options.

Sorry about the rant.
They/Them pronouns please.

-Phi

[Ifni]

To all those people who work on the website out there...
The only Options I could pick from when registering were:
M2F, F2M, Male, Female and Intersex

This thread probably isn't the best place for that comment, I'm not sure your target audience will see it. Perhaps ask on the Board/Site Issues forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?25-Board-Site-Issues)?


Most trans people I know wouldn't want to out themselves as M2F or F2M, so why have that as an option? Its kind of insulting that you would put that as a separate option than Male or Female.

I can see your point with wanting more options, but this seems to run counter to that. Some of the trans people on this board do use those options; I don't see any need to remove them just because you personally don't want to use them. It's fine you don't want to use them - many people don't - but getting rid of them removes options, it doesn't expand them.

Regarding a "none of the above" option: at least when I registered, you could just leave the gender field blank.

[Razade]

To all those people who work on the website out there...
The only Options I could pick from when registering were:
M2F, F2M, Male, Female and Intersex

No idea what they were thinking, if you don't want to take any of those options then you don't have to display gender at all. Plenty of people don't. Most people don't as far as I've seen. Frankly if this were my forum there wouldn't be an option at all.


Why is the gender selection so limited for registering? Couldn't you have written in genders, or have a "none of the above" option at least? Most trans people I know wouldn't want to out themselves as M2F or F2M, so why have that as an option? Its kind of insulting that you would put that as a separate option than Male or Female. Idk it just frustrates me. There should definitely be more options.

Here's the problem. Right here. Plenty of Trans people on this site are more than happy using them, no complains from what I've seen. I think you're taking this much too seriously. Don't display a gender if none of the ones available match. Which you've done. End of problem really.

[AmberVael]

I can see your point with wanting more options, but this seems to run counter to that. Some of the trans people on this board do use those options; I don't see any need to remove them just because you personally don't want to use them. It's fine you don't want to use them - many people don't - but getting rid of them removes options, it doesn't expand them.

I dunno, I've always had an issue with the trans gender-markers myself, simply because they prompt misunderstanding of what gender someone is, and what being trans means. Having them as a separate gender symbol puts them out there as a separate gender, distinct from male and female, and that's just incorrect. Trans is not my gender. Its an elaboration on the circumstances around my gender. Its like the difference between a local student and a transfer student: they're both still students, they both go to the same school, its just that they had different routes there.

I like the idea of being out, of raising awareness that hey, we're here, but I have concerns about the way trans gender-markers work on this forum.

[Heliomance]

The one labelled Intersex does work fairly well as a non binary marker though - it displays as a purple circle with both the Mars and Venus symbols on.

[Jormengand]

The one labelled Intersex does work fairly well as a non binary marker though - it displays as a purple circle with both the Mars and Venus symbols on.

I would use it if it weren't called the intersex symbol on the forum. That's my main issue with it.

[Troacctid]

Yeah, I believe it even says "Intersex" when you mouse over it.

[Inevitability]

Yeah, I believe it even says "Intersex" when you mouse over it.

It does.

I'd say this is indeed worth mentioning to the moderators. A gender field that can be just filled in seems fine to me; we don't have a drop-down list of countries you can pick from for the 'location' field either, do we?

[Razade]

I imagine it is even less of a priority than the name changing thread personally. The option not to select one of the options is available to everyone.

[noparlpf]

I think they didn't want to do a text field for gender (or sexuality) because those are the ones trolls tend to abuse more than location.

I do think that it would be worth adding a marker for nonbinary/genderqueer and/or agender/gender-neutral, but from a website designer's perspective I would imagine there's only so far you can go with manually adding new specific options before switching to a text field, and if it's already been decided that a text field is a no-go then they're probably going to be more hesitant to start adding new specific options.

[Inevitability]

I think they didn't want to do a text field for gender (or sexuality) because those are the ones trolls tend to abuse more than location.

Trolls tend to abuse regular posts more than the location field. Does that mean we should disallow regular posts? No; we let people post whatever they want, but punish them appropriately if they fail to stick to the rules regarding said posts.

[Razade]

Trolls tend to abuse regular posts more than the location field. Does that mean we should disallow regular posts? No; we let people post whatever they want, but punish them appropriately if they fail to stick to the rules regarding said posts.

What noparlpf said doesn't lead to that extreme. It's harder to report things that aren't posts for one. There's no Report function for people's location/gender tab. It's hard enough for the Mods to get to every reported thread, let alone giving them more work having to police peoples avatars and locations and gender slots. When they don't even have to provide either of the latter two. They didn't have to add MtF and FtM and Intersex, that was done at the behest of the vocal LGTBQ group here on this forum, it as a nicety and it still wasn't enough apparently.

[Jormengand]

What noparlpf said doesn't lead to that extreme. It's harder to report things that aren't posts for one. There's no Report function for people's location/gender tab. It's hard enough for the Mods to get to every reported thread, let alone giving them more work having to police peoples avatars and locations and gender slots.
One can report a post to alert the mods of a signature- or location-based rule breaking.


When they don't even have to provide either of the latter two. They didn't have to add MtF and FtM and Intersex, that was done at the behest of the vocal LGTBQ group here on this forum, it as a nicety and it still wasn't enough apparently.

Well, I hear that not all people are male, female, MtF, FtM or intersex (which is a list which contains two-and-two-halves genders and one-and-two-halves sexes, which is slightly odd for a "Gender" field anyway).

[Asmodean_]

If it's that important, just put it in your signature or location?

[Razade]

Well, I hear that not all people are male, female, MtF, FtM or intersex (which is a list which contains two-and-two-halves genders and one-and-two-halves sexes, which is slightly odd for a "Gender" field anyway).

So what? Not only is there the option that Asmodean_ has provided there's always the option to put it in your signature if you care that much about it. I fail to see how, on an anonymous gaming board, broadcasting your gender is but everyone's different.

[Troacctid]

If it's that important, just put it in your signature or location?
How would you feel if the only gender markers available were female, FtM, or MtF, and the only way to indicate that you are male would be to either pick FtM (even if you're cis) or put it in your signature or location?

[Murk]

How would you feel if the only gender markers available were female, FtM, or MtF, and the only way to indicate that you are male would be to either pick FtM or put it in your signature or location?

I wouldn't care, and Asmodean probably wouldn't care either - but that's not really important here, I think. What is important is that clearly, someone cares, and it doesn't hurt us in any way if that option gets added.

I don't think there is anything against shooting a mod a PM (or posting a thread on the forum issue board) if it is that important to someone.

[Razade]

How would you feel if the only gender markers available were female, FtM, or MtF, and the only way to indicate that you are male would be to either pick FtM (even if you're cis) or put it in your signature or location?

I know you asked Asmodean_ but since I'm arguing from the same position.

I'd feel exactly the same as I feel currently. My gender and sexual orientation isn't anyone's business but mine and my partner. I don't feel the need to broadcast it and wouldn't feel the need to broadcast it if the option wasn't available for me to do so. Other people don't feel that way, I accept that, but my answer won't change regardless of my personal situation. I hope that'd be anyone's response.

[noparlpf]

I mean, I'm cis so this particular case doesn't apply, but I know I'm annoyed* when I'm filling something out and it only has options for "straight," "gay," "bi," "lesbian." No "other" or anything. Sure, you can leave it blank, but then it's a matter of constantly feeling disrespected and invalidated because nobody ever acknowledges your identity, or even that there could be other options.
The worst ones are the computerised forms with tick-boxes or drop-down lists that don't let you submit it until you've picked something. I just got a copy of my records from the counselling services at my old school and I had forgotten I had picked "lesbian" in the vain hope that somebody would notice I had picked the only option completely incompatible with "cis male" and ask about it...

*I say "annoyed" because I'm not particularly invested in people knowing things about me, but I also get a lot less **** as a largely-closeted asexual than most non-cishet people do.

[Knaight]

I know you asked Asmodean_ but since I'm arguing from the same position.

I'd feel exactly the same as I feel currently. My gender and sexual orientation isn't anyone's business but mine and my partner. I don't feel the need to broadcast it and wouldn't feel the need to broadcast it if the option wasn't available for me to do so. Other people don't feel that way, I accept that, but my answer won't change regardless of my personal situation. I hope that'd be anyone's response.

Yes, but you're one of the people who chooses not to display the gender. So am I - the options don't matter to me personally because I wouldn't use them. Yet when you look at the gender form in a thread (any thread, not just this one) a big chunk of them are filled in. Clearly some people care enough to provide an indicator. There's no reason to expect the people who care to conveniently line up with the people who have the appropriate indicator. That's why the two trans specific ones were added a few years ago; specific people wanted to have them for themselves, so they were placed. The same thing could apply to adding more.

[Razade]

Yes, but you're one of the people who chooses not to display the gender. So am I - the options don't matter to me personally because I wouldn't use them. Yet when you look at the gender form in a thread (any thread, not just this one) a big chunk of them are filled in. Clearly some people care enough to provide an indicator. There's no reason to expect the people who care to conveniently line up with the people who have the appropriate indicator. That's why the two trans specific ones were added a few years ago; specific people wanted to have them for themselves, so they were placed. The same thing could apply to adding more.

I think I freely acknowledged that? Have I said anything contrary to this?

[Jormengand]

If it's that important, just put it in your signature

I did, and as has been pointed out, that's not the point.

[Knaight]

I think I freely acknowledged that? Have I said anything contrary to this?

No, but it's worth reemphasizing.

[noparlpf]

I think I freely acknowledged that? Have I said anything contrary to this?

After other people have said they would like it you've continued to state that you don't think it's necessary, which some people might perceive as arguing that their feelings are irrelevant. You also kind of pulled out the "special snowflake" argument a couple posts back (the last line in post #61). Keep in mind that queer peoples' feelings and identities constantly being seen as irrelevant is the reason some people feel hurt that it's not an option—not just here on a gaming forum, but ever, anywhere. And since this forum does have some options for non-cis identities, it's not unreasonable for somebody who still isn't included to feel left out. If you don't care and it doesn't affect you either way, why keep telling people who do care that you don't care?

[CWater]

The curious thing about the gender marker is that it is labeled 'Gender' while all the options are sexes. And true enough if we focus only on the physical qualities, then those 5 about cover it, right?

However, that's a weird logic to use, as people are unlikely to want to answer that question based on their physical body (especially if that doesn't align with their gender) and considering this is a non-physical environment, the approach feels particularly nonsensical.

Now, this functionality was probably designed by someone who doesn't know/make the difference between 'gender' and 'sex' (not really surprising, considering a lot of people don't), but I see no reason why it couldn't be fixed, one way or the other. Changing the label to 'Sex' would probably be simpler, but I think it would make a lot more sense to change its options to actual genders, as that is how people like to use it. (Also, the former has some homonym issues.)

[noparlpf]

I mean, in the last like, 5-6 years there's been something of a cultural shift from MtF/FtM terminology to AMAB/AFAB terminology to largely not mentioning sex assigned at birth. When they were talking about adding those markers that's the terminology a lot of people were using. (I can't remember if she was involved in the decision to add them, but one of the mods from back then used the MtF marker.)

[Asmodean_]

How would you feel if the only gender markers available were female, FtM, or MtF, and the only way to indicate that you are male would be to either pick FtM (even if you're cis) or put it in your signature or location?

I honestly wouldn't care. I'd just disable the marker and move on.

[Icewraith]

How would you feel if the only gender markers available were female, FtM, or MtF, and the only way to indicate that you are male would be to either pick FtM (even if you're cis) or put it in your signature or location?

That's not really how the language or symbology works... there wouldn't be a "female" option but no "male" option. What you're talking about would be more of a "Gender Status" marker with options for "cis", "trans", "Intersex", and "it's complicated" in addition to the option to leave the marker blank, but no gender marker.

On a forum populated by Wrasses instead of Humans and the occasional spambot, your proposed options would make more sense.

The concept I think you're trying to get across - how would you feel if YOUR symbol wasn't available- doesn't work because you're treating the "male" symbol like it's the "cismale" symbol. If it were the "cismale symbol" the terminology of cis-and trans- wouldn't have developed as it did. There's no "cismale symbol" (or cisfemale symbol) that has gained enough traction for me to even recognize it, assuming I had any desire to use it. Trans men have the option to use the Trans Male symbol, helpfully informing the rest of us forum-goers they are somewhere along the path of undergoing a specific set of very significant life experiences and/or medical procedures. If they want people to use male pronouns for them without broadcasting that highly personal information, they use the Male symbol.

[Coidzor]

That's not really how the language or symbology works... there wouldn't be a "female" option but no "male" option. What you're talking about would be more of a "Gender Status" marker with options for "cis", "trans", "Intersex", and "it's complicated" in addition to the option to leave the marker blank, but no gender marker.

I mean, there could be, but it'd be a deliberate, political move on the part of someone who wanted to have an "online safe space" that bans cis men, which also would make the analogy fall apart due to being such a fundamentally different scenario, such that asking for a male marker would get you banned from the site, unlike the current scenario where messaging the admins or posting in board/site issues to petition the powers that be for a genderqueer marker or a text field would not result in a ban.

But that's getting very particular.

IIRC, the last time this subject came up, around the time of the last change, the nature of the forum's infrastructure came up in some capacity with regards to a text field for gender, but it's been long enough I couldn't exactly say whether anything conclusive was mentioned.

[Serpentine]

The mods were asked, and answered, these exact questions when it was originally introduced and several times since. I can't remember what they said and it's too hard to search for it on my phone, but a search should be able to dig up the official word.


I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:
Yep, definitely a thing. If I'm inclined to go into that sort of detail, I'd say I'm something along the lines of bisexual heterodemiromantic.

[noparlpf]

I tried searching on desktop yesterday and didn't find it (though I didn't try very hard). It might not be searchable since we had a server upgrade since then, didn't we?

[137beth]

I have a question regarding romantic orientation. When ever anyone reverences it is seemingly only paired with asexual. I was wondering weather someone could be hetero biromantic. (Recent events have lead me to believe I might be biromantic)
Just wondering:smallsmile:. You can all get back to relavnt discussion now.:smallbiggrin:
Yep. I know a few people who are biromantic but either hetero or homosexual.


Wow, as a trans youth, and a new member of the forum, it really is amazing that you guys have a thread like this. I am really happy with the level of acceptance here. I am just so happy that there is a place like this. I am a HUGE fan of OOTS, and it is really great that there are other members of "the community" in this community. I have had lots of trouble with people accepting me in my life, and this thread is so cool!!! I just recently came out to my closest friends, and most people in my life don't know about/respect my gender identity. My whole life, though that doesn't seem like a very long time to some of you out there, I haven't fit into the ideas of classical gender. I have always pushed against gender stereotypes and have always felt different than everybody else. I personally used to use they/them pronouns, and for some reason, people seemed to really have a hard time with using those pronouns. I eventually gave up with trying to convince my friends to use proper pronouns, and settled with anything they wanted to call me. But seeing this thread, wow, I can't believe I'm saying this, but has given me the balls to start being true to who I am. Thank you so much, everybody on this thread. I realize I should care about how people see me and how they treat me. I am done with people disrespecting me. I am going to stand up for myself. Its crazy, but this internet forum is actually going to change my life. Wow. You guys can call me Phi, like the greek letter. They/Them pronouns please. Thank you all so much. I am going to start frequenting this forum from now on.

-Phi
Welcome to the forums, we're glad to have ya here:smallsmile:


I mean, I'm cis so this particular case doesn't apply, but I know I'm annoyed* when I'm filling something out and it only has options for "straight," "gay," "bi," "lesbian." No "other" or anything. Sure, you can leave it blank, but then it's a matter of constantly feeling disrespected and invalidated because nobody ever acknowledges your identity, or even that there could be other options.
The worst ones are the computerised forms with tick-boxes or drop-down lists that don't let you submit it until you've picked something. I just got a copy of my records from the counselling services at my old school and I had forgotten I had picked "lesbian" in the vain hope that somebody would notice I had picked the only option completely incompatible with "cis male" and ask about it...

*I say "annoyed" because I'm not particularly invested in people knowing things about me, but I also get a lot less **** as a largely-closeted asexual than most non-cishet people do.

Gah, I hate those. At the very least I'm glad my workplace has an "other" option.

[TheDarkLord]

[QUOTE=TheDarkLord;21572630\
Why is the gender selection so limited for registering? Couldn't you have written in genders, or have a "none of the above" option at least? Most trans people I know wouldn't want to out themselves as M2F or F2M, so why have that as an option? Its kind of insulting that you would put that as a separate option than Male or Female. Idk it just frustrates me. There should definitely be more options.
\

It would be so much easier if they just asked for pronouns instead. I am so glad that this conversation got started. What thread would be best for me to post on to get this changed?

-Phi

[Razade]

Probably in the Site Issues board but don't hold your breath on them changing anything in any way.

[Prof. Maple]

Sorry again for my breaking of the subject. I think I am biromantic. I have a crush on one of my same sex friends. Should I come out? Who should I come out to?
Thanks for listening :smallsmile:

[Coidzor]

Sorry again for my breaking of the subject. I think I am biromantic. I have a crush on one of my same sex friends. Should I come out? Who should I come out to?
Thanks for listening :smallsmile:

Don't be sorry, it's good to not go in circles about something over and over again and instead talk about something new.

What you should do depends on a lot of factors that we really don't know going off of what little you've shared, though.

Generally speaking, though, if you know someone is definitely not interested in you and you're not clear on being both sexually and romantically interested in them (assuming asexuality isn't in the mix), then it's generally best not to make a romantic overture if they're categorically not interested in the kind of relationship that you would be offering to them by virtue of homosexuality/heterosexuality or allosexuality.







Edit: Since it took me, like, 5 tries last night to not sound like a robot in the sister thread, what is the proper way to do this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21591761&postcount=668)?

[golentan]

Don't be sorry, it's good to not go in circles about something over and over again and instead talk about something new.

What you should do depends on a lot of factors that we really don't know going off of what little you've shared, though.

Generally speaking, though, if you know someone is definitely not interested in you and you're not clear on being both sexually and romantically interested in them (assuming asexuality isn't in the mix), then it's generally best not to make a romantic overture if they're categorically not interested in the kind of relationship that you would be offering to them by virtue of homosexuality/heterosexuality or allosexuality.

Edit: Since it took me, like, 5 tries last night to not sound like a robot in the sister thread, what is the proper way to do this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21591761&postcount=668)?

One question I used to ask myself when I was aware of being biromantic but before I realized I was bisexual is "Even if you are sexually not attracted to someone, are you willing to have sex with them for the relationship for it to work?" A no usually requires additional thought, but a yes generally makes questions like yours easier, Coid.

Prof. Maple, to be honest, asking someone out is always a risk, massively more so if it's someone of the same sex. If you're interested enough to risk it, I'd say go for it. If you think he's likely to reciprocate, I'd say go for it. If you're not sure, it might be better to wait and maybe ask some leading questions to fell out your fella's feelings on the subject? It's hard to judge without more detail, as Coidzor says.

[Coidzor]

One question I used to ask myself when I was aware of being biromantic but before I realized I was bisexual is "Even if you are sexually not attracted to someone, are you willing to have sex with them for the relationship for it to work?" A no usually requires additional thought, but a yes generally makes questions like yours easier, Coid.

Prof. Maple, to be honest, asking someone out is always a risk, massively more so if it's someone of the same sex. If you're interested enough to risk it, I'd say go for it. If you think he's likely to reciprocate, I'd say go for it. If you're not sure, it might be better to wait and maybe ask some leading questions to fell out your fella's feelings on the subject? It's hard to judge without more detail, as Coidzor says.

Questions like mine? Which/what do you mean in particular? :smallconfused:

I guess there's a couple of implied questions, but my sleep-deprived brain right now is trying to figure out how this is connected to my question of how to talk about it when someone says that trans women just don't have periods at all without going into explicit or overly technical detail or just being a clod.

[golentan]

Questions like mine? Which/what do you mean in particular? :smallconfused:

I guess there's a couple of implied questions, but my sleep-deprived brain right now is trying to figure out how this is connected to my question of how to talk about it when someone says that trans women just don't have periods at all without going into explicit or overly technical detail or just being a clod.

...Questions about Prof. Maple's situation, and generally of how to pursue a relationship across sexual attraction lines?

[Ursus the Grim]

Yes, but you're one of the people who chooses not to display the gender. So am I - the options don't matter to me personally because I wouldn't use them. Yet when you look at the gender form in a thread (any thread, not just this one) a big chunk of them are filled in. Clearly some people care enough to provide an indicator.

FWIW, I checked off the gender field.

I do not feel the 'need' to tell people I'm cismale and identify as such. But nor do I feel the need to conceal it. If 'Male' were not an option in that field, I would simply not populate it. If I'm filling out my profile information and there is a question that applies to me, I answer it. If it doesn't, I don't.

I think I've been referred to with a gendered pronoun all of once on these forums. If I had been assumed female and called 'she/her' that one time, I can't imagine I would be particularly offended or upset by it.

If I were called 'she/her' a few dozen times and thought it was particularly offensive or egregious, I would mention it in my sig and assume I had stumbled upon a community of, uh, 'non-males' and that their assumptions were reasonable for the userbase.

[Razade]

To build on the above, I grow my hair out really long and have a rather high toned voice. I've been called ma'am in public by people not paying attention. I don't think I've ever been called sir by random phone call telemarketers once in my life. Never once was I upset by the misgendering, I never took it personally and I don't think I ever will. I don't even get upset when I get "oh, you sound very feminine/you sound like a woman." Wounds me not one bit.

[noparlpf]

That's a pretty typical response for cis people. And to be blunt, it isn't particularly relevant to the subject of trans people wanting their identities to be acknowledged. "I get misgendered occasionally (and then quickly apologised to) but my default experience is to be acknowledged and respected" is the opposite of "I get misgendered constantly and only rarely is my identity acknowledged and respected."

[KyooTrap]

Do y'all consider Polyamory to be part of the LGBTAI~ family? My dad asked me about it the other day and I personally think of it as a kind of separate identity, where for those I'd say I'm like bi, ace, etc. and then also Poly as a different axis. Kinda like how gender and sexual orientation are separate. I dunno, just wanted to see what y'all think.

[Ursus the Grim]

That's a pretty typical response for cis people. And to be blunt, it isn't particularly relevant to the subject of trans people wanting their identities to be acknowledged. "I get misgendered occasionally (and then quickly apologised to) but my default experience is to be acknowledged and respected" is the opposite of "I get misgendered constantly and only rarely is my identity acknowledged and respected."

That's a pretty typical response for trans people.:smallwink:

Though your elaboration clears things up, the premise posed was pretty explicitly "how would you as a cismale feel if you were misgendered or excluded". Your argument shouldn't be with our response but with the validity of the question posed.

I guess my gender isn't a big enough part of my identity to take offense.


Do y'all consider Polyamory to be part of the LGBTAI~ family? My dad asked me about it the other day and I personally think of it as a kind of separate identity, where for those I'd say I'm like bi, ace, etc. and then also Poly as a different axis. Kinda like how gender and sexual orientation are separate. I dunno, just wanted to see what y'all think.

I would. Frankly I consider any alternative/marginalized gender or sexuality in the Quiltbag. That's partially for my own sanity and partially because I feel like everyone who falls under that very broad umbrella would be best served by banding together against the common injustices they face.

[Ifni]

@Razade: it's good that you don't find it insulting to be mistaken for a woman, and that you're secure enough in your masculinity to laugh it off when people get it wrong. That said -


That's a pretty typical response for cis people. And to be blunt, it isn't particularly relevant to the subject of trans people wanting their identities to be acknowledged. "I get misgendered occasionally (and then quickly apologised to) but my default experience is to be acknowledged and respected" is the opposite of "I get misgendered constantly and only rarely is my identity acknowledged and respected."

Yeah - there are many, many things that don't hurt when they happen occasionally, or when you have zero reason to feel threatened on the topic, but when they happen all the time, or when you're living in a hostile environment with respect to that topic anyway? Then it can hurt quite a bit.

I've been misgendered in person a few times - again, they were one-off events, they didn't hurt even a little bit. (And I like looking androgynous, so it actually makes me quite happy to be occasionally read as male.) I've been misgendered in email more often, usually in the context of "I know Ifni based on their work as a physicist, so I'm not even going to ask about gender or read their website [which is probably where they got my email], I'm just going to assume they're male". This doesn't hurt deeply, but it does bug me a bit. It bugs me because there's a pre-existing environment where I'm the only female faculty member in my research group (there are about 20 male faculty members), and I've given talks where I'm the only woman in a room with 50+ people. When people just assume I'm male by virtue of my profession, it reminds me that I'm the odd one out, of the underrepresentation of women in my field, and of certain bad experiences in my past (which were in part due to the assumption that girls could not do physics). In the absence of that environment it would be as non-bothersome as the in-person misgenderings, but the environment makes a difference.

Trans people may have to deal with both living in an invalidating environment and being misgendered in a good chunk of their everyday interactions. That is hard, and I don't think you can estimate how it feels by taking what you feel on being misgendered once, and multiplying by the frequency of events - the cumulative effect is worse than the sum of the individual instances.

For a non-gender-related example, from my own experience: one person in a group choosing not to talk to or interact with you in one conversation is business-as-usual, you generally won't even notice it. Effect = 0, to a good approximation. If everyone you know decides not to talk to or interact with you, for an extended period of time, you will notice and it will hurt. How much it hurts may depend on how introverted you are, but I'm a fairly extreme introvert, and when my entire high school class decided to stop talking to me or acknowledging my existence, that was a vastly more effective form of bullying than any name-calling or physical bullying they'd ever tried.

@Ursus: I do think appeals to empathy which are just "how would you feel if this happened to you", from marginalized to non-marginalized groups, don't always translate very well, because the existing marginalization can be an intrinsic part of what makes it hurt. But presumably you can see why people make them?

[Lycunadari]

Noparlpf and Ifni have explained the misgendering thing pretty well. Another aspect is also that if you get misgendered all the time, it makes being misgendered in spaces that are usually better about things like this, or by people who know better, hurt even more. I get misgendered all the time, every day, because I don't pass (whatever passing as nonbinary even means) and I'm only out to a few people, and while of course it hurts, and wears me down, it's something I'm used to and I don't hold it against people because they just don't know any better. But when my mum or my grandma, or people online in places where I have my pronouns in my signature or something, use the wrong name or the wrong pronouns, it hurts. Because I've let down my guard, metaphorically speaking, believing a place or person to be safe enough, just to find myself hurt again. And also, because it often means they just don't care enough, don't care about how they hurt me*. So every time it happens, I'm disappointed, every time I trust them a little less. So it's not "just" misgendering. It's also gradually losing faith in the people around you.


*Before people start saying something along the lines of "but it's so hard to use the right name/pronouns if you've know the person for a long time!" (because cis people always say this) – I'm not talking about the occasional slip up in the beginning, followed by an apology. I know it happens, though it doesn't have to – since I came out to my sister and told her my new name four years ago, she hasn't misgendered me a single time, hasn't used my old name once. I have friends who changed their name and pronouns, and it's really not that hard to not misgender them. But I'm talking about the times months or years after coming out, that are brushed off as if nothing happened, that are just a sign of carelessness, or a sign that the person still sees me as my assigned gender. Those are the times that hurt the most.


Do y'all consider Polyamory to be part of the LGBTAI~ family? My dad asked me about it the other day and I personally think of it as a kind of separate identity, where for those I'd say I'm like bi, ace, etc. and then also Poly as a different axis. Kinda like how gender and sexual orientation are separate. I dunno, just wanted to see what y'all think.

Yeah, I do. Sure, it's not a gender or a sexuality, but grouping marginalised gender identities and sexualities together doesn't really make sense either, but that's how it is so I don't see why we shouldn't include other non-normative categories as well. (Intersexuality is another separate axis that is included, and I'd also include kinky people though I understand how that can be controversial.) Everyone who is somehow excluded from Straight society has a place at my queer table. :smallsmile:

[noparlpf]

@Ursus: I do think appeals to empathy which are just "how would you feel if this happened to you", from marginalized to non-marginalized groups, don't always translate very well, because the existing marginalization can be an intrinsic part of what makes it hurt. But presumably you can see why people make them?

Definitely this. I wasn't thinking how to say that clearly.


*Before people start saying something along the lines of "but it's so hard to use the right name/pronouns if you've know the person for a long time!" (because cis people always say this) – I'm not talking about the occasional slip up in the beginning, followed by an apology. I know it happens, though it doesn't have to – since I came out to my sister and told her my new name four years ago, she hasn't misgendered me a single time, hasn't used my old name once. I have friends who changed their name and pronouns, and it's really not that hard to not misgender them. But I'm talking about the times months or years after coming out, that are brushed off as if nothing happened, that are just a sign of carelessness, or a sign that the person still sees me as my assigned gender. Those are the times that hurt the most.

It's really not that hard to keep pronouns or names straight if you actually acknowledge and respect somebody's identity instead of whining about how their coming out impacts you. Isn't it funny how cis people seem to find it pretty easy to use the right name when it's a cis person who changed their name for whatever reason?

[Razade]

That's a pretty typical response for cis people. And to be blunt, it isn't particularly relevant to the subject of trans people wanting their identities to be acknowledged. "I get misgendered occasionally (and then quickly apologised to) but my default experience is to be acknowledged and respected" is the opposite of "I get misgendered constantly and only rarely is my identity acknowledged and respected."

Except I wasn't using it as an argument to tell Trans people to shut up about their identities being acknowledged. I have, repeatedly, pointed out ways for them to do so on this board and have been told "yeah but that's not the point" which I understand. It doesn't change the fact that those options are both existent and viable in the face of the fact that adding another innumerable amount of gender tags isn't exactly top priority on a forum that can barely handle a few spam bots. That's simply the reality we have to live in. And the people don't apologize (when they do...they often don't as I noted) because I correct them. They apologize because they see I have more male characteristics and their assessment of my sex and gender was on a small number of cues. However. Ursus has the right of it.


That's a pretty typical response for trans people.:smallwink:

Well, typical response from anyone who wants to invalidate the other side's experiences as "not counting because power dynamics and privileged etc etc".


Though your elaboration clears things up, the premise posed was pretty explicitly "how would you as a cismale feel if you were misgendered or excluded". Your argument shouldn't be with our response but with the validity of the question posed.

This. I thought I'd made that clear. I was expounding on what Ursus said in relation to a question I'd felt I'd already answered but was shown that perhaps some more elaboration was needed.


I guess my gender isn't a big enough part of my identity to take offense.

Ditto.


Do y'all consider Polyamory to be part of the LGBTAI~ family? My dad asked me about it the other day and I personally think of it as a kind of separate identity, where for those I'd say I'm like bi, ace, etc. and then also Poly as a different axis. Kinda like how gender and sexual orientation are separate. I dunno, just wanted to see what y'all think.

I certainly don't think it is.


@Razade: it's good that you don't find it insulting to be mistaken for a woman, and that you're secure enough in your masculinity to laugh it off when people get it wrong. That said -

It's got nothing to do with my masculinity, or lack there of, but everything to do with being comfortable with myself over all. What I identify as has nothing to do with it and the question I was responding to was asking specifically that. I certainly get that that isn't the case for everyone and I absolutely want to live in a world where everyone can be as comfortable in their own skin as me. But again, that has nothing to do with the question I was actually answering and expanding upon.

[Icewraith]

Definitely this. I wasn't thinking how to say that clearly.



It's really not that hard to keep pronouns or names straight if you actually acknowledge and respect somebody's identity instead of whining about how their coming out impacts you. Isn't it funny how cis people seem to find it pretty easy to use the right name when it's a cis person who changed their name for whatever reason?

Speak for yourself, I have enough problems remembering names for people I've known for years when they haven't changed their name.

[Ursus the Grim]

Speak for yourself, I have enough problems remembering names for people I've known for years when they haven't changed their name.

Heck I don't even know anyone who has changed their name.

Hopefully I can clear up some stereotypes about cis people. :P

[Iris]

Let me preface this with the fact that I grew up in a very religious family and thus have little knowledge of this sort of thing... I don't mean to offend.

How would one be able to tell if they are trans? I always thought of it as a binary scale, where the genders were actually defined as "what parts do you have? Okay, you're a guy." However, I've been growing more and more uncomfortable with myself, and I often fantasize about being a member of the opposite sex. If I could switch genders, I probably would. Then again, I don't really know what it's like to be of the opposite gender. I identify more with them, and I've been told that the way I think is much less typical of my sex than of the other, but I've never experienced being treated that way. Another thing standing in my way is that I've always considered myself heterosexual, and I feel like it's somehow "cheating"to say I'm trans and homosexual, as if it's just some excuse for being treated differently but keeping the same habits.

Is it just wishful thinking? Is it just a phase? Or am I really trans? Can I even tell for sure at this point? And if I am, how do I even begin to come out to my family? Is it worth it?

As you can tell, I'm questioning. A lot. If anyone can help me out, it would be very much appreciated.

Thank you.

[EternalMelon]

Let me preface this with the fact that I grew up in a very religious family and thus have little knowledge of this sort of thing... I don't mean to offend.
How would one be able to tell if they are trans? I always thought of it as a binary scale, where the genders were actually defined as "what parts do you have? Okay, you're a guy." However, I've been growing more and more uncomfortable with myself, and I often fantasize about being a member of the opposite sex. If I could switch genders, I probably would. Then again, I don't really know what it's like to be of the opposite gender. I identify more with them, and I've been told that the way I think is much less typical of my sex than of the other, but I've never experienced being treated that way. Another thing standing in my way is that I've always considered myself heterosexual, and I feel like it's somehow "cheating"to say I'm trans and homosexual, as if it's just some excuse for being treated differently but keeping the same habits.

Is it just wishful thinking? Is it just a phase? Or am I really trans? Can I even tell for sure at this point? And if I am, how do I even begin to come out to my family? Is it worth it?

As you can tell, I'm questioning. A lot. If anyone can help me out, it would be very much appreciated.

Thank you.
Only you can tell whether or not you are trans. Personally I don't like the idea of labeling people if they don't want to be, but from what you've posted so far it might be a possibility. In my experience most cis people don't linger long on any feelings of changing their genders. As for your sexuality, it is definitely not cheating to be homosexual after transitioning. Gender and sexuality are two separate things. Just as a gay man isn't a woman for being attracted to men, a trans-man is just as much of a man even if he too is attracted to men.

Part of transitioning is kinda to be treated differently without changing your habits. For example, I am still loud and eccentric after coming out, and all the changes I have made have been physical or terminology changes. Still the same person, treated differently.

If you still want to continue on the track of figuring out your gender identity I recommend doing some tests. Stuff like dressing up or presenting (in private if need be) as your preferred gender or seeing how you feel about being referred to as a specific gender. Stuff like how does the sentence "I was talking to Iris online the other day, she was asking questions in the LGBTIA+ thread" feel versus "I was talking to Iris online the other day, he was asking questions in the LGBTIA+ thread". It might be awkward at first because its different/scary. But if you try for a bit it might help you figure things out.

As for coming out, you might want to hold off on that until you yourself are sure. If you have a close friend you trust (especially if they are LGBT+ themselves) that you can talk to about this who can help you air things out or try on different names/pronouns then I suggest that. As for being worth it being comfortable with who you are is a very important thing to have. Again, only you can tell if its worth it but a vast majority of trans people do not regret transitioning.

Hopefully some of this helps. If you need support we have a thread for that and feel free to ask questions here, there, or by PM. We are here to help.

[AliceLost]

Let me preface this with the fact that I grew up in a very religious family and thus have little knowledge of this sort of thing... I don't mean to offend.

How would one be able to tell if they are trans? I always thought of it as a binary scale, where the genders were actually defined as "what parts do you have? Okay, you're a guy." However, I've been growing more and more uncomfortable with myself, and I often fantasize about being a member of the opposite sex. If I could switch genders, I probably would. Then again, I don't really know what it's like to be of the opposite gender. I identify more with them, and I've been told that the way I think is much less typical of my sex than of the other, but I've never experienced being treated that way. Another thing standing in my way is that I've always considered myself heterosexual, and I feel like it's somehow "cheating"to say I'm trans and homosexual, as if it's just some excuse for being treated differently but keeping the same habits.

Is it just wishful thinking? Is it just a phase? Or am I really trans? Can I even tell for sure at this point? And if I am, how do I even begin to come out to my family? Is it worth it?

As you can tell, I'm questioning. A lot. If anyone can help me out, it would be very much appreciated.

Thank you.

In addition to the great stuff posted by EternalMelon, you might find it educational to do some reading about the differences between gender and sex. A traditional (and outdated) view of gender and sex is that they are the same thing; ascribing gendered traits like hair length, clothes, emotions and proficiency at various tasks to individuals based on their chromosomes and genitals at birth. However, there are a lot of flaws with that system, not the least of which is that what society considers "masculine" and "feminine" traits changes constantly over time. So really, gender is just a social construct that we use as a shorthand for a lot of individual traits (and that we afford a lot of leeway. After all, dresses are considered feminine, yet a woman who wears suits isn't assumed to be a man), which means that if you feel more comfortable associating with traits not traditionally associated with your birth gender, "transitioning" is a perfectly legitimate way of expressing yourself. There is ever increasing acceptance for a much broader variety of gender expressions, which can allow you to define yourself in whatever way you feel most comfortable with. Don't feel locked in or overwhelmed by existing terminology, and feel you have to figure out exactly which label applies to you.

Also, gender and sexuality are different things, so you can identify as whichever gender you prefer, and be attracted to whatever gender(s) you prefer.

[Troacctid]

Which would you rather be if you had the choice, a boy or a girl?

If you've been regularly fantasizing about being the opposite sex for a significant amount of time and it's giving you confused feelings, there's a very high chance you are not cisgender. When a questioning person says they're doing that, that's usually when I link them to http://amitransgender.com (which, besides being able to tell if you are trans, also contains some good resources for people who are questioning). Keep in mind though that "Not cisgender" doesn't automatically mean "Trans man/woman," because there's a whole range of nonbinary gender identities that would exhibit all the same signs. Only you can decide what label, if any, to place on your gender identity.

[martixy]

I wonder how many LGBT people tie their self-identity to a gender-related label...

[Razade]

I wonder how many LGBT people tie their self-identity to a gender-related label...

I most demonstrably don't. I think it's rather silly honestly.

[Jormengand]

I wonder how many LGBT people tie their self-identity to a gender-related label...

I don't have a monolithic thing called a "Self-identity" so I guess I tie part of it to a gender-related label. I'm genderfluid. I'm also 19 years old. I'm also a computer scientist. Are these part of my self-identity? Well I guess, but it's really just a list of things which are true about me at this point.

[Heliomance]

I wonder how many LGBT people tie their self-identity to a gender-related label...

Not entirely sure what you mean. Elaborate?

[Murk]

I don't have a monolithic thing called a "Self-identity" so I guess I tie part of it to a gender-related label. I'm genderfluid. I'm also 19 years old. I'm also a computer scientist. Are these part of my self-identity? Well I guess, but it's really just a list of things which are true about me at this point.

I'm not sure about the terminology, but I think those are all part of what people regularly call "self-identity".
Imagine having to write ten times "I am [...]" and then filling in the dots. Which ten things that you are come to mind the quickest? Is your gender one of the ten? Your eye colour? Your job, your nationality, your sports club, the size of your nose?
There is of course no reason to go for ten things instead of any other number, but it can give you a good sense of priority (I read an interesting research that seemed to show that people from Western Europe, for example, would write down individual character traits much more, and people from Eastern Asian countries would more often write down groups that they are a part of. Just as an example).

I might be wrong, but if I'd had to guess, I'd say that's martyix's question: for how many people is their gender an actual important part of their identity, and for how many is it not very important?
(For me, personally, I guess I'd write down my gender somewhere around "I am [...]" 25, I think. I don't really care about it, but it can be a useful label)

[Serpentine]

I wonder how many LGBT people tie their self-identity to a gender-related label...
I mean, you could ask this about non-LGBT people as well...

[Lycunadari]

I think whether a certain aspect of someone makes it into their self identity depends at least partially on how often or how much that aspect has an influence on your life which to a certain extend is also related to how unusual it is. Say you're a natural redhead - you'll probably occasionally get people commenting on your haircolour, positively or negatively (a lot of people admire red hair, but I've also heard that red haired children often get bullied for their hair.) So I wouldn't be surprised if "natural redhead" would make it high on the "I am ..." list - probably higher than having brown or black hair. Or if you live abroad, your ethnicity might get a higher spot than it would if you lived in your home country, because then it's something unusual.
Tying that back to gender - for trans people gender influences life a lot. Taking HRT pills every morning, getting misgendered, seeing a therapist for gender related reasons, getting more comfortable with your body, being called different names when you're only out to some people... and simply the fact that you have to start thinking about gender a lot to figure out you're trans in the first place, makes gender quite important for trans people, so for a lot of trans people it's likely to be an important part of their identity (being genderfluid would definitely make it into the first 10 "I am" sentences for me).
To a lesser extend that probably also applies to cis non-straight people. Being attracted to a gender you are not "supposed" to be attracted to according to society is in itself a sort of being gender nonconforming, and people love making a fuss around it, so I'd expect that on average, gender is going to be more important to queer people than to cis Straight people.
Similarly, I think cis Straight people will also have their gender being more important to their self identity when they are in a position where it is unusual or comes up more often, like women working in STEM fields or stay at home dads.

[Murk]

I think whether a certain aspect of someone makes it into their self identity depends at least partially on how often or how much that aspect has an influence on your life which to a certain extend is also related to how unusual it is. Say you're a natural redhead - you'll probably occasionally get people commenting on your haircolour, positively or negatively (a lot of people admire red hair, but I've also heard that red haired children often get bullied for their hair.) So I wouldn't be surprised if "natural redhead" would make it high on the "I am ..." list - probably higher than having brown or black hair. Or if you live abroad, your ethnicity might get a higher spot than it would if you lived in your home country, because then it's something unusual.
Tying that back to gender - for trans people gender influences life a lot. Taking HRT pills every morning, getting misgendered, seeing a therapist for gender related reasons, getting more comfortable with your body, being called different names when you're only out to some people... and simply the fact that you have to start thinking about gender a lot to figure out you're trans in the first place, makes gender quite important for trans people, so for a lot of trans people it's likely to be an important part of their identity (being genderfluid would definitely make it into the first 10 "I am" sentences for me).


I'd assume so, yes, but it would be cool to see some data on it.
Also, if there is an inverse correlation too: if you could, say, "predict" the chances of someone being trans by looking how much they care about gender in the first place (this seems a lot less probable to me, but again, it would be cool to see some data on it).

I'm probably straying far away from Martixy's original question here, though.

[Ursus the Grim]

I mean, you could ask this about non-LGBT people as well...

And I suspect you'd get drastically different answers between the two.

For me, I'm 'B the gamer'. Its only when issues like this come up or when someone explicitly asks me about it that I think 'straight white cis-male'. I don't make those explicit parts of my self-identity because I don't think they're that important. I don't (and can't) take pride in being straight or white.

Tying back into Lycunadari's point, it must have something to do with how much adversity you face regarding that part of who you are.

From the outside looking in, my first gay friend was a guy named F. F seemed to have pretty good support at school, nobody messed with him and he was universally liked. F was the school musical star (of course) and a martial arts enthusiast - he was my senpai in kendo and held a black belt in a discipline I can't recall.

When I think of F, I think 'oh, my kendo senpai' or 'oh, my understudy for the school play', and though I feel a little guilty for the latter (he probably deserved the role more) I never think 'oh, the gay kid.' That's probably hampering my attempts to understand why and how people come to base the majority of their identity on whom they're attracted to or what they define their gender as. If he had been visibly bullied in school because of it, I'd probably get stuck thinking 'oh, the kid who got bullied because he was gay.'

I have the mindset of 'being LGBT' shouldn't be a big deal. But I'm starting to see how people who have faced a lot of adversity because of that part of their identity have had to galvanize and bolster it in response.

[Lycunadari]

Interesting (and quite sad) article about the poor (mental) health amongst gay men. (http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/gay-loneliness/) Trigger warning for suicide, addiction, bullying, homophobia and more I might have missed.

It's exclusively talking about (cis) and mostly white gay men, but a lot of the things discussed inside also apply to other queer people (and possibly other minorities).

One thing I found especially interesting was the concept of "minority stress" :


In its most direct form, it’s pretty simple: Being a member of a marginalized group requires extra effort. When you’re the only woman at a business meeting, or the only black guy in your college dorm, you have to think on a level that members of the majority don’t. If you stand up to your boss, or fail to, are you playing into stereotypes of women in the workplace? If you don’t ace a test, will people think it’s because of your race? Even if you don’t experience overt stigma, considering these possibilities takes its toll over time.

For gay people, the effect is magnified by the fact that our minority status is hidden. Not only do we have to do all this extra work and answer all these internal questions when we’re 12, but we also have to do it without being able to talk to our friends or parents about it.

John Pachankis, a stress researcher at Yale, says the real damage gets done in the five or so years between realizing your sexuality and starting to tell other people. Even relatively small stressors in this period have an outsized effect—not because they’re directly traumatic, but because we start to expect them. “No one has to call you queer for you to adjust your behavior to avoid being called that,” Salway says.

One of the most striking studies I found described the spike in anxiety and depression among gay men in 2004 and 2005, the years when 14 states passed constitutional amendments defining marriage as being between a man and a woman. Gay men in those states showed a 37 percent increase in mood disorders, a 42 percent increase in alcoholism and a 248 percent increase in generalized anxiety disorder.

The most chilling thing about those numbers is that the legal rights of gay people living in those states didn’t materially change. We couldn’t get married in Michigan before the amendment passed, and we couldn’t get married in Michigan after it passed. The laws were symbolic. They were the majority’s way of informing gay people that we weren’t wanted. What’s worse, the rates of anxiety and depression didn’t just jump in the states that passed constitutional amendments. They increased (though less dramatically) among gay people across the entire country. The campaign to make us suffer worked.

That's something I've noticed as well - even though my family and friends are really accepting, and I've never personally been called slurs for being queer, I'm sure the way society at large is still treating queer people is part of the reason for my bad mental health. I'm always worrying that new people I meet will reject me for being queer, so I'm afraid of opening up to people and don't really make new friends, which makes me lonely, leading to my depression getting worse. And while I'm proud of being queer, and happy to be queer, and I'd never chose to be straight, it still causes me to be always anxious, and always depressed.

Another thing in the article is how toxic the gay community often is:

The word I hear from Paul, from everyone, is “re-traumatized.” You grow up with this loneliness, accumulating all this baggage, and then you arrive in the Castro or Chelsea or Boystown thinking you’ll finally be accepted for who you are. And then you realize that everyone else here has baggage, too. All of a sudden it’s not your gayness that gets you rejected. It’s your weight, or your income, or your race. “The bullied kids of our youth,” Paul says, “grew up and became bullies themselves.”


For other minority groups, living in a community with people like them is linked to lower rates of anxiety and depression. It helps to be close to people who instinctively understand you. But for us, the effect is the opposite. Several studies have found that living in gay neighborhoods predicts higher rates of risky sex and meth use and less time spent on other community activities like volunteering or playing sports. A 2009 study suggested that gay men who were more linked to the gay community were less satisfied with their own romantic relationships.

“Gay and bisexual men talk about the gay community as a significant source of stress in their lives,” Pachankis says. The fundamental reason for this, he says, is that “in-group discrimination” does more harm to your psyche than getting rejected by members of the majority. It’s easy to ignore, roll your eyes and put a middle finger up to straight people who don’t like you because, whatever, you don’t need their approval anyway. Rejection from other gay people, though, feels like losing your only way of making friends and finding love. Being pushed away from your own people hurts more because you need them more.

I'm wondering if this is one of the reasons why cis gay men are often more sexist, transphobic and biphobic than cis straight people - it's a community with a lot of intra-community bullying, so they feel powerless (both against straight society, and against other gay men who are fitter/stronger/taller etc) and start punching down, re-traumatizing the bi and trans (and ace, pan, etc) people who expected to feel welcome in a community of other "social outcasts".

[Astrella]

*nod* Minority stress is an important factor in why poor people / people that are part of other minorities tend to have elevated risks of mental health issues. It's an important concept.

[Ursus the Grim]

I have a question. It’s not about LGBTQAI+, but I would appreciate answers from an equity perspective and I think that is more likely here than if I just start a new thread in the general discussion. If it is inappropriate to ask this question here, please feel free to delete it and I will post it elsewhere.

I am a cis straight white male with a wife, career and two young sons, and I’m working on a campaign I’m going to run via PbP at another site. My concern is whether I’ve included subject matter that could be triggering to some potential gamers and whether the things I’ve done to minimize that are sufficient.

The game will start with the PCs involved in a search for signs of a missing woman, the daughter of a wealthy merchant. The PCs will be one group of several searching the surrounding hillsides for signs of what happened to her. Two hobgoblins were slain by the town guard at the missing woman’s last known location, so it is believed that hobgoblins are responsible (they are not).

The real captors are another group of adventurers who have been looking for a secret entrance to the same megadungeon that the PCs are interested in searching. These adventurers have found a dungeon beneath an abandoned mine and have captured a Skum whom they have been trying to get information from. They eventually realize that torture doesn’t work, but that it will speak if it is allowed to “have sons”(because that’s what Skum do). So these adventurers have been providing it with women in exchange for information about the megadungeon. The PCs will come along and have to face the evil adventurers (one of which has realized they have done wrong but is too scared to go against the others, and might be convinced by the PCs to surrender), then the Skum, then find the women he has kidnapped in his lair. The first woman (a former member of the evil adventurers before they went bad) died fighting the Skum off before anything could happen (maybe even taking her own life). The second is a poor prostitute who thinks the child she bears might have been from the (evil) bard who seduced her and wants to keep it. The third (merchant’s daughter) will ask the PCs to discretely go purchase herbs that will abort it, other herbs that will make her forget what happened, and then pays them to never come back to town again. The regretful evil PC (a gnome) will help the prostitute raise the child as penance for his crimes (assuming the PCs let this happen), though the merchant’s daughter never forgives him for his part in it.

Things that will not happen:

Anything remotely sexual is completely “off screen”. The PCs show up afterwards.

The PCs will not be allowed to have romantic relationships with any of these women: any interactions with these NPCs will be to show how truly traumatic this experience was for them. They might have “saved” them, but they haven’t truly saved them.

Why I want to use this scenario:

There are lots of things I like about this idea: a cautionary tale about the perils of the adventuring life and the lust for gold (a sort of Lord of the Flies aspect in a way), a cautionary tale about popular perceptions and stereotypes (with the initial search focusing on the hobgoblins), a connection to the deeper horrors of the megadungeon (which drove some of the evil adventurers towards taking these evil actions when they were initially less inclined to do so), and the reality of those damaged by rape (to counter the tendency of our culture to normalize it).

Why I am cautious about this:

Neither I nor anyone currently important in my life (that I know of) has experienced rape, so as much as I don’t want to normalize it, I fear I might trivialize it unintentionally.

There is already so much of this in the genre (Game of Thrones, not uncommon in published RPG material, and all the horror stories I’ve heard about what some women have to put up with in game stores) that I wonder if even as careful as I’m trying to be here, it’s just better to avoid using rape in the story at all.


So what should I do? Have I taken enough precautions in the aftermath of the event? Is there something else I should try? Should I scrap the idea altogether?

Its a bit off topic, but here's my take.


Since you thought it a relevant detail, this is coming from another straight white cismale.

This is frankly going to depend on your players. You really need to know how comfortable they are with this subject matter. I assume they are mature enough to not try and make fun of it, but that doesn't mean they are comfortable with it.

I've got a dark sense of humor and a habit of being inappropriate and rape is still my number one trigger (well, tied for it). If you are really attached to it, you might be better served by never directly referring to it. Let the players draw their own conclusions and take those details where they want.

It's often used pretty cheaply as a plot device, and I think you can do better than "Heroes avenge the rape victims".

[noparlpf]

I have a question. It’s not about LGBTQAI+, but I would appreciate answers from an equity perspective and I think that is more likely here than if I just start a new thread in the general discussion. If it is inappropriate to ask this question here, please feel free to delete it and I will post it elsewhere.

I am a cis straight white male with a wife, career and two young sons, and I’m working on a campaign I’m going to run via PbP at another site. My concern is whether I’ve included subject matter that could be triggering to some potential gamers and whether the things I’ve done to minimize that are sufficient.

The game will start with the PCs involved in a search for signs of a missing woman, the daughter of a wealthy merchant. The PCs will be one group of several searching the surrounding hillsides for signs of what happened to her. Two hobgoblins were slain by the town guard at the missing woman’s last known location, so it is believed that hobgoblins are responsible (they are not).

The real captors are another group of adventurers who have been looking for a secret entrance to the same megadungeon that the PCs are interested in searching. These adventurers have found a dungeon beneath an abandoned mine and have captured a Skum whom they have been trying to get information from. They eventually realize that torture doesn’t work, but that it will speak if it is allowed to “have sons” (because that’s what Skum do). So these adventurers have been providing it with women in exchange for information about the megadungeon. The PCs will come along and have to face the evil adventurers (one of which has realized they have done wrong but is too scared to go against the others, and might be convinced by the PCs to surrender), then the Skum, then find the women he has kidnapped in his lair. The first woman (a former member of the evil adventurers before they went bad) died fighting the Skum off before anything could happen (maybe even taking her own life). The second is a poor prostitute who thinks the child she bears might have been from the (evil) bard who seduced her and wants to keep it. The third (merchant’s daughter) will ask the PCs to discretely go purchase herbs that will abort it, other herbs that will make her forget what happened, and then pays them to never come back to town again. The regretful evil PC (a gnome) will help the prostitute raise the child as penance for his crimes (assuming the PCs let this happen), though the merchant’s daughter never forgives him for his part in it.

Things that will not happen:

Anything remotely sexual is completely “off screen”. The PCs show up afterwards.

The PCs will not be allowed to have romantic relationships with any of these women: any interactions with these NPCs will be to show how truly traumatic this experience was for them. They might have “saved” them, but they haven’t truly saved them.

Why I want to use this scenario:

There are lots of things I like about this idea: a cautionary tale about the perils of the adventuring life and the lust for gold (a sort of Lord of the Flies aspect in a way), a cautionary tale about popular perceptions and stereotypes (with the initial search focusing on the hobgoblins), a connection to the deeper horrors of the megadungeon (which drove some of the evil adventurers towards taking these evil actions when they were initially less inclined to do so), and the reality of those damaged by rape (to counter the tendency of our culture to normalize it).

Why I am cautious about this:

Neither I nor anyone currently important in my life (that I know of) has experienced rape, so as much as I don’t want to normalize it, I fear I might trivialize it unintentionally.

There is already so much of this in the genre (Game of Thrones, not uncommon in published RPG material, and all the horror stories I’ve heard about what some women have to put up with in game stores) that I wonder if even as careful as I’m trying to be here, it’s just better to avoid using rape in the story at all.


So what should I do? Have I taken enough precautions in the aftermath of the event? Is there something else I should try? Should I scrap the idea altogether?

Well, first of all, yeah, this isn't really the appropriate thread for this.

Secondly, I'm not a fan of the premise.
You could accomplish more or less the same thing with kidnapping and murder, which is already an accepted part of the genre, without going all the way to rape. That goes double for straight cis male story writers, who are the ones who most need to stop using rape as a cheap plot device to motivate the (usually also straight male) protagonist(s). Judging by your post you seem to be aware of this and were hoping to address it, but I think you pretty much nailed it with your "why I am cautious about this" paragraph. There's already too much use of rape as a plot device, it's a very difficult subject to handle appropriately, and if it's pbp, you won't necessarily know the players well enough to know how they will handle the subjects of rape and abortion. I can't really see it working out that well. If you want to highlight how the genre normalises violence while ignoring its long-term effects, I think you can explore that well enough using kidnap/torture/murder. Those are already plenty traumatic.

[goatmeal]

Thank you both for your responses. I think I will put this idea on hold for now and just use an AL or something instead.

Also, sorry for the off topic question. I will try to delete my original post.

[Svata]

Ok guys. I am deeeeeeeeply confused right now. Can anyone tell me if there's any truth to this, or is this person just being kinda... look, Idk what even to call it. Can someone please explain this to me if it is true? Please? If I'm in the wrong, I would like to know so that I can improve myself and not be anymore.




https://twitter.com/valeriekeefe/status/874115895286611968






Pls help.

[Jormengand]

Ok guys. I am deeeeeeeeply confused right now. Can anyone tell me if there's any truth to this, or is this person just being kinda... look, Idk what even to call it. Can someone please explain this to me if it is true? Please? If I'm in the wrong, I would like to know so that I can improve myself and not be anymore.




https://twitter.com/valeriekeefe/status/874115895286611968






Pls help.

I'm pretty sure that person just doesn't know what words mean.

[Iruka]

It seems I'm completely out of the loop. Don't even know what CAMAB means. :smalleek:

[Svata]

I'm pretty sure that person just doesn't know what words mean.

Ok, good. That was my gut feeling, but I've been wrong before. (and I learned I was wrong and I changed, and now I'm a better person :D )


Also, Iruka, it means "coercively assigned male at birth".

[BiblioRook]

So I never posted here, largely since I rarely actually leave the Media sub-forum I guess, but it there always was quite a lot I desired to talk about with myself and understanding where I fit in the LGBTQ+ community and so, it being Pride Month, I felt it was as good as a time as any to just do it...
Sorry if it reads weird, I'm kind of copy-and-pasting it from where I wrote it out elsewhere and it was hard enough to write then and I'm not entirely sure I would be able to write it out a second time without chickening out and just not bothering...

[CWater]

So I never posted here, largely since I rarely actually leave the Media sub-forum I guess, but it there always was quite a lot I desired to talk about with myself and understanding where I fit in the LGBTQ+ community and so, it being Pride Month, I felt it was as good as a time as any to just do it...
Sorry if it reads weird, I'm kind of copy-and-pasting it from where I wrote it out elsewhere and it was hard enough to write then and I'm not entirely sure I would be able to write it out a second time without chickening out and just not bothering...

Anyways:

Hi, welcome!:smallsmile: But you should perhaps move (or repost) this in the other thread. That's the main support thread, this is more for questions.

Unless there was a particular question that I missed. If so, maybe try put it in bold?

[BiblioRook]

Ah, yeah. I saw the two threads and wasn't sure just which really to go to.

[Wondermndjr]

I was recently wondering how sexual orientations apply to trans*. For example, suppose an FtM was attracted to men -- would this be considered heterosexual or homosexual? I would like to avoid offending my friends if this comes up in the future.
Thanks for any answers.

[Sobol]

For example, suppose an FtM was attracted to men -- would this be considered heterosexual or homosexual?
Homosexual.

Also, if you aren't sure about someone's gender, you can just use "androsexual" (attracted to men), "gynosexual" (attracted to women).

[AmberVael]

I was recently wondering how sexual orientations apply to trans*. For example, suppose an FtM was attracted to men -- would this be considered heterosexual or homosexual? I would like to avoid offending my friends if this comes up in the future.
Thanks for any answers.

To expand on Sobol's answer, trans and cis only have to do with gender identity, not sexuality.

In short, it doesn't matter if you're a transman, or a cisman. If you're a man and your sexual interest is only towards men, you're homosexual.

[AuthorGirl]

Umm, really sorry to waste you guys' time, but would someone please explain the thread title? Darth Arminius Apology? The curiosity has been kicking me in the ankles for days.

[The_Snark]

You're not the first to ask, as it happens. Darth Arminius was the username of the original poster, at the time that thread was made (they've changed it since then). I don't know what they felt they needed to apologize for.

[golentan]

Umm, really sorry to waste you guys' time, but would someone please explain the thread title? Darth Arminius Apology? The curiosity has been kicking me in the ankles for days.

Darth Arminius had propositioned another thread member for sex in PMs, apparently making them extremely uncomfortable. The aggrieved party aired that grievance on the last page of the thread's previous incarnation.

Darth Arminius then started the new thread.

Ironically, it probably would have blown over and been long forgotten with a simple private exchange of apologies and any required change of behavior rather than making it the top of a public fifty page thread.

A lesson to bear in mind, perhaps.

[AliceLost]

I was recently wondering how sexual orientations apply to trans*. For example, suppose an FtM was attracted to men -- would this be considered heterosexual or homosexual? I would like to avoid offending my friends if this comes up in the future.
Thanks for any answers.

Also to note that trans is an adjective, and trans folk usually prefer to be referred to as people rather than just as their medical condition (that is: "trans people", or "an FtM person", not just "trans" or "an FtM"). You might not mean ill, but it's dehumanizing, and used intentionally so by people who do.

[Coidzor]

I have to wonder how much of that is because they're using that particular phrasing to be dehumanizing and how much of it is because the people who want to be dehumanizing never actually learn the proper grammar.

[AuthorGirl]

Darth Arminius had propositioned another thread member for sex in PMs, apparently making them extremely uncomfortable. The aggrieved party aired that grievance on the last page of the thread's previous incarnation.

Darth Arminius then started the new thread.

Ironically, it probably would have blown over and been long forgotten with a simple private exchange of apologies and any required change of behavior rather than making it the top of a public fifty page thread.

A lesson to bear in mind, perhaps.

Thanks! :smallsmile: now I don't have to wonder.

[Delicious Taffy]

I've got a question, and it's about discussion. Specifically, discussion of the lives of transfolk.

My question is this: Does anyone here know of a board, site, chat client, or anything of that nature, where I could have a conversation with a trans person and ask questions of just about any sort, even if some of them are awkward and possibly very personal? I'm not talking about invading an existing board where trans people go for mutual support and demanding they let me quiz them on everything, either. I gave that impression elsewhere, and trying to dispel it became grating.

To try and elaborate, I'm talking about a site where, with this being at least one of the intended goals of the service, I could ask a trans person questions that maybe I couldn't elsewhere. Just as examples, I'm talking about questions like "What's the sex like?", "What's it like going to the doctor for certain things?", and "In your own experience, how common is it for transfolk to be into D&D?". Something I could ask, get some kind of serious answer for, and build an understanding based on. I don't want links to a site that just gives broad statistics, or a Q&A article with relatively-generic questions already asked and answered, nothing like that. I'm talking about a service of some description that would allow me to connect with an actual, real trans person, not just a name followed by citations of their work.

My only motivation behind asking about this, and the sorts of questions I gave as examples, is to learn about things from someone who's lived experiences, and has a perspective, that I'd never be able to replicate myself. If you're wondering "Why transfolk, specifically?", well... That's difficult to answer, but I can promise there's no malice, or any attempt to put transfolk in some sort of box. If someone pressed me, I guess I'd have to answer "Well, why not?". I could Google this myself, yes, but I'm honestly afraid I'd find a site that looked suitable, but be wrong and wind up causing harm.

If nobody reading this post knows about any such service, that's totally fine. I'm not making any demands, after all. If you know somewhere that's maybe not based around what I've described, but generally okay with it, that's also very welcome.

[Anymage]

A very lazy search sent me to https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/ and https://fetlife.com/groups/9005

(Edit to add: due to ads and user pics, the latter might not be the best place to go if you're at work.)

Although for certain questions, be mindful that you're not asking an entirely neutral hive mind. For instance, how many trans redditors play D&D can be misleading if you don't know whether redditors are more or less likely than the average population to play D&D in the first place.

[Astrella]

If you want you can pm me and I'll try and answer the questions I can answer. r/asktransgender is probably still one of the better spots, but do note that not everyone will appreciate probing questions on there.

[Lycunadari]

Keep in mind that the answers to your questions will vary widely on who you ask. Just taking the sex question as an example, you can get very different answers depending on a) their sexuality, b) their own gender c) their partner's gender, d) whether they're on HRT e) whether they've had any kind of surgery, f) whether their partner is on HRT or had any kind of surgery, f) simply different preferences etc. And the same goes for basically all other kinds of questions, too.

[Delicious Taffy]

A very lazy search sent me to https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/ and https://fetlife.com/groups/9005

(Edit to add: due to ads and user pics, the latter might not be the best place to go if you're at work.)

Although for certain questions, be mindful that you're not asking an entirely neutral hive mind. For instance, how many trans redditors play D&D can be misleading if you don't know whether redditors are more or less likely than the average population to play D&D in the first place.

Thanks for these. I have very little knowledge of Reddit, so even if it was on my radar, I probably wouldn't have thought about going there for this sort of thing. Honestly, I forget it even exists, most of the time, and the only times I really hear about it are in reference to trolls or online harassment, so when I think about it, it's automatically equated to something like 4Chan and I just write it off. As for fetlife, I'm not sure I want a fetish site in my browser history, much less in a capacity that can be traced back to one of my e-mail addresses.

[Coidzor]

Why are you so interested in Trans* populations and D&D in particular?

[Delicious Taffy]

Why are you so interested in Trans* populations and D&D in particular?

Mostly out of mild curiosity, but there are also some slightly more...personal reasons. More specifically, they're personal in a way that, if I were to disclose them too easily, I worry I'd be put into a "box" of sorts. There are certain things I'd prefer to keep personal, for the time being. So, mostly mild curiosity is my reason for asking about specifically D&D.

[JNAProductions]

Mostly out of mild curiosity, but there are also some slightly more...personal reasons. More specifically, they're personal in a way that, if I were to disclose them too easily, I worry I'd be put into a "box" of sorts. There are certain things I'd prefer to keep personal, for the time being. So, mostly mild curiosity is my reason for asking about specifically D&D.

That sounds suspicious. Like, to the point where if I was trans, I'd want to hear the reason before I answered many questions.

But, seeing as I'm not and the lovely Astrella already offered, it's on her to determine if she wants to answer.

[Delicious Taffy]

That sounds suspicious. Like, to the point where if I was trans, I'd want to hear the reason before I answered many questions.

But, seeing as I'm not and the lovely Astrella already offered, it's on her to determine if she wants to answer.

I'm really curious to know how it's suspicious. Like, do I really have to disclose every single possible reason I might have for asking a question, no matter how incredibly personal they might be? Maybe I'm questioning things myself and want to ask someone with personal experience, maybe I've got someone close to me going through some things, maybe I'm working on a story and want to properly represent one of the trans characters in it. Maybe it's all of the above, and I'd rather not be up-front about those to avoid being shoehorned into a certain role, or maybe it's none of them and I have another reason.

I already said this, but just to reiterate - There is absolutely no malice behind any potential questions I might have, and my ultimate motivation is to learn. I don't think it really matters why I want to learn, so long as I'm not using that knowledge for malicious or otherwise harmful reasons. If my intent was to cause harm, I'd just go on an existing message board and be a troll there. It should be noted that I've not done that, and instead asked if anyone already knowledgeable could kindly point me in the direction of a place where I could learn.

I don't appreciate being regarded with suspicion when I've been completely transparent.

[JNAProductions]

Maybe suspicious was the wrong word? I'm sorry for giving offense.

The thing is, not knowing the reason wasn't a huge deal. But knowing you don't want to share the reason makes it seem like a big deal, or at least does to me.

Regardless, this is probably taking up too much of this thread, so if you want to keep talking about this, maybe clear the air a little more, feel free to PM me. (I think I have space in my inbox.)

And also, sorry again. I really didn't mean to cause any harm.

[Future Sword]

Well, I WAS gonna ask something pretty serious, but then I noticed the last guy who did that wound up killing the thread for a week and a half. Gotta say, that's pretty discouraging, especially in a thread specifically for questions.

[golentan]

We answer questions as they come in. And depending on what the asker asks, with various degrees of enthusiasm or clarity. Sometimes the thread goes silent for a month, sometimes it has a bunch of conversations going on on top of each other.

Ask away.

[Serpentine]

Recent developments in Australia have already opened the floodgates on hate speech, bullying and misinformation. What can we do to help QUILTBAG people get through it with as little harm as possible?

[golentan]

Recent developments in Australia have already opened the floodgates on hate speech, bullying and misinformation. What can we do to help QUILTBAG people get through it with as little harm as possible?

For a generic you: Making sure the queer folks in your life know that you openly support them is a big deal. I know for me, a big plus of the community I live in is the presence of Rainbow flags or safe-space markers in public places. Especially a church down the street from me, which flies a rainbow flag... It doesn't have to be a big, garish thing. Just knowing that LGBT people are welcome in public spaces and have people who will have their back if something goes wrong is massive for a sense of security and love.

[Future Sword]

Nice try with the platitude, but I've already recognised that my question would just get my ass jumped.

[golentan]

That may be, but based on your initial approach, it almost can't be worse than what I'm currently imagining, and I'm still willing to at least respond.

So while I can't speak for anyone else, you ain't got a lot to lose. It can be a learning experience either way!

And isn't this thread all about learning experiences? It's not the support thread, it's meant to push back on the darkness for people who are still finding their footing in a world of QUILTBAGs.

[Serpentine]

Nice try with the platitude, but I've already recognised that my question would just get my ass jumped.
Ask, or don't ask. If you think it's really that bad a question to ask, maybe you should think about why you want to ask it, whether you think you already know the answer but you're trying to make some point with it, whether it's something you might be able to find out with a Google search if you're not comfortable asking it here...
But all you're doing now is attacking people for something they haven't even done yet. Either ask your question, or stop accusing people of attacking you for something you keep saying you're not going to do.
Ask or don't ask. There is no "I'd ask this question but you're all terrible people so I refuse".

[Rain Dragon]

If you don't feel comfortable asking a question to the thread, there's a list in the OP of people you can PM with a question (including myself).

It'd probably be fine to ask here, though anyway. There have been quite a lot of questions answered in the past, you can read the thread and its predecessors to get a better idea (and it may even be that your question or similar has been asked before).

[Asmodean_]

Recent developments in Australia have already opened the floodgates on hate speech, bullying and misinformation. What can we do to help QUILTBAG people get through it with as little harm as possible?

I'm assuming this has something to do with the mail-survey thing that's going on. The whole point of it is to spread apathy, because most people will go "eh I'm not LGBTQ+ so it doesn't matter to me, I won't answer it", whereas the phobes will jump on the opportunity to have their voices heard. The lower the turnout/response rate, the worse it'll be for us, so the key is encouraging those who would otherwise have ignored the survey to engage with the survey (and in the right direction :smallwink: )

If this isn't to do with that then forgive me, I'm not in Australia ATM so I'm not up-to-date with what's going on.

[Rain Dragon]

I can't respond as for the plebiscite itself, but I'd like to second Asmodean's suggestion of encouraging people and conversation. I think having some sane, constructive and positive talk around me if there were hateful talk as well would be pretty helpful, a relief and somewhat encouraging. =)

That said, I've only seen/heard constructive discussion surrounding the issue so I'm speaking hypothetically.

[AmberVael]

I have a question, are trans. people willing to date other Trans people?
Trans people dating other trans people is fairly common, so in general I'd say yes. We're not a monolith though, so exceptions probably exist.


If not that sounds like a huge hypocrisy.
...


If yes that sounds like way solution to most of trans people dating issues, isn't it?
I wouldn't say this is a solution to trans dating issues in general. Acceptance within a small group isn't a solution to being shunned by a far larger group. It's nice, it's helpful, but it hasn't fixed the broken dynamic.

[Shamash]

To me it means someone who understands what you have been through, your hardships, issues and demands.

[Recherché]

I have a question, are trans. people willing to date other Trans people?

If not that sounds like a huge hypocrisy.

If yes that sounds like way solution to most of trans people dating issues, isn't it?

I know a married couple who are both trans. So at least anecdotally it happens. However expecting trans people to only date other trans people seems problematic at best.

[Shamash]

I know a married couple who are both trans. So at least anecdotally it happens. However expecting trans people to only date other trans people seems problematic at best.

Oh, I see now how what is said could be read that way :smallfrown:

That wasn't my intention. Sorry, I just see so many trans people trying to date CIS people and getting frustrated on how they are not able to understand them.

[golentan]

Most relationships don't work out one way or another, and often people like to complain about it (see how often you hear straight people make a sweeping complaint about "men/women"). Based on my experiences, trans people dating trans people is disproportionately likely compared to how many trans folks are in the general pop.

Coming in asking a yes or no question about people's dating habits and saying "one makes you a hypocrite, the other solves your problems," kind of... off put me.

[Shamash]

Most relationships don't work out one way or another, and often people like to complain about it (see how often you hear straight people make a sweeping complaint about "men/women"). Based on my experiences, trans people dating trans people is disproportionately likely compared to how many trans folks are in the general pop.

Coming in asking a yes or no question about people's dating habits and saying "one makes you a hypocrite, the other solves your problems," kind of... off put me.

Sorry you are correct, deleted it.

[EternalMelon]

I have a question, are trans. people willing to date other Trans people?

If not that sounds like a huge hypocrisy.

If yes that sounds like way solution to most of trans people dating issues, isn't it?
Trans people in theory should be willing to date other trans people, as long as all the hundreds of conditions for attraction match up.

To me it means someone who understands what you have been through, your hardships, issues and demands.
Not every trans person experiences being trans the same way. Take passing for example; someone who can pass easily or is less bothered by not passing might cause friction in a relationship with someone who is agitated by their inability to pass.

Oh, I see now how what is said could be read that way :smallfrown:

That wasn't my intention. Sorry, I just see so many trans people trying to date CIS people and getting frustrated on how they are not able to understand them.
Hey, don't fret about asking what might be an off colour question, and thank you for apologizing.

And trans people should be able to date cis people if they want, and just as Trans people don't necessarily understand the needs of a Trans person a Cis person is capable of understanding/tolerating/empathizing/accepting/ect the issues that Trans people have in the sphere of dating. As long as they put the effort into it and the transperson is willing/cap to help educate

Most relationships don't work out one way or another, and often people like to complain about it (see how often you hear straight people make a sweeping complaint about "men/women").
And of course, everything gol said here is important.

[golentan]

Hey, don't fret about asking what might be an off colour question, and thank you for apologizing.


Seconded. It is kind of the mission statement of the thread.

[lio45]

Also, generally speaking, I wouldn't call having deal-breakers you don't satisfy yourself "hypocrisy". Especially if you're honest about it.

For example, I've known overweight people who weren't attracted by overweight people (and yeah, they admitted they weren't really in a position to "demand"...) but they couldn't help it - it's how attraction works.

If the other person has a different set of deal-breakers, the relationship can very well work fine.

[WarKitty]

Also, generally speaking, I wouldn't call having deal-breakers you don't satisfy yourself "hypocrisy". Especially if you're honest about it.

For example, I've known overweight people who weren't attracted by overweight people (and yeah, they admitted they weren't really in a position to "demand"...) but they couldn't help it - it's how attraction works.

If the other person has a different set of deal-breakers, the relationship can very well work fine.

Heck, technically that's how heterosexual relationships between straight people work.

[EternalMelon]

Also, generally speaking, I wouldn't call having deal-breakers you don't satisfy yourself "hypocrisy". Especially if you're honest about it.

For example, I've known overweight people who weren't attracted by overweight people (and yeah, they admitted they weren't really in a position to "demand"...) but they couldn't help it - it's how attraction works.

If the other person has a different set of deal-breakers, the relationship can very well work fine.
Just to be clear we are talking about aversions to Trans-byproducts like equipment and passing as apposed to deal breakers in spite of otherwise passes in compatibility and attraction right?

[Prospekt]

To me it means someone who understands what you have been through, your hardships, issues and demands.

One of the reasons I've been in a relationship with another trans woman for over 5 years is because of this, yes. (The biggest reason of course is that we actually love each other very very much.) It's also just because- and sorry if this sounds a bit rude- I don't want to be a cis person's learning experience. I do personally know cis people who are cool with trans people and know more about us than you'd expect, but it's still a risk with relationships. There's dealing with the fact that they may not be comfortable with how our bodies change. They may not be comfortable with the things we want to do with our bodies. I've seen trans women with cis partners who disagree with what they want for themselves personally. That's why I'm personally not interested in cis people. Plus, you know, you never hear of another trans person murdering another person for finding out that they're trans. :smallsigh:

[lio45]

Just to be clear we are talking about aversions to Trans-byproducts like equipment and passing as apposed to deal breakers in spite of otherwise passes in compatibility and attraction right?

I just wanted to point out the general idea that was being floated that it would be hypocrisy to simply be attracted to whatever you happen to be attracted to, regardless of yourself, is wrong.

[EternalMelon]

I just wanted to point out the general idea that was being floated that it would be hypocrisy to simply be attracted to whatever you happen to be attracted to, regardless of yourself, is wrong.
Ah, I see now. Thanks.

[WarKitty]

Do you think there's a social component to who does and does not decide to identify as transgender? I was thinking about how, statistically, there's more trans women than trans men. One of the possible reasons presented for this is that being a woman with masculine traits is more acceptable than being a man with feminine traits. I, as a cisish woman, can put on a sports bra, shave my head, put on a flannel button-down and cargo pants from the men's department, and still not be regarded as crossdressing or seriously outside the bounds of acceptable behavior for a woman. It might get a bit of side-eye. But compare that to the reaction if a male-identified individual were to put on a dress, carry a handbag, and paint his nails.

I'm wondering if that has some impact on who identifies as transgender.

[Astrella]

Do you think there's a social component to who does and does not decide to identify as transgender? I was thinking about how, statistically, there's more trans women than trans men. One of the possible reasons presented for this is that being a woman with masculine traits is more acceptable than being a man with feminine traits. I, as a cisish woman, can put on a sports bra, shave my head, put on a flannel button-down and cargo pants from the men's department, and still not be regarded as crossdressing or seriously outside the bounds of acceptable behavior for a woman. It might get a bit of side-eye. But compare that to the reaction if a male-identified individual were to put on a dress, carry a handbag, and paint his nails.

I'm wondering if that has some impact on who identifies as transgender.

Most recent research actually shows that amab and afab people transition at similar rates these days; but social factors do of course influence things; just look at different cultural interpretations of gender and transness.

[golentan]

Most recent research actually shows that amab and afab people transition at similar rates these days; but social factors do of course influence things; just look at different cultural interpretations of gender and transness.

As someone living in santa cruz and who has on numerous occasions gotten to visit the castro... People might also self segregate into or out of certain communities, throwing off samples.

[Mari_Lilac]

Most recent research actually shows that amab and afab people transition at similar rates these days; but social factors do of course influence things; just look at different cultural interpretations of gender and transness.

There's also the issue that because transness is read so differently in trans men and trans women, many trans men might just be assumed by cis peeps to be butch lesbians, or well tomboyish women (What's a grownup tomboy? Butch is a lesbian identity afaik?) reinforcing the notion that trans women are more common.

[Knaight]

There's also the issue that because transness is read so differently in trans men and trans women, many trans men might just be assumed by cis peeps to be butch lesbians, or well tomboyish women (What's a grownup tomboy? Butch is a lesbian identity afaik?) reinforcing the notion that trans women are more common.

This seems unlikely - both trans men and trans women are relatively small fractions of the population, to the point where the general population noticing a difference in size there (and thus being skewed by all the people who aren't counted) is likely to be a fairly small factor. Widespread media panic aimed vastly more towards trans women on the other hand...

[ArlEammon]

Does anyone know how to use the Bro app? I keep trying to put it on my phone and it keeps saying I need to post more on my "about me" section. :/

[Comrade]

Er, I suspect you'll have better luck contacting customer service for that app than asking here.

[ArlEammon]

Er, I suspect you'll have better luck contacting customer service for that app than asking here.

I got it done anyway. LoL.

[Zendy]

Hello all, I have a question.

I have this friend who everyone think is really handsome, we are very close, he is like my best friend, and every girl we meet confess that they have a crush on him to me and ask me to be their wingman.

Anyway, I think he is rather plain looking, but since everyone thinks he is super hot I guess he is? Even my mom once commented on his beauty -_-

I have to admit he is really charismatic, something on his voice is really charming and alluring, my point is that he could have any girl he want with little to no difficulty.

In the end of 2015 he started dating a girl.

I just found out yesterday that she is not "cis" but rather a trans woman, I found that intriguing and asked him why date a M -> F woman since he identify as straight and he told me he found her body and the fact she was trans really hot.

What I want to ask you guys is, what do you think about this whole thing? Is the fact that he likes her mainly because of a sexual thing, he finds her trans status something attractive that turns him on, something good or is this type of fetishization of trans bodies something harmful?

Don’t get me wrong he seems to be genuinely liking her, they are together for almost three years now and they even moved to the same apartment but still strike me as odd that the main factor that lead them to be a couple was so sexual. I mean he is a very sexual person and maybe that was only what started and he grow to love her for personality but still my question stays.

What you guys think? Good or bad? Healthy or harmful?

[Knaight]

I just found out yesterday that she is not really a girl per se but rather a trans woman, I found that intriguing and asked him why date a M -> F woman since he identify as straight and he told me he found her body and the fact she was trans really hot.

Trans women are really women. Men dating trans women is an indicator that they have a sexuality that includes dating women, a category that includes straight.

[Lissou]

What you guys think? Good or bad? Healthy or harmful?

I think the harm is when a fetish leads you to objectify people (who don't want to be objectified). In this case they're in a steady relationship, and he finds the fact that she's trans hot, but from what you've said we don't even know if that's why he started being interested in her or if he learned it later on (you learned it later on so I'm guessing she passes well?). At any rate, it seems like they have an actual relationship, and the fact that it started sexual isn't necessarily a problem. Dan Savage has talked about how his relationship with his husband started as a one night stand, and when his husband went to take a shower, he (Dan Savage), rushed to get the guy's wallet to look at his ID because he had forgotten his name (but the sex was so good he wanted to see him again I'm guessing). Other people have relationships that started as Craiglist ads for a particular fetish. You can have an awesome, deep relationship that started purely sexual. (You can also have awesome relationships that stay purely sexual by the way).

At any rate, it doesn't seem like he's using transwomen and dating one after the other, having sex with her and then dumping her or something. I can't tell you how the attraction would feel to his girlfriend because that's something that depends on the person so you really would need to ask her. Some people will be uncomfortable with it, some will embrace it. It depends on a lot of things, including how much disphoria they have and whether they plan on transitioning more (for instance if someone loves their penis but they're planning on having bottom surgery).

At any rate, I don't see any reason to worry from what you've told us.

[Eldest]

In the end of 2015 he started dating a girl.

I just found out yesterday that she is not really a girl per se but rather a trans woman, I found that intriguing and asked him why date a M -> F woman since he identify as straight and he told me he found her body and the fact she was trans really hot.

What I want to ask you guys is, what do you think about this whole thing? Is the fact that he likes her mainly because of a sexual thing, he finds her trans status something attractive that turns him on, something good or is this type of fetishization of trans bodies something harmful?

Don’t get me wrong he seems to be genuinely liking her, they are together for almost three years now and they even moved to the same apartment but still strike me as odd that the main factor that lead them to be a couple was so sexual. I mean he is a very sexual person and maybe that was only what started and he grow to love her for personality but still my question stays.

What you guys think? Good or bad? Healthy or harmful?

The fact that you think we (transwomen) can only get dates by being fetishized... that worries me. Unless he's stated to you that he's interested in her sexually because of her being trans, that seems like an unfounded assumption to me.

[golentan]

Sounds to me like you asked some uncomfortably personal questions and intimated he might not be straight, and he responded with "I am straight and my girlfriend is sexy."

And now you're making insulting comments about his attractiveness and insulting transwomen online, and basically offering various sly slanders against his person, identity, and grossly insulting ones against hers.

This isn't a good look on you.

[Zendy]

Trans women are really women. Men dating trans women is an indicator that they have a sexuality that includes dating women, a category that includes straight.

I know that’s not my point.


The fact that you think we (transwomen) can only get dates by being fetishized... that worries me. Unless he's stated to you that he's interested in her sexually because of her being trans, that seems like an unfounded assumption to me.

I don’t, please don't assume you know what I think, that's rude arrogant and pretentious, I know that some can find real love, some don’t (to be honest all trans people I know are or were prostitutes) my point is if you think a relationship who started in fetishization is good and healthy or something bad.


Sounds to me like you asked some uncomfortably personal questions and intimated he might not be straight, and he responded with "I am straight and my girlfriend is sexy."

And now you're making insulting comments about his attractiveness and insulting transwomen online, and basically offering various sly slanders against his person, identity, and grossly insulting ones against hers.

This isn't a good look on you.

We are good friends and he is very open about his sex life, mostly because I’m not a very big fan of sex in the first place and he almost has satyromania.

The point I was trying to make is that he is a very sexual person and someone who can easily start a relationship with any kind of girl and he choose to date a trans despite having so many other options which I think is valid and relevant I did it with no ill intentions.

I did no such things and I meant no harm, I would ask for forgiveness but all I said was said with no intention of harming others and since others seem to not be offended I will take that maybe you need to grow a thicker skin? This is the questions thread and not knowing is not a sin, can you turn that heterophobia down please? Thanks, I’m sorry if anything I said was offensive, I can’t see where and you haven’t pointed out where so I will just conclude that not everything is an attack sometimes people just don’t know any better, I hope this won’t make you think less of me.


I think the harm is when a fetish leads you to objectify people (who don't want to be objectified).

Hummm... That makes sense but are there people who are ok with being objectified?


In this case they're in a steady relationship, and he finds the fact that she's trans hot, but from what you've said we don't even know if that's why he started being interested in her or if he learned it later on (you learned it later on so I'm guessing she passes well?).

She does! Not only does she looks like a girl she looks like a very pretty one, above average looks, but when she starts talking you can clearly see that she was originally a man, that's how I found out about it (And confirmed by stalking her social media).


At any rate, it seems like they have an actual relationship, and the fact that it started sexual isn't necessarily a problem.

Isn't it? By what he said he knew she was trans found that hot and that's why they started dating, unlike the non-trans girls he dated who shared the same interests as him.


Dan Savage has talked about how his relationship with his husband started as a one night stand, and when his husband went to take a shower, he (Dan Savage), rushed to get the guy's wallet to look at his ID because he had forgotten his name (but the sex was so good he wanted to see him again I'm guessing). Other people have relationships that started as Craiglist ads for a particular fetish. You can have an awesome, deep relationship that started purely sexual. (You can also have awesome relationships that stay purely sexual by the way).

I don't doubt that such relationship are real I'm asking if they are good or healthy.


At any rate, it doesn't seem like he's using transwomen and dating one after the other, having sex with her and then dumping her or something. I can't tell you how the attraction would feel to his girlfriend because that's something that depends on the person so you really would need to ask her. Some people will be uncomfortable with it, some will embrace it. It depends on a lot of things, including how much disphoria they have and whether they plan on transitioning more (for instance if someone loves their penis but they're planning on having bottom surgery).

Yeah, I'm not friends with her so asking her is not really possible. By what he told me she has a **** and plans to keep, I don’t know if she uses it on him or not.

So I guess it all boils down on "if they are ok with it it's fine" I get that but let's stop focusing on him and his gf and generalize it to this kind of dating as whole, a guy who dates a trans woman because trans folk turn him on is a good or a bad thing? I believe that trans people have many dating issues is this kind of stuff something better and a good prospect or part of the problem?


At any rate, I don't see any reason to worry from what you've told us.

Good to know, I really like him and she seems like a good girl, I wish the best for them and would hate to see that they are stuck in a harmful situation.

[golentan]

You said he was unattractive, you asserted the relationship was based off of fetishization based on nothing more than him saying he found her body really attractive as you put it and asked your only question around said fetishization in a multi year relationship, which... anyway, you dismissed her identity as not really a girl, and in your explicit non-apology you implied most trans people are prostitutes and therefore unable to find love which... anyway, and used the word heterophobia to dismiss upset directed at you.

The reasons I think less of you are only partially ignorance related, and are nothing to do with your sexuality or gender.

[Rain Dragon]

Re good, bad, unhealthy, healthy question, I think it depends a lot more on context for each case.

For this one, if I'm reading right you said your friend is really into his girlfriend and only one of the reasons is she's trans. As posters above mentioned, lots of good relationships started from lots of different reasons. You said they'd been together almost three years and so from just the story and that, their relationship is probably good and healthy. How or why it started is probably rather small compared to how or why it continued for three years. =p

[Zendy]

You said he was unattractive, you asserted the relationship was based off of fetishization based on nothing more than him saying he found her body really attractive as you put it and asked your only question around said fetishization in a multi year relationship, which... anyway, you dismissed her identity as not really a girl, and in your explicit non-apology you implied most trans people are prostitutes and therefore unable to find love which... anyway, and used the word heterophobia to dismiss upset directed at you.

The reasons I think less of you are only partially ignorance related, and are nothing to do with your sexuality or gender.

I didn't said that, I just said I didn't find him attractive as way to assert my heterosexuality since I'm posting in a gay thread and I'm a very insecure person by default for not liking sports and other manly things and constantly having my sexuality questioned, something that is quite frustrating and stressful for me.

He clearly stated that, I'm sorry if that wasn't made clear I didn't want to use his worlds with fear of offending someone, clearly that didn't work and LGBT people once more proved to be easily offended and extremely defensive.

The fact is that I asked something I always ask to him when he starts dating a girl, why did you started liking her? Normally he says stuff such as the book she was reading, some stuff she said the way she danced... I this case he specially said it was something sexual.

How did I dismiss her as a girl? I have been using the right pronouns all the time.

Well, all the trans folk I know are or were prostitutes a lot of trans folk are, that's a fact, not that there is anything wrong with it, or do you also hate prostitutes? And I never said they are unable to find love.

Oh so you admit you dislike me just because I'm not well versed in the LGBT culture?


Re good, bad, unhealthy, healthy question, I think it depends a lot more on context for each case.

For this one, if I'm reading right you said your friend is really into his girlfriend and only one of the reasons is she's trans. As posters above mentioned, lots of good relationships started from lots of different reasons. You said they'd been together almost three years and so from just the story and that, their relationship is probably good and healthy. How or why it started is probably rather small compared to how or why it continued for three years. =p

I guess you are right, it's just that I haven't talked to him for a long while since I was far away, now that I’m back all those changes kind of got me off-guard. They may be dating for a while but she is someone new for me.

[lio45]

You said they'd been together almost three years...

But then she also said they'd been together barely over a year and a half. (Started dating at "the end of 2015", we're in the summer of 2017.)

[golentan]

Anyway, I think he is rather plain looking,

Insult which is as pointless as the prior compliments.


I just found out yesterday that she is not really a girl per se but rather a trans woman

Dismissing her identity. Right here. This is the big one which put my teeth on edge. Read this sentence, and your response to Knaight and Eldest as many times as it takes to realize why I will. Not. Drop. This.


Is the fact that he likes her mainly because of a sexual thing, he finds her trans status something attractive that turns him on, something good or is this type of fetishization of trans bodies something harmful?

but still strike me as odd that the main factor that lead them to be a couple was so sexual.

I mean he is a very sexual person and maybe that was only what started and he grow to love her for personality but still my question stays.

Sexualizing her an awful lot given it's not your relationship, it seems to be going strong, and you have asserted his sexual appetite which... not something I associate with stable multi-year relationships.

You are asserting that the reason was sexual, but he said it was because she was trans.


I don’t, please don't assume you know what I think, that's rude arrogant and pretentious, I know that some can find real love, some don’t (to be honest all trans people I know are or were prostitutes)

Prostitution, sexualizing, slanders about ability to find love. Getting angry about people calling you out on your words.


We are good friends and he is very open about his sex life, mostly because I’m not a very big fan of sex in the first place and he almost has satyromania.

he is a very sexual person and someone who can easily start a relationship with any kind of girl and he choose to date a trans despite having so many other options

Assertions about sexual proclivities again, questioning why anyone would have a relationship with a transperson...


I did no such things and I meant no harm, I would ask for forgiveness but all I said was said with no intention of harming others and since others seem to not be offended I will take that maybe you need to grow a thicker skin?

Explicitly refusing to apologize... kind of angries up my blood whenever someone does it.


can you turn that heterophobia down please?

Up to this point, you haven't said anything about your gender or sexual identity. You were just being kind of nasty on the subject of your friend's relationship.


Thanks, I’m sorry if anything I said was offensive, I can’t see where and you haven’t pointed out where so I will just conclude that not everything is an attack sometimes people just don’t know any better

Refusal to acknowledge complaints is not the same as complaints lacking substance.


She does! Not only does she looks like a girl she looks like a very pretty one, above average looks, but when she starts talking you can clearly see that she was originally a man, that's how I found out about it (And confirmed by stalking her social media).

Going after a transwoman on the question of passing, stalking her on social media.


Isn't it? By what he said he knew she was trans found that hot and that's why they started dating, unlike the non-trans girls he dated who shared the same interests as him.

I don't doubt that such relationship are real I'm asking if they are good or healthy.

Again, implying basically that he chose wrong and questioning a relationship that is not your business.


Yeah, I'm not friends with her so asking her is not really possible. By what he told me she has a **** and plans to keep, I don’t know if she uses it on him or not.

Why do you care enough about the mechanics of their sex life to post about it? Do you know if your other male friends are into pegging, for example?


So I guess it all boils down on "if they are ok with it it's fine" I get that but let's stop focusing on him and his gf and generalize it to this kind of dating as whole, a guy who dates a trans woman because trans folk turn him on is a good or a bad thing? I believe that trans people have many dating issues is this kind of stuff something better and a good prospect or part of the problem?

See, you came so close to a good sentiment here, and then turned around and questioned the romantic lives of a huge number of people and asking about the difference between trans-attraction and chasers, which... whole debate thattaway, and it's not your call in the end.


I didn't said that, I just said I didn't find him attractive as way to assert my heterosexuality since I'm posting in a gay thread and I'm a very insecure person by default for not liking sports and other manly things and constantly having my sexuality questioned, something that is quite frustrating and stressful for me.

Yeah. We got that. The sexual insecurity subtext is something many of us here have long history with and recognized pretty clearly. You didn't have to tell us that you are insecure.


He clearly stated that, I'm sorry if that wasn't made clear I didn't want to use his worlds with fear of offending someone, clearly that didn't work and LGBT people once more proved to be easily offended and extremely defensive.

I'm also not surprised that you believe LGBT folk to be thin skinned if this is how you talk to them in daily life.


The fact is that I asked something I always ask to him when he starts dating a girl, why did you started liking her? Normally he says stuff such as the book she was reading, some stuff she said the way she danced... I this case he specially said it was something sexual.

From what you've said, he finds her trans-ness attractive. Maybe that means her strong sense of identity and self. Maybe it was a sex thing, so what, lots of people have relationships which start as a sex thing. But you're then blowing everything into questioning the health of a three year relationship and getting super defensive about any criticism, so I got to wonder why this is such a big deal to you.


How did I dismiss her as a girl? I have been using the right pronouns all the time.

See above.


Well, all the trans folk I know are or were prostitutes a lot of trans folk are, that's a fact, not that there is anything wrong with it, or do you also hate prostitutes? And I never said they are unable to find love.

Quite the double-down. No, I said nothing of the sort. But when asked about love, you said some people can, some people can't, and transwomen are prostitutes. And... just, so many flags coming off you.


Oh so you admit you dislike me just because I'm not well versed in the LGBT culture?

I said... almost literally the exact opposite. If your response to anyone questioning your assumptions or trying to ask you to moderate your tone wasn't to double down and get defensive I would not be angry right now.

[WarKitty]

I don’t, please don't assume you know what I think, that's rude arrogant and pretentious, I know that some can find real love, some don’t (to be honest all trans people I know are or were prostitutes) my point is if you think a relationship who started in fetishization is good and healthy or something bad.

The point I was trying to make is that he is a very sexual person and someone who can easily start a relationship with any kind of girl and he choose to date a trans despite having so many other options which I think is valid and relevant I did it with no ill intentions.

The fact is that I asked something I always ask to him when he starts dating a girl, why did you started liking her? Normally he says stuff such as the book she was reading, some stuff she said the way she danced... I this case he specially said it was something sexual.

Replace "being trans" with any other attribute and I think you'll see what the issue is. You're talking very much like there's something weird or in need of special justification that he's dating a trans woman. If he'd dated small breasted women before, and now he was dating a woman with larger breasts, and he told you he found her attractive, would you ask these same questions? (Especially the "so many other options" bit - I doubt there are many relationships where people would find that a non-offensive comment.)


I did no such things and I meant no harm, I would ask for forgiveness but all I said was said with no intention of harming others and since others seem to not be offended I will take that maybe you need to grow a thicker skin? This is the questions thread and not knowing is not a sin, can you turn that heterophobia down please? Thanks, I’m sorry if anything I said was offensive, I can’t see where and you haven’t pointed out where so I will just conclude that not everything is an attack sometimes people just don’t know any better, I hope this won’t make you think less of me.

There's a phrase, "intent isn't magic." Meaning you can hold attitudes where you don't mean to offend anyone, but that still *are* bad attitudes to have and bad things to say. In this case, whether you meant it or not, implying that there's something weird or significantly different about dating a trans woman as opposed to a cis woman is the kind of thing that tends to be hurtful. You're coming across very much as that being interested in a trans person is some sort of special fetish as opposed to dating a cis person.


I didn't said that, I just said I didn't find him attractive as way to assert my heterosexuality since I'm posting in a gay thread and I'm a very insecure person by default for not liking sports and other manly things and constantly having my sexuality questioned, something that is quite frustrating and stressful for me.

Oh so you admit you dislike me just because I'm not well versed in the LGBT culture?

It's more that you're turning very defensive pretty much immediately when told that some of what you're saying isn't ok.

As a side note...if it's frustrating and stressful to have your sexuality questioned as a heterosexual man, do you imagine it might actually be more stressful for those who are not heterosexual?

[Rain Dragon]

But then she also said they'd been together barely over a year and a half. (Started dating at "the end of 2015", we're in the summer of 2017.)

I missed the number, cheers.
I'm not sure if the difference invalidates my post or not. <.<


I guess you are right, it's just that I haven't talked to him for a long while since I was far away, now that I’m back all those changes kind of got me off-guard. They may be dating for a while but she is someone new for me.

Ah, you'll be fine I'm sure, I'd recommend if I may, just focus on being a good/supportive friend.

[lio45]

I missed the number, cheers.
I'm not sure if the difference invalidates my post or not. <.<

No, it doesn't. Sure, three years is better than a year and a half (personally, I had no less than two serious relationships that crumbled at the 2-year threshold, so I'm probably even a bit biased) but I wouldn't say it invalidates your argument - 1.5 years is still a decently long time, it's not just a throwaway thing.

[Knaight]

I guess you are right, it's just that I haven't talked to him for a long while since I was far away, now that I’m back all those changes kind of got me off-guard. They may be dating for a while but she is someone new for me.

It's almost like your friend suspected that telling you, specifically this information wouldn't go over well for some reason. Given your attitude on this thread so far that's not exactly surprising.

[Zendy]

But then she also said they'd been together barely over a year and a half. (Started dating at "the end of 2015", we're in the summer of 2017.)

Yeah that's why I used the term "together" rather than dating, they only officially started dating in the end of 2016 but they have been together for a long time, I'm not even sure of how much I assume they meet around March of 2016, but maybe it was earlier.


Replace "being trans" with any other attribute and I think you'll see what the issue is. You're talking very much like there's something weird or in need of special justification that he's dating a trans woman. If he'd dated small breasted women before, and now he was dating a woman with larger breasts, and he told you he found her attractive, would you ask these same questions? (Especially the "so many other options" bit - I doubt there are many relationships where people would find that a non-offensive comment.)

I would be just as concerned if he for started dating a black woman and I asked why and he answered “because she is black and that’s hot” see how messed up that is? Same goes with Asian, Inuit or any sort of group.


Ah, you'll be fine I'm sure, I'd recommend if I may, just focus on being a good/supportive friend.

Thanks I’ll try, they invited me to got out with them this weekend I just hope I don’t make a fool of myself.


No, it doesn't. Sure, three years is better than a year and a half (personally, I had no less than two serious relationships that crumbled at the 2-year threshold, so I'm probably even a bit biased) but I wouldn't say it invalidates your argument - 1.5 years is still a decently long time, it's not just a throwaway thing.

Well, I hope that they work out.


It's almost like your friend suspected that telling you, specifically this information wouldn't go over well for some reason. Given your attitude on this thread so far that's not exactly surprising.

I don’t think so, why do you assume so?


There's a phrase, "intent isn't magic." Meaning you can hold attitudes where you don't mean to offend anyone, but that still *are* bad attitudes to have and bad things to say. In this case, whether you meant it or not, implying that there's something weird or significantly different about dating a trans woman as opposed to a cis woman is the kind of thing that tends to be hurtful. You're coming across very much as that being interested in a trans person is some sort of special fetish as opposed to dating a cis person.

I’m not, it’s just his attitude made me think of that.

I’m sorry if the things I said were hurtful in anyway, I just don’t know how to approach LGBT people and that’s not a problem I have with any other group of minorities.


It's more that you're turning very defensive pretty much immediately when told that some of what you're saying isn't ok.

Because I was almost accused of being a homophobe because I asked a question.


As a side note...if it's frustrating and stressful to have your sexuality questioned as a heterosexual man, do you imagine it might actually be more stressful for those who are not heterosexual?

Yes, that’s why I expected Golentan to be more understanding that posting here for me is quite a trial.


Insult which is as pointless as the prior compliments.

Being plain looking is an insult? How come? I didn’t said he was ugly or anything just said that he has an ordinary face, geez.


Dismissing her identity. Right here. This is the big one which put my teeth on edge. Read this sentence, and your response to Knaight and Eldest as many times as it takes to realize why I will. Not. Drop. This.

Oh, I see now, yeah that was really bad of my part, I’m sorry trans women are just as women as "cis" women. I will correct it.


Sexualizing her an awful lot given it's not your relationship, it seems to be going strong, and you have asserted his sexual appetite which... not something I associate with stable multi-year relationships.

Well that’s what he does and that’s what it worries me since I agree that type of sexual thing is not what comes in mind for a long stable healthy relationship.


You are asserting that the reason was sexual, but he said it was because she was trans.

They are not mutually exclusive.


Prostitution, sexualizing, slanders about ability to find love. Getting angry about people calling you out on your words.

Most of them goddammit, I said most of them, all of the ones I know, which are not many, are or were prostitutes but this is just a fact about my life not an attack, I’m not calling you or anyone you know a prostitute Gheesh.


Assertions about sexual proclivities again, questioning why anyone would have a relationship with a
transperson...

No, I’m not I just think his reasons for dating her are too limited. If I asked him why and he told me the reason he liked her were her personality or something she did or liked buit instead he said “because she is trans and that’s turns me on” I see that as reducing her to something she is rather than do, think or say. I fear for her, being with someone who doesn’t see her as a person but as a fetish for his kink.


Explicitly refusing to apologize... kind of angries up my blood whenever someone does it.

Ok I admit I was rude for calling her not a girl per see. I’m sorry I hope you are able to forgive me.


Going after a transwoman on the question of passing, stalking her on social media.

I’m not “going after her” she asked if she passed well and I said yes expect for her voice, it’s not like I said that to her face. And stalking her was a manner of speech and you know it.


Again, implying basically that he chose wrong and questioning a relationship that is not your business.

I didn’t I was talking about if people who are with each other and their main reason is sexual I’m asking if that’s ok and healthy you are taking my words out of context.


Why do you care enough about the mechanics of their sex life to post about it? Do you know if your other male friends are into pegging, for example?

Because it’s different from what I’m used to? And it’s natural for us humans to be curios, sexuality is not something to be ashamed of and if someone one is ok with talking about I’m willing to listen and understand in a rational level. I would never inquire about “pegging” since I didn’t know what that was until know but if I saw one of my friend’s Gf buying that stuff or he is open about I would want to learn more if he is willing to explain he appeal to me, why is that bad?


See, you came so close to a good sentiment here, and then turned around and questioned the romantic lives of a huge number of people and asking about the difference between trans-attraction and chasers, which... whole debate thattaway, and it's not your call in the end.

Why not? I think it’s a valid question and concern. Why are you so defensive and don’t just explain to me the difference between trans-attraction and chasers? It may be obvious to you but it’s not for me, if you share you knowledge with me that won’t be a problem anymore, instead of fighting me.


Yeah. We got that. The sexual insecurity subtext is something many of us here have long history with and recognized pretty clearly. You didn't have to tell us that you are insecure.

Well if you so clearly knew those assertions were caused by my insecurity why question it? Why ruin my coping mechanism? I really expected more empathy from trans people.



I'm also not surprised that you believe LGBT folk to be thin skinned if this is how you talk to them in daily life.

Believe, I talk and work with all kinds of people and never had any problem with them, I never worked directly with LGBT people but by what I see form other people, they are not an easy bunch to deal with, I guess they suffered a lot but that don’t justify.


From what you've said, he finds her trans-ness attractive. Maybe that means her strong sense of identity and self. Maybe it was a sex thing, so what, lots of people have relationships which start as a sex thing. But you're then blowing everything into questioning the health of a three year relationship and getting super defensive about any criticism, so I got to wonder why this is such a big deal to you.

I expect her Trans. status to be a factor not the main reason. Is like a girl dating a guy because of his abs rather than who he is, personality and actions wise.


Quite the double-down. No, I said nothing of the sort. But when asked about love, you said some people can, some people can't, and transwomen are prostitutes. And... just, so many flags coming off you.

But that’s people, some find love and some don’t trans people are not any different from people are they?

But most are prostitutes, it’s a sad fact but a fact nonetheless or do you deny it? Just because you don’t want something to be true doesn’t mean you can ignore the fact and make it magicly not be a thing.


I said... almost literally the exact opposite. If your response to anyone questioning your assumptions or trying to ask you to moderate your tone wasn't to double down and get defensive I would not be angry right now.

I’m sorry, but the point I’m trying to get across is that I would be just as concerned if he was dating a “cis” woman because of her feet. It’s not about her being trans it’s about her being reduced to being trans.

[Knaight]

Believe, I talk and work with all kinds of people and never had any problem with them, I never worked directly with LGBT people but by what I see form other people, they are not an easy bunch to deal with, I guess they suffered a lot but that don’t justify.

Unless you've never worked directly with more than about fifteen, twenty people total this isn't plausible. What is plausible is that the LGBT people you've worked with haven't told you they were LGBT. Given that you've been alternating between naked hostility and a martyrdom act from the moment you joined this thread, that seems vastly more likely. It's generally hard to get along with a group when you alternate between insulting them and acting like it's just such a burden to interact with the group because you might be interpreted as a member of it, and that's just a terrible, terrible thing.

[Sobol]

I'm a very insecure person by default for not liking sports and other manly things
The wonderful world of Manly Things is vast and manifold. I'm pretty sure you've seen only a small part of it and there are some Manly Things out there you'd find to your liking (regardless of whether you're a man, a woman, or other).

I hated PT at school. Then I went to university - and PT was my favorite class: we did different exercises there and played different games.

Also, "being rude and self-assertive" seems like a Manly Thing you've already mastered.


But most are prostitutes, it’s a sad fact but a fact nonetheless or do you deny it?
I'm not an authority on the subject at all, but a quick Google search shows the number of 11% mentioned:
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-it-appear-every-transgender-woman-is-in-prostitution
- while only 1% concerning cisgender women.
11% is high, for me. But 11% isn't "most."

From which reliable sources did you get your numbers?

[Prospekt]

How did I dismiss her as a girl? I have been using the right pronouns all the time.

"I just found out yesterday that she is not really a girl per se but rather a trans woman"

"she is not really a girl per se"

"not really a girl"

[golentan]

You barely know her, but you're stalking her social media accounts, openly questioning their sex life, trying to justify your disapproval, getting all defensive about your own sexual interests when I doubt anyone here would have blinked at "Hi, I'm a heterosexual guy with a question about my friend and how to support him," making socially loaded statements without any awareness of context or willingness to contemplate why it might upset people, and just generally reminding me of the worst elements of being a queer kid in high school. It reminds me of one person I knew who was absolutely convinced that jewish people have horns under their hair, and I could not even explain why that was not an okay thing to say because trying to untangle it involved dealing with too many assumptions.

And you keep asserting your friend is sexually rapacious, but the only thing you've said about it is that he has a sex life and claimed that he is sexually rapacious, which... Okay? He's held a stable relationship down and seems to be having fun. That sounds like a positive, not like Sex Addicts who spin out of control and damage their health and careers because of their addiction, and generally need a loving support group to help them find better coping mechanisms for what they're dealing with.

And WHY would posting here be a trial? Kindly explain why, if you thought your story and question were inoffensive, the act of talking to queer folks might be so upsetting you wanted to do some preemptive verbal defenses?

[Lissou]

Hummm... That makes sense but are there people who are ok with being objectified?

Yes. On their own terms, often only during sex, sometimes 24/7.



Isn't it? By what he said he knew she was trans found that hot and that's why they started dating, unlike the non-trans girls he dated who shared the same interests as him.

I don't doubt that such relationship are real I'm asking if they are good or healthy.

I don't see a problem. It doesn't seem to be the only thing he likes about her. And I don't see why "he started dating her because he was attracted to her" would be a red flag. Replace her being trans with anything else a guy may find attractive (being a nerd, having large breasts, having a French accent), and at some point if you dismiss there relationships there is nothing left. It's good that she's with someone who likes her for who she is rather than despite it, and it doesn't seem that he's using her, so it just seems to me like they're really compatible. He learned something about her, which is something he's attracted to, so he asked her out and from that point the relationship progressed. That's pretty standard.

I know you were not trying to dismiss her identity, and that you were just clumsy in your phrasing. But saying "not really a girl" is hurtful to a lot of people here. If you truly meant no harm, I think you should apologise for it. The accepted way to phrase it, for future reference, would be "I learned that she was assigned male at birth". I know that's what you meant, because I've been unfamiliar with the accepted terms in the past, and it's natural to be defensive when you were not trying to hurt people. But by defending yourself you'll only come across worse. It's much better to admit you didn't know the right term and you are really sorry for using a hurtful phrase, and then make sure to use the proper terms in the future.

I hope we did answer your question, at any rate :)

[Recherché]

Also something to note is that it's really rare and pretty hard for people to be seriously heterophobic; a lot of us thought we were cis-het at some point. Statistically most of our families are cis-het people. Most people we deal with on a daily basis are also outside the LGBTQA community.

If we had an irrational hatred of them we'd be in a lot of trouble. Irritation sometimes when people make unfounded assumptions about us is doable. Anger at specific people when they're jerks also happens. However that's very different from a general hated of straight people. And usually fairly easily forgiven when they stop being asses.

[Shamash]

Well, I'm not really trans so I can't speak for them but from what I'm able to gather by living together with trans folk is that fetichization is indeed a problem, there are many guys willing to go out with trans people for sexual gratification rather than pursuit a romantic and affective relationship, but the point I think the others are trying to make is that, going by what you described this doesn't seem to be the case, besides for many people, Myself not included, discussing the romantic and sexual life of other people online is just plain rude, even if you don't name them, so there is that.

I also want to point out that there is nothing wrong with being gay. I know you are not gay, but if you were which you aren't that's not a problem, stop giving other people so much power of you. That's not good trust me.

[lio45]

I’m sorry, but the point I’m trying to get across is that I would be just as concerned if he was dating a “cis” woman because of her feet.

And that would also not be cause for concern after they've been in a friction-free relationship for years. People happen to be attracted to various things, and if I fall for a girl with perfect feet and that's what makes me happy and she also likes me, nothing wrong with that.

[lio45]

P.S. if it's your friend you're concerned about, you have absolutely nothing to fear - you pointed out repeatedly he could basically get any girl he wanted, so if he chooses to stay with one then you can take it for granted he's satisfied with what he's got.

The opposite problem is more common - someone who's always had a hard time finding a partner and who's having to choose between continuing with an unhealthy relationship or cutting that cord to become alone and unloved for the foreseeable future. That's a reasonable question to be in a dilemma about, but your friend is far from being in that position.

[Zendy]

Also, "being rude and self-assertive" seems like a Manly Thing you've already mastered.

I didn’t do it on purpose it was developed as a cooping mechanism to deal with the toxic environment I live in.


"I just found out yesterday that she is not really a girl per se but rather a trans woman"

"she is not really a girl per se"

"not really a girl"

I already apoligezed for that.


And that would also not be cause for concern after they've been in a friction-free relationship for years. People happen to be attracted to various things, and if I fall for a girl with perfect feet and that's what makes me happy and she also likes me, nothing wrong with that.

I guess you are rigth.


P.S. if it's your friend you're concerned about, you have absolutely nothing to fear - you pointed out repeatedly he could basically get any girl he wanted, so if he chooses to stay with one then you can take it for granted he's satisfied with what he's got.

The opposite problem is more common - someone who's always had a hard time finding a partner and who's having to choose between continuing with an unhealthy relationship or cutting that cord to become alone and unloved for the foreseeable future. That's a reasonable question to be in a dilemma about, but your friend is far from being in that position.

I'm more concerned with her than him to be honest, sorry if that was not made clear.


I know you were not trying to dismiss her identity, and that you were just clumsy in your phrasing. But saying "not really a girl" is hurtful to a lot of people here. If you truly meant no harm, I think you should apologise for it. The accepted way to phrase it, for future reference, would be "I learned that she was assigned male at birth". I know that's what you meant, because I've been unfamiliar with the accepted terms in the past, and it's natural to be defensive when you were not trying to hurt people. But by defending yourself you'll only come across worse. It's much better to admit you didn't know the right term and you are really sorry for using a hurtful phrase, and then make sure to use the proper terms in the future.

I get that, I did apologise, I even edited my original post as a gesture of good faith.


Well, I'm not really trans so I can't speak for them but from what I'm able to gather by living together with trans folk is that fetichization is indeed a problem, there are many guys willing to go out with trans people for sexual gratification rather than pursuit a romantic and affective relationship, but the point I think the others are trying to make is that, going by what you described this doesn't seem to be the case, besides for many people, Myself not included, discussing the romantic and sexual life of other people online is just plain rude, even if you don't name them, so there is that.

I also want to point out that there is nothing wrong with being gay. I know you are not gay, but if you were which you aren't that's not a problem, stop giving other people so much power of you. That's not good trust me.

I guess you are right It’s just so frustrating to have people speculating about your sexuality, people who think I’m gay just because I don’t act as the stereotypical male makes me so angry not because I think being gay is bad or wrong just because I’m not that.

[Themrys]

And that would also not be cause for concern after they've been in a friction-free relationship for years. People happen to be attracted to various things, and if I fall for a girl with perfect feet and that's what makes me happy and she also likes me, nothing wrong with that.

Speak for yourself.
If I found out that a boy I love is only attracted to me because of my perfect feet, I'd be creeped out. Big time. I once found out that a dude who had a crush on me was attracted to my pretty face, when he recommended an anti-wrinkle cream. (Something I had never expressed any interest in)

It is creepy as hell.

And someone not finding out that their romantic partner is a creep for years is a thing that happens. Doesn't prove anything.

[Zendy]

Speak for yourself.
If I found out that a boy I love is only attracted to me because of my perfect feet, I'd be creeped out. Big time. I once found out that a dude who had a crush on me was attracted to my pretty face, when he recommended an anti-wrinkle cream. (Something I had never expressed any interest in)

It is creepy as hell.

And someone not finding out that their romantic partner is a creep for years is a thing that happens. Doesn't prove anything.

Thank you! This is where I was trying to get at!

[Astrella]

It's honestly really hard to judge their relationship on second hand info. Him saying he thinks it's hot that she's trans made me raise my eyebrows a little bit, but it's not easy to tell without context or if that was in response to you questioning his sexuality. I don't think there's anything wrong with being attracted to certain features, but it's important to handle it in a healthy way, put the actual person you're dating first.

[Themrys]

I guess you are right It’s just so frustrating to have people speculating about your sexuality, people who think I’m gay just because I don’t act as the stereotypical male makes me so angry not because I think being gay is bad or wrong just because I’m not that.

I don't know, I personally don't give a **** if anyone thinks I'm a lesbian, and never did, but of course, it is different. Men call women lesbians because they're frustrated they can't have that woman, and I only grin smugly if a homophobic idiot tells me, in other words, that I am not interested in him.

The dynamics of men calling other men gay as insult are different. I can imagine it feels bad to have your sexual orientation questioned because of things that have nothing to do with sexual orientation and are just lazy stereotyping.

However, you'd be much happier if people couldn't hurt you so easily. I hope you manage to build more self esteem. The only people whose opinion of your sexual orientation really matters are women you are interested in, and if a woman assumes you must be gay because you aren't stereotypical enough, she's probably not the right woman for you anyway. :smallwink:

[Sobol]

constantly having my sexuality questioned, something that is quite frustrating and stressful for me.
I'm regularly mistaken for a woman online because of my opinions. I've met people on the internet who refused to believe when I said I'm a cis male. (IRL it doesn't happen - I'm rather big, I like lifting weights, shave my head, etc.)

I find it hilarious. Why should I be stressed if someone thinks I'm a woman / an American / an astronaut? They are mistaken, but they didn't offend me. Because I don't consider women / Americans / astronauts worse than me.

Also, please learn to respect yourself and care less what other people think. (Finding Manly Things you like may help a lot - especially those Manly Things which make you feel proud after overcoming some difficulties.)

[Heliomance]

I guess you are right It’s just so frustrating to have people speculating about your sexuality, people who think I’m gay just because I don’t act as the stereotypical male makes me so angry not because I think being gay is bad or wrong just because I’m not that.

I have to say, people assuming I'm straight doesn't make me angry, despite the fact that I'm not. Why would it? Why should someone else's idea about my sexuality have any relevance to me, unless they're someone that I'm interested in?

[Themrys]

I'm regularly mistaken for a woman online because of my opinions. I've met people on the internet who refused to believe when I said I'm a cis male. (IRL it doesn't happen - I'm rather big, I like lifting weights, shave my head, etc.)

I find it hilarious. Why should I be stressed if someone thinks I'm a woman / an American / an astronaut? They are mistaken, but they didn't offend me. Because I don't consider women / Americans / astronauts worse than me.

I feel the same, but obviously to most trans people it is a big deal.

So I guess there's just people to whom their sexual orientation is equally important.

As I said, I don't mind if anyone mistakes me for a lesbian, but I think I'd be rather annoyed if I was lesbian and some creepy dude insisted that I must be het. Creepy dudes insisting you must be, at least potentially, sexually attracted to them is unpleasant. It probably doesn't happen to men in the same way, but I can understand why it'd be rather annoying to be called gay by very unattractive, nasty men, even if they don't mean to imply any attraction towards them, specifically.

[S@tanicoaldo]

I just found out yesterday that she is not "cis" but rather a trans woman, I found that intriguing and asked him why date a M -> F woman since he identify as straight and he told me he found her body and the fact she was trans really hot.


I guess you are right It’s just so frustrating to have people speculating about your sexuality, people who think I’m gay just because I don’t act as the stereotypical male makes me so angry not because I think being gay is bad or wrong just because I’m not that.

*Snicker* :smallbiggrin:

[Knaight]

It's honestly really hard to judge their relationship on second hand info. Him saying he thinks it's hot that she's trans made me raise my eyebrows a little bit, but it's not easy to tell without context or if that was in response to you questioning his sexuality. I don't think there's anything wrong with being attracted to certain features, but it's important to handle it in a healthy way, put the actual person you're dating first.

Had that part of the description come from someone else I'd have been raising my eyebrows a bit too, but given the rest of the post I strongly suspect an unreliable narrator at this point.

[Themrys]

*Snicker* :smallbiggrin:

It works the other way round, too.

If you want to call him out on speculating about his friend's sexuality, you can't at the same time tell him he should be fine with people speculating about his sexuality.

[S@tanicoaldo]

It works the other way round, too.

If you want to call him out on speculating about his friend's sexuality, you can't at the same time tell him he should be fine with people speculating about his sexuality.

I'm sorry what? Are you lecturing me? :smallconfused:

[Themrys]

I'm sorry what? Are you lecturing me? :smallconfused:

Sorry for assuming you wouldn't want to look like a hypocrite. :smallconfused:

I won't do it again.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Sorry for assuming you wouldn't want to look like a hypocrite. :smallconfused:

I won't do it again.

Good. :smallbiggrin:

[Knaight]

It works the other way round, too.

If you want to call him out on speculating about his friend's sexuality, you can't at the same time tell him he should be fine with people speculating about his sexuality.

Pointing out that people are breaking their own rules doesn't require subscribing to their rules.

[Shamash]

It works the other way round, too.

If you want to call him out on speculating about his friend's sexuality, you can't at the same time tell him he should be fine with people speculating about his sexuality.

I think Satanicoaldo was more interested in calling him on his hypocrisy than telling him he should be fine with people speculating about his sexuality, to be honest I’m not able to read that at all on her comment! Are you sure you are not just projecting what you are thinking on her comment?

[Zendy]

I just found out they hired a professional photographer to make a sexy potshot of the two, if that’s not him objectifying her trans body I don’t know what is.

Oh, and for people who can't understand why people calling me gay or calming that I look gay is so terrible, think of it as if they were misgendering me, only with my sexuality rather than my gender.

Can you see how hurtful it is now?

[The Extinguisher]

I just found out they hired a professional photographer to make a sexy potshot of the two (https://68.media.tumblr.com/8678027421b558faf7d768c74daa5d65/tumblr_ovimnkiycD1veme87o6_1280.jpg) (NSFW for obvious reasons), if that’s not him objectifying her trans body I don’t know what is.

Oh, and for people who can't understand why people calling me gay or calming that I look gay is so terrible, think of it as if they were misgendering me, only with my sexuality rather than my gender.

Can you see how hurtful it is now?


Okay i have no idea whats going on right now, and the whole thing reads incredibly fishy. Where did you get that image. Are you sharing something they made for themselves (gross) or did they post it publicly (on tumblr it looks like)? Like, we dont know these people or the context behind the photoshoot at all. This is just two people being sexy for each other because they are in a relationship.

Is your friend actually you? Are we being set up in an elaborate ruse?
Whats your end game here?

[Shamash]

I just found out they hired a professional photographer to make a sexy potshot of the two (https://68.media.tumblr.com/8678027421b558faf7d768c74daa5d65/tumblr_ovimnkiycD1veme87o6_1280.jpg) (NSFW for obvious reasons), if that’s not him objectifying her trans body I don’t know what is.

Oh, and for people who can't understand why people calling me gay or calming that I look gay is so terrible, think of it as if they were misgendering me, only with my sexuality rather than my gender.

Can you see how hurtful it is now?

The photos look tasteful enough, the point is that they are beautiful, young and seem to be having lots of fun with each other, don’t be an ass, if they have the money let them do what they want don’t be that guy, don’t be the party pooper that ruins their relationship by meddling too much, that’s a good way to lose your friend.

(Also, I’m not sure how private they want their photos to be so maybe sharing it with strangers on the net is not a good idea? Kind of rude to show their intimacy like this maybe you want to take that down?).

And I think no one was diminishing your suffering for having your sexuality questioned, it's just that no one did it here and you seem too obsessive about it, chill out friend.

[Zendy]

Okay i have no idea whats going on right now, and the whole thing reads incredibly fishy. Where did you get that image. Are you sharing something they made for themselves (gross) or did they post it publicly (on tumblr it looks like)? Like, we dont know these people or the context behind the photoshoot at all. This is just two people being sexy for each other because they are in a relationship.

Is your friend actually you? Are we being set up in an elaborate ruse?
Whats your end game here?

No, it's just that I can't stop thinking how wrong this is and almost no one is believing me and I wanted to prove myself, it looked like a good idea at the time, I’m sorry that was a dumb thing to do.

[Prospekt]

I just found out they hired a professional photographer to make a sexy potshot of the two (https://68.media.tumblr.com/8678027421b558faf7d768c74daa5d65/tumblr_ovimnkiycD1veme87o6_1280.jpg) (NSFW for obvious reasons), if that’s not him objectifying her trans body I don’t know what is.

Oh, and for people who can't understand why people calling me gay or calming that I look gay is so terrible, think of it as if they were misgendering me, only with my sexuality rather than my gender.

Can you see how hurtful it is now?

I mean, if she's perfectly willing to be a part of it, then no, I really don't see it that way. I'm not saying that he isn't, but this entire time it has seemed like you're willing to take anything you can get to fire off some accusation of him objectifying her.

Also, I really am going to disagree on your analogy there. I don't think you understand the magnitude of being denied your gender identity by others. I've had people laugh in my face, or accuse me of being out of uniform, because my nametag at my previous job said Amber but I looked like a cis guy. I've worked with people who have muttered under their breath that you can't change your gender, in regards to me. Every time I have to pick up my HRT from Walgreen's, I have to hear them call me by my dead name. People would refer to me by miss when they saw me from the side or from my back, and then when I turn around to face them, they'd say, "Oh, sorry, I meant sir." That is stuff I deal with in my everyday life. Stuff like that has a bit more impact than someone assuming you're gay. If you have a problem that people think you're gay based on how you look, it sounds a lot more like you have a problem with the concept of being gay.

[Knaight]

I just found out they hired a professional photographer to make a sexy potshot of the two, if that’s not him objectifying her trans body I don’t know what is.
Three things:
1) Objectifying someone who is trans* is not the same thing as objectifying someone's trans* status. Acting like they're equivalent suggests that you think that the only reason someone could find someone trans* attractive is as a fetish, which is abject nonsense.
2) A mutual decision between two people to both appear in a sexy photo is really stretching the term "objectifying" to begin with.
3) This right here? This sort of thing is just yet more evidence for why I'd consider you an incredibly unreliable source here.


Oh, and for people who can't understand why people calling me gay or calming that I look gay is so terrible, think of it as if they were misgendering me, only with my sexuality rather than my gender.

See, here's the thing - that's not what happened in this thread. You came barreling in with a proclamation that you were straight, and emphasized that you didn't want to be mistaken for any other sexuality because it would be traumatic. "Let me be clear, I'm not one of you people" has a very different ring to it than "stop spreading misinformation about me".

[Zendy]

I mean, if she's perfectly willing to be a part of it, then no, I really don't see it that way. I'm not saying that he isn't, but this entire time it has seemed like you're willing to take anything you can get to fire off some accusation of him objectifying her.

Well, drug users are willing to use their drug, that doesn’t make it less unhealthy. But I guess I have done enough harm here, I’m sorry if I bothered you guys with questions and insecurities, we can move on and I won’t be bothering you guys no more.

[golentan]

No, it's just that I can't stop thinking how wrong this is and almost no one is believing me and I wanted to prove myself, it looked like a good idea at the time, I’m sorry that was a dumb thing to do.

If you want affirmation of your gut reaction that relationship between a cis man and a trans woman is a bad thing from this thread, you would really have to provide evidence of "bad things" in their relationship besides the trans thing.

Because right now, it's just coming off as you being really creepy about someone else's sex life and carrying a whole lot of baggage about what it means to be trans. Or non-straight, for that matter.

[S@tanicoaldo]

He does look hot, are you sure you are not just attracted to him and jealous of his new girlfriend? ::smallwink:

Jokes aside, this is really weird, the way you keep insisting a couple that seems happy is unhealthy really makes me think there are hidden layers that you want to share but don’t know how. :smallconfused:

Come on open up buddy what’s the problem here? :smallbiggrin:

[Honest Tiefling]

If you want affirmation of your gut reaction that relationship between a cis man and a trans woman is a bad thing from this thread, you would really have to provide evidence of "bad things" in their relationship besides the trans thing.

I agree whole-heartedly with this. Abuse in a relationship is a bad thing, but the worst this guy has done is 1) find her hot 2) want pictures of said hotness. If she was a cis woman, would you care? I wouldn't give a flying rat's butt if a friend told me they were doing so, trans or not. Okay, I might live in a more open area then most, but I didn't think this was so rare? Heck, even if the photos were public, I'd assume it was a part of their bedroom play or them looking for a third because I assumed abuse or him objectifying her.

Also, are you sure he didn't tell you this as a joke? I mean, I tell my friends that I married my husband to reach things in tall places. I wouldn't care if he was shorter, but that makes for a better joke. Some circles are not so good on the political humor, so I've heard jokes regarding certain fetishes of this nature.

[Sobol]

I’m sorry if I bothered you guys with questions and insecurities, we can move on and I won’t be bothering you guys no more.
There's nothing wrong with questions per se. Answering LGBTAI+-related questions is the whole purpose of this thread. And you seem to listen to what others say and try to understand.

Come to the support thread when you need help about your insecurities. Or just want to chat. We have straight cis guys there, too.

[Rain Dragon]

Can you see how hurtful it is now?

What?
And you said in your original post he said he thought she's hot. This seems more like something he'd do because she's hot than damning evidence that he's only into her for being trans*.

In my opinion (which you can take or leave as you wish, of course), you should stop worrying about an otherwise private thing for these two people. I'm sure they're fine, as posters above have stated there hasn't been any context really that suggests they're not fine. =/

[Heliomance]

I just found out they hired a professional photographer to make a sexy potshot of the two, if that’s not him objectifying her trans body I don’t know what is.

Oh, and for people who can't understand why people calling me gay or calming that I look gay is so terrible, think of it as if they were misgendering me, only with my sexuality rather than my gender.

Can you see how hurtful it is now?

Again, I think the vast majority of gay people wouldn't give a rat's arse if some randomer assumed they were straight, so long as they weren't creepily coming on to them despite making it clear that such advances were unwelcome. I don't give a toss what someone I don't want to date thinks of my sexuality - why do you?

[Zendy]

If you want affirmation of your gut reaction that relationship between a cis man and a trans woman is a bad thing from this thread, you would really have to provide evidence of "bad things" in their relationship besides the trans thing.

Because right now, it's just coming off as you being really creepy about someone else's sex life and carrying a whole lot of baggage about what it means to be trans. Or non-straight, for that matter.

It has nothing to do with the fact that she is trans. I don't know why you guys keep insisting on that. If she was black for example I would be posting this in a black support forum but she is trans so LGBT support forum.


He does look hot, are you sure you are not just attracted to him and jealous of his new girlfriend? ::smallwink:

Jokes aside, this is really weird, the way you keep insisting a couple that seems happy is unhealthy really makes me think there are hidden layers that you want to share but don’t know how. :smallconfused:

Come on open up buddy what’s the problem here? :smallbiggrin:

There are no “hidden layers” this whole thing just got me by surprise and I'm not being able to deal with it properly.


I agree whole-heartedly with this. Abuse in a relationship is a bad thing, but the worst this guy has done is 1) find her hot 2) want pictures of said hotness. If she was a cis woman, would you care? I wouldn't give a flying rat's butt if a friend told me they were doing so, trans or not. Okay, I might live in a more open area then most, but I didn't think this was so rare? Heck, even if the photos were public, I'd assume it was a part of their bedroom play or them looking for a third because I assumed abuse or him objectifying her.

Also, are you sure he didn't tell you this as a joke? I mean, I tell my friends that I married my husband to reach things in tall places. I wouldn't care if he was shorter, but that makes for a better joke. Some circles are not so good on the political humor, so I've heard jokes regarding certain fetishes of this nature.

I don't think he would joke with something like that, why would he? Besides her voice clearly indicates that she's trans and her social media also says so.


There's nothing wrong with questions per se. Answering LGBTAI+-related questions is the whole purpose of this thread. And you seem to listen to what others say and try to understand.

Come to the support thread when you need help about your insecurities. Or just want to chat. We have straight cis guys there, too.

I don't think I would fit there, but thanks for being kind.


What?
And you said in your original post he said he thought she's hot. This seems more like something he'd do because she's hot than damning evidence that he's only into her for being trans*.

In my opinion (which you can take or leave as you wish, of course), you should stop worrying about an otherwise private thing for these two people. I'm sure they're fine, as posters above have stated there hasn't been any context really that suggests they're not fine. =/

Well, good to know.


Again, I think the vast majority of gay people wouldn't give a rat's arse if some randomer assumed they were straight, so long as they weren't creepily coming on to them despite making it clear that such advances were unwelcome. I don't give a toss what someone I don't want to date thinks of my sexuality - why do you?

Because that's something I'm not, I bet a lot of CIS people tell you they don't mind being misgendered, does that make it less of a problem?

[Thufir]

It has nothing to do with the fact that she is trans. I don't know why you guys keep insisting on that. If she was black for example I would be posting this in a black support forum but she is trans so LGBT support forum.

And if you conducted yourself in the same way there you would probably be told you had some problematic attitudes about race.

[Heliomance]

Because that's something I'm not, I bet a lot of CIS people tell you they don't mind being misgendered, does that make it less of a problem?

If those cis (not an acronym btw) people actually ever got misgendered, let alone on a regular basis, I'm pretty certain their tunes would change PDQ.

[Jormengand]

If those cis (not an acronym btw) people actually ever got misgendered, let alone on a regular basis, I'm pretty certain their tunes would change PDQ.

(See: Dave from Boyinaband talking about his long hair/people's reaction to it.)

[Icewraith]

It has nothing to do with the fact that she is trans. I don't know why you guys keep insisting on that. If she was black for example I would be posting this in a black support forum but she is trans so LGBT support forum.



There are no “hidden layers” this whole thing just got me by surprise and I'm not being able to deal with it properly.



I don't think he would joke with something like that, why would he? Besides her voice clearly indicates that she's trans and her social media also says so.



I don't think I would fit there, but thanks for being kind.



Well, good to know.



Because that's something I'm not, I bet a lot of CIS people tell you they don't mind being misgendered, does that make it less of a problem?

I would bet not, because purposeful misgendering of cis people is often used and understood as a direct insult. Especially among men. I've seen it on a few occasions.

[S@tanicoaldo]

There are no “hidden layers” this whole thing just got me by surprise and I'm not being able to deal with it properly.

Wait, didn't you tell us that the problem is he just being with her becuase trans people turns he on? Why does that suprise you? Didn't you also told us he is kind of a super sexual guy? Isn't that the kind of behavior a super sexual guy whould have?

Is the suprise that he is doign that? Or that he is doing that with a trans?

[Heliomance]

Is the suprise that he is doign that? Or that he is doing that with a trans?
Friendly pointer: trans is an adjective, not a noun. You cannot have "a trans", you have "a trans person" or "a trans woman" or "a trans man".

[Orcus The Vile]

Because that's something I'm not, I bet a lot of CIS people tell you they don't mind being misgendered, does that make it less of a problem?

It all goes on how you deal with it, I remember that one day I went to the USA and overheard a bunch of friends talking in the table next to me at the restaurant.

One of them was making fun of the other because he was a wrestler during high school and college, he was saying stuff like:

"Wow you did wrestling? You know that's like super gay right? Those thigh cloths rubbing against guys asses in such homoerotic positions! Do you know that makes you super gay?"

Everyone was laughing and the guy went on to say:

"Yeah it's pretty gay if you think about it, I guess it must be gayest sport in the world *puts hands on his friend shoulders and whisper in a sexy way* Why do you ask? Want to try it?"

The guy get super uncomfortable and everyone starts laughing at him, he is now the butt of the joke it all goes on your attitude, if you are able to deal with it with assuredness makes it an easy problem to solve.

if you keep acting in a defensive manner you will only make it worst.

[Coidzor]

I just found out they hired a professional photographer to make a sexy potshot of the two, if that’s not him objectifying her trans body I don’t know what is.

That is not a potshot. Those are staged photographs, not something a paparazzo took under dubious circumstances.

Objectification and someone being an active participant when there's not even money being exchanged is a bit of an iffy proposition anyway.


Oh, and for people who can't understand why people calling me gay or calming that I look gay is so terrible, think of it as if they were misgendering me, only with my sexuality rather than my gender.

Can you see how hurtful it is now?

It's certainly very tiresome, rude behavior in the majority of contexts in which that could happen, but as was said, that's not what's going on here.

At any rate, it is "cis" or "Cis" when beginning a sentence with it. CIS is incorrect, it is not an acronym.

[Asmodean_]

Unless you're dealing with Computer Information Systems

[137beth]

"CIS" is correct if you are writing in some dialects of Latin, in which all letters were capitalized before lower-case letters became the standard. If you're writing in modern English, though, non-acronyms aren't supposed to be in all caps.

[Jormengand]

CIS is also the location code for a small island where everything happens backwards. I don't know how many people will get that reference but I MADE IT ANYWAY SO HA!

[SaintRidley]

No, it's just that I can't stop thinking how wrong this is and almost no one is believing me and I wanted to prove myself, it looked like a good idea at the time, I’m sorry that was a dumb thing to do.

In your crusade to stop the fetishization of trans people's bodies, you've pretty well turned the corner into "and all sexual attraction to trans people is fetishizing, so nobody should be attracted to trans people" (because you can't seem to conceive of a way your friend could be attracted to a trans person and not be creepy) and driven right into a wall.

I would recommend, instead of getting defensive, that you sit down and carefully re-read your posts asking yourself "Is there any conceivable way that what this says is transphobic? Does this leave any room for anybody to be attracted to trans people without being called creepy?" as you go along. It might help you get some perspective on why you're receiving the pushback you are.

[Siosilvar]

It's also the Confederation of Independent Systems.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/072/311/891.png

[JNAProductions]

Question: I'm running a genderfluid character in a PbP here on the forum. They're biologically female but have lost most attachment to their gender, and switch freely between male, female, or androgynous.

I figured I'd be playing them much as I would a normal person, obviously, but also (since they're a sneaky, deceptive type) switching genders as need be to play into stereotypes. Acting masculine when they need to intimidate someone, playing the girl card when they need to seem demure and suibtle, etc. etc.

I guess my main question is thus: Are there any big pitfalls I'd need to avoid to not be offensive with this character? Anything obvious that I might miss, not being genderfluid myself, that would be a jerk move?

[WarKitty]

In your crusade to stop the fetishization of trans people's bodies, you've pretty well turned the corner into "and all sexual attraction to trans people is fetishizing, so nobody should be attracted to trans people" (because you can't seem to conceive of a way your friend could be attracted to a trans person and not be creepy) and driven right into a wall.

I would recommend, instead of getting defensive, that you sit down and carefully re-read your posts asking yourself "Is there any conceivable way that what this says is transphobic? Does this leave any room for anybody to be attracted to trans people without being called creepy?" as you go along. It might help you get some perspective on why you're receiving the pushback you are.

Right - that's what people are reacting to. It comes across very much as "being attracted to a trans person is a fetish." Or at least that someone needs special justification to be attracted to a trans person despite their transness. And then you were getting very defensive and coming across as since you didn't mean badly nothing you said should be criticized.

[Zendy]

Well, in my native language we have to uppercase every word that is short for something for example if I say fem as in the short for feminine I have to write it FEM, sorry it’s just a habit.

I went out with them tonight (https://68.media.tumblr.com/445b8e8de36f33ecefe8698ac5c164b6/tumblr_ovoc5ax6Mu1veme87o1_540.jpg), and she is nice, I guess he really isn’t seeing her as an object of his fetish he just likes her.

Maybe, I used to look up to him as a masculine ideal and the fact she is trans made me uncomfortable for me being insecure if that’s what a idealized ideal of a straight manly man would do, to my unconscious he wouldn’t go out with a trans. woman, but he has to live his life not live up to my sick expectations of idealization.

Maybe… Not sure, that’s something she said, not sure if I agree 100%.

The fact is that I only tough it was weird the fact she was trans. be the reason he gave me to be with her, just as weird if he dated her because of her hair or any physical attribute but that seems to be a thing people do so I’m sorry if that sounded transphobic.


In your crusade to stop the fetishization of trans people's bodies, you've pretty well turned the corner into "and all sexual attraction to trans people is fetishizing, so nobody should be attracted to trans people" (because you can't seem to conceive of a way your friend could be attracted to a trans person and not be creepy) and driven right into a wall.

I never said that and I can't see how you can read that form what i have write, can you elaborate? I only said that IN THIS CASE it looked weird, in this case he said he wanted to be with her becuase she was trans. and girls with d**** are hot and turn him on.

If soemone is dating a trans. person because they love her for her personality and ideas that's great more power to you.

[Knaight]

If soemone is dating a trans. person because they love her for her personality and ideas that's great more power to you.

Again, this criteria excludes the possibility that trans people can be physically attractive at all outside of a fetish, leaving only personality based options. It's the exact thing people are criticizing.

[Zendy]

Again, this criteria excludes the possibility that trans people can be physically attractive at all outside of a fetish, leaving only personality based options. It's the exact thing people are criticizing.

But a guy liking a cis woman just because of her body is just as problematic.

[Vinyadan]

To go on a tangent, I have recently often read that you can't say "a transexual" or "a transgender", because they are adjectives. However, English can turn adjectives into nouns (substantivized adjectives) -- see "my racist uncle is a racist". Is there a derogative value to substantivization of adjectives? I think of "the rich", "the poor", "the happy few", "the loved dead", or, as a singular, "the extravagant", "the unearthed".

So what difference is there between "black (or trans or ____) people" and "blacks" or "trans"?

And between "blacks" and "the blacks"?

My mother tongue isn't English.

[WarKitty]

But a guy liking a cis woman just because of her body is just as problematic.

Eh, a lot of relationships start because someone is physically attracted to the other person. I wouldn't say that by itself is problematic.

[The Extinguisher]

Question: I'm running a genderfluid character in a PbP here on the forum. They're biologically female but have lost most attachment to their gender, and switch freely between male, female, or androgynous.

I figured I'd be playing them much as I would a normal person, obviously, but also (since they're a sneaky, deceptive type) switching genders as need be to play into stereotypes. Acting masculine when they need to intimidate someone, playing the girl card when they need to seem demure and suibtle, etc. etc.

I guess my main question is thus: Are there any big pitfalls I'd need to avoid to not be offensive with this character? Anything obvious that I might miss, not being genderfluid myself, that would be a jerk move?

Personally, I would not do the thing you said about switching genders to play into stereotypes. You dont need to perpetuate the idea that masculine=aggressive and feminine=passive, especially when they have no bearing on your characters gender. Genderfluid is a fairly broad term, and I would certainly do some research and read up on things that genderfluid people have to say. Think about what being genderfluid means to your character. And most importantly, don't let other players at the table ignore or dismiss your characters nonbinaryness. If your character uses they/them pronouns, or switches from he/him to she/her then tell the other players and enforce it.


To go on a tangent, I have recently often read that you can't say "a transexual" or "a transgender", because they are adjectives. However, English can turn adjectives into nouns (substantivized adjectives) -- see "my racist uncle is a racist". Is there a derogative value to substantivization of adjectives? I think of "the rich", "the poor", "the happy few", "the loved dead", or, as a singular, "the extravagant", "the unearthed".

So what difference is there between "black (or trans or ____) people" and "blacks" or "trans"?

And between "blacks" and "the blacks"?

My mother tongue isn't English.

I mean, you're right, in that its something that can be done. But it shouldn't, because its rude and dehumanizing. It others the group, and it's especially harmful in the case of marginalized groups who have been and often are treated as "less than people"

(I have similar thoughts on "the poor". It may not seem bad but think of describing an individual as "a poor")

[The_Snark]

To go on a tangent, I have recently often read that you can't say "a transexual" or "a transgender", because they are adjectives. However, English can turn adjectives into nouns (substantivized adjectives) -- see "my racist uncle is a racist". Is there a derogative value to substantivization of adjectives? I think of "the rich", "the poor", "the happy few", "the loved dead", or, as a singular, "the extravagant", "the unearthed".

There isn't an inherent derogative value to that process, no. However, doing this with gender, race or orientation has picked up some strong negative connotations by association - it's often done by people who are clueless and/or prejudiced.

Edit - Extinguisher makes a good point about othering too; this probably explains how it picked up those associations. By now, though, I think the association is more widespread; if someone refers to "females" or "the gays" in casual conversations, most people will not consciously pick at the implications of their choice of terms, but they will be reminded of that weird guy at university who treated women like space aliens, or their elderly homophobic relatives, or some such.

[lio45]

"CIS" is correct if you are writing in some dialects of latin, in which all letters were capitalized before lower-case letters became the standard. If you're writing in modern english, though, non-acronyms aren't supposed to be in all caps.
text that's not in caps...
GOOD POINT. IF YOUR CAPS LOCK IS ON, THEN "CIS" IS PERFECTLY CORRECT. ;)