Question re relationships with trans people

As far asking for an opinion on male dominated sites, I think we all know that what men would do given the opportunity and what they would admit to doing are often two different things !

Cis, trans etc are not words biological women have forced on people

"Rugby build, shoulders, thighs, calves and strength to move cabinets are pretty easy to get with testosterone, by the by, just not height"

And a functioning penis? I'm sorry but I really don't believe many gay men used to having sex with other gay men would be satisfied by having sex with a trans man, nope, sorry, don't believe it. Easy to say I would, actually doing it, routinely, consistently, nope.

I do know gay men in relationships with trans women, and I note that they're not now identifying as straight, after a lifetime of being gay. Again, there's a reason for that.

I have been told I am transphobic because I am bi sexual and have said I wouldn't date either a transwomen or transman. Am I transphobic? Nope, not at all but because I have previously dated men and women it's not an acceptable view to have.

From you at the moment, yes.

Compelled speech is only coming from one direction

There's no such thing as "cis". Women are not a subcategory of our own sex.

I'd never date a trans or cis woman because I'm not interested in entering relationships with women.

I would date a guy though, regardless of whether he's trans or cis.

Rugby build, shoulders, thighs, calves and strength to move cabinets are pretty easy to get with testosterone, by the by, just not height (unless we're allowed access to testosterone early enough, but then we're confused youth who don't know anything).

For @NiceGerbil .
Yes, as youngsters we think that we are invincible. Made of India rubber
It's only after a big injury that we realize, with shock, that we never truly heal.
Pain comes back at surgery sites randomly, for the rest of our lives. I can attest to that too.

I like your phrase - "There is no Fully Transitioned". It says it all, succinctly.
Yup. Of course there isn't. There is only Cosmetic Surgery.

I get this is personal to you.

But the posts are general. We don't know you.

I'm heterosexual.

I have always liked tall men. Ones with a rugby type of build.

Shoulders thighs. Height. The strength that makes them useful when a huge wardrobe needs shifting. Big hands feet calves etc.

You say fully transitioned. You can't make those things through surgery. Or drugs.

What about mastectomy scars? Have you seen the amount of flesh that's cut to make a penis? More scars.

The drugs lead to issues with bones, womb. Maybe more.

For those who feel they need to go through that, or the surgery to cut off the penis and testicles and fashion a vulva and vagina.

It's massive. Risky, huge surgery. The blood supply there is vast. The pain. The recovery. Risk of infection.

I've had a lot of surgery as a child and it was very painful and the recovery was long. Anyone who needs to do that I wish them luck, successful surgery, as easy a recovery as possible and that it brings them peace/ happiness.

But I'm sorry. There is no fully transitioned. Humans can't change sex. It's not just about dick/ balls/boobs/ vagina.

And I would personally be wary about a serious relationship with someone who had that background and future. It speaks of deep unhappiness and desperation. A lifetime of medical checks, drugs.

My life centred around my hospital appointments for many years. For me it was not healthy psychologically.

That's my honest view.

ImASoulMan

Have you asked that question on male dominated sites?

Out of interest.

I find it kind of weird and kind of funny and kind of baffling.

We are mammals.
We procreate through sexual reproduction, sperm egg. Same as other mammals.

Back in the day when we wandered around as an emergent evolutionary species, I mean I think there's some debate but say a million years ago.

When we developed speech. As a species that lived in groups. The important words would have come first.

Danger
Shelter
Water
Food
Etc.

But apparently NO WORDS for male or female child or adult.

I mean. Really?

So in all the languages around the world now and through history.
There have been NO WORDS to indicate sex- male female- and whether they are little kids running about or grown up?

Really????

How can anyone assert that? I mean. What?

Nothing about the UK definition of sex mentions "man" or "woman" once. These gender identities are only mentioned under gender.

Right. So what does "sex" as a protected characteristic in the equality refer to in your opinion, if it is not referrinng to protecting those who are women (adult human females per the Oxford English dictionary) or men (adult human males per the same)? These are biological terms referring to the sex of individuals, that is protected from discrimination. As is same-sex attraction. Those battles were hard fought and won and frankly anybody attempting to undermine that is a disgrace.

'The language itself is gender no less than gendered clothes, is the part you stubbornly refuse to understand.'

The different uses of the word gender I agree with a pp has been exploited to the max.

It used to mean. Sex role. The strongly enforced norms that start from day 1.
From pink is for girls to boys and men are natural leaders to girls and women must be controlled to men who have sex with men should be severely punished.

That is how feminists used it and many others, the (UN or WHO maybe both can't remember still do).

Then at some point in the 80s ish. It started appearing on forms for the bank etc instead of sex. Presumably because sex is a bit rude.

Recently we have got
Gender presentation (sex role expectations)
Gender ID (an internal feeling of what gender you are)
And I think theres maybe another one on genderbread man and similar.

The words for sex role expectations are masculinity and femininity.

The words for juvenile human are boy/ girl and for adults men/women.

This last bit you disagree on. Your view is they have always referred to sex role- oppressive norms for the 2 sexes.

Questions.

1. All through the history of the human race globally. You say that there were no words for male/ female juvenile/ adult humans. They always referred to which sex role individuals adopted.

1. When there was the fight for votes for women. They were fighting for the right for those who met the female sex role to vote? Not those of the female sex?

1. When searching up porn. And you click I dunno. 3 guys + 1 girl. (Yes yes I know it's cruder than that!). That means 3 people who meet the gender role for males and one who meets the gender role for women. And it's nothing to do with their physical bodies. And that's always been what man woman girl boy meant.

Is that about right?

Well said wildgarlicpesto.

Yes.

The language itself is gender no less than gendered clothes, is the part you stubbornly refuse to understand.

People understand. They also understand that that it's a theoretical interpretation of some fairly basic words that is now being used against them. You can't berate people as stubborn for not wanting to submit to a theoretical position that is not in their best interests. We live in a pluralist society and need to accept others won't agree. There's been many a poster here insisting that the right side of history is to agree that woman has no meaning other than that men have decided on. It's a regular occurrence.
It's not stubborn to disagree. If you are unable to persuade people with your arguments then they are not up to the job.

Thank you.

Horrifying. Monica Lennon for example.....

Opening the debate, Lamont told colleagues the change was about clarity and doing what was right for traumatised women.
She said: “In giving people rights, in giving women victims of rape and sexual assault rights, in giving all survivors of sexual violence rights, we need to be precise.
“Sex is defined in law, and gender is not. A right is not a right, if it’s unenforceable. We owe it to survivors to listen and treat them with respect.”
Her colleague Monica Lennon said that some of those backing the amendment were ”blatantly hostile towards trans women, and the trans community.”
She added: “Clearly, there are some people who want to exclude trans women from working with women and girls to have disclosed rape or sexual assault.”
Responding, Lamont said "Forgive me if I focus on survivors in this debate. We should centre the experience of survivors and ask what is right for traumatised women. These women are not responsible for what people say on Twitter or on Facebook.

www.thenational.scot/news/18936441.msps-overwhelmingly-vote-replace-gender-sex-rape-support-law/

Eresh

Look at the furore in Scotland over Joann Lamont's amendment to the Forensic Medicine bill

What was the amendment about?