I honestly did not know where to put this, as it is a genuine question of mine, with no “gotcha” or ideology or anything behind it. Simply ignorance and curiosity. I didn’t think GQ was appropriate due to the nature of the question but I also wanted to try and keep it out of GD, as I want nothing more than to learn, not debate.
My question is, since the term “transsexual” has fallen out of favor for the more accurate and accepted “transgender”, why doesn’t the same apply to the term “homosexual”? Are gay people attracted to people with opposing genitalia? Or to those with opposing gender identities that overwhelmingly happen to have opposing genitalia? Are there gay men who would be interested in a (pre-op) transgender woman who had a working penis? Simply because she had male genitalia, even though she presented as a woman?
Well, ask yourself the same question: IIRC, you’re attracted to women, right? Well, would you be attracted to a trans woman who was still physically male? Would you be attracted to a trans man who was still physically female? Or maybe you’re not even sure.
Just as much variety of opinions will be found among gay folks as among straights.
I think this would depend entirely on the gender presentation of the trans men/women. I could find myself attracted to either transgenders who still had original equipment, as long as I found them sufficiently feminine.
It’s mostly just because we still call gendered attraction “sexuality”, so “homosexuality” means you’re sexually attracted to people of the same gender or sex, and whether it’s gender, sex or both depends on the person you’re talking to. You could propose replacing it with a new word that’s more gender-oriented, but most queer people are okay with keeping it as “sexuality” and it’s less confusing that way so it stays. Though, to be honest, hearing “homosexual” casually is a bit… odd, almost everyone just says “gay” or “lesbian”, using “gay” as the gender-neutral catchall. “Homosexual” has a bit of a clinical or formal feel. Like you’d expect it in a court opinion or survey, but not someone to just say it.
Transsexual is also more in use in medical literature, and has a more specific meaning of binary transpeople who plan to undergo hormonal and/or surgical transition. It’s mostly out of favor in common parlance due to the increasing visibility of transpeople who can’t medically transition in one or more ways, and non-binary people, as well as just bad associations with people who tend to still use the word. “Transsexual” acts as a bit of a shibboleth because largely people who still use it in casual conversation are out of touch which suggests they don’t keep up on trans issues and their opinions should be taken with a grain of salt (there are exceptions like Una, of course, who at least last I read prefers “transsexual” for various reasons).
(Note: “transgenders” is also not in favor, use “trans people”/“transpeople” or “transgender people”)
Oh I agree, I actually feel the same way about “transgender”. I was not suggesting these terms were common, everyday words (that may or may not be true, I was just not suggesting it), I was simply noting the difference between the two. Transgender has a cold, clinical feel to it for sure. Just as “transsexual” is used in medical literature, so is “homosexual”. Neither are seen as socially welcomed by the groups being described by the terms. I think “trans” will eventually become the equivalent of “gay” throughout the majority of our society (if not another, more neutral term entirely).
Yeah, sexuality is our term for sexual attractiveness–it’s not referencing gender in this case. It’s the homo, hetero, or bi part that is referencing gender. It’s even been extended so that someone can be homo-romantic, rather than homosexual–though I admit I don’t know a generic word for this concept. (“Romanticity” sounds good to me, though.) A homo-romantic person is attracted to the same gender, but not sexually.
Then there is gynophile and androphile to lump in everyone based on which gender they are attracted to. Though whether the -phile prefix includes “romaniticity” is something I don’t know.
Ok but what is the basis or origin for the sexuality of someone attracted to members of their same gender if not that person’s gender itself? I may be ignorant of the world outside my cozy bubble, but I’ve never heard of a gay man (for instance) who was sexually attracted to a person who also had a functioning penis but identified as a (often) very feminine woman. I’m sorry if I’ve already had this concept explained to me, I just want to be on solid ground as far as understanding. And right now, I ain’t feeling too sharp. Is it a matter of describing two fundamentally different concepts? Or just a matter of socially friendly terms that work and are in no need of addressing (if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it)?
I’m arguing that sex meaning “male/female/intersex” and sex meaning a certain fun activity are nearly completely separated in most people’s minds. I’m suggesting the concept of sexuality comes from the latter (who I would like to have sex with), not the former (which gender am I attracted to). Hence no need to change words.
It’s the homo- part (which means “same”) of homosexual which refers to gender, and that doesn’t need to be changed, since it refers to “the same gender.”
And, yes, I would argue the other thing you describe is something that is basically separate. There are straight guys who don’t care about genitals, who specifically like women with penises, and specifically dislike them. And while I’ve also never heard of a gay guy who liked a trans woman, I know gay guys who will have sex with a crossdresser who is in character as a woman. And crossdressers usually play them as ultra-femme.
I think it’s another dimension that’s just not really well explored yet. I myself am so not into penises that they bother me in porn. I seem to be out of the norm with that, given how often porn not only has guys with them but focuses on how big they are.
Crossdresser here.
–Actually, “transsexual” and “transgender” aren’t the same thing at all. Transgender is an incredibly broad term for anyone whose behavior and/or dress doesn’t match their birth gender. That covers everyone from a guy who puts on a dress but doesn’t change anything else to a man who had sex change surgery. A lot, if not most, transgendered women have zero interest in having gender reassignment surgery. A transsexual must have, or has had, that surgery to feel anywhere near happy.
–Why has “homosexual” stayed while transgendered terms have changed so much? I think we’re ignoring the obvious; the TG community has been public much less and for a lot less time than the gay community. “Homosexual”, whatever its drawbacks, is so established that it’s here to stay. The TG community hasn’t been “out” long enough for its terminology to ossify.
–What do we prefer to be called? It’s a lot easier than people think it is; as long as you avoid obviously loaded terms like “trannies” or “shemales” few are going to be upset. We know people don’t follow the latest gender terminology, and to be honest a lot of that terminology was more thought up by activists than the average TG. Indeed, I’m amused that terms that many genetic women feel are sexist like “gals” or “girls” are lovingly used by TGs. Much like calling a TG “ma’am”, few things make us happier than someone acknowledging our feminity.
Quite aside from all the historical and cultural reasons for why the terminology is what it is, Ambivalid’s question brings up an interesting point.
Some people are sexually attracted to people on the basis of the body they have. Things like personality and behavior and interests and whatnot may influence which out of several folks with delicious bodies are the ones they’d actually want to be with, but the fundamental driving force for them is the physical body type they’re attracted to. For some individuals this may go beyond “has penis” versus “has clitoris” and include things like “isn’t skinnier than this or fatter than that, no shorter than like so but not taller than up to here, no butterface please” and so on, but certainly the morphological biological sex of the person (which isn’t the same thing as their gender) is often the most important factor here.
In contrast, some other people may be attracted to people on the basis of their gender, how they present and what identity they have internalized, along with the nuances and behaviors and personality characteristics that tend to accompany that, and also often including some tendency to conform to associated expectations and roles when interacting with other people. Gender, in other words. So for them if someone is a woman and evinces reactions from them as a woman does, and “woman” is what they’re attracted to, the details of their physical structure may not be a big factor. Cisgender, transgender, short, bearded, has a vagina, adam’s apple, whatever.
Yet other people require specific components of both in order to feel attracted: “You are obviously male and you have an attrractive body but no, I just can’t see myself with someone who wears my dresses better than I do. We can be friends, I ilke you, but if I’m going to bed with man he has to actually be a man, not just a male”; or “Fuck no, I wouldn’t hit that, I don’t care what that body’s like, that ain’t no woman, my socket wrench has got more femininity” etc
So maybe it would be useful to have different terms to distinguish between one’s sexual attraction and one’s gender attraction, and how one “is” on both components of orientation.
Is it a matter of describing two fundamentally different concepts? Or just a matter of socially friendly terms that work and are in no need of addressing (if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it)?