(June 14, 2015 at 12:23 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(June 14, 2015 at 12:18 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: Woah Woah Woah... this is a massive red herring. Last minute reveal is not a quality of transgendered people. It is a quality of a bad person. If a transgendered person didn't tell an intimate partner they were about to have sex with that they are preoperative trans, then the person cannot make a fully informed decision in consenting to a sexual encounter.

Woah woah woah, you.  I agree 100% with everything you said.  That's why this thread is pissing me off-- I'm not against people being transgendered, and I support Caitlyn's right to be / be called whatever she wants. But if woman means what people here are saying it means, then there IS no reponsibility to inform before a sexual accounter, because according to them a pre-op transgender person is in fact fully woman. A full woman who just happens to be packing a penis.

Yes, there is. What you are implying here applies to every human, transgender or not. That's why it is a red herring. Every human has a responsibility to make sure his/her sexual partner is fully informed. If a person is into a choking or bondage fetish and he chokes or whips a partner on the first sexual encounter without discussing it beforehand, he has done the same thing. He has engaged in a sexual encounter without fully informing his partner. You are suggesting that a transgender woman doesn't recognize the fact that she has a penis, or that she automatically doesn't care if anyone has an issue with that sexually. If she doesn't care, that makes her a bad person. This is not endemic to the transgender population.

A preoperative transgender male to female is a female, with a penis. Gender=female, sex=male. Believe me, she is aware of the penis. Just because she asks you to refer to her as a woman, and her brain has been telling her she is a woman her whole life in most cases, doesn't mean she expects everyone to ignore the appendage that she is, by all accounts, acutely aware of. A lot of FtM transgenders will tell you about their phantom penis. It is a very acute syndrome.

What is comes off as, bennyboy, is that you think these people are making flippant decisions with the intent to somehow game the system.

(June 14, 2015 at 12:52 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: Yes, there is. What you are implying here applies to every human, transgender or not. That's why it is a red herring. Every human has a responsibility to make sure his/her sexual partner is fully informed.

I've been with maybe a dozen women in my life. None of them ever had to tell me she was genetically and physically female. I made a reasonable assumption that if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck.

Disclosure is only necessary if there is something about you which departs from reasonable expectations: like you don't have an STD. . . or that you aren't going to unstrap your giant girl-penis.

(June 14, 2015 at 1:36 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(June 14, 2015 at 12:52 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: Yes, there is. What you are implying here applies to every human, transgender or not. That's why it is a red herring. Every human has a responsibility to make sure his/her sexual partner is fully informed.

I've been with maybe a dozen women in my life.  None of them ever had to tell me she was genetically and physically female.  I made a reasonable assumption that if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck.

Disclosure is only necessary if there is something about you which departs from reasonable expectations: like you don't have an STD. . . or that you aren't going to unstrap your giant girl-penis.

Did you even read past that line you quoted?

If there is nothing to tell, then your partner is fully informed, yes?

(June 14, 2015 at 12:09 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(June 13, 2015 at 10:45 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: An easier alternative would be to not worry so much about how others identify themselves so long as it doesn't harm you.

Just a thought, y'know.  Carry on.

We are all part of this culture, and redefinition of words in a social context affects us all.  It affects our view of laws, of manners, and of ethics.  I think my views represent the majority, though perhaps not on AF, and I feel perfectly comfortable discussing them.  And so I should.

No doubt you should feel comfortable doing so, and I'm not counseling otherwise.

I am, however, suggesting one should not be put out about the self-identification others have for themselves.

Also, I'm unsure what word is being redefined. Would you be so kind as to be specific?

(June 14, 2015 at 12:14 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(June 14, 2015 at 12:02 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: I suppose we have different ideas about trauma. What makes yours so special that it ranks with rape?

I'm not ranking trauma.  I'm saying that there IS trauma, and that it's not right for someone to put a man in a situation where he's likely to experience it.

We can argue about the rights and wrongs all day, but I think it is a fact that many men would be traumatized in that situation, and every transwoman with a penis surely knows this fact.

And I'm saying that the unpleasant feeling that might come about from reaching down between her legs and finding a surprise is much less visceral and thereby much less traumatic than having a penis forcibly inserted into an orifice of yours.

YMMV, and all that.

(June 13, 2015 at 8:21 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Either way, she's going to be causing a stir. I think she should use the women's changing room, but should avoid showing her penis. In other words, she should not impose on normal women the idea that they must accept her as a woman, penis and all.

What does that mean? They can accept her as a woman with her still having the penis. You make it sound like she would be walking around sticking it in their faces or something

And you would agree, I hope, that a few women accidentally seeing a penis as she changes is clearly lesser evil to her being possibly verbally and physically harassed in the men's changing room

Quote:This is a male organism who has instincts to mate with a female organism-- something which Jenner isn't, actually. The male is very likely to have a negative reaction, causing trama to himself and possibly endangering Jenner. Jenner doesn't get to be surprised, and say "What's wrong? I'm just a girl with a penis. Why are you overreacting?" Her fail to disclose is a lie of omission, and any normal person can see that it is going to cause a problem.

Dude, she is fully aware of the penis. Believe me, she knows it's there and she knows what the reaction would be. I think she wouldn't go into sex with someone without filling them in first. There might be transgendered people out there who wouldn't, but it's not because they're transgendered, but that they're dishonest.

Quote:I think this is selfish and immoral. If she is getting involved with a man, there are some obvious expectations-- specifically, that the woman he's having sex with is not a man made by surgery to look like a woman. And that she doesn't have boy parts. I don't think a transwoman's right to privacy trumps this poor guy's experience of having the trans-definition issue imposed on him unexpectedly. Just to show up in the bedroom without first addressing the issue would constitute, in my opinion, a category of rape or sexual abuse, because the psychological effects it could have are so predictable and powerful that a responsible person would take steps to avoid them. Saying the man involved shouldn't have that emotional reaction is like saying a raped girl shouldn't have that emotional reaction-- neither can help it, and both should be protected by law from being subjected to it.

that comparison is extremely unjust and disgusting.

Would you apply that to sexual history? If a former prostitute doesn't tell her partner she used to prostitute herself, you would count that as sexual abuse and rape?

I think if people are close enough to have sex, the subject probably already came up, but if not, that might means she doesn't want to talk about it

I don't think keeping a secret and physically assaulting a person are the same sort of misdeed. Equating them strikes me as either moral blindness or willful obtuseness.

(June 14, 2015 at 3:25 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: Also, I'm unsure what word is being redefined. Would you be so kind as to be specific?

Woman.

(June 14, 2015 at 3:29 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: And I'm saying that the unpleasant feeling that might come about from reaching down between her legs and finding a surprise is much less visceral and thereby much less traumatic than having a penis forcibly inserted into an orifice of yours.

YMMV, and all that.

I'm not comparing rape and undisclosed boy parts on a scale of 1 to 10. I'm saying that there is likely to be trauma, and that the victim of the trauma is likely to feel demeaned and violated by a non-disclosure which is essentially an aggressive sexual act.

(June 14, 2015 at 3:34 am)Neimenovic Wrote: What does that mean? They can accept her as a woman with her still having the penis. You make it sound like she would be walking around sticking it in their faces or something

Accepting her as a woman and her actually being a woman are not equivalent.

Quote:Dude, she is fully aware of the penis. Believe me,  she knows it's there and she knows what the reaction would be. I think she wouldn't go into sex with someone without filling them in first. There might be transgendered people out there who wouldn't, but it's not because they're transgendered, but that they're dishonest.

IF a transgender woman is fully and completely to be considered a woman, then why would there need to be any disclosure? The reality is that this is a man who is taking steps to be more womanly, but will never be one in the way that other women are, because of the physical reality of her situation.