684
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
684 points (92.4% liked)
News
35774 readers
2171 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If only they addressed that in the article...
Oh wait they did. Read the article.
It really gets under my skin when folks frame bisexuality as bigoted pansexuality.
Edit: I'm not saying he wasn't making a lighthearted joke and I'm not even really saying he shouldn't have said it. I'm just sad that for a lot of people this may be the first time they hear about pansexuality and assume it means that people who say they're bi are transphobic, enbyphobic, or something else.
Yeah tons of people use the label “bisexual” even though by strict definition they might actually be pan. And that’s totally fine, you don’t always have to use the most specific terminology.
I probably lean harder pan than bi, but the bi flag is too nice to not like it.
I'm not a pansexual because I refuse to fuck people with green skin, regardless of gender status.
Exactly. Unfuckable.
Sulley tho...
We all have our types I guess.
What about an olive hue to their skin complexion? Why do you love everyone except Mediterranean people?
They don't appreciate your absurd twist of the term olive complexion, but I do.
And it's because the Mediterraneans won't nut up and reestablish the Phoenician Empire.
What is a close-minded bisexual?
Only eats at a restaurant that has at least one Michelin Star, wears only black socks, listens only to music that was popular when they were between the ages of 12-18 years old, insists that video games and cartoons peaked when they were age 22.
A closed minded bisexual would be someone that is only attracted to cisgender people of either sex. So only females that identify as women and males that identify as men.
A pansexual person can be attracted to females that identify as women, men, neither, both, etc. Same with males that identify as men, women, neither, both, etc.
When he said "open mind" it was a joke. You don't choose who you're sexually attracted to. If you're not attracted to trans people, that's fine and is no reflection on whether or not you're a bigot.
You may know this, but I've run into several who don't, so I want to clarify.
Bisexuality isn't transphobic. Transphobes are transphobic.
Good lord, not being sexually attracted to trans folks is not transphobia.
Being bisexual doesn't mean you can't be attracted to trans folks though.
Fucking preach. I’m bisexual and I’m attracted to anyone my brain and heart click with. Which is very few people. Luckily I found another me to date, then marry, and be togevva foreva with.
Bi = 2
Bisexual = attracted to people of the other sex AND my own = 2
So many people don’t get that.
Well yes, we get that but some people are non binary.
I’m bisexual. Those people would either
Be the same sex as me
Be a different sex than I am
So they’re included.
That's fair, and it's also fair if someone else identifies as pansexual.
If you're refusing to date someone solely because they're trans, then yeah it kinda is. Things like genital preference, the person "passing", etc are preferences you're certainly allowed to have, but are going to apply on a case by case basis. If you're otherwise attracted to someone and the only deal breaker is the fact that they're trans, that's by definition a prejudice against trans people.
Edit: listen nobody is forcing yall to date a trans person. What I'm saying is that most valid hang ups someone might have don't apply to every trans person, there's gonna be trans people with the junk/body type/voice/whatever else that you're into. So refusing to date someone just because they're trans is the prejudiced part, not whatever personal preference you have that's gonna stop you from dating some or most trans folks.
No? If you're a cis straight person, you're going to be attracted to people of the other gender. For most people, this is both attraction to the behaviour (attracted to femininity or masculinity respectively), and the attraction to the specific gentials.
If I was 100% in that cis straight guy box, then for a female trans person to meet those requirements, they'd have to be fairly indistingishable from a cis female. That's very rare, for example most people would not have had a vaginoplasty. If I was to date a trans guy, then I'd personally be put off by the masculinity, even if they had the genitalia I was into.
Personally, I'm not 100% straight because I'm more flexibile with the genitalia, so long as they have that femininity. But I 100% understand why other people wouldn't date a trans person because they're trans, even if they were fine being friends with them. After all, I wouldn't date a guy even though I'm fine being friends with them, that doesn't make me homophobic.
Of course lemmy.world went down right as I finished writing my response and made me lose everything lmao
Anyhow none of what you said contradicts the point I'm trying to make, which I've evidently failed miserably at making even with an edit.
I'm not saying you have to go out and get a trans girlfriend. What I'm trying to get at is that, as you noted, it's possible for a trans woman to meet the requirements a cishet man might have for traits such as genitals, personality, voice, height, body type, etc. This hypothetical cishet dude doesn't have to be attracted to every trans woman, just like how it would be insane if he was attracted to every cis woman. But if that perfect trans woman showed up, who meets every possible requirement for the guy, and he still doesn't want to date her because she's trans, then that is prejudice against trans people.
There's probably going to still be a disconnect on this despite my best efforts and this whole thing will probably get slammed with downvotes too. I'm rephrasing an argument based off of what I mostly remember saying in my original reply to this before world shit the bed, and plus this is a conversation about LGBT people happening in a comment section full of (presumably) cishet people. Getting within 1000 yards of the possibility that they aren't perfect allies with absolutely no internalized bias or prejudice is going to get people defensive. But hell, I'm several letters in LGBT and I've got internalized homophobia and transphobia that I'm trying to sort out, the point I'm trying to make here wasn't an easy one for me to consider either when it was said by someone way smarter than me.
Hey there. Trans person here to tell you that you are just straight up wrong. We haven't been fighting for rights for years so people can backtrack on the basic rules of sexuality out of misplaced identity zealotry. The whole point of most queer dialogue is that you can't control who you're attracted to. Magically changing that is actually just another way to harm trans people in the eyes of potential cis allies.
Hello, other trans person here questioning what part of my statement gave you the impression that I'm saying you have control over who you're attracted to. The entire idea I've said several times now is that if your attraction to someone is only overridden by the fact that they're trans rather than any actual physical or emotional traits they have, then at that point there's nothing to do with your sexual, emotional, or physical attraction to someone and just boils down to a prejudice against trans people. Any trait that might actually determine someone's attraction towards a person is not a single shared trait that all of us have.
If you think that a relationship is the line where that prejudice is considered okay, that's for you to decide and I wont stop you. Everyone is going to have prejudices regarding potential partners, I'm married but personally wouldn't have dated someone with even vaguely conservative views for instance. But whether it makes cis people uncomfortable or not, it is prejudiced to ignore all attraction towards us just because we're trans and for no other reason.
Human sexuality is itself prejudiced. That's the whole point of the queer movement. You are claiming that sexual attraction is never allowed to stop once it starts, but people do that all the freaking time over the most mundane reasons. The dealbreaker is absolutely allowed to be genitalia - it can also be a mole or an odor or a nose that you decide reminds you too much of someone who caused trauma or whatever. People are allowed their fluidity, especially once you start moving into less sex positive spaces. It is very much you saying we can control attraction to deny how sexuality operates.
Correct, people have their prejudices when it comes to partners. I think I'm starting to get the disconnect now. The comment I replied to stated that lack of attraction to trans people isn't transphobic. I think people are reading transphobic in this sense as explicitly hateful, and I've been trying to state that while it might not be hateful, it is transphobic in the sense that it's displaying a prejudice against trans people. Perhaps a misinterpretation of the term on my part, but I question if someone's prejudice towards a trans partner stems from a level of internalized hate, conscious or not.
No I'm not, and if that's really how it's been coming across, then that's a mistake on how I've been phrasing my argument.
I've been saying this over and over and I don't know how else I can phrase it to make it clear that I don't disagree with that idea. You're allowed to have whatever deal breakers you want, but that deal breaker being solely that the person is trans is prejudice against trans people.
Again, I'm not trying to say this and if that's the position that's coming across, then I made a mistake with my wording.
We can argue till the cows come home about whether or not refusing to date a trans person is okay, but I'm not trying to argue the morality of prejudice against a trans partner(though obviously I have opinions about it). You and the other person who replied to me may think that the prejudice is okay, prejudice isn't inherently negative. But the argument I'm reading from both of you is that it's somehow not prejudiced, which is simply incorrect by the definition of prejudice.
Bigotry is when you attack a person with prejudice. It’s not if a person just doesn’t date a person. No one is owed sex. Not getting sex is not a prejudice nor is it oppression.
And if a person didn’t go the distance to attack people they simply aren’t attracted to, attacking someone by calling them prejudiced just cuz they won’t have sex with someone is an incorrect use of the meaning of that word. This breaches on being malicious with intent to harass.
Evidently there's something wrong with my word choice of "prejudice" because that word choice really seems to be the part everyone's getting pissed over. Do you have any suggestion for a more appropriate word choice because you seem to at least kinda get what I'm trying to say.
Yep, right here. The perfect example of how we shouldn't do inclusion. No, I don't want to date a trans person. It's a preference. Not prejudice. I am into biological women. Why would you care? It's not your call to make what I can or can't be into and it's not yours to call me prejudiced because I don't want to date a trans person.
You are missing their point.
Consider a cis woman, and compare her to a trans woman who is has been on hormones their entire adult life (never went through male puberty) and has had the complete series of surgeries to get her genitals and secondary sexual characteristics perfectly in line with her gender.
Now consider two more women, one of which is similarly cis, and the other is similarly trans, but you don't get to know which is which beforehand. Would your attraction magically know which woman had female genes? Of course not.
So the point is if it is the knowledge of their being trans is the entire reason for your lack of attraction then that is a negative bias against trans people, commonly referred to as transphobia. If you can base your lack of attraction on character, behavior, physical features, compatibility, or even just what sex organs they have, then that is not transphobia.
You should just come in and take over on this because this is exactly what I've been trying to say, but now it's being said properly by someone who isn't a moron lmao
Whether you like it or not, that is a prejudice towards trans people. Call it a bias or a preference or whatever else you like, but its there. You're allowed to date whoever you want for whatever reason, but those are still prejudices towards or against particular traits about someone.
Are we now going to see biphobia from trans people too? Fuckin A. As you were, we are used to it.
Going to? They have always been here, but like the rise of TERFs or Cubans in Florida, now that a lot of the LGBTQ spectrum has gotten some progress--enough that the T part of that list is being addressed--some people are gonna play the "got mine, fuck you" game.
It's a good reminder that even people who agree with 99% of what you do can still be assholes somewhere deep down in their cold hearts.
Trans women are female. Trans men are male.
Wait, you can read articles?
So somebody wanted to broaden their understanding by asking a simple question and you decided to be a dick?
Maybe they didn’t have time to read the article and thought somebody would help.
The previous comment getting so many votes is saddening on lemmy. Someone asked a question that wasn’t bigoted and instead of taking the opportunity to educate another human they took the time to quote the article and type up a reply that was dismissive. These types of issues can only be resolved with education and someone taking the extra time to put someone else down is definitely not an ally.
Right. I personally struggle with a lot of the “terms” these days - not because I think they are wrong, only because I don’t always understand what they mean.
On Reddit, when I saw them used, I would ask for clarification and I’d learn something.
Being dismissive to people trying to learn isn’t going to bring them into the ally space.