What’s so weird about this? There is no reason to bring up genitalia on a first date, unless said date actually starts leaning towards being sexual. There is no reason to care at all about someone’s genitals if you aren’t going to even see them.
When it does transition to sex, it will be discussed (as no trans person would not tell you and risk harm). At that point, you can decide if you’re horny enough and/or like her enough that you don’t care, or if the penis is (still) a dealbreaker. If you decide to turn down sex, you decide to turn down sex. But you should know that you can have sex without involving her penis at all, because it may be the thought of touching her penis that bothers you.
That is the case for me, I figured out. I really don’t give a shit if a girl has a penis as long as I don’t see it or have to interact with it. And I’m well past the idea that sex must be PIV (penis in vagina). Maybe that’s not the case for you, but then you aren’t who the article is talking to.
Though I will point out that, when humans get horny, things that are normally turn offs often no longer are, or even become appealing. Studies show guys get less germaphobic when horny, or become more willing to have risky sex. They find previously unattractive women more attractive. And both men and women tolerate a much higher amount of pain, to the point that what would normally be painful can be pleasurable.
Humans are lousy at judging how they’d feel in the actual moment. It’s very possible that for a usual dealbreaker to no longer be a big deal if you’ve made a connection. Many of those aforementioned straight men would say they never thought they’d want to be with a woman with a penis.
Humanity has a history of persecuting people they consider immoral. (You’d think this would be easy to remember in a thread about alternate sexualities.) Maybe it’s just because I’m an atheist, but when people start calling me immoral, I start to get wary of what they’ll do.
I haven’t really had that sort of problem with people who call me a plant. I mean, they sometimes try to harvest me, but except for that guy who came after me with a combine that’s been pretty easy to avoid.
As begbert2 pointed out, this claim is absurd. Pretty much every straight man can identify categories of women he’s not willing to date, including not only his own immediate female relatives but, say, women more than thirty years older than he is, women more than thirty years younger than he is (or than his granddaughter is), women more than three inches taller than he is, goth women, evangelical women, non-English-speaking women, whatever.
No, there is no rational reason at all to think that recognizing trans women as women automatically implies that any and every straight man “should” be willing to date trans women. There is nothing wrong with (politely and non-judgmentally) refusing to date people you just don’t happen to be attracted to.
It’s true that quite a few straight men who’ve met, dated and married trans women did not previously seek out trans women to date or even consider such dating possible for themselves. So yes, it is possible for people to change their minds about what they find sexually attractive. But that in no way implies that people should be trying to force their minds to change, or to date people they don’t find attractive out of fear of being called a “bigot”.
We are not allowed to voice what we like because not liking EVERYTHING ELSE besides what we like immediately makes us homophobic hateful violent dangerous people. We have to feel self-loathing specifically because we like what we like and don’t have any prurient interest in the rest of the planet’s dangly bits.
:rolleyes: You have evidently got stuck in the same straw universe that’s causing Acsenray so much concern. If you ever find your way back here to the real one, you’ll discover that the situation isn’t nearly that bad.
If you think that trans women are women, full stop, what’s the justification for categorically excluding trans women from your dating pool? I can understand, “I don’t like dick,” but not all trans women have dicks. I can understand, “She’s got features that read as masculine to me, and I find that unattractive,” but that also doesn’t apply to all trans women. I can see, “I want to have kids some day,” and yeah, that pretty much does eliminate all trans women from your dating pool, but that’s also going to include a fair number of cis women for the exact same reason. In all those cases (and a few others I didn’t list) it’s not specifically the trans-ness that’s the reason for the rejection. The only way I can square that circle is if the person in question doesn’t believe that trans women are women, “full stop,” and instead, at most, believes that trans women are “women with an asterisk”. And that latter position is okay, at least as far as personal romantic desire goes - I’m not taking the “fuck anyone or you’re a bigot” straw position that’s been cropping up the last few posts. But if someone feels that way, they’re also not the subject of my post, which is positing someone who is all-in on trans identity.
If you think that tall women, or short-haired women, or tattooed or pierced women, or elderly women, are “women-full-stop”, then what’s the justification for categorically excluding those women from your dating pool?
There’s no “justification” because there doesn’t have to be any justification. You can categorically exclude anyone from your dating pool for the sole and simple reason that you don’t happen to find them attractive. You don’t have to justify your lack of attraction to them in any way.
Yes, sometimes a lack of attraction is ultimately rooted in bigotry or prejudice of some sort. And yes, trans women (and black women, fat women, etc.) are disproportionately likely to be the targets of such bigotry or prejudice (and not only in the context of dating). But that still doesn’t mean that anybody is obligated to “justify” their lack of interest in dating a trans woman (or any other kind of woman).
I take it that you would find it acceptable for a woman who cares about a man’s credit score to ask potential partners to turn over a credit report before she says “yes” to their requests to go out on a date.
I’m actually OK with this. I think such a woman is clearly signaling to others what’s she’s looking for in a mate and what her values are. She’s reducing the likelihood of any confusion or heartbreak.
But do you think it’s the potential partner’s responsibility to turn over a credit report without being prompted first? Would you fault a guy for not showing up to the first date equipped with seven years of bank statements and a recent pay stub?
Because I wouldn’t. I don’t think it’s a potential partner’s responsibility to intuit that the woman he’s sorta-kinda interested in places such a huge premium on financial stability when they haven’t even had a first date yet.
I think it’s up to the person with the “deep visceral instincts” to let it be known early on what they are looking for. That means if dating a chick with a dick skeeves them out, maybe they need to set up a dating profile that explicitly says “Cis-male seeking cis-female or post-op trans-female”. Maybe they should avoid hitting on any ole random women who catches their eye.
AFAICT, what monstro was saying is that if a woman cares about a man’s credit score that much, it’s up to her to ask him about it. It’s not the man’s responsibility to announce his credit score without being asked.
Similarly, a transgender woman isn’t obligated to provide information about her genitalia to all potential dating partners without being asked.
It wouldn’t be how I would go about things, but I don’t see that there’s anything objectively wrong with this game-play. She’s letting guys know upfront that she’s not looking for no scrubs. She could be a gold-digger–which I wouldn’t respect at all. Or she could be a person who wants to be with someone who is just as financially responsible and fortunate as she is. I can’t hate on that. Not with this economy.
It might be stupid of her to limit her dating options in this way. But unless she’s complaining to me about how hard it is to find a good man, I couldn’t care less.
No. A date is not an agreement to have sex, it’s for getting to know someone. Each party will give as much information about themselves as they are comfortable with at the time.
You’re talking about this in the particular. I’m talking about it in the abstract. In the particular, if you ask a person out on a date, and they say no, you are correct, they don’t have to provide any justification beyond, “I don’t want to.” In the abstract, if a person says, “I would never date someone who is X,” I think its perfectly acceptable to ask for a justification for that.
Depends on what “okay” means. I think it’s okay for a woman to ask, and it’s okay for a man to think she’s a shallow twit and run the other way. It’s okay in the sense that it doesn’t hurt anybody if she asks. And if she finds a guy who eagerly complies then they were probably made for each other.