If you are interested in a person you assume to be cis, and they have had bottom surgery so the only real way to tell if they are trans is if they tell you, and finding that out makes you decide against having sex with them, you're a transphobe.
If you are interested in a person who is trans but has not had bottom surgery, and that makes you not want to have sex with them because you are not attracted to penises/vaginas/etc., you are not a transphobic
I assume all cis people are transphobic, thats my stance until they prove otherwise.
If you want to have sleep with a white-passing person of color and then finding out they aren't white makes you not want to sleep with them, you're racist
Agree with the larger point but:
Isn't a white-passing POC (particularly if they have pale eyes/hair) just white?
What defines white, in the essentialist sense? Everything in Europe is a mutt soup of indigenous and Anatolian genes anyway (among other things).
I'm also kind of opposed to calling dark eye/haired people with light skin white, because that's a phenotype which is VERY common in the Middle East (and it's also a trait which literally came from the ancient Middle East, indigenous Europeans were nearly 100% light eyed). It objectively makes more sense to only call blonde/blue people "white", and then call the "darker whites" as "tan"
white is a cultural category that has no relationship to physical characteristics & genetics. it's defined by the ruling class. ancestry, culture, language, and economic class are more important factors than physical appearance.
they put race on birth certificates before anyone knows what the kid will look like. being white-passing doesn't extricate people from the system of racism.
idk if you're trying to challenge racism by criticising the lack of a scientific or consistent framework but it kinda sounds like you're getting closer to recasting race and reinforcing it, just on different bases. which in any case misses the point. race is about power. its absurd and its arbitrary, because its absurd and arbitrary and unjust for one group of people to decide to put another beneath them.
For the part about bottom surgery, what are your thought about it? To me it isn't necessary to undergo any surgery if you are attracted to someone and what is in their pants destroys that for you then the problem is with this person and they are just weird I'm probably in the minority I don't get the whole "genital preference" thing.
I don't think any trans-related surgery is necessary unless the person feels it's necessary. I've had tons of people try to talk me out of FFS and tell me I don't need it, but I know what I need and no one is gonna convince otherwise. On the opposite end, there are plenty of trans people who don't get bottom surgery by choice and that's perfectly fine
As for the genital preference, honestly I'm pan and I'm attracted to really any kind of genitals, even ambiguous ones. I don't really know what it's even like to have a genital preferences I'm not going to say it's wrong to have one.
The way I view it is that many of those traditional excuses used would be acceptable excuses normally, if not for the very clear and often very poorly hidden real reasons behind them being based in transphobic beliefs.
A person who claims to care about having kids is a reasonable excuse, but then they will go and hook up with people and use condoms and other forms of protection outside of that. Clearly then this excuse isn't actually truthful.
If they actually showed honesty and practiced their claims, there should be no issue had with them then.
Edit: Also another point, I think that's a pretty major difference in mindset between "I haven't been attracted to X yet" and the "I will never be" mindset. This also happens with race discussions. While the first can still have issues with bigotry, it certainly at least is not as heavily based into it as the second one is. Anyone who can claim that they never will be is a person who is not open to it primarily for reasons outside of actual attraction, else they will be willing to concede the possibility that if they did find someone attractive it would be okay.
anyone who says that is a freak, literally just adopt a kid ffs
Its honestly kind of immoral to have kids instead of adopting, barring some possibility of reasonable reasons for why they have to be biologically yours, just adopt a fucking kid, help a life that already exists instead of dooming one that doesn't to existence
Note: this is not an anti-natalist argument, just think way more people should think about adopting first before conceiving
What about if you're hellbent on having kids? I've had women stop dating me for having a vasectomy/not wanting to make kids. I don't feel ill will towards them, different life paths.
Does the same pass apply to cis's that are adamant on procreation?
Like some people are bonkers & relationships are literally about passing on their genes and raising little hellspawn
not really. "mate" and "raise offspring" are basic drives but they're just rough heuristics that approximate "pass on your genes". animals raise young that aren't their own, even of different species, all the time. different human societies have had vastly varying concepts of who raises which kids - many would raise kids communally, without regard for who the parents were. taking our societal notions about "passing down your genes" and making evopsych arguments for why they represent "human nature" is just laundering the present into the past and pretending that this is the way things have always been.
nah fuck that just have thoughts and say them
hundreds of years of philosophy doesnt get you any clsoer to being right
There’s cis het couples who can’t have children despite wanting them and I think ending an otherwise good relationship because you can’t have biological children is weird and problematic in general.>
Ye, can't imagine leaving someone I love for not being able to have kids.
Personally I'd think being upfront with one's motives would be enough - like if I were in the position of hooking up with a trans cutie & actually cared about having kids (I don't) I'd probably suggest something along the lines of: "hey its really important to me to have kids some day with my own genes because [why?] - so if you're into it I'm down to hook up, just don't want to get into a longterm commitment."
Not sure if that's a good way to go about it or not but that would be my instinct
jesus I don't even know if I want to get into all this
Please keep in mind that prejudiced "preferences" in dating largely revolve around race in the United States, so it's not limited to the experiences of trans people. For example, Asian men are frequently discriminated against for supposed effeminacy, and black women are discriminated against for ... too many things.
I am tempted to approach the subject of trans people not getting fair dating action in a similar way. There's not much of a reason to pursue a relationship with prejudiced/uninterested people. It sucks and it's bullshit, though, that minorities of one stripe or another are expected to be the understanding and accommodating people when they're the ones being treated unfairly.
