Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 11-14-2017, 10:26 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Why should anybody else care what crosses or doesn't cross your mind? The point is that if you feel this issue is important in your dating life, it's up to you to make that known, rather than requiring strangers to guess it.


Like I said, it's not up to you to decide what other people should reveal about themselves to strangers. If transgender identity is something you want to know about certain strangers, or if you want to avoid dating people who are transgender, it's not their responsibility to guess that without being told.
I can certainly judge you for failing to reveal this to someone you want to get romantically involved with. You are basically placing the burden on the majority of the population to identify their VERY common desires not to date someone who is transgender so that the 0.5% of the population doesn't have to divulge this material information to their prospective romantic partners.

When the overwhelming majority of people (over 80%) would not want to date transgender people. You're not really "guessing"that people might not want to date you. Its common enough thay ypu should disclose.
  #152  
Old 11-14-2017, 10:33 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Ok. And how is failing to disclose transgender stairs going to get us there a second faster?
"Stairs" typo for "status"? If so, I think you've got it backwards: Increasing societal acceptance of transgender people is accomplished by society in general treating transgender status as just another normal variant of gender identity.

The ideal state of societal acceptance would be something like "Yeah, some women have or used to have penises, some men have or used to have vaginas, so what? Not my business what's in everybody else's underwear. Let people use whatever restroom they feel is appropriate for their gender identity, and stop worrying about what kind of urethral structure their pee is coming out of."

Your demand that transgender people should have to pre-emptively announce their transgender status to strangers at the very start of the dating process would be the reverse of this kind of general acceptance. That's saying that some women have to be prominently flagged from the get-go as a "different" type of women separate from "normal" women (and ditto for transgender men).

No. Transgender women are women. Most women have had vaginas since birth. A small percentage of women have not. (And correspondingly for men.) That's just one of the facts about human gender.

If you have particular requirements about genitalia or birth sex in a date, you're the one responsible for making them known to potential dates, same as with any other particular requirements you may have about any other characteristics in a potential date.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
I don't think most people are going to know enough to put it in those words.
They'll learn. It's really not that difficult.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
Because, you are the last cost avoider.
"Last" typo for "least"? If so, big fucking deal: tort-law jargon is not what determines people's responsibilities about discussing their personal lives.

If you ever start a dating site specifically for tort nerds, you can all agree what information is whose responsibility under what circumstances based on liability-law principles or anything you like. For ordinary social interactions in the real world, on the other hand, you don't get to decide what other people are obligated to reveal about themselves just because you want to know it but for some reason are too chicken to ask.
  #153  
Old 11-14-2017, 10:47 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
You are basically placing the burden on the majority of the population to identify their VERY common desires not to date someone who is transgender so that the 0.5% of the population doesn't have to divulge this material information to their prospective romantic partners.
In what way is it a "burden" to take responsibility for making clear what your own requirements are for dating? If you're the one who cares about it so much, you should be the one to put it on the table. Your issue, your responsibility.

ISTM the only "burden" is what you're placing on other people when you require them to guess whether and how strongly you feel you need to know their birth-assigned gender when you meet them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
When the overwhelming majority of people (over 80%) would not want to date transgender people. You're not really "guessing"that people might not want to date you. Its common enough thay ypu should disclose.
Pfft, lots of people don't want to date poor people either, but it's still not a poor person's responsibiity to disclose their economic status on their dating profile. Your issue, your responsibility, no matter how many other people happen to have the same issue.

Once again, why on earth would somebody who supposedly cares so much about this criterion for dating be so resistant to making that criterion clear up front?

To take another "preferences" analogy, if you're allergic to some ingredient and somebody who doesn't know about your allergy invites you to dinner, do you expect them to spontaneously tell you whether or not the food contains that ingredient? Or do you say, like a sensible and sane person, "By the way, I should tell you that I'm allergic to Ingredient X and absolutely can't eat anything with Ingredient X in it"?

The latter, right? Because your issue, your responsibility.
  #154  
Old 11-14-2017, 11:05 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 4,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
The ideal state of societal acceptance would be something like [i]"Yeah, some women have or used to have penises, some men have or used to have vaginas, so what? Not my business what's in everybody else's underwear.
While not effecting the intent of your post I feel that we need really clarify something here that helps with the ambiguity of the situation.

We ALL started with two sets of organs, the Wolffian duct and the Mullerian duct. Without testosterone and without AMH, the Wolffian duct will develop into the clitoris and the Mullerian duct will develop into female sex organs. With testosterone and AMH, the Wolffian duct to develop into the male sex organs, and the Mullerian duct will degrade.

Technicality at some point all of us had both options in place, and only the effects of hormones impacted the expression. In typical cases testosterone and AMH are produced only in the case of XY.

We would all express female sexual traits in the absence of Testosterone and AMH.

Last edited by rat avatar; 11-14-2017 at 11:05 PM.
  #155  
Old 11-14-2017, 11:06 PM
Nava Nava is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 39,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
No. Transgender women are women. Most women have had vaginas since birth.
And some have had vaginas since birth but they're connected to non-working uteruses. And?

Some have genetic conditions which are not a problem if present once, but can cause enormous problems if present twice. And?

Are we going to start demanding that everybody wear their medical history in an embedded chip, so we can decide whether someone is of interest as a reproductive partner before engaging in conversation? Talk about treating people like cattle... mooooo...

Transgender women are indeed women. Intersex women are women. Women who have had a hysterectomy are women. Intersex men are men. Impotent men are no less male for having reproductive problems. And that is all the kind of details which no, people shouldn't have to being their introductions with.
__________________
Evidence gathered through the use of science is easily dismissed through the use of idiocy. - Czarcasm.

Last edited by Nava; 11-14-2017 at 11:08 PM.
  #156  
Old 11-14-2017, 11:18 PM
Una Persson's Avatar
Una Persson Una Persson is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 15,989
I'm grateful for the people here who consistently defend people like me. Very grateful.
  #157  
Old 11-14-2017, 11:22 PM
Nava Nava is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 39,716
I'm pissed that it's even necessary.
__________________
Evidence gathered through the use of science is easily dismissed through the use of idiocy. - Czarcasm.
  #158  
Old 11-14-2017, 11:25 PM
Ethilrist Ethilrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Saint Paul
Posts: 26,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu
No. Transgender women are women. Most women have had vaginas since birth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava
And some have had vaginas since birth but they're connected to non-working uteruses. And?
For the record, it looks like Kimstu was agreeing with you, as in "most women have had vaginas since birth; others, more recently than that, if at all"
  #159  
Old 11-15-2017, 12:20 AM
jayjay jayjay is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 36,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Technicality at some point all of us had both options in place, and only the effects of hormones impacted the expression. In typical cases testosterone and AMH are produced only in the case of XY.
And you CAN have XY and androgen insensitivity syndrome and still develop like a female.
  #160  
Old 11-15-2017, 12:51 AM
molten molten is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 129
I think it is the responsibility of the trans person to let you know they are trans in case you are dating with the purpose of having sex (which nearly everyone is).

The analogies presented here are not valid. If you are dating for the purpose of having sex, your economic status is not relevant, because almost all of us can afford a condom. Having sex with someone who doesn't have the organs or ability to do so would pose a problem, just like they need to inform you if they have STDs and you should not be asking people if they have AIDS. Of course an STD is a very different from having a mismatching organ, as that doesn't cause any harm to anyone. But in both cases if you have an obstacle to having sex, you should inform the other person.

Any obstacle to having sex pretty much should be informed in advance. If you are dating online and your spine is broken and you can't feel your downstairs, you should let the other person know. We cannot be expected to demand the obvious things that come with 99.9% of the population one by one explicitly: "I am looking for someone with one-and-a-half to two legs, 2 hands, one nose, at least one working eye etc". If you are a man and you cannot achieve an erection even with drugs or a prosthetic, it is in your benefit to let the other person know, not to waste both of your times.

Asking a women if she has a vagina is HUGE insult and will never be practical until technology is far more advanced.

If you are say over 70 and do not have sex in mind, then there is no need to inform of any of this.
  #161  
Old 11-15-2017, 01:18 AM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 4,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by molten View Post
I think it is the responsibility of the trans person to let you know they are trans in case you are dating with the purpose of having sex (which nearly everyone is).

The analogies presented here are not valid. If you are dating for the purpose of having sex, your economic status is not relevant, because almost all of us can afford a condom. Having sex with someone who doesn't have the organs or ability to do so would pose a problem, just like they need to inform you if they have STDs and you should not be asking people if they have AIDS. Of course an STD is a very different from having a mismatching organ, as that doesn't cause any harm to anyone. But in both cases if you have an obstacle to having sex, you should inform the other person.

Any obstacle to having sex pretty much should be informed in advance. If you are dating online and your spine is broken and you can't feel your downstairs, you should let the other person know. We cannot be expected to demand the obvious things that come with 99.9% of the population one by one explicitly: "I am looking for someone with one-and-a-half to two legs, 2 hands, one nose, at least one working eye etc". If you are a man and you cannot achieve an erection even with drugs or a prosthetic, it is in your benefit to let the other person know, not to waste both of your times.

Asking a women if she has a vagina is HUGE insult and will never be practical until technology is far more advanced.

If you are say over 70 and do not have sex in mind, then there is no need to inform of any of this.
Do your restrictions become no longer applicable after a successful GRS surgery?

What if a woman had a vaginal prolapse and had to have reconstructive surgery? Or other women who have had a vaginoplasty due to cancer treatments of chemotherapy or radiation therapy?

Are teenage boys required to inform potential dates that they suffer from premature ejaculation?

As a male if I need to take medication to perform do I need to indicate it on my dating profile, and if so where is the option to select? (need answer fast)

Should I have been outraged when my ex failed to bring up her endometriosis and a need for lubrication?

What if your cardio condition limits your ability to perform when on top, do you broadcast to potential dates that if they need to be on the bottom to concentrate and reach a release that they need to look for other partners who are more fit?

As it is all about the sex, why the double standard?

(Also I assume you have never worked in a nursing home...they are crazy)

Last edited by rat avatar; 11-15-2017 at 01:23 AM.
  #162  
Old 11-15-2017, 02:08 AM
AI Proofreader AI Proofreader is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
While not effecting the intent of your post I feel that we need really clarify something here that helps with the ambiguity of the situation.

We ALL started with two sets of organs, the Wolffian duct and the Mullerian duct. Without testosterone and without AMH, the Wolffian duct will develop into the clitoris and the Mullerian duct will develop into female sex organs. With testosterone and AMH, the Wolffian duct to develop into the male sex organs, and the Mullerian duct will degrade.

Technicality at some point all of us had both options in place, and only the effects of hormones impacted the expression. In typical cases testosterone and AMH are produced only in the case of XY.

We would all express female sexual traits in the absence of Testosterone and AMH.
Thanks for this post, very enlightening. I'd always heard that we all started undifferentiated as female in utero and then developed from there.

Also, now I'm picturing a paradise/apocalypse in which some experiment goes horribly awry and the entire human race develops a condition in which androgens are blocked and all children are born female.

Except for a rare male from a mother and father who were in a very isolated area and somehow escaped the contagion - who will be hunted for sport.
__________________
- Born after "computer" was a synonym for "woman" but before "worker" becomes a synonym for "robot."
  #163  
Old 11-15-2017, 02:14 AM
Nava Nava is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 39,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethilrist View Post
For the record, it looks like Kimstu was agreeing with you, as in "most women have had vaginas since birth; others, more recently than that, if at all"
Actually, I was agreeing with him.

Responding to someone doesn't necessarily have to be in opposition.
__________________
Evidence gathered through the use of science is easily dismissed through the use of idiocy. - Czarcasm.
  #164  
Old 11-15-2017, 02:28 AM
molten molten is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by rat avatar View Post
Do your restrictions become no longer applicable after a successful GRS surgery?

What if a woman had a vaginal prolapse and had to have reconstructive surgery? Or other women who have had a vaginoplasty due to cancer treatments of chemotherapy or radiation therapy?

Are teenage boys required to inform potential dates that they suffer from premature ejaculation?

As a male if I need to take medication to perform do I need to indicate it on my dating profile, and if so where is the option to select? (need answer fast)

Should I have been outraged when my ex failed to bring up her endometriosis and a need for lubrication?

What if your cardio condition limits your ability to perform when on top, do you broadcast to potential dates that if they need to be on the bottom to concentrate and reach a release that they need to look for other partners who are more fit?

As it is all about the sex, why the double standard?

(Also I assume you have never worked in a nursing home...they are crazy)
Well if a trans person has had surgery and they have something that works like a female sex organ I guess there is no real need to inform anyone. There is some gray area due to the boobjob. In my opinion the best way is show the upper part with cleavage and it becomes in many cases obvious (I mean if you did a boobjob as a trans you don't need to inform that you are trans, just that you did the boobjob, if anything). I am not personally into that, but I have heard that many men don't make a big fuss over it like I do, so I guess if that is the case there is no real need to inform on that either.

If a woman has had vaginal surgery and can still function in sex then there is no need to inform ahead of time.

Teenage boys don't need to inform about things that are expected from the vast majority. Besides that is not a real barrier because they can recover very quickly.

If you need medication to perform that is not relevant, unless you expect the other person to buy you the mediation or prescribe it to you. It's not a barrier in any way.

There are gray areas and I think in general if you can perform but need some help or have some limitations that is not something that you need to inform about. You need to inform about things that for a reasonable person would physically prevent you from having relations, or make them unenjoyable.
  #165  
Old 11-15-2017, 02:47 AM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by molten View Post
Any obstacle to having sex pretty much should be informed in advance. If you are dating online and your spine is broken and you can't feel your downstairs, you should let the other person know. [...] If you are a man and you cannot achieve an erection even with drugs or a prosthetic, it is in your benefit to let the other person know, not to waste both of your times.
This is not so much a can of worms as a barrel of cobras. No, I really don't agree that it would improve the dating scene if everybody listed all the potential impediments to their sexual performance right up front, so to speak, in their profile. TMI and then some.

Quote:
Originally Posted by molten
We cannot be expected to demand the obvious things that come with 99.9% of the population one by one explicitly: "I am looking for someone with one-and-a-half to two legs, 2 hands, one nose, at least one working eye etc".
Sure you can be expected to demand them if they are really important to you in a potential date, and if you will feel resentful or put-upon if you don't find out about them right away.

Doesn't matter how common or "normal" or expected a particular characteristic may be in the dating pool. If you feel you would need to know right away if a potential date was one of the rare people who didn't have that characteristic, or if you want potential dates to avoid you if they happen not to have that characteristic, it is on you to make your requirements clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by molten
Asking a women if she has a vagina is HUGE insult
Now here is the only place where I feel any sympathy at all for what is in general the simultaneously entitled and cowardly position of "I don't want to date transgender women but don't want to be upfront about admitting that."

I agree that there is a toxic and transphobic attitude prevalent among too many cisgender women that being perceived as possibly transgender is insulting. (I suppose there might be a similar attitude among cisgender men, but heterosexual women don't seem to have as much anxiety about what might be in their date's underwear as heterosexual men do, so we don't fret so much over how to find out whether or not our dates might be trans.)

Two points about the "but I don't want to offend a cisgender woman by asking if she's trans" issue:

1) Too bad. Just because many cisgender women are transphobic enough to get offended at being asked about their birth-assigned gender does not entitle you to offload the responsibility for your own dating preferences onto transgender women. If you don't want to date transgender women, it's still on you to make that clear, no matter how many potential dates you may offend in the process. Don't expect transgender women to automatically announce to strangers their own gender status just to spare you the potential embarrassment of asking a cisgender woman about her gender status. (And by the way, many cisgender women who are not transphobic will still be offended about having the subject of genitalia brought up at the very start of the dating process, because it's traditionally seen as a tad low-minded to be concerned about that sort of thing right away.)

2) This problem is rapidly solving itself as more transgender women are openly identified as such in media and the arts, because as a lot of guys have already noticed, a lot of transgender women are smoking hot according to traditional female beauty standards. It is putting it mildly to say that I would not be offended if a guy thought I looked sort of like, say, Candis Cayne or Antonia San Juan, although it would raise serious concerns about his visual acuity. And the standards of comparison currently suggested by younger women such as these are just off the charts.

So relax, it will not in fact be very long before being mistaken for a transgender woman ceases to be widely perceived as an insult.

Last edited by Kimstu; 11-15-2017 at 02:51 AM.
  #166  
Old 11-15-2017, 03:16 AM
tim314 tim314 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,590
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Ok, what are the arguments for saying it's not an illness. I mean, being deaf is an illness, right? We shouldn't hate deaf people or discriminate them, but compared to healthy humans of the past million years, deaf people are not as functional as fully able bodied humans. And, we can treat being deaf and have invented prosthetics.
You might be surprised to learn how many deaf people would disagree with this, especially among those who are more immersed in Deaf culture. For some, being Deaf is a point of pride, much as members of other minorities tend to view their culture with pride. Cochlear implants and such are also quite controversial in the Deaf community. (To be clear, I'm no expert on Deaf culture, but I've been learning more about it because I have a child with a genetic condition that limits her ability to hear.)

I don't think anyone would deny that the deaf lack one particular ability that hearing people have, but there are lots of abilities that some people have that other people lack, and the view that "hearing" is such a critical ability that those who don't have it are in some sense incomplete is perhaps a rather hearing-centric way of viewing things. Some Deaf people would say that not being able to hear is much less of an impediment than hearing society's assumption that everyone can hear.

Putting aside the question of "Is deafness a disability", there's the more important question: "Do we make things better or worse by labeling deafness a disability?" The quote below is the view of a Deaf college professor, which I personally found rather eye opening. Getting back to the subject of this thread, I think that the same question could be asked about how we label people who are transgender.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Bill Vicars
Let me share a scenario to you: Suppose you see, hear, and move around just fine. Suppose you do not feel that you have a disability. This is your life, you are fine, and you are generally more or less like your friends, neighbors, and parents. Now suppose instead of having been born on Earth -- you were instead born on a planet where almost everyone has "ESP" (extra sensory perception). They have this sixth sense that you lack. The adults on this planet consider you to be a broken individual. They spend countless hours trying to teach you to "perceive." They implant you with a "perception" device that when you include evaluation, surgery, the device, and rehabilitation can cost as much as $100,000 and provides a semblance of "perception" but is quite limited and very different from the real thing. You go through life on this ESP planet being made to feel like an impaired half-person always asking for people around you to "think louder" or "more clearly" so that you can understand them with your implant (which only provides a strange simulation of ESP, not a crisp clear ESP).

Then one day you meet a girl (or guy) and instead of "thinking at you" she talks to you (with her mouth) and you understand her perfectly without strain. You find out that she was born like you and communicates with her voice instead of telepathic projection (ESP). She introduces you to her friends who also talk. For the first time in your life you feel normal. You feel like you belong. You feel not like a broken person (an ESP impaired person) but rather like a person period. You feel accepted for what you are. You wish that you had felt like this your whole life. Your lack of ESP is no longer a disability because everyone in your new circle of friends talks. You find yourself turning off your ESP implant much of the time (since it is not needed in your new community) and start to think that maybe that $100,000 had could have been better used for college tuition, to buy a condo, invest in stocks, or maybe save the lives of a hundred starving kids in a 3rd world country who can't afford an ESP implant much less food and mosquito netting.
Source: http://asluniversity.com/asl101/topi...y-deafness.htm
  #167  
Old 11-15-2017, 03:27 AM
molten molten is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
This is not so much a can of worms as a barrel of cobras. No, I really don't agree that it would improve the dating scene if everybody listed all the potential impediments to their sexual performance right up front, so to speak, in their profile. TMI and then some.
Not all impediments, only things that will physically prevent you and another reasonable person from achieving relations, or make them unenjoyable. Those things are rare.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Sure you can be expected to demand them if they are really important to you in a potential date, and if you will feel resentful or put-upon if you don't find out about them right away.

Doesn't matter how common or "normal" or expected a particular characteristic may be in the dating pool. If you feel you would need to know right away if a potential date was one of the rare people who didn't have that characteristic, or if you want potential dates to avoid you if they happen not to have that characteristic, it is on you to make your requirements clear.
Okay lets be realistic here, modern dating is capitalistic and your demands or self descriptions are always perceived in the context of how the majority presents itself. No man is going to write (if dating online): "must have real vagina." Simply because those men who won't write that will be perceived by some in a more positive light and have an increased target audience, no matter if that is due to a good reason or not. Women simply do not experience this effect as much (due to having many more options) and may not know what I mean.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Now here is the only place where I feel any sympathy at all for what is in general the simultaneously entitled and cowardly position of "I don't want to date transgender women but don't want to be upfront about admitting that."
Personally, if a trans woman had surgery that made her truly indistinguishable from a born woman I would not care either way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Two points about the "but I don't want to offend a cisgender woman by asking if she's trans" issue:

1) Too bad. Just because many cisgender women are transphobic enough to get offended at being asked about their birth-assigned gender does not entitle you to offload the responsibility for your own dating preferences onto transgender women. If you don't want to date transgender women, it's still on you to make that clear, no matter how many potential dates you may offend in the process. Don't expect transgender women to automatically announce to strangers their own gender status just to spare you the potential embarrassment of asking a cisgender woman about her gender status. (And by the way, many cisgender women who are not transphobic will still be offended about having the subject of genitalia brought up at the very start of the dating process, because it's traditionally seen as a tad low-minded to be concerned about that sort of thing right away.)

2) This problem is rapidly solving itself as more transgender women are openly identified as such in media and the arts, because as a lot of guys have already noticed, a lot of transgender women are smoking hot according to traditional female beauty standards. It is putting it mildly to say that I would not be offended if a guy thought I looked sort of like, say, Candis Cayne or Antonia San Juan, although it would raise serious concerns about his visual acuity. And the standards of comparison currently suggested by younger women such as these are just off the charts.

So relax, it will not in fact be very long before being mistaken for a transgender woman ceases to be widely perceived as an insult.
Any woman who identifies female would be insulted from the insinuation that she looks male (not trans! the assumption is that if you are asked "are you trans?", is that you look like you are of the opposing gender), as much as any male who identifies as male would be insulted if people assumed he is female, exactly as a trans person is insulted from people assuming they are not the gender they identify as. There is nothing phobic about this issue, and it will never change as long as humans have different genders.

If trans people will look like the their identity gender and will not be distinguished from a member of that gender, then yes, the question will no longer be an insult, yet no one would ask it due to the market effect of looking bad when opposed to people who do not ask.
  #168  
Old 11-15-2017, 08:45 AM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by molten View Post
Okay lets be realistic here, modern dating is capitalistic and your demands or self descriptions are always perceived in the context of how the majority presents itself. No man is going to write (if dating online): "must have real vagina." Simply because those men who won't write that will be perceived by some in a more positive light and have an increased target audience, no matter if that is due to a good reason or not.
If so, then it's up to individual men to decide whether their goal of screening out transgender women from their dating pool is worth taking the hit of possibly being perceived more negatively if they're explicit about that goal.

So, either:

1) put "no transgender women please" in your profile, and accept that it will be negatively perceived by some cisgender women; or

2) keep quiet about your no-transgender requirements, and accept that you might possibly spend some time dating a transgender woman before finding out she's transgender and kindly telling her "thanks but no thanks".

You're equally entitled to choose either of those options, ethically speaking. The option you're not entitled to is the cowardly one of whining that all transgender women should pre-emptively announce their transgender status up front in order to shield you from any negative consequences of taking responsibility for your own dating preferences.
  #169  
Old 11-15-2017, 08:58 AM
Shodan Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
:Two points about the "but I don't want to offend a cisgender woman by asking if she's trans" issue:

1) Too bad. Just because many cisgender women are transphobic enough to get offended at being asked about their birth-assigned gender does not entitle you to offload the responsibility for your own dating preferences onto transgender women.
I assume that cuts both ways - if I ask a transgender person about their gender at birth, and they get offended, too bad.

And transgender people have an equal responsibility to make clear that they do not want to date transphobic people right up front.

Regards,
Shodan
  #170  
Old 11-15-2017, 10:02 AM
andylongino andylongino is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 3
Not natural

People who have same-sex partners and people who change their sex there is something not natural about this. About all this gays getting married more power to them. How can I hurt straight people. I think anyone who is in a position to adopt children only should do so I won’t be allowed to adopt only in to a natural light and varmin I think anyone who is in a position to adopt children only should do so I will be allowed to adopt only in to a natural like environment. I mean a man and a woman that I think should be married and that cannot have children or just wants to help should be able to do so. Can people of the same sex that is married should not at all be able to adopt for the child sake. They gave up that right of having children when they decided to get same-sex partners.
  #171  
Old 11-15-2017, 11:42 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Una Persson View Post
So really this all boils down to you don't believe I'm a woman. I'm either a man to you, or something else
This is not true at all, nor do I see how you could possible think I think that, unless, like other topics on this board, anything less than 100% agreement with whatever you say means I 100% agree with the exact opposite.

Quote:
What you posted above pretty much seals the deal as far as the discussion goes. Unless you believe I or people like me are "women," then there's no meeting of the minds possible.
I don't care what gender you are. I'm talking about sex. If someone asked me "Who's Una Persson?" I would say "Some woman on a message board i read"

If someone asked me "Would you have sex with someone who had a penis instead of a vagina?" I would say no, and it wouldn't matter what their gender was.
  #172  
Old 11-15-2017, 11:47 AM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Doesn't matter how common or "normal" or expected a particular characteristic may be in the dating pool. If you feel you would need to know right away if a potential date was one of the rare people who didn't have that characteristic, or if you want potential dates to avoid you if they happen not to have that characteristic, it is on you to make your requirements clear.
Do you similarly feel the same about someone who has herpes or HIV or Hep C? Should they disclose that during the first date or talk before a date?
  #173  
Old 11-15-2017, 12:33 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Do you similarly feel the same about someone who has herpes or HIV or Hep C? Should they disclose that during the first date or talk before a date?
That's another thing with a lot of stigma -- "outing" one's medical status can have reprecussions, socially and even in one's career, and many folks would be uncomfortable telling strangers their medical status due to very reasonable concerns.

Which says nothing about sex -- everyone should inform a sexual partner about any medical issues like HIV status before they engage in sex.
  #174  
Old 11-15-2017, 12:38 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
That's another thing with a lot of stigma -- "outing" one's medical status can have reprecussions, socially and even in one's career, and many folks would be uncomfortable telling strangers their medical status due to very reasonable concerns.

Which says nothing about sex -- everyone should inform a sexual partner about any medical issues like HIV status before they engage in sex.
So, is that a yes or a no? Do you think medical issues like HIV status should be disclosed before sex becomes a possibility, or do you think people should wait until sex is a certainty before disclosing it?
  #175  
Old 11-15-2017, 12:53 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
So, is that a yes or a no? Do you think medical issues like HIV status should be disclosed before sex becomes a possibility, or do you think people should wait until sex is a certainty before disclosing it?
Up to the individual. As long as it's shared before sex happens, either choice is acceptable IMO.
  #176  
Old 11-15-2017, 12:58 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Up to the individual. As long as it's shared before sex happens, either choice is acceptable IMO.
Fair enough. And the person has no right to be angry that the HIV positive person didn't disclose it earlier, or before they started dating?
  #177  
Old 11-15-2017, 01:35 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
I assume that cuts both ways - if I ask a transgender person about their gender at birth, and they get offended, too bad.
Meaning, too bad for you? Yes. If your dating policy is to ask all potential dates about their birth gender to ensure that you aren't dating anybody transgender, then you will have to accept that some people, whether cisgender or transgender, will be offended by that question.

And of course, the cisgender and transgender people whom you offend with that question will also have to accept that they encountered a potential dating partner who asks offensive questions. But I think everybody involved in online dating probably knows to expect that.

(Note, btw, that this does not translate into a universal etiquette license to ask people about their birth genders in all situations. Only in dating situations are you ethically entitled to screen your acquaintances based on their genital characteristics.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan
And transgender people have an equal responsibility to make clear that they do not want to date transphobic people right up front.
They have exactly the same choice that the transgender-dating-averse men we've been talking about do. Namely, either

1) state right up front what their preference is, or

2) keep quiet about their preference and accept that they may end up finding out somewhere down the road that they've been dating somebody who doesn't conform to that preference.

Transphobic people are not automatically obligated to disclose that fact about themselves right away to strangers, any more than transgender people are.

The point is that if transphobic people (or more generally, transgender-dating-averse people) want to be sure that they aren't dating anybody transgender, it's up to them to make that preference clear.
  #178  
Old 11-15-2017, 01:48 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Do you similarly feel the same about someone who has herpes or HIV or Hep C? Should they disclose that during the first date or talk before a date?
Nope, not unless they want to or they're expecting to have sex on that date. Infectious-disease status should be disclosed when (a) you are in a situation where you might infect the other person, or (b) the other person asks you about it, or (c) you feel comfortable spontaneously sharing that information.

Requiring people to disclose their STDs on their dating profile or during non-sexual casual dating activity would IMO take us too close to the molten scenario of expecting all possible sexual impairments to be advertised in advance. Yuck and no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972
And the person has no right to be angry that the HIV positive person didn't disclose it earlier, or before they started dating?
Absofuckinglutely. If you don't want to engage in any dating activity with HIV+ people, it's on you to make that preference clear to potential dates. Your issue, your responsibility.

As previously noted, an HIV+ person is morally (and in many cases legally) obligated to announce their STD status before actually running the risk of infecting a date via sexual activity. Prior to that, though, they are entitled to keep the information to themselves unless a date asks them about it.

Last edited by Kimstu; 11-15-2017 at 01:49 PM.
  #179  
Old 11-15-2017, 01:54 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Absofuckinglutely. If you don't want to engage in any dating activity with HIV+ people, it's on you to make that preference clear to potential dates. Your issue, your responsibility.

As previously noted, an HIV+ person is morally (and in many cases legally) obligated to announce their STD status before actually running the risk of infecting a date via sexual activity. Prior to that, though, they are entitled to keep the information to themselves unless a date asks them about it.
Fair enough. Out of respect for your consistency, I agree with you on this topic.
  #180  
Old 11-15-2017, 01:57 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Thank you, and thank you for an interesting and intelligent discussion.
  #181  
Old 11-15-2017, 05:05 PM
Una Persson's Avatar
Una Persson Una Persson is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 15,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
This is not true at all, nor do I see how you could possible think I think that, unless, like other topics on this board, anything less than 100% agreement with whatever you say means I 100% agree with the exact opposite.



I don't care what gender you are. I'm talking about sex. If someone asked me "Who's Una Persson?" I would say "Some woman on a message board i read"

If someone asked me "Would you have sex with someone who had a penis instead of a vagina?" I would say no, and it wouldn't matter what their gender was.
In post #143, you didn't refer to sex - your example was "gender typical women." You're saying that transgender women aren't the same as women in general by making that distinction. If you misspoke and meant to refer to sex, then that would be different.
  #182  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:16 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
"Stairs" typo for "status"? If so, I think you've got it backwards: Increasing societal acceptance of transgender people is accomplished by society in general treating transgender status as just another normal variant of gender identity.

The ideal state of societal acceptance would be something like "Yeah, some women have or used to have penises, some men have or used to have vaginas, so what? Not my business what's in everybody else's underwear. Let people use whatever restroom they feel is appropriate for their gender identity, and stop worrying about what kind of urethral structure their pee is coming out of."
OK I'm fine with transgender use of bathrooms based on gender.

Quote:
Your demand that transgender people should have to pre-emptively announce their transgender status to strangers at the very start of the dating process would be the reverse of this kind of general acceptance. That's saying that some women have to be prominently flagged from the get-go as a "different" type of women separate from "normal" women (and ditto for transgender men).
Yes. They are different to more than 80% of straight men. Different enough that they would not consider dating them. Until there is better general acceptance of transgender women, I'm saying they should be upfront about it.

Quote:
No. Transgender women are women. Most women have had vaginas since birth. A small percentage of women have not. (And correspondingly for men.) That's just one of the facts about human gender.
A material fact in the dating context. One that ought to be disclosed.

Quote:
If you have particular requirements about genitalia or birth sex in a date, you're the one responsible for making them known to potential dates, same as with any other particular requirements you may have about any other characteristics in a potential date.
Once again, that is wrong. When over 80% of people would object to dating someone that is transgender and less than 1% of the population is transgender, the most efficient way of avoiding bad matches is to have the 1% provide notice rather than have the 80%+ ask the question.

Quote:
They'll learn. It's really not that difficult.
No, not they won't. Mostly because people don't give a shit.

Quote:
"Last" typo for "least"? If so, big fucking deal: tort-law jargon is not what determines people's responsibilities about discussing their personal lives.

If you ever start a dating site specifically for tort nerds, you can all agree what information is whose responsibility under what circumstances based on liability-law principles or anything you like. For ordinary social interactions in the real world, on the other hand, you don't get to decide what other people are obligated to reveal about themselves just because you want to know it but for some reason are too chicken to ask.
I'm married, my cowardice has nothing to do with it.

Its not just tort law jargon. The principle is used in tort law to help us determine where burdens should be placed in a just society. What you are asking for is not fairness, its special treatment.

Less than 1% of the people you might date will be transgender. Not asking is not the result of cowardice, its the result of it being so rare that noone thinks to ask.

Sorry for the typos, autocorrect on my phone.
  #183  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:23 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
In what way is it a "burden" to take responsibility for making clear what your own requirements are for dating? If you're the one who cares about it so much, you should be the one to put it on the table. Your issue, your responsibility.
You're the one that is transgender and this is one more thing on the long laundry list of things that you have to deal with. Insisting that the whole world adjusts its behavior to accommodate you.

Quote:
ISTM the only "burden" is what you're placing on other people when you require them to guess whether and how strongly you feel you need to know their birth-assigned gender when you meet them.
80%+ of the population do not want to date someone that is transgender.

0.5% of the population is transgender.

You think it makes more sense for that 80% to make its preferences known rather than have the 0.5% tell peopple they are transgender (and to be fair, the number is probably a lot lower than that because they are transgender but have not started transition in any way shape or form).

Quote:
Pfft, lots of people don't want to date poor people either, but it's still not a poor person's responsibiity to disclose their economic status on their dating profile. Your issue, your responsibility, no matter how many other people happen to have the same issue.
Wrong. Entirely wrong. Being transgender is nothing like being poor. It is immutable. Poverty is not.

Quote:
Once again, why on earth would somebody who supposedly cares so much about this criterion for dating be so resistant to making that criterion clear up front?
because its so fucking rare to run into someone that is transgender and can pass.

Quote:
To take another "preferences" analogy, if you're allergic to some ingredient and somebody who doesn't know about your allergy invites you to dinner, do you expect them to spontaneously tell you whether or not the food contains that ingredient? Or do you say, like a sensible and sane person, "By the way, I should tell you that I'm allergic to Ingredient X and absolutely can't eat anything with Ingredient X in it"?
Lets say that 80%+ of the population is allergic to something that is extremely rare (say poison ivy in an urban environment). Is it up to the diner to ask if there is poison ivy in the salad or should the restaurant say something about the poison ivy they put in their salad?

Quote:
The latter, right? Because your issue, your responsibility.
As I have shown, it depends on how common the allergy is and how common the allrgen is.
  #184  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:28 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Una Persson View Post
I'm grateful for the people here who consistently defend people like me. Very grateful.
I hope you don't think I'm attacking you.

I think its deceptive to date someone who almost certainly thinks you are a typical man/woman when you are a transgender man/woman. I am surprised that people think that its a good idea to get 80%+ of the population to express their desire not to date transgender folks on a regular basis.
  #185  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:34 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by andylongino View Post
People who have same-sex partners and people who change their sex there is something not natural about this. About all this gays getting married more power to them. How can I hurt straight people. I think anyone who is in a position to adopt children only should do so I won’t be allowed to adopt only in to a natural light and varmin I think anyone who is in a position to adopt children only should do so I will be allowed to adopt only in to a natural like environment. I mean a man and a woman that I think should be married and that cannot have children or just wants to help should be able to do so. Can people of the same sex that is married should not at all be able to adopt for the child sake. They gave up that right of having children when they decided to get same-sex partners.
Can they adopt if they DON'T get married? It would be a weird world where single gay people could adopt orphans but married ones couldn't.

I think an orphan is much better off with two gay parents than in foster care. I say let them adopt ALL the orphans if they want to.
  #186  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:35 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I hope you don't think I'm attacking you.

I think its deceptive to date someone who almost certainly thinks you are a typical man/woman when you are a transgender man/woman. I am surprised that people think that its a good idea to get 80%+ of the population to express their desire not to date transgender folks on a regular basis.
Did you miss the part about outing? Being outed can be hazardous to one's career or life, in some circumstances. It's entirely reasonable that someone might not be comfortable telling a stranger that they're trans in a society in which trans people are so often mistreated and even brutalized.
  #187  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:40 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Meaning, too bad for you? Yes. If your dating policy is to ask all potential dates about their birth gender to ensure that you aren't dating anybody transgender, then you will have to accept that some people, whether cisgender or transgender, will be offended by that question.

And of course, the cisgender and transgender people whom you offend with that question will also have to accept that they encountered a potential dating partner who asks offensive questions. But I think everybody involved in online dating probably knows to expect that.
So you recognize at least some downsides to asking everyone you go out with if they are transgender and you still ask why people wouldn't want to do it, unless they're chicken of course.

Quote:
(Note, btw, that this does not translate into a universal etiquette license to ask people about their birth genders in all situations. Only in dating situations are you ethically entitled to screen your acquaintances based on their genital characteristics.)

They have exactly the same choice that the transgender-dating-averse men we've been talking about do. Namely, either

1) state right up front what their preference is, or

2) keep quiet about their preference and accept that they may end up finding out somewhere down the road that they've been dating somebody who doesn't conform to that preference.

Transphobic people are not automatically obligated to disclose that fact about themselves right away to strangers, any more than transgender people are.

The point is that if transphobic people (or more generally, transgender-dating-averse people) want to be sure that they aren't dating anybody transgender, it's up to them to make that preference clear.
And its a really bad indefensible point.
  #188  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:41 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Una Persson View Post
In post #143, you didn't refer to sex - your example was "gender typical women." You're saying that transgender women aren't the same as women in general by making that distinction. If you misspoke and meant to refer to sex, then that would be different.
Hunh. I thought that was just how people referred to people who were not transgender.
  #189  
Old 11-15-2017, 07:47 PM
Damuri Ajashi Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Did you miss the part about outing? Being outed can be hazardous to one's career or life, in some circumstances. It's entirely reasonable that someone might not be comfortable telling a stranger that they're trans in a society in which trans people are so often mistreated and even brutalized.
I understand the risk exists. I don't think it will improve the situation to have people get surprised with their romantic partners transgender status when things start to get serious. The notion that everyone has to go around declaring their aversion to dating transgender is silly tho. And not disclosing borders on deception.
  #190  
Old 11-15-2017, 08:04 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
When over 80% of people would object to dating someone that is transgender and less than 1% of the population is transgender, the most efficient way of avoiding bad matches is to have the 1% provide notice rather than have the 80%+ ask the question.
Efficiency's not the crucial issue here. Other people's obligations to make pre-emptive announcements about their personal lives are not dependent on what you consider to be "the most efficient way of avoiding bad matches".

Your artificial social-utilitarian ideals of dating efficiency do not override other people's ethical right to choose for themselves what personal information they want to announce in their dating profiles.

Nor do they eliminate the fundamental ethical obligation of grownups to take responsibility for telling potential dating partners what their own dating requirements are.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
Less than 1% of the people you might date will be transgender.
Doesn't matter, either for transgender or for any other of the numerous rare characteristics that most people don't want in a dating partner. For example, less than 1% of people in the US are HIV+, too, and lots of HIV- people don't want to date somebody HIV+.

That still doesn't make it the responsibility of HIV+ people to announce their status to potential dating partners right away. It's not about the statistical numbers or made-up rationales concerning "efficiency" or "cost". It's about the moral right of individuals to decide for themselves what personal information to reveal to strangers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
Not asking is not the result of cowardice, its the result of it being so rare that noone thinks to ask.
So what? Other people are not responsible for guessing what your crucial dating requirements might be just because you can't be bothered to bear them in mind yourself.

If it's so important to you not to date transgender women, it's up to you to remember that fact and regulate your own dating behavior accordingly. Your issue, your responsibility.
  #191  
Old 11-15-2017, 08:07 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I understand the risk exists. I don't think it will improve the situation to have people get surprised with their romantic partners transgender status when things start to get serious. The notion that everyone has to go around declaring their aversion to dating transgender is silly tho. And not disclosing borders on deception.
No one has to declare anything -- by not declaring that they're trans, a trans person is accepting the risk that their date may feel angry or disappointed in the future if the relationship develops to the extent that they reveal it. Many may decide that this risk is less dangerous than revealing it from the start. And by not declaring that someone doesn't want to date a trans person, a cis person is accepting the risk that they may find out later that the person they're dating is trans, and thus might be angry or disappointed.

Thus goes dating. Dating can result in anger or disappointment or lots of other things.
  #192  
Old 11-15-2017, 08:12 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
So you recognize at least some downsides to asking everyone you go out with if they are transgender and you still ask why people wouldn't want to do it, unless they're chicken of course.
Oh, now you're saying that the reason people don't want to ask potential dates about transgender status is because there are "downsides to asking", instead of your earlier claim that "no one thinks to ask"?

Yes, this attitude of demanding that transgender women pre-emptively announce their own status, in order to spare transgender-dating-averse men possible negative consequences of asking dates about their birth gender, is 100% chicken.

Either be honest about what your dating requirements are and take whatever negative consequences may ensue, or if you don't want to be honest about your dating requirements, don't whine that your potential dates aren't doing enough to help you evade the consequences of your own dishonesty.
  #193  
Old 11-15-2017, 08:13 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Una Persson View Post
In post #143, you didn't refer to sex - your example was "gender typical women." You're saying that transgender women aren't the same as women in general by making that distinction. If you misspoke and meant to refer to sex, then that would be different.
Sorry, but I used "gender-typical woman" with a hyphen that you failed to quote properly. Gender-typical means someone whose gender matches their sex.

I also don't appreciate you telling me what I'm saying. Asking me to clarify would be the better choice.
  #194  
Old 11-15-2017, 08:16 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Lets say that 80%+ of the population is allergic to something that is extremely rare (say poison ivy in an urban environment). Is it up to the diner to ask if there is poison ivy in the salad or should the restaurant say something about the poison ivy they put in their salad?
Poison ivy is literally a non-food-approved poison which it is illegal to put in foods (and in some places illegal even to burn in the open air). Comparing that with transgender status is ridiculous.
  #195  
Old 11-15-2017, 09:52 PM
Una Persson's Avatar
Una Persson Una Persson is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 15,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Sorry, but I used "gender-typical woman" with a hyphen that you failed to quote properly. Gender-typical means someone whose gender matches their sex.
Yes I got that, but that wasn't the point.
  #196  
Old 11-15-2017, 09:59 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 8,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Una Persson View Post
Yes I got that, but that wasn't the point.
Well, maybe you can tell me what you thought the point was. Because that was MY point.
  #197  
Old 11-15-2017, 10:04 PM
Una Persson's Avatar
Una Persson Una Persson is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 15,989
Perhaps there's a moral burden on cisgender men to take the initiative and be open and honest, forthright even, about their dislike, disapproval, or hatred of us in dating situations. Perhaps because the killer in almost all cases where a transgender woman is murdered is a cisgender man.

Or maybe cisgender men could actively police themselves, and teach each other not to murder people like me.

Naw, wouldn't work.

So let's consider something else.

If a cisgender person politely and reasonably preemptively outs themselves as not wanting to be with a transgender woman, the absolute worst that happens to them is some people might think a little less of them. Maybe. Whereas if a transgender person preemptively outs themselves in that same situation, they suddenly have painted a giant target for abuse, harassment, assault, and worse upon themselves. Is the peril equal in this situation? Doesn't seem that way to me.

Or let's consider something else.

The cisgender person is merely preemptively disclosing an opinion on compatibility of a mate. Whereas the transgender person must preemptively disclose personal and almost certainly painful medical information. Don't even pretend like the two should have an equal level of expected privacy.
  #198  
Old 11-15-2017, 10:05 PM
Una Persson's Avatar
Una Persson Una Persson is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 15,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Well, maybe you can tell me what you thought the point was. Because that was MY point.
I told you that your post wasn't clear. That's the issue; your post was unclear.
  #199  
Old 11-15-2017, 10:37 PM
elfkin477 elfkin477 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NH
Posts: 22,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
There is new research that indicates the lack of any structural differences between a "male brain" and a female brain" — which has implications for trans people and cis people as well. I'll be blogging on that theme on Monday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Thanks for the IMHO post, and I read the article you were blogging about. I think your one-sentence summary may be slightly misleading about the actual findings of the article, which says in the last sentence of the abstract:

In other words, although sex-based structural differences in the brain are variable enough to preclude categorizing brains with a simple binary classification, they do exist. The article continues:

Judging from the links at the bottom of that page, this is part of an ongoing debate about whether brain sex/gender differences warrant using a binary "female vs. male" brain classification system. Nobody's disputing the existence of documented sex/gender brain differences in themselves.
Is that the same study as this?

Quote:
Anywhere between 23 percent and 53 percent of the MRIs had at least one region with a “male-end” score and one region with a “female-end” score, they found. And at the most, 8 percent of the brain scans showed someone whose brain regions all scored “male” or “female.”
  #200  
Old 11-15-2017, 10:40 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 43,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I can certainly judge you for failing to reveal this to someone you want to get romantically involved with.
And I can certainly judge you for that attitude.

Doin' it right now, as a matter of fact.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017