[Magni]

Just like I am glad to have been born without physical defects, I am glad to have been born cisgender.

I am NOT equating transgenderness to a birth defect, I am equating the hardships that go along with both. I can't wait for technology and society to reach a point where switching physical genders (sexes) is easy, painless, and not frowned upon. (think The Culture)

[soepje]

Nice thread! I have a question, and i honestly don´t mean offend anyone (it´s about a quite specific workfield, and i know not all transgendered people choose that line of work :p). But anyway..

Some time ago i saw a documentary about a transgender woman working the windows as a prostitute.
Her whole life story came by, and it was quite touching to say the least, childhood, abuse, moving countries, lovelife etc..
But she would get men who walked by her work-window into her room, to get to business, for the costumers only then to find out she still had a penis. She demanded they would pay eitherway, and was really mad about the fact that some people where not willing to pay/have sex after finding out.

Now, to me it seemed like she was selling under false pretences, she looked female. But at the same time i get she was selling herself and her specialties, not her gender.

I still believe that she should mention it before costumers make their decision to have sexual encounters. But what does transgaf think about this strange senario? Why would she get so mad? Do you think she should mention it before making the deal?

Again my apologies for the stupid question, but i honestly wonder.

[Brian Griffin]

Just like I am glad to have been born without physical defects, I am glad to have been born cisgender. I am NOT equating transgenderness to a birth defect, I am equating the hardships that go along with both. I can't wait for technology and society to reach a point where switching physical genders (sexes) is easy, painless, and not frowned upon. (think The Culture)

You say you aren't equating it with a birth defect but if society as a whole saw it that way it would probably improve a lot of things. No one has any problem with someone getting treatment for a deformed arm or face or something but when nearly the entire body needs changing, as with many trans people, society can be bigoted and mean.

Nice thread! I have a question, and i honestly don´t mean offend anyone (it´s about a quite specific workfield, and i know not all transgendered people choose that line of work :p). But anyway.. Some time ago i saw a documentary about a transgender woman working the windows as a prostitute. Her whole life story came by, and it was quite touching to say the least, childhood, abuse, moving countries, lovelife etc.. But she would get men who walked by her work-window into her room, to get to business, for the costumers only then to find out she still had a penis. She demanded they would pay eitherway, and was really mad about the fact that some people where not willing to pay/have sex after finding out. Now, to me it seemed like she was selling under false pretences, she looked female. But at the same time i get she was selling herself and her specialties, not her gender. I still believe that she should mention it before costumers make their decision to have sexual encounters. But what does transgaf think about this strange senario? Why would she get so mad? Do you think she should mention it before making the deal? Again my apologies for the stupid question, but i honestly wonder.

People who are shopping for sex probably have an idea of what they want. If they want to put their penis in a vagina and there is no vagina then you can't blame them for backing out.

[Emitan]

Nice thread! I have a question, and i honestly don´t mean offend anyone (it´s about a quite specific workfield, and i know not all transgendered people choose that line of work :p). But anyway.. Some time ago i saw a documentary about a transgender woman working the windows as a prostitute. Her whole life story came by, and it was quite touching to say the least, childhood, abuse, moving countries, lovelife etc.. But she would get men who walked by her work-window into her room, to get to business, for the costumers only then to find out she still had a penis. She demanded they would pay eitherway, and was really mad about the fact that some people where not willing to pay/have sex after finding out. Now, to me it seemed like she was selling under false pretences, she looked female. But at the same time i get she was selling herself and her specialties, not her gender. I still believe that she should mention it before costumers make their decision to have sexual encounters. But what does transgaf think about this strange senario? Why would she get so mad? Do you think she should mention it before making the deal? Again my apologies for the stupid question, but i honestly wonder.

I very much think she should disclose that. I don't think trans people who are post-op should be obligated to disclose the fact that they are trans but it seems like common sense to me to disclose that if you have "unexpected" genitalia.

[SquiddyCracker]

What if it's a paragraph(s) and you have to reference the person multiple times. It wouldn't sound or read smoothly saying Squiddy over and over.

Oh, I don't mind it when you say Squiddy over and over again.

[Platy]

Neither of these responses answer my question. I'm not asking whether there is a sliding scale and whether there are exceptions. I'm also not arguing whether something 'matters' or not, or whether it should matter, or to whom it should matter. Furthermore, my question had nothing to do with 'showing your papers' or respectfulness. I think it is completely disrespectful and apathetic for you to disregard someone's identity. But semantically, you can't dismiss others as being wrong when they aren't. You either need to convince them to use your lexicon, or show them how their terminology is factually incorrect. So, if we are talking about this case: A person is born into a biologically male sexed body, with a gender female brain. Is there a cited hard science article which states: "This person is biologically female"? If not, then you are asking people to accept a different paradigm than they correctly learned, so it shouldn't be stated with snark or condescension. That almost never serves to forward your cause or change minds. And I'm also genuinely curious to read that paper for my own interest.

Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers says sex is, acording to TheFreeDictionary.com

sex (seks) 1. a distinctive character of most animals and plants, based on the type of gametes produced by the gonads, ova (macrogametes) being typical of the female, and spermatozoa (microgametes) of the male, or the category in which the individual is placed on such basis. 2. see gender identity, under identity. 3. sexual intercourse. 4. to determine whether an organism is male or female. chromosomal sex , genetic sex sex as determined by the presence of the XX (female) or the XY (male) genotype in somatic cells, without regard to phenotypic manifestations. gonadal sex that part of the phenotypic sex that is determined by the gonadal tissue present (ovarian or testicular). morphological sex that part of the phenotypic sex that is determined by the morphology of the external genitals. phenotypic sex the phenotypic manifestations of sex determined by endocrine influences.

So lets see ... by this definition a post-op transwoman is ....

1. a distinctive character of most animals and plants, based on the type of gametes produced by the gonads, ova (macrogametes) being typical of the female, and spermatozoa (microgametes) of the male, or the category in which the individual is placed on such basis.

She don't produces gametes anymore, so she don't have a sex.

2. see gender identity, under identity.

Female gender identity

3. sexual intercourse.

She is probably looking for ... unless she is asexual

4. to determine whether an organism is male or female.

Is that a rethorical question ? =P

chromosomal sex , genetic sex sex as determined by the presence of the XX (female) or the XY (male) genotype in somatic cells, without regard to phenotypic manifestations.

In most cases, she can be fit into the hetoromatic way of the XY

gonadal sex that part of the phenotypic sex that is determined by the gonadal tissue present (ovarian or testicular).

No tissue here. Hormones released by those are changed with the use of drugs.
Count as you want

morphological sex that part of the phenotypic sex that is determined by the morphology of the external genitals.

External genitalia is female

phenotypic sex the phenotypic manifestations of sex determined by endocrine influences.

Endocrine influences is certanly female.

---------------------------------------------------------------

So for anyone keep scores at home we have ....

Female Biological Sex : 4,6
Male Biological Sex : 1,5

If you want to give the gonadal tissue to male that would make 2 x 4

[PhoenixPause]

It does in all but a tiny number of medical cases. You have NO idea whether your last GF was chromosomally female, its simply not something that is tested unless there is a reason to suspect a problem medically.

That is simply not true and you know it. People can say with at least 90% certainty that every man and woman they see have the chromosomes associated with their sex. You are using a small amount of cases to cast doubt on the majority

[Gaborn]

That is simply not true and you know it. People can say with at least 90% certainty that every man and woman they see have the chromosomes associated with their sex. You are using a small amount of cases to cast doubt on the majority

My point is that you didn't for one 1 billionth of a second even question it. And you wouldn't whether she was one of the rare people with AIS or was not. SEX has NEVER trumped gender in the real world the majority of the time.

[Devolution]

That is simply not true and you know it. People can say with at least 90% certainty that every man and woman they see have the chromosomes associated with their sex. You are using a small amount of cases to cast doubt on the majority

Why do chromosomes matter PD?

[lingiii]

This chromosomal discussion is disheartening. The core idea here is that biological sex and identified gender are two separate things, and it comes back to a pretty simple idea: don't try to invalidate somebody else's experience.

It isn't ok to respond to somebody telling you they're a man with "no you aren't". No matter what you think you can cite as "fact", it isn't your place.

[gblues]

It is?

I have some terrible news..... you're blind. :P

Ah I didn't realize that 'cis' was just an abbreviation of 'cisgender' (a term I've never heard before). I still think there should be an edit to the OP to explain the 'cis-' prefix (thanks Aeana).

[Emerson]

Why do chromosomes matter PD?

I don't think anybody thinks they actually matter. What PD and SnakesWithLasers (and myself, actually) don't like is that people will essentially say:

There is no component of a transwoman that is male, she is scientifically female in every way. This is scientific fact and you're ignorant/a bigot if you disagree.


Which is, as far as my understanding goes, not true. Again, it doesn't matter, but I don't like to see people acting shitty and snide, saying things that aren't true. It's an exaggeration that's not necessary. All that needs to be said is that she has gender dysphoria and deserves to be identified how she wishes.

[Devolution]

This chromosomal discussion is disheartening. The core idea here is that biological sex and identified gender are two separate things, and it comes back to a pretty simple idea: don't try to invalidate somebody else's experience. It isn't ok to respond to somebody telling you they're a man with "no you aren't". No matter what you think you can cite as "fact", it isn't your place.

It's quite ridiculous. Biology isn't consistent. It fucks up. And we also ignore variety for the sake of our rigid confines. I think more people should read about intersexed individuals and how they are forced into one box or the other based on genitalia. Some are even mutilated into being girls because we want binaries even when nature gives us variety.

[Jokergrin]

My point is that you didn't for one 1 billionth of a second even question it. And you wouldn't whether she was one of the rare people with AIS or was not. SEX has NEVER trumped gender in the real world the majority of the time.

Exactly

[Instigator]

I don't think anybody thinks they actually matter. What PD and SnakesWithLasers (and myself, actually) don't like is that people will essentially say: There is no component of a transwoman that is female, she is scientifically female in every way. This is scientific fact and you're ignorant/a bigot if you disagree. Which is, as far as my understanding goes, not true. Again, it doesn't matter, but I don't like to see people acting shitty and snide, saying things that aren't true. It's an exaggeration that's not necessary. All that needs to be said is that she has gender dysphoria and deserves to be identified how she wishes.

What is a woman?

[soepje]

I very much think she should disclose that. I don't think trans people who are post-op should be obligated to disclose the fact that they are trans but it seems like common sense to me to disclose that if you have "unexpected" genitalia.

People who are shopping for sex probably have an idea of what they want. If they want to put their penis in a vagina and there is no vagina then you can't blame them for backing out.

Thanks, that was what i was thinking too. I guess it was just one crazy lady then :).

[PhoenixPause]

My point is that you didn't for one 1 billionth of a second even question it. And you wouldn't whether she was one of the rare people with AIS or was not. SEX has NEVER trumped gender in the real world the majority of the time.

Of course I wouldn't question it on face value, given the probability.

My point was that in these discussions the two are blurred, with sex written off as if it is irrelevant (because it is inconvenient to the arguments presented). The majority of straight men would not willingly date someone who was born male, so the argument that sex doesn't matter or isn't accurate in real life; it matters to people for a variety of reasons.

[Zeer0id]

This is a very helpful OP, thank you!

[Gaborn]

Of course I wouldn't question it on face value, given the probability. My point was that in these discussions the two are blurred, with sex written off as if it is irrelevant (because it is inconvenient to the arguments presented). The majority of straight men would not willingly date someone who was born male, so the argument that sex doesn't matter or isn't accurate in real life; it matters to people for a variety of reasons.

Why would it be relevant if you never really care to verify? In practical terms it ISN'T relevant. Its an excuse.

[Emerson]

What is a woman?

It is a word with several different meanings, which given the modern state of society and science can both overlap and contradict.

This question is not really relevant to the point of my post.

[lexi]

What is a woman?

A happy little pile of secrets?

[Emitan]

sugar, space, and everything nice and chemical x

[SnakeswithLasers]

Insofar as you agree with the statement that, "I think it is completely disrespectful and apathetic for you to disregard someone's identity," it seems that their position - which is to be respectful of the person's identity and use the nomenclature that they wish for you to use when referring to them - is already one you should agree with, even if you are not convinced that it is factually correct to use "male" or "female" in a particular instance because you think a different paradigm is more accurate.

And I'm not at all arguing that. I'm arguing that it is factually inaccurate for people to say that those who classify trans people as their non-identified gender are 'scientifically wrong,' which is what is happening in this thread. These people may be morally wrong, or culturally wrong, but they aren't scientifically wrong.

I'm not saying that it matters what the chromosomes are for purposes of an interpersonal lexicon. I think people should be respectful of others' identities. What I'm saying is that it is fallacious and disingenuous to be condescending toward one person's word choice, which is based on a factual connection (a person born with the biological sex of "male" is biologically "male" regardless of gender) as though it is wrong when it is not.

Of course, I posted all of this with the caveat that I would like for someone to show me a hard science research paper that contradicts this. But until that happens, you can't fault people for using different terminology, when that terminology remains factually accurate, all you can do is correct them that culturally they are being insensitive because we no longer base gender identities around biological sex.

[PhoenixPause]

Why would it be relevant if you never really care to verify? In practical terms it ISN'T relevant. Its an excuse.

Again, why would you immediately verify something that is associated with the vast majority of cases? A better question would be whether a person would verify/discuss some things before entering a serious relationship with someone. Fertility, sickle cell, and other things would likely come up in such a discussion, correct? And in the case of a trans person, they would likely reveal their own situation in such a discussion as well. Although I'd imagine that information would be known already by the other party if any intimate activity occurred or almost occurred

[Gaborn]

Again, why would you immediately verify something that is associated with the vast majority of cases? A better question would be whether a person would verify/discuss some things before entering a serious relationship with someone. Fertility, sickle cell, and other things would likely come up in such a discussion, correct? And in the case of a trans person, they would likely reveal their own situation in such a discussion as well.

Whether its the majority or minority of cases is not the issue. I asked you before and I'll ask you again: Why does it matter?

[PBalfredo]

Most surgeons require letters from multiple therapists, years of HRT, and years of living as the identified gender before performing the operation.

I've heard about that before. Why is that, exactly?

I think this might also help

This just raises more questions. What the hell is "two-spirit"? How can someone be "genderless". What's the difference between "bisexual" and "pansexual"?

[Exterminieren]

This just raises more questions. What the hell is "two-spirit"? How can someone be "genderless". What's the difference between "bisexual" and "pansexual"?

In terms of gender identity, and please someone pull me up on this if it's wrong, two-spirit is identifying as both genders and genderless isn't identifying as any gender.

Bisexuals can be attracted to males and/or females, whereas pansexuals can be attracted to anyone on the spectrum, including transgendered or genderless people.

[thatbox]

I've heard about that before. Why is that, exactly?

The medical establishment in this area is recovering from remnants of its initial bigoted construction. Trans women were often denied help if they weren't deemed pretty or passable enough, if they weren't deemed feminine enough (as if cis women don't themselves run the gambit from tomboy to whatever the opposite of tomboy is), if they were too old, if they were lesbians, if they didn't tell the right lies or have the stories the therapists wanted to hear. Put most simply, it was designed more to keep cis people from hurting themselves than to help treat trans people.

Did you get any angry pms or emails, thatbox?

Not yet. Just one supportive PM.

[PhoenixPause]

Whether its the majority or minority of cases is not the issue. I asked you before and I'll ask you again: Why does it matter?

To me, personally? Because I would prefer not to willingly date someone who was born male. I don't see how that is a controversial point

[Devolution]

Again, why would you immediately verify something that is associated with the vast majority of cases? A better question would be whether a person would verify/discuss some things before entering a serious relationship with someone. Fertility, sickle cell, and other things would likely come up in such a discussion, correct? And in the case of a trans person, they would likely reveal their own situation in such a discussion as well. Although I'd imagine that information would be known already by the other party if any intimate activity occurred or almost occurred

If I found out tomorrow my chromosomes weren't XX I doubt shit would change. Unfortunately it's not that easy for trans women because of the stigma attached to what they were previously.

[jgminto]

Great thread. Now whenever someone posts something potentially offensive or ignorant, someone can simply link to this, much less of a hassle. And it got Holy Wars banned! I'd call that a win/win.

[SquiddyCracker]

I've heard about that before. Why is that, exactly? This just raises more questions. What the hell is "two-spirit"? How can something be "genderless". What's the difference between "bisexual" and "pansexual"?

That diagram is just trying to combine a bunch of gender concepts within the relatively narrow female-male continuum found in western culture.

Here's my attempt at improving it:

Biological

• Most individuals have either XY or XX chromosomes, but some can have anything from XXX to XYY.
  
• Most individuals have either male or female genitalia, but some can have anything from one type of genitalia but one or two different types of internal gonads (testes/ovaries) to a combination of external genitalia (in the form of a big clit and so on).
  
• Most individuals have a particular brain structure, either a "male" or a "female" one (the difference being quite distinctive when comparing both average brain size as well as grey to white neuron matter ratio), but some can have a brain structure that falls between the male and female average.

Now, these three points usually line up in most people, but not in everyone. So while most individuals with XY chromosomes have exclusively male genitalia, and a male brain - this isn't the case for everyone. One might for an example have female genitalia, but have a chromosomal abnormality (and still have a female brain). This was a major simplification, as there are other differences between these two most common types of people, but you get the idea.

Gender

The biology of an individual, so relatively neatly being divided into two "groups", has thus given rise to primarily two "groups" when it comes to gender. Wikipedia defines gender as "Gender is a range of characteristics of femininity and masculinity", femininity as "(also called womanliness or womanhood) is a set of attributes, behaviors, and roles generally associated with girls and women", and masculinity as "possessing qualities or characteristics considered typical of or appropriate to a man".

Ignore those definitions.

It is circular reasoning, and a better definition would just be "A socially recognized label for an individual that is associated with X characteristics". These could be biological, such as appearance, or just behavioral. In western society, you got "men" and "women - just two commonly accepted genders - but in other cultures you can have more than just two genders:

In the culture of South Asia, hijras (Hindi: हिजड़ा, Urdu: ہِجڑا, Bengali: হিজড়া, Kannada: ಹಿಜಡಾ, Telugu: హిజ్ర) or chhakka in Kannada, khusra in Punjabi and kojja in Telugu are physiological males who have feminine gender identity, women's clothing and other feminine gender roles. Hijras have a long recorded history in the Indian subcontinent, from the antiquity, as suggested by the Kama Sutra period onwards. This history features a number of well-known roles within subcontinental cultures, part gender-liminal, part spiritual and part survival. In South Asia, many hijras live in well-defined, organized, all-hijra communities, led by a guru.[1][2] These communities have sustained themselves over generations by "adopting" young boys who are rejected by, or flee their family of origin.[3] Many work as sex workers for survival.[4] The word hijra is Urdu, derived from the Arabic root hjr in its sense of "leaving one's tribe,"[5] and has been borrowed into Hindi. The Indian usage has traditionally been translated into English as "eunuch" or "hermaphrodite," where "the irregularity of the male genitalia is central to the definition."[6] However, in general hijras are born with typically male physiology, only a few having been born with male intersex variations.[7] Some Hijras undergo an initiation rite into the hijra community called nirwaan, which refers to the removal of penis, testicles and scrotum.[4] Since the late 20th century, some hijra activists and Western non-government organizations (NGOs) have been lobbying for official recognition of the hijra as a kind of "third sex" or "third gender," as neither man nor woman.[8]

They are now recognized as a third gender in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Attraction

This is tricky.

If genders are social constructs, are we then attracted (and research show that our attraction is something innate to most of us) to artificial constructs themselves or to some underlying aspect of particular social constructs (such as a commonly accepted biological trait of a "man" being a penis)?

So what would attraction (from a male) to this third gender be called?

They are neither women nor men, so it seems logical that we would invent a term to denote attraction to the gender "hijra" - which is quite a challenge.

Man is attracted to Woman - Heterosexual
Man is attracted to Man - Homosexual
Man is attracted to third gender - ???

At least when a third gendered person is attracted to another person of the same, third gender, we can call them homosexuals.

Expression

Of course, just because "society" has a definition for "man", "woman", and so on, doesn't mean that you necessarily will follow all these criteria to the point. You might still consider yourself a "man" or a "woman", and/or some other label that has social significance (whether on a societal or a local scale), because there are some benefits to conforming to a particular label (and you might still have shared characteristics that make you feel comfortable with said label).

[charlequin]

The one point I'm confused on is that transgenderism isn't a "mental disorder." I mean, I understand it's not, like, schizophrenia or depression or anything like that - it's like any other orientation or understanding of the body - but what is it? A mental... miswiring? Abnormality? Phenomenon?

So: think about phantom limb syndrome. When someone loses a limb, they often have an experience where they perceive themselves to still have that limb (experiencing itching or pain, misjudging their balance because of the limb's perceived "weight," etc.) This isn't really "mental illness" but it is a primarily mental effect that's incredibly difficult to combat and which lingers long after the actual loss that brings it on.

There's an increasingly large body of scientific evidence that suggests that gender dysmorphia is actually equivalent to phantom limb syndrome -- that one portion of the brain maintains a model of the body and that disagreements between this model and the actual body cause intense discomfort and stress. The effective treatment is to remake the body to match the brain model.

Is it actually an established scientific fact that a trans man is biologically male? And that a trans woman is biologically female?

Calling it "an established scientific fact" is stretching it a bit, but I think it's fair to say that there exists a growing scientific consensus about the subject, at least. Others in this thread can probably dig up some good cites.

In general, I think any strongly-worded claim of the type "it is scientifically unambiguous that trans people ARE their stated gender, period" is kind of wacky because it gets into murky territory about what gender even means. But I would say that the position that transgenderism is "legitimate" (i.e. that it reflects a real, meaningful need that should be respected and supported by society) is broadly supported by what scientific knowledge we have and the denialist position is largely rooted in (sometimes willful) ignorance.

[Spiffy_1st]

In terms of gender identity, and please someone pull me up on this if it's wrong, two-spirit is identifying as both genders and genderless isn't identifying as any gender.

What? Is this really a thing? I can't even begin to imagine what that would be like.

[water_wendi]

What? Is this really a thing? I can't even begin to imagine what that would be like.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

[kamorra]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

After reading this I'm even more confused.

[water_wendi]

After reading this I'm even more confused.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39EWTnS05Ww

Here you go.

[Gaborn]

To me, personally? Because I would prefer not to willingly date someone who was born male. I don't see how that is a controversial point

Here's the thing. You're not homophobic. I've trusted you when you've said this. I believe you've also said you don't care if you're attracted to a guy then so be it. But NOW you're suggesting that if you are attracted to someone who is tg you want them to tell you so you can be... not attracted to them. Forgive me but it really makes you come off badly.

[charlequin]

This just raises more questions. What the hell is "two-spirit"? How can someone be "genderless". What's the difference between "bisexual" and "pansexual"?

Two-Spirit is an umbrella term for a range of different alternative gender roles found within indigenous American communities. It covers a variety of different identities, many of which themselves don't map neatly to common Western identities but instead touch on elements of gay, trans, and other non-traditional sexual and gender roles.

Being "genderless" would generally mean feeling entirely disconnected from both genders. I don't think this is really a particularly prevalent or common identification from people.

On a certain basic level, "bisexuality" is being attracted to men and also to women, while "pansexuality" is being attracted to all people regardless of the specifics of their gender expression. The specific concrete reason for the use of the latter term was to express an attraction to and interest in all manner of atypically-gendered people (the huge, broad umbrella called "genderqueer") but depending on who you ask, it's a distinction without a difference.

(Unfortunately I think that the Genderbread Person image can hurt more than it helps, especially with some of the specific labels, just because it presumes a looooot of knowledge about the ins and outs of advanced gender and sexuality theory.)

After reading this I'm even more confused.

Which part is confusing you?

[yeoz]

So: think about phantom limb syndrome. When someone loses a limb, they often have an experience where they perceive themselves to still have that limb (experiencing itching or pain, misjudging their balance because of the limb's perceived "weight," etc.) This isn't really "mental illness" but it is a primarily mental effect that's incredibly difficult to combat and which lingers long after the actual loss that brings it on. There's an increasingly large body of scientific evidence that suggests that gender dysmorphia is actually equivalent to phantom limb syndrome -- that one portion of the brain maintains a model of the body and that disagreements between this model and the actual body cause intense discomfort and stress. The effective treatment is to remake the body to match the brain model.

Wait, do you actually mean phantom limb syndrome, and not Body integrity identity disorder (or Somatoparaphrenia)?

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

A happy little pile of secrets?

:( You beat me to this.

[Spiffy_1st]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39EWTnS05Ww Here you go.

This is just introducing a load more terms which makes something that already doesn't make sense make even less sense.

I think I'm just going to be ignorant and imagine the entire world is either straight or gay.

[charlequin]

Wait, do you actually mean phantom limb syndrome

Yes. There's a growing body of evidence that suggests that people with gender dysmorphia actually experience the equivalent of a "phantom limb" for a body of the gender they feel they belong to.

[Enco]

This is good info and all, but can people on GAF try not getting so offended when people don't use the "proper terms" for things, especially when it's clear from a person's post that they are in no way trying to be offensive?

This.

The number of times people have jumped on someone for using an 'offensive' term without realizing is silly.

[PhoenixPause]

Here's the thing. You're not homophobic. I've trusted you when you've said this. I believe you've also said you don't care if you're attracted to a guy then so be it. But NOW you're suggesting that if you are attracted to someone who is tg you want them to tell you so you can be... not attracted to them. Forgive me but it really makes you come off badly.

Where have I mentioned attraction in this thread? My point has been that I would not willingly be involved with someone who was born male. You're scenario wonders whether I would magically not be attracted to someone if told they were born male - say, if someone showed me a lineup like on Maury and I had to decide who was who. Could I be attracted to a trans person? Sure, I've seen some that are quite attractive - just as I have no qualms saying Idris Elba is an attractive man. Would I become "involved" with either? No. That is my preference as a straight man.

[water_wendi]

This. The number of times people have jumped on someone for using an 'offensive' term without realizing is silly.

Has this even happened lately? Certainly not in the latest few transgender threads ive been in.

[Emitan]

Where have I mentioned attraction in this thread? My point has been that I would not willingly be involved with someone who was born male. You're scenario wonders whether I would magically not be attracted to someone if told they were born male - say, if someone showed me a lineup like on Maury and I had to decide who was who. Could I be attracted to a trans person? Sure, I've seen some that are quite attractive - just as I have no qualms saying Idris Elba is an attractive man. Would I become "involved" with either? No. That is my preference as a straight man.

being straight should have nothing to do with it unless you are implying something offensive

[Femmeworth]

This. The number of times people have jumped on someone for using an 'offensive' term without realizing is silly.

Considering the amount of willful ignorance out there, I don't care about giving people the benefit of the doubt. It's not that fucking hard to look up the proper terms.

[Uncle0wnage]

being straight should have nothing to do with it unless you are implying something offensive

Facepalm.jpg
Of course he wasn't implying anything offensive, but you seem to take offense with everything.

[Gaborn]

Facepalm.jpg Of course he wasn't implying anything offensive, but you seem to take offense with everything.

Really? because I think I got the same thing from it Billie did.