Okay guys, need a drop of advice to see the spectrum here.
I am dating a transwoman, she is at the start of her transition but identifies entirely as female.
I know I am straight, I just want to see the way anyone who doesn't agree thinks...
>tldr; thoughts on transexual dating and sexuality
If she is cute/pretty like a girl and identifies as a girl then it's not gay. Sexuality isn't just about genitals anyway. People who think it's gay must love muscular manly women as long as she has a vagina I guess.
Shameless bump
Are you really straight? I mean, when her pants come down will you be comfortable with her cock?
She may plan on fully transitioning and losing the cock but that is expensive and may never happen. If you ARE straight and are faced with her cock for years, how will that sit with you?
If you are at lease bisexual and OK with her cock, how will you feel when she goes to have it removed?
>>16945176
lol. A bunch of loons convinced you of the completely unscientific notion that sex is entirely unrelated to biology. It's not true. Date whoever you want, but don't kid yourself, it's a man, baby.
If you are of the opinion that sex is determined by how a person feels, then if "she" changes her mind in a week she'll be a man. If "he" changes her mind a week after that he'll be a woman again. And all that shows is that removing the biological component from sexuality renders it a pretty meaningless term.
>>16945183
Thanks anon, this is what I was thinking, just not sure you can put a cute/pretty minimum on it desu...
>>16945183
>People who think it's gay must love muscular manly women as long as she has a vagina I guess.
>implying muscles are a stronger indicator of sex than genitalia
>being this confused
>>16945176
Little kids asking for opinions.... Who the fuck cares if you're gay or straight, little shitter. Do you ever plan on having kids? Yes? Then that thing is not for you.
>>16945185
I am straight as in I am attracted to feminity, and the secondary sexual characteristics of women. Her cock is just a deformity she was born with, and seeing as how she is relaxed about it and gets some enjoyment from playing with it I guess I am okay with it?
I am not overly bothered with her cock, I enjoy her enjoying herself, as any normal partner would, and wether that is through playing with a cock or a vagina that is more up to her?
I am more worried about the stigma attached to this, as althought I see her as obviously female, I know there will always be people wanting to tear that down and make her and me both feel like shit...
>>16945196
If she changes her mind I would leave her? as I am not attracted to the masculinity she would surely portray after that change.
>>16945204
What the fuck man, I am 24, I just wanted to know what the consesus of what I assumed to be the most well-adjusted people on the internet, as having been brought up pretty conservatively I don't know who else to ask.
>>16945213
If being gay or straight doesn't matter to you, don't even bother with it.
If social perception matters to you, you might want to worry about it. Even if you live in a pretty liberal urban center there's still going to be a chunk of the population that laughs at you behind your back that you are in love with a man who dresses girly.
And there's a good chance in 30 years the whole cycle of perception will have shifted right back to where it used to be and everyone will think that shit's just plain faggy.
>>16945205
>being this mental
>she
>she
>her
>her
>her cock
>HER
>COCK
Jesus fucking christ dude just start getting comfortable now with the fact that you're not only gay as fuck, you're attracted to a peak example of mental illness. Not that that really matters, though, since you seem to be retarded enough to call something with a penis by feminine names. I want off this fucking ride.
>>16945223
Okay fair enough, I don't mind if some idiots laugh, they always will, just wanted to see how many. What is your verdict on my sexuality anon?
I don't really care either way as far as it's impact on my character, I would just rather not live with the stigma of being classified as gay...
>a good chance
How did you come to this inference anon?
>>16945224
Take that as a gay?
>>16945225
You too?
Look bro's I don't care if that is your opinion, you are entitled to it, but do you want to present some actual reasons as to why you backlashing against modern society?
Is it just for the trolls?
Or do you not believe in transexualism?
>>16945233
My verdict on your sexuality? Probably straight, based on your description. You perceive your friend as female, your friend appears female in most regards, and you are ignoring the masculine bits, apparently, so I'd call you straight, even if you are boning a dude.
>a good chance
Just based on the fact that we have overwhelmingly considered sex to be a biological consideration throughout history (and we still do for most intents and purposes - even while the olympics are supposedly going to allow transmen and transwomen to cross-compete, there are still substantially different standards for establishing their new identity). The current trend towards basing it entirely on personal perception isn't science based, is just driven by political pressure, and is pretty limited in its acceptance. That seems pretty fragile to me.
>>16945239
Look, dumbfuck, you best be trolling at this point.
If anyone is "backlashing" against anything, it's people flying in the fucking face of all scientific evidence indicating that transexuals are mentally ill and need help that doesn't involve cutting off their dicks or turning their vaginas inside out. You need to take a long hard look at transexuals and realize that their appropriation of the opposite gender's perceived appearances is just pushing the exact "social constructs" they claim to be fighting against. "Being a woman" does not fucking mean wearing caked on makeup or fucking with your eyebrows or obsessing over your hair or wearing certain clothing or talking certain ways or acting like you're interested in certain things. All of these ideas are fed into people's minds through the media they willingly consume. Stop feeding into it.
If it's pretty, fuck it.
>>16945246
Not OP, but this is an awfully persuasive argument. If I wasn't a religious fag this would be my MO for sure.
Is it pretty? does it turn you on? Are you as a couple going to freak out the neighbours? Are you both going to be OK in 10 years?
Things to live with... If you can .. Then do!
>>16945243
Okay, seems reasonable, although if you believe she is a man, and that I am not gay, but still fucking her... You think I am delusional?
Fair enough, I would not say that I can see the same trend represented in society as you, and I actually believe the Olympics should never change their definition because unfortunately it is just not fair on the other athletes in my opinion. However I am not so sure we will experience this vast societal change you speak of, transexuality has been attempted to be labled a mental illness for decades now, and has mostly failed, and to accept that there is no transexualism, it would mean that men and woman are totally interchangable in roles and such anyways, if that makes sense?
Due to transexualism arguably being the best current proof that men and woman are entirely different animals, to the extent that a brain can be in the "wron g" body. Again though, your opinion on the whole debate, and thanks, will be something to consider I guess.
>>16945257
Good job ignoring everything but the posts that make you feel better about wanting to fuck a dude. No one cares if you're gay, just don't try to tell other people that a human with a penis isn't a man. Stop trying to rewrite history and change the definitions of words. I bet you haven't even read 1984.
>>16945245
>scientific evidence
>*citation needed*
I don't think many of them are fighting against social constructs outside of a few overly retarded youtubers? Stereotypes are what makes their transition easier, and allows them to find their place as a women much easier, or not in your opinion?
So in your opinion anon, having a vagina is the only quality that makes someone a woman? and so you view the female to male pornstars as women? no matter that they are more built than most men, fuck women, and would pass undetected in almost all circles?
I feel you are over simplifying this issue totally, and using a few blogs or youtube rants as tbe entirity of your ammo against all transpeople, and anyone that agrees with them.
Just come with some decent reasons or evidence please, I am more than happy to hear a point of view which is not just spagetti spilling and autists shouting, which is what your post came off as to me?
>>16945253
OP here, this is pretty much my problem desu. Glad to hear that some don't even require a framework
>>16945257
Technically not in the clinical sense, just in the looser general sense. You are ignoring the physical evidence to convince yourself that the man you are dating is a woman. You aren't telling yourself that that evidence doesn't exist, you're just telling yourself that a penis is irrelevant to a person's sex. That's just really, really bad biology. More of a social delusion than a personal one though.
>>16945256
>it
Okay, your opinion, I can live with that.
She turns me on a lot, more than most girls I have been with. Neighbours will be scared of me anyways, let alone with her around, but I guess such is life.
Thanks for your take anon, pretty helpful desu
>>16945262
>ignoring posts
Okay..? which ones would that be anon?
>stop trying to rewrite history
Not sure where I did that.
>stop trying to change the definition of words
Not certain that woman just meant a vagina anon, but thanks for you input. I feel you may just be confused with women, and female. I am a biology major, but you have definitely outclassed me on the science front with these definite terms like, man, and woman, which we only relate to one species and could view more as behavioural cues than biological ones, but well done, I am stumped.
>>16945176
He was born with male sex organs; he has a Y chromosome. Given only his genetic and corporeal material (and no artificial help), he is only capable of producing sperm. His taxonomic sex classification is male (as far as concrete biology goes). His behavior and tastes, regardless of whether or not he removes his organs, will not change these facts.
You were born with male sex organs; he has a Y chromosome. Given only your genetic and corporeal material (and no artificial help), you are only capable of producing sperm. Your taxonomic sex classification is male (as far as concrete biology goes). His behavior and tastes, regardless of whether or not he removes his organs, will not change these facts.
Given that you are both male in sex, any sexual interaction between you two would be, by definition, homosexual. Short of modifying your genetic material, you cannot use subjective means to change this fact.
>>16945176
>>16945270
Now that I read it, you may also want to take a look at this
>>16945282
We are arguing over a definition which could be said to change as society changes, due to it being a self-describing term. The characteristics/definition for a man back in the day was very different to how it is now, and in some cultures we see boys not becoming "men" until they have undergone rituals etc, making man, or woman, likely to be an innacurate biological term to use in this instance. Again, we can go down this path, I majored in it, but I think is probably more helpful to the discussion to keep it at a social level, unless your entire way if telling a persons gender role is by their genitals?
>>16945264
>oversimplifying the issue
Yeah man. It's a simple issue. You have convinced yourself that chromosomes and bone structure and hormones don't matter, but they very much do. The fact of the matter is that when your boyfriend dies, if someone were to dig up his skeleton in a hundred years and try to determine as much information as possible based on the given evidence, they would assuredly determine that the skeleton belonged to a male. You can cut as much stuff off as you want, or dope up with hormones from Thailand, but nothing will ever change the slope of your forehead, or the angle your femurs come out of your pelvis, or the size of the opening in your pelvis, or the ratios of your limbs to other parts of your body, etc etc. Anyone with a basic understanding of biology knows that transsexuals are mentally ill, along with the people that indulge them. That's what I think is really the issue - no one is taught these things anymore, or at least, no one pays attention in school when the teacher is talking about it.
>>16945176
You are a faggot, end of story.
>>16945288
Thank you, this is the shit that the other posters couldn't get right in their explanations. Now, with this in mind, that it is biologically homosexual, what do we do about societal opinion?
I understand if for you it doesn't factor into your own opinion on the matter, but seeing as things like marriage, religion, and higher forms of government seem to take little root in biology, and are huge factors in our current social environment, could we take cues from them in our personal definition without being insane?
>>16945292
There are also other influences at play. For example, in modern Western society, you are put in the category of being 'backwards' and/or simply cast aside as being 'wrong' if you disagree with whatever notion(s) of progress are popular to believe in at the time.
Recent case: college campuses in the east coast. People are boycotting, lashing out violently, and demanding 'safe spaces.' The reason? A sizable (yet less vocal) minority of people on those campus don't agree with the liberal precepts the majority seems to expect everyone to accept. It's silly, really.
>>16945292
>basic understanding of biology leads to the FACT that transexuals are mentally ill
Where are you pulling this out of anon?
I agree with your point on their actual biology being unchangable, but do you really feel that in such a complex society we can put it down to one thing?
I majored biology m8, I understand that science of how she can never escape being born male, but I am asking you if you truly believe all society is based around is what you are born? and that you can only play the role you are born into?
As in that case, Black Lives Matter, all whites are inherently better off because of their birth, and hard work to change your standing is impossible.
>>16945304
>whatever notion(s) of progress are popular to believe in at the time
Look, faggot: This isn't about being popular or unpopular. This is about people like you trying to rewrite basic definitions of biology. I don't fucking care what you want to put your dick in, just don't start trying to tell other people that you're not gay or that a male isn't a male or that having a penis doesn't mean you're male or what the fuck ever. What it comes down to, and what people are upset about, is a very vocal group of people trying to foist ultra liberal concepts onto people that fly in the face of all logic. You insult everyone's intelligence by trying to force them to believe what you're saying.
>>16945299
My opinion of society is that, at best, its understanding at any one given point in time is an approximation to physical reality. That approximation (I think) is getting better; however, there are clearly points in time when society relapses, rejecting notions that do accurately reflect reality.
My further opinion is that recent perceptions of gender is an example of society rejecting previously-held notions which are sound in reality. Regardless of whether the topic is religion, sexuality, or government, as an individual, you should always be willing to subject your beliefs to rational scrutiny. If you're willing to forego clear physical definitions for a reason as subjective as 'but I don't ~feel~ that way,' I think you're edging towards rejecting rationality overall.
My advice is this (and this is coming from a morally conservative Christian in a STEM field who is generally uninterested in politics): if you're going to indulge in homosexuality, don't be in denial about it. If you really think it's right, it shouldn't matter what anybody calls it. Once you get past being hung up on what other people think, you'll be able to better understand what you think.
>>16945314
If you majored in biology and passed with this notion still in your head, your professor was a complete failure.
>she can never escape being born male
>she
>born male
Do you not fucking understand how retarded that phrase is? Do you even English, motherfucker? Do you even logic?
>>16945319
Anon, I'm not sure you read my post. I agree with you. I was simply pointing out that this unhealthy level of cognitive dissonance is present in even more pervasive forms.
>>16945326
>Using she as a biological term with an implication
Just stop bruh, "she" is a social construct, male is not. Male is male, she is woman or feminine, this is what I am saying, is that I am wondering wether we have to look past pure biology here and observe human society in order to accurately understand the labels we give things
Ie, not every black man is a nignog, just the retarded ones who spread so much fear and brutality
>>16945323
Okay, I get that, and you have definitely been one of the far more rational and educated nah-sayers here. Thank you for helping me out with a counter to my own opinion.
I understand what you say, and I understand that you have grounded your entire world in science, and I defintely feel there is a place for that, and I can give you the fact that you are definitely right, but as a society do we not choose to look past that?
In that sometimes being a nigger, or being a jew, or gay, or whatever derogotory or otherwise label we can give, is often influeced by things outside of science.
I used to see this black and white you speak of, but having now interacted with a few trans people, I do believe there is more at play in our society than genetics alone.
>>16945333
What you are saying literally does not make sense. If you want to continue down this path of rewriting the rules of an entire language, be my fucking guest, but it's only going to be you and your dumbfuck friends that believe it.
>you are definitely right, but as a society do we not choose to look past that?
So you literally want to tell society to ignore science. Because it makes you feel good. Fuck you.
>>16945361
Nigro, there no rules being rewritten, do you truly believe that having a penis is all it takes to be a man? It has never been this way.
>quoting my reply to a different anon
No you stupid faggot, I am saying that society does not base all of it's practices off science, does it?
We are sentimental and emotional creatures, hence our need for concepts such a love, marriage, funerals etc. And yet you are really going to put one of the most important facets of our society down to cold hard biological fact?
There is other shit you need to be attacking then nigger, like all of the above mentioned inefficiencies.
>>16945339
I think you're doing yourself a service by being able to accept alternate opinions.
As for labels, it's important to notice that they often arise as a result of something else. I'm personally biracial (black and white); my family has Muslims on one side and a few possible Jews on the other.
Any derogatory label resulting from someone's opinion of something I do or am is, as you say, not influenced by science, since the motivation behind defamation is entirely subjective. Any label you could place on me (e.g., black) that is used in society as a result of something I objectively do or am is another story entirely.
In your case, here are the objective labels I don't think you can contest:
(a) You are biologically male.
(b) Your partner is biologically male.
(c) Your sexual relationship is inherently homosexual, since you are both of the same sex.
All three of these arise because of verifiable characteristics you hold or because of verifiable actions you've taken.
Here are the societal (subjective) issues that are points of argument:
(d) Is it wrong for you to be in a homosexual relationship?
(e) Is your homosexual relationship somehow more justifiable than others because one partner takes a masculine role and another takes a feminine role?
I think the primary issue you're facing is that you're allowing your opinions on (d) and (e) affect the relevance of (a), (b), and (c).
If you like her that's all that matters.
>>16945410
You are correct again. That is all applicable, however I am not so caught up on the subjective dillemas you hae outline.
I know it is fine to be gay, I just simply don't feel I fit the traditional societal mold of being gay, as I am not attracted at all to the male form?
Is it more justifiable, no, all relationships are justifiable as in honesty they are of no importance to a non-participant, or shouldn't be.
What I am getting at here, is that in society there are certain requirements to being a "man" and "woman" in the western world, and I am now intrigued to know what your take on this is?
Is societies perception of a man purely based on him having a penis? is a man who underwent a horrible accident and lost his tackle to be considered less than a man now?
With those subjective definitions for the masculine and feminine roles in mind (man, women) instead of male, female, does this change how we view a hypothetical trans relationship, due to our lens being tinted by something other than science?
You by no means need to agree with my possibley flawed outlook, I am simplying asking if the definitions and stigmas of modern society itself could play a part in warping our traditional understanding of what it means to be a man and woman, and wether a male on male relationship scientifically, could actually fulfill the social criteria to be treated as a heterosexual relationship?
>>16945412
Thanks anon, pretty much where I have got to, some will accept, others won't, and that's totally okay.
Bump for more thoughts.
>>16945410
>(c) Your sexual relationship is inherently homosexual, since you are both of the same sex.
A different anon from earlier, not sure if I agree. If OP is pretty much closing his eyes and visualizing a woman under him as he fucks a dude (and we're giving OP the benefit of the doubt that he's not sucking his boyfriend's dick or letting him pound his butt), then I could categorize OP as a heterosexual in serious denial about the sexuality of his partner.
Just like you can have gay men that engage in sex with women, and are able to carry it through because they imagine it's a man they are boning. Gay? You betcha.
>>16945547
I am OP, still lurking, and this is a heavily simplified version of what I was trying to get at >>16945418 here, with wether science is where it stops.
He is right in calling my relationships homosexual in purely biological terms, I just agree to an extent with your idea that society doesn't always stop at science, and it can be dependent on the human factor of emotion etc.
>>16945574
Further bumping
OP is fucking a dude because he's a homosexual. If you were born a male then you're a male. No amount of bullshit you fill your head with will change that. Just accept that you like pounding that tight boipussy and you both can save a a lot of money on and expensive painful worthless surgery.
>>16945762
>implying I get any say in what she sees herself as or wants done
What the fuck dude, are you 12? Obviously I enjoy boipussy, just please read the thread and contribute intelligently
>>16945764
>She
You mean "He". Stop lying to yourself and buying into this bullshit. It's a male. You're fucking a male. They could call themselves a lizard but that doesn't make them a lizard. Fuck off.
>>16945768
Again, read the thread. Obviously "she" is male, but she fulfills a good number of the recognisable criterea for being a woman.
Why so salty bro? come back with some reasoning behind your idea that science impacts society so directly
>>16945771
Criteria for being a woman: be born with female sex organs. If you are to lose those organs later in life you are still a woman.
Your personality does not determine your gender you blithering idiot. While you can speak in generalities all you want they're just that: generalities. Essentially worthless. So, just accept that you're a cock loving faggot and save yourself a whole bunch of trouble.
>>16945785
>if you lose them you are still a woman
And say a woman is born with a misformed vagina, or no ovaries? Is she then not a woman at all?
Oh, you got me, I am the blithering idiot with holes in their outlook
>>16945813
Defective parts does not equal different parts. You're pants on head retarded who's trying to delude himself into thinking he's not a flaming homosexual so I'm not surprised that it's difficult for you to understand. Just put the cock back in your hands and stop typing.
>>16945906
>a dick is in no way shape or form a defective vagina
Holy fuck mate just come up with something that makes sense instead of flaming, why not?
you're gay nigga
>>16946687
Again, not helpful without rationale, but cool, thanks.
Does it really matter? If you like cock, you like cock. Nobody is gonna know if the shemale you're dating looks like a woman.
>>16947389
Issue was more because she is still very much so a work in progress with her transition. Not at all masculine imo, but not OVERLY feminine either, so I wanted a reflection of what most people thought of this kind of relationship, and wether I can expect to be treated like a gay man.
You're too insecure to date a faggot. Your friends will probably shun you, and for good reason since you're clearly ashamed m8.
>>16947405
What do you mean "treated like a gay man?" People aren't going to treat you like a gay unless you act like a flaming homosexual.
Now, will people think you're gay if they know your partner has a penis? Most will. Honestly it sounds like you need to come to terms with the fact that you don't mind cock. It's okay to like cock. Just fucking accept it if you actually love this person (it seems like you do)
>>16947405
Yes, you will be seen as closet gay or just super weird by the average person.
This is bait right? Did the thread actually clear anything up?
Some people will accept it, some won't, some couldn't give less of a fuck. Some will see you as open minded and moving society in a positive direction. Some will genuinely wish you die in a fire.
Your best bet is walking around in public together, since some areas might be more supportive than others. Even if /adv/ was all okay with it, doesn't mean people in your city are.
