• S E X
    L O V E +
    R E L A T I O N S H I P S


    ❤️ Welcome Guest! ❤️


    Posting Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • SLR Moderators: Senior Staff

transsexuals

So, where do you stand on transsexuals declaring their gender history to potential sexual partners? At what point do their freedoms begin to impose on other people? In short, if you have intentionally tried to convince someone you belong to one gender, when you were not a member of that sex biologically (Which is, after all, the current global standard for determining gender. Debates on what makes a man or a woman can be endlessly stymied with post-modern bullshit, but in the absence of a practical alternative, lets treat physical genitalia as the generally accepted indicator of gender), is it ethically ok for you to then sleep with that person, under false pretences as it were?

Ok, that wasn't short at all, but I hope it conveyed what I am asking.

On one hand, if someone is so committed to being another gender that they get ex(p)tensive surgery done on themselves, it is surely counterproductive to insist they inform partners of their role reversal. On the other hand, being a duplicitous, manipulative bitch and withholding essential information about yourself so someone will fuck you, possibly endangering their spiritual/moral belief structures, just to satisfy your own sexual desires strikes me as coming pretty close to evil. I can't make up my own mind on this issue, and this problem fuels my distrust of transsexualism.
 
^I think you're confusing the issue to be honest. Behaving in the way you described is completely inappropriate for anyone (transgender or not) and I also think it's not something that does in fact happen as frequently as you are inclined to believe. While I agree that full disclosure is the best policy, you have to understand (as I mentioned earlier) that there ARE people like greenfalcon running around out there who do not understand this and who may react to a transgendered person with violence. So in a sense it can be very dangerous for some people.

lets treat physical genitalia as the generally accepted indicator of gender


It is the "generally accepted" indicator but it is not the correct indicator for all people. Some people were born with a penis yet identify as female and vice versa.
 
The problem I described is unique to transsexuals though. I was trying to think of an analogy, and nothing quite fits. I realize that transsexuals are marginalised, and persecuted, and have to worry about being rejected out of hand by probably a relatively high proportion of people they encounter, and this is in large part what fuels my concern, such as it is. I know there are perfectly valid reasons for not exposing a (trans)gender history, and this is why it is such a quandary for me.

If I was a transsexual, I'm damn sure that fear of rejection/disgust, not to mention wanting to believe that I can pass as a woman and testing that belief, would encourage me not to reveal my original self. However, this is drastically unfair to any potential sexual partners that I may have. In effect, the initial choice comes down to self-interest vs protecting someone elses interests. Of course, the choice is nowhere near that simple in the long run, as I imagine it would be much harder to tell someone you are transsexual after having sex with them, but in the case of one night stands, which my own experience so nearly was, the choice really is that simple.

This is why I question where you think one person's freedom stops and another begins, because my own feelings are highly ambivalent.

Asserting that physical genitalia is not the correct indicator for all people leads to all sorts of unanswerable questions about what is 'correct'. Maybe it is correct, and it is actually transgendered people's perception of themselves that is in error. I'm actually doing a course that deals with the transgendered, and male lesbians, and other such people at the moment. Eventually it all boils down to "reality is perception, and vice versa", which is fine as a theory or even a paradigm, but is almost wholly useless for practical purposes. I can assert that I am a black man trapped in a white man's body, or a woman trapped in a man's body, on the grounds that how others perceive me has no bearing on what I actually am. Although interesting academically, this is pretty much bullshit. If I firmly believe myself to be God's gift to women, and yet haven't spoken to a women in years, much less touched one, does that make me God's gift to women or simply deluded? Unless you are willing to accept external evidence beyond my self-perception, anything is possible. My thoughts on the matter are that people need to consider what they actually are, instead of what they think they are, far more frequently, and this isn't going to be achieved as long as people can tell themselves that theirs is the only opinion that matters.

Anyway, this has become horrendously long, and I've gotten way off point, so I'll end this by completely contradicting myself and saying I am very interested in Judith Butlers work, which problematises the whole male/female binary.
 
So, where do you stand on transsexuals declaring their gender history to potential sexual partners?
Click to expand...

If minors (and I mean the adult-looking early bloomer 14-17 year olds running about) aren't legally or morally bound to disclose their true ages to prospective sexual partners, then why should transsexuals be held to that standard of disclosure about their true physiological gender?

At least when you have a sexual encounter with a transgender, you're not running the risk of going to jail, unless s/he's a minor as well.
 
Firstly, because as far as I know, there aren't any mainstream religions which view sex with minors as a sin. I am not religious at all, but I know how much it would fuck up some of my religious friends to mistakenly have sex with a guy. Secondly, I would hazard a guess that people would be much more traumatised by discovering they had been misled into a sexual act with a member of a different gender to the one which they were led to believe, than by discovering they had been misled by a few years in someone's age.

None of that is really relevant though, because I wonder where are you getting the idea that underagers aren't morally bound to disclose their true ages? I would argue that they most certainly are, just like std-infected people are morally bound to inform potential partners of their condition, or women on their periods are morally bound to inform their partners of that fact. (joking, settle down people, I'm not seriously correlating std's and periods).
 
Originally posted by Fallen1
Asserting that physical genitalia is not the correct indicator for all people leads to all sorts of unanswerable questions about what is 'correct'. Maybe it is correct, and it is actually transgendered people's perception of themselves that is in error.


I suppose that's where the issue lies. IMO, sex is between the legs; everything else is gender. This is important because the difference between sex and gender is crucial and I think we need different terms for them. One common convention is to use male and female for sex, and to use woman and man for gender. By separating sex and gender, we allow for the possibilities that a woman might be male, or that a man might be female.

I think gender subdivides into two aspects (more or less). One is gender identity, which is the internal sense of who we are. Another is gender role, that set of social niches and expectations that people do or do not fit into. Yet another aspect (which is harder to pin a label on) is the adaptation (or lack of it) to gender role, the interaction between nature and nurture in which people develop and grow as children. What I'm getting at is transgender people defy categorization and this tends to disorient people who need to neatly define the world. There is so much stigma out there that many transgender people who have been marginalized and oppressed have difficulty with self-acceptance and live secret lives and that results in what your friend experienced (I'm not condoning that btw).
 
Fallen1 said:
Firstly, because as far as I know, there aren't any mainstream religions which view sex with minors as a sin. I am not religious at all, but I know how much it would fuck up some of my religious friends to mistakenly have sex with a guy. Secondly, I would hazard a guess that people would be much more traumatised by discovering they had been misled into a sexual act with a member of a different gender to the one which they were led to believe, than by discovering they had been misled by a few years in someone's age.

None of that is really relevant though, because I wonder where are you getting the idea that underagers aren't morally bound to disclose their true ages? I would argue that they most certainly are, just like std-infected people are morally bound to inform potential partners of their condition, or women on their periods are morally bound to inform their partners of that fact. (joking, settle down people, I'm not seriously correlating std's and periods).
Click to expand...


When I was stationed in the military up in Spokane, WA, one of the biggest problems the base had was servicemen getting hemmed up for sex with minors. The chronic problem is that all these minors willfully misrepresented their ages to their partners and it cost these servicemen their careers and, in some cases, their freedom. They're either in jail right now or dishonorably discharged.

Military or civilian, I'd hazard a guess that the legal repercussions of being misled into sex by a minor would be more devastating to a person than the self-imposed religious repercussions of having sex with a transsexual. But, I suppose you're right, none of this is relevant. I was merely trying to draw an analogy.

In any case, I'd rather find out my evening pick-up has a dick than that she's a grade below my kid sister.
 
grapeape said:
This is such a perfect comment. I think that people should be able to be whatever they want, whether it be female, male, gay, lesbain...whatever makes them happy. It is sad that people regres to violence because they do not understand, and I *do* also agree that in a way TSs have it much harder than gays or lesbians. Wanting to change your body into something else is a very difficult concept to grasp for one who does not feel it as well, but I think I could accept a friend who told me they felt this way. If they were not happy, I would just want them to *be* happy.

I think that the day will come where people are just more compasionate in general for different types of people whether it be race,gender, sexual orientation or whatever. Hell, look how far we've gotten in just the last 50 years!!

Click to expand...

Yeah I agree, that's exactly my point.Why do we have to hate on each other just because the other person is different from what were used to?Were all human at the end of the day, and should all be treated equally.
 
Fallen1 said:
I am not religious at all, but I know how much it would fuck up some of my religious friends to mistakenly have sex with a guy.
Click to expand...

while i understand your point, i do have to ask: how many of these mainstream religions condone premarital sex in the first place? isn't it possible that the worldview of your religious friends is a bit fucked up anyway?

and not to complicate matters further, but i have to also take issue with such statements as "sex is between the legs" and "physical genitalia is the correct indicator". some people are born into this world with ambiguous genitalia. in many cases, the doctor on duty makes a determination as to what the sex of the baby should be and the child is raised accordingly. sometimes, perhaps at the onset of puberty, these people find that the doctor's arbitrary choice does not correspond to how they feel and/or how their bodies develop. what of these people? do they also have the responsibility of full self-disclosure for one night stands? are they morally obligated to explain the ins and outs of fetal androgens to potential lays at the bar?

i do agree that people should be honest about their histories, but i also think that you have to be realistic about how we expect people to act.
 
I do believe that full disclosure should be made in advance of any physical intimacy. I know my friend who got head from the MTF in NY was *very* upset at not having been informed.
 
Originally posted by @lterEgo
and not to complicate matters further, but i have to also take issue with such statements as "sex is between the legs" and "physical genitalia is the correct indicator". some people are born into this world with ambiguous genitalia. in many cases, the doctor on duty makes a determination as to what the sex of the baby should be and the child is raised accordingly.


I follow your logic but I don't think you completely understood what I meant by "sex is between the legs". Sex is between the legs; everything else is gender.
 
there is a transgender "man" at the coffee shop at work, while "he" has breasts big enough as a female, dresses like a woman and pretends to be a woman, I think it should be downright illegal for this man to use the female toilets.

but its not, because everyone is trying so hard to be politically correct, but IMO, it's no different "him" using the female toilets than any other guys.

can anyone explain why it's okay for a transgender (male) that now claims to be female to use female only facilities, play in female only sporting teams (which is an unfair advantage at the least) and the like.
 
^ Let's examine the alternative. Can you imagine what it would be like for "her" to use the male toilets? Especially in bars and the like with drunk, rowdy men also using those facilities.

I've often come across transexuals in female toilets (I go to fetish balls!) - doesn't bother me in the *slightest*. Whose rights are you proposing to "protect" by outlawing transexuals in women's toilets? Most women I know wouldn't give two hoots. The transexual is obviously not going to be looking at you in a sexual way. "She" is after all, behaviourally female.

Also, I don't know that it IS allowed for transexual M-t-F to play in female sporting teams... definitely not on a professional level as far as I'm aware. Where did you get that information from?
 
there was a thing on Today Tonight a month or two ago about a professional male soccer player, playing in the mens league in Tasmania, then he had a sex change and went to the girls leagues.

I'll see if I can find some more information on it.
 
Hobart, Tasmania - Martine Delaney thinks it's strange that of all the discrimination she could encounter as a transsexual, it's the relatively minor obstacles she's overcome to play in a women's soccer league that makes her front-page news in Australia.

Soccer Tasmania cleared Delaney - a 47-year-old transsexual - this week to continue playing in a women's league based in the state capital, Hobart.

Football Federation Australia said it didn't know of any precedents in Australian soccer and Delaney also thinks it's a first, perhaps for the world.

The FFA didn't have a specific policy regarding transsexual players but advised Tasmanian state authorities that if legally she was classified female, Delaney qualified for the women's competition under guidelines adopted from the International Olympic Committee.

Delaney played for 25 years in men's leagues in Australia's southern island state of Tasmania and conceded to being widely known within soccer circles for being "a bit outlandish" and having long, flowing hair.

Following male-to-female gender reassignment surgery just over two years ago, Delaney was tentative about returning to the soccer pitch.

She did so in recent months, at the insistence of some girlfriends, and scored a half dozen goals for Claremont United in the women's division 1 competition before supporters of a rival club discovered Delaney's previous registration - as Martin Delaney - and asked the state association for clarification on her registration.

Soccer Tasmania chief

Soccer Tasmania chief executive Martin Shaw gave the OK, saying state laws and the FFA's rules prohibited discrimination in Delaney's case.

"I think our decision is in line with the prevailing attitudes in sport, in the IOC, and the case with Mianne Bagger in women's golf," said Shaw.

"We got a request for clarification from another club - they were informed of our decision and they'll abide by it."

The issue has given soccer a higher level of exposure in Tasmania, including front-page articles in Hobart's The Mercury daily newspaper.

"We're on the front page, and that doesn't happen for women's soccer around here," Shaw said. "Most people will understand the decision that's been made and are comfortable with it."

Delaney has been surprised by the level of interest from the media and people in the street.

"It's not the primary reason I decided to play, but it's given transgender issues some profile - for sure," Delaney told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

"I've had some wonderful reactions. An elderly lady recognized me and walked up to me, grabbed my arm and told me: 'Congratulations, you've done a good thing - go for it, girl!"'
Click to expand...
 
Well, that's a decision that's been made by the relevant authorities. I for one think it was the correct one - if she's now legally female she should have all the rights of a female, including to play women's sport.

I'm sure it happens so rarely it's not likely to be a huge issue. It's not like hordes of transexuals are going to be taking over female sport. It's a minor issue imo. But if you want to use that to justify your dislike then... go ahead I guess.:\
 
one of my best friends is gay and suspects he may be transgenderd or at least into heavy drag. He's going to ignore those TG feelings for now though.

I met a MTF at a bar I go to and she's rather crazy and I suspect that she may be schizophranic.
 
Originally posted by greenfalcon
Secondly, what relevance is it to my point whether they are born believing they should be male or female?


Because you're making the incorrect assumption that transgendered people are transitioning for aesthetic or cosmetic reasons.

I'm saying that I feel it is something you just have to live with, it's what nature intended, why fuck with it?... If you're born a boy and want to become a woman, I'd say that's probably a mental problem, not some sort of physical necessity.


Because some people are born incorrectly female or incorrectly male and those people have the courage to correct that mistake.
"Nature" makes mistakes.

But let me guess: 'It's ok though, because their choices dont' affect anyone'


With the exception of the scenario mariposa and Fallen1 presented, how do their personal life choices affect you? Because you have to look at them?

a) as proved numerous times in this forum, it does affect people. There are many issues involved.


Please elaborate, what are the "many issues"?


b)Does that make it ok for me to do whatever i want as long as it doesnt' affect anyone?


Yes, most definitely. That is a fundamental human right.


So why can't I think less of transsexuals?


As I said previously you can think ANYTHING you want, however, if you choose to express that opinion in a public venue expect to be called on your bullshit.
 
Last edited:
"Nature" makes mistakes.


And if you want proof, look at siamese twins and the platypus. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top