To think (worry) kids are so confused these days? (Trans)

[bambambini]

This story is in the Independent and doing the rounds on twitter etc. Supposed to be a 17yr old high school kid telling of his huge crush on a transgirl in school. He wants to ask her out and turned to reddit for advice. Says he’s worried about others reactions and that they might think he’s gay. All seems so sweet and heartwarming - but.

He’s being put on a pedestal and told to go for it - all seems to be hugely encouraging - even famous trans actor Laverne Cox tweeted their approval.

My issue is - is everyone forgetting that the his transgirl will have a male body beneath the feminine exterior. Or have we reached a place where this actually doesn’t matter anymore and this is the brave new word - the future? Where sex is sidelined for gender identity. So is this a heart warming progressive tale, a sign of things to come - or is it weird, are our children being brainwashed into a new way of thinking, a new society shske up really. Is this where our kids are heading. Attraction to gender the aim rather than sex/biological attraction. Anyone else find this somewhat weird snd even sinister? Who is pushing this brave new ideology?

This is a long thread of it on twitter. And the Indy article.

mobile.twitter.com/EricTheDragon/status/956313410844680193?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-23805105102167027181.ampproject.net%2F1516833286380%2Fframe.html

mobile.twitter.com/Independent/status/957233552285929474

The deeply conservative notion that it is OK for a young male human to be attracted to another young male human do long as one of them identifies as a girl (because being gay would be A Bad Thing) is one of the most potentially damaging aspects of the current fashion for trans.

I don't recognise this as 'conservative'. Is there actually such a movement afoot?

It’s conservative in the small C sense.

The logic goes: two young men who want to have sex = bad. But if one of them becomes a young woman then that’s awesome and heterosexual and all is well in the world. The Iranian government are quite keen on this logic.

Magpie And the question begs to be asked if all sexes dressed, styled their hair and groomed themselves identically, would everyone have the same sexuality, in terms of feeling physically attracted to someone, according to trans ideology?

And yes agsin, I’ve sort of wondered this myself after reading from some Transactivists how you are attracted to people - not their genitals. So if we were able to make everyone look the same and hid everyone’s sex - would we pair off with folk we are just attracted to - would it matter what bits they had - especially if there were no social norms or expectations in regards to sexual attraction.

How would we all behave if all societies rules no longer existed on sex. Though females being female always have the disadvantage of pregnancy and biology (which would possibly be fully contollable in the future in the future). Wasn’t society in Brave New World a bit like that - been a while.

a boy discovering he has sexual feelings towards someone that is trans is not even comparable to trans activists trying to insult and pressurising lesbians into having sex with cock
Agreed.

OP, I think you’re getting the issue a bit arse over tit. As long as everyone is consenting, I don’t care what gender presentation/genital biology combination anyone finds attractive.

The problem is the assertion of TRAs that the genital biology must be discounted, not that a young lad fancies someone outside of heterosexuality.

I’ll admit to faint concern about the idea that men will use this kind of ‘setup’ to explore homosexuality but avoid that label. It does nothing to further gay rights.

Branleuse yes, completely different I agree. That was my point.

sexuality itself, as in which gender you are most attracted to being such an intrinsic part of someones identity, is such a recent phenomenon anyway, and yet we now all accept it. Deciding that you ARE gay, rather than being somebody that is often or usually attracted to people of the same sex.

I think people are just more and more obsessed with themselves and think their identity in the world is somehow massively important to other people.

sexuality itself, as in which gender you are most attracted to being such an intrinsic part of someones identity, is such a recent phenomenon anyway, and yet we now all accept it.

Or is it which sex you are most attracted to? If sexual characteristics are denied as having a part in sexuality then sexuality surely becomes meaningless.You'd just be attracted to a, rather elusive, changeable (set of) loosely defined, characteristic(s) that anyone can decide to adopt or drop,

I haven't read the links so forgive me if I've missed anything important but unlike the recent thread I commented on regarding "trans" women being transferred to women's prisons after committing sexual and violent crimes, this appears to be two young adults making their own choices which doesn't directly impact others. It's their business.

I put "trans" in quotes because in the last year or two it's changed from actual transsexual people to putting on a dress or cutting your hair short and saying "I'm a woman/man"

I guess thats probably up to the individual.
Im attracted to men, and masculine women and really like the androgynous look, but im totally fed up of people insisting that liking and relating to non stereotypical gender interests, means that you are a different sex entirely and insist that other people accept this as fact and remove other peoples rights because of it. I think its terifying

Of course a relationship between two consenting adults is their business. However on a societal level the, relatively new, trans ideology is having an effect on the way we view sex, sexuality and what is deemed acceptable or offensive.

If biology is relegated as being unimportant with regards to sex and sexuality there are all sorts of implications. From what someone's sex and sexuality actually means to protected statuses, segregated spaces and healthcare. And not just that, but what conversations concerning differences between biological sexes are 'allowed' or deemed 'offensive' and 'exclusionary'.

Im attracted to men, and masculine women and really like the androgynous look,

So, forgive me if I'm wrong, but your attraction does actually seem to be gender (but not sex) based Branleuse. So gender certainly shouldn't be ignored in terms of it being able to affect attraction.

but im totally fed up of people insisting that liking and relating to non stereotypical gender interests, means that you are a different sex entirely and insist that other people accept this as fact and remove other peoples rights because of it. I think its terifying

I agree. Biological (birth) sex certainly cannot be ignored, either.

I dont see androgynous or masculine women as being male though.

I can understand that Branleuse. But you seem to be attracted to a particular 'gendered' (androgynous or masculine) type rather than particular (biological) sex. If I understand correctly.

Which would suggest that physical sexual attraction is much more complex than simply being attracted to sexually determined characteristics. There is a huge socially conditioned/constructed element there too. However that does not mean this element within physical sexual attraction is more powerful than actual biological determined urges.

ArbitraryName
It’s conservative in the small C sense.
The logic goes: two young men who want to have sex = bad. But if one of them becomes a young woman then that’s awesome and heterosexual and all is well in the world. The Iranian government are quite keen on this logic.

The Iranian government may be keen on something. It doesn't mean that that policy can be extrapolated as conservative ideology. This is something the poster known as VestalVirgin has pushed heavily. Conservatives (not the political party) generally believe in God and the infallibility of God, so it stands to reason that if you were born male, that's how God intended you to be and trying to change sex would be seen as against the natural order of things.

When you challenge conservative beliefs or the beliefs of any other group, please actually challenge/attack their actual beliefs, not ones you make up for them.

charles

Conservatives (not the political party) generally believe in God and the infallibility of God, so it stands to reason that if you were born male, that's how God intended you to be and trying to change sex would be seen as against the natural order of things.

When you challenge conservative beliefs or the beliefs of any other group, please actually challenge/attack their actual beliefs, not ones you make up for them.

But this conservatism surely is conservative by degrees. Some will take it further than others. Do you treat sickness? Amputate infected flesh? Use artificial limbs? Hearing aides? Spectacles? Are doing those things against the 'natural order' of things?

So by this reasoning, Conservatism could include a gay person choosing to have a relationship with a trans person because they are attracted to their (same) biological sex but feel that them identifying as the opposite gender is (somehow) more socially acceptable, appealing to a certain kind of conservatism, as it appears heterosexual.

I’ll admit to faint concern about the idea that men will use this kind of ‘setup’ to explore homosexuality but avoid that label. It does nothing to further gay rights

I don't really think that's a concern tbh.

I've had the trans 'discussion' a few times with various groups and without exception I have found men (both straight and gay) eager to denounce the whole trans 'thing' as fucking weird.

For a man worried about the 'label' of homosexuality, I highly doubt they would find the 'label' of trans (or partner of a trans woman) preferable or acceptable tbh.

Despite how often it's discussed on mn, in rl the whole thing is still generally seen as odd and 'other' IME.

Magic I think in the danger of this is in countries and cultures where being gay is seen as 'not ok', eg very conservative christians in some areas of the US.

I take it there aren’t as many troll hunters on Reddit as mumsnet. I think the lack of boundaries and black and white has made the world a very confusing place for kids of all ages today. Why can’t we just bring our kids up saying what the norm is and explain there are minority’s exceptions without som pressure group demanding that actually everyone should be like them (so they can feel better about themselves)

magpiemischief
But this conservatism surely is conservative by degrees. Some will take it further than others. Do you treat sickness? Amputate infected flesh? Use artificial limbs? Hearing aides? Spectacles? Are doing those things against the 'natural order' of things?

So by this reasoning, Conservatism could include a gay person choosing to have a relationship with a trans person because they are attracted to their (same) biological sex but feel that them identifying as the opposite gender is (somehow) more socially acceptable, appealing to a certain kind of conservatism, as it appears heterosexual.

The poster I quoted was implying that this is a mainstream conservative position whereas I haven't come across it anywhere other than as a policy of the Iranian government. If other conservative groups, religious or otherwise, have taken this position, especially large groups, please enlighten me. There may be individual people who try to reconcile their faith and their feelings in this way, in the way some people always try to find 'workarounds' to aspects of religion/faith they find tricky. That is their individual position. They don't, and can't claim to speak for the faith itself.

Tackling your first paragraph is a different conversation entirely. I will answer as best I can. Most Christians believe God is infallible. I'm not sure why they would bother if they didn't to be honest. Most Christians also intervene to treat disease. Most Christians do not believe God wants us to suffer (so alleviating suffering is not wrong), but he does allow some suffering. It is not a mistake or a punishment but a natural consequence of sin entering the world. God isn't a puppet or a genie who exists just to make our lives lovely, and lovely in the precise way we want it to be.

charles there are groups, that exist, who describe themselves as Christian, who are extremely 'conservative' regarding their interpretation of Christianity and who do shun medicine as part of their faith.

The new trans ideology would have children 'treated' with hormones to stop puberty because they had preferences and interests associated with the opposite gender (stereotype). Thus their preferences and interests are being treated medically as if they have a medical condition / disease. So a conservative who thinks it right to intervene and treat disease could very well justify transition by the medicalisation of it.

So I don't think things are as clear cut as you seem to be presenting them.

I worry for the young guy (if its real, it does seem a little 'perfect' in terms of his timing/writings)

The same people who are praising him on social media can very quickly and easily turn on him like jackals if he says/does something they feel to be wrong. What if the couple end up going out, but breaking up shortly afterwards (which happens a lot in new relationships)? Idiots may decide he didn't try hard enough.

There's a lot of pressure on them now, I hope he doesn't get doxxed if things turn sour on social media

It’s interesting as he has mentioned being perceived as being gay. Sexual preference is usually determined by an individual but with transgender sexuality is not fixed, he could begin this relationship believing it is heterosexual and if the trans girl decides he is not a girl but a boy the relationship changes to homosexual. If my partner decides he is a woman and always has been a woman am I a lesbian by default, has his changing his gender changed my sexuality.

I know several males who would self identify as straight who have slept with trans women. Knowingly might I add. Everyone had a lovely consensual time.

What exactly is the issue here?

The new trans ideology would have children 'treated' with hormones to stop puberty because they had preferences and interests associated with the opposite gender (stereotype). Thus their preferences and interests are being treated medically as if they have a medical condition / disease. So a conservative who thinks it right to intervene and treat disease could very well justify transition by the medicalisation of it.

I cannot reconcile this with any conservative views I've ever encountered. A person, as you describe, would surely just want to correct the mental disorder rather than re-assign sexuality?