Trans man on naked attraction

[itispersonal]

Not watched but has seen some tweets about this. India Willoughby being one, who questioned it.

Straight female on naked attraction and one of the options of the men she could choose to date was trans man with a vagina.

This is the (rubbish) programme, where you choose a person based on the look of their genitalia.

I know channel 4 has always been one to push boundaries but come on.

I didn’t watch it (I don’t stay up late enough) but have watched the programme several times before. It obviously gets the viewers or it would have been gone a long time ago. It doesn’t bother me, nakedness doesn’t bother me, some of the comments are a bit off the wall but the people going in there no what to expect. Maybe the woman on their said she would happily date a trans person? Or maybe not.

I have a trans friend, we met through a dating app and at first I did not know he’s was actually a she. I don’t think I would date a trans person but I do have trans friends.

The show has covered all sorts of things including 3 person relationships, gay relationships and older people. I think it’s good that they don’t just have young, straight, skinny people on their, it shows that all people are different and like different things.

Some people might say no disabled people, or not interested in trans etc. are you equating disability and being trans”? I’d have thought “Some people might say no Jewish/Muslim/Catholic people, or not interested in trans etc.“ Would be a better example, those things being a choice.

it shows that all people are different and like different things.

If it shows all different things, why no hairy fannies?

I assume that the application process includes a check list of types you are happy to consider.

I saw another one with a Lauren Harries and they didn’t mention she was trans at all. She was actually quite aggressive that she wasn’t picked.

If it shows all different things, why no hairy fannies?

Because none of the women who want to appear happen to have one?

Fair point 5z, that there’s a difference between immutable qualities of someone’s body (physical disability, skin colour) and components of someone’s belief (religious belief, belief in gender etc) however ‘being trans’ blurs that line surely, if we’re specifically talking about physical bodies and assuming ‘trans’ in this context means ‘has undergone surgery/medical treatment to alter their secondary sex characteristics in some way to mimic the opposite sex’. A contestant(?) might say the do/don’t find that attractive in a different way to the do/don’t think they’d be compatible with someone who holds a religious belief.

Had she said she was heterosexual, then it would be be very unfair and misleading. Judging by her comments however, she was absolutely open and didn’t see it as an issue so all is good.

Lastly, what a shit TV show!

I dont get the controversy here. I like dick. I'm going to choose someone with a dick.
Its really not that complicated. I'm not attracted to women's body parts.I dont have anything against women's body parts (I think theyre beautiful)- I have them! But I am not sexually attracted to them. Thats not something I can control or help.

I wouldnt expect a gay man to be aroused by a woman's body parts so why would a heterosexual female?

Ever seen this programme with the audio description switched on?

Adds another dimension

That sounds entertaining, pinkfly

@5zeds

I think that’s the whole argument though. Much in the same way you don’t chose to be disabled, you don’t chose to be trans. You may chose to have procedures to change your appearance, however you can’t control how you feel inside, which prompts someone to get the procedures done. In other words it’s not a choice from my understanding.

Obviously religion it could be argued is a choice, although I’m pretty sure some would disagree!

I watched it. It was actually the picker who was the transman. They had had upper surgery, but still kept womb and ovaries as they didn’t want to rule out not having children at a later date. They had been living as a lesbian,but then decided they were a man. Slightly gruff voice from testosterone, and a bit of a beard.

What a weird concept for a show - it's not like we see our partner's genitals most of the time.
How does this fit with the TRA mantra "you are reducing us to our genitals"?

I (guiltily) enjoyed the few episodes I saw. Sexual attraction is very much based on bodies for me, although there obviously has to be a lot more than that for a functional relationship.

If I went on this show I'm not sure how I'd describe my sexuality though. I'm boringly straight in old speak. I could fancy any male bodied person if they had a body and face I found attractive, regardless of personality.

However beyond initial attraction I might find a gender identity off putting for relationship purposes, be they a self proclaimed "cis" man or a transwoman. I might also find a banker or a butcher off putting too. But I suppose that's the purpose of the show - you don't know who they are until you meet them later.

5zeds No, you are the one equating disability and trans.

I'm assuming the show asks participants beforehand what their sexuality is and if they have any physical characteristics that they either strongly prefer or strongly don't like. This is a show about people's naked bodies. Not about subjective aspects like religious beliefs etc. That comes in the dating stage.

There have been participants who have said they like tattoos or piercings... The woman who hosts the thing... Sorry I can't remember her name. She's made comments like 'so you've said you like nipple piercings' or 'you've said you don't like too much body hair' etc which means clearly they ask the participants beforehand what they like and don't like in terms of physical appearance.

Sexual attraction is unfortunately superficial in many ways. Many people aren't keen on someone with prosthetic limbs or some sort of disfigurement. They might feel reticent to say it openly because it's viewed as rude and unkind, but it doesn't stop people from thinking it and deciding who they would prefer to have sex with. Others don't have an issue and there have been physically disabled participants on the show.

Trans is absolutely about people's physical, sexed bodies. Otherwise what are people trans from and to?!
Some people are pansexual and claim to not care about physical appearance, but the vast majority of people do.
They are picky about how much hair a guy has on his chest, or how much pubic hair a woman has, or how tall or short people are etc. Do you really think they won't also be making decisions about mastectomy scars or the lack of a penis etc on a trans person? These physical aspects matter to many people even if it's currently considered impolite to state openly.

Posters saying the contestant was fine with it - do we really believe they had a choice to say anything but? I can imagine the threats, harassment and possible police visits they would face if they said, 'I don't fancy women, whether they have taken testosterone and had their boobs cut off or not.'

Born with vagina and Is willing to date person born with vagina, not straight then.

Like another PP mentioned, it was the picker who was the transman and they mentioned all of the women picked were ok with him being trans. If they had been put on the spot it would be different, but they knew and were comfortable with it.

If the Channel 4 Turkey Shop don't put you off sex for life, there's no saving you.

The person picked doesn't have to show up for the date if they don't want to.

I honestly cannot draw any learning or moral conclusions from people who go on television to pick / be picked on the basis of judgement on their body parts.

I'd imagine, as she said in her tweet, she was okay with it (and in my mind that means she is not heterosexual). At a guess, the show checked. The response of the average woman expecting a dick and getting a vag would most likely not be broadcastable. I would be horrified and at best wtf and I wouldn't be able to hide it.

I actually think it might have served a purpose. This will be the first time many people will have been confronted with the idea that gender identity might be taken to over-ride biology.

(I remember watching a bisexual dating programme, it was actually quite sweet. They had one woman who described herself as pansexual and she had a blind date with a transwoman which both enjoyed - I thought that was fair. All the others had appropriately sexed same and opposite sex dates)

I am occasional watcher and find this programme quite fascinating.
It is a refreshing change to show a wider range of physical types than the usual aethetic. Plus there's no coy hiding! It's all out there. No one is being deceived.
It's funny how almost everyone looks better with their clothes on.

Just to repeat my earlier post - it was the picker who was trans.