Would you date a transgender?

[Individuality-ness]

Well, yes. There's a way to phrase it respectfully, I posted an example on how to do it earlier.

The problem with these threads is that we're treating <group> as something to be studied, a subspecies on what is seen as "normal" (heaven knows what that really is). Trans* people are just people, they're not some new category of human. *sigh*

Oooh, we should have a "would you date a Homo Erectus or Neanderthal?" if we want to talk about new categories of humans

[Vorshka]

No, i dont have such interests.

[Grad Duchy of Luxembourg]

Oooh, we should have a "would you date a Homo Erectus or Neanderthal?" if we want to talk about new categories of humans

Neanderthal, for sure. Bigger brains are <3.

And the longer thigh bones.

[Individuality-ness]

Instead of gang signs, they flash longcat and nyancat pictures.

And because at least 75% of them are teenage aspies your main defensive move is trying to engage them in conversation.

Actually diganosed-officially-by-psychiatrist Aspies or self-diganosed? If it's the former, I take slight offense to that.

[Ceannairceach]

Do note the abbreviation of 'especially" in that little bolded section. Propaganda is neither good nor bad, but can be used for either.

Especially denotes that while propaganda is not necessarily biased or misleading, it's common usage in everyday language involves information that is biased or misleading.

I would prefer if "education" was referred do if we're talking about disseminating information to the public. Propaganda has the implication that were disseminating false or otherwise misleading information.

Education implies a factual or inherently truthful information. Propaganda sends out political or opinionated information. Both are completely acceptable. What the implication is does not matter if that isn't what is happening.

[Person012345]

No, i dont have such interests.

What does that even mean. You're not interested in attractive girls or guys?

[Xathranaar]

Well, yes. There's a way to phrase it respectfully, I posted an example on how to do it earlier.

The problem with these threads is that we're treating <group> as something to be studied, a subspecies on what is seen as "normal" (heaven knows what that really is). Trans* people are just people, they're not some new category of human. *sigh*

Oooh, we should have a "would you date a Homo Erectus or Neanderthal?" if we want to talk about new categories of humans

Worked out okay in Quest for Fire.

[Quelesh]

"The Men from the Internet" sounds like the least terrifying gang ever.

Is this terrifying?

[Nadkor]

And because at least 75% of them are teenage aspies your main defensive move is trying to engage them in conversation.

Actually diganosed-officially-by-psychiatrist Aspies or self-diganosed? If it's the former, I take slight offense to that.

Take your pick.

[Person012345]

And because at least 75% of them are teenage aspies your main defensive move is trying to engage them in conversation.

Actually diganosed-officially-by-psychiatrist Aspies or self-diganosed? If it's the former, I take slight offense to that.

I mainly found it amusing. Although I was wondering if "aspies" was a slur, if so then maybe I take some offence. I guess.

[The Blaatschapen]

Warning: I've only read the OP.

I won't date someone who's had a sex change. I'm just not attracted to them.

Ofcourse, the real reason that I won't date a transperson (male to female, the other way around is even more out of the question) is because she'd be all like "When I still had a penis, I knew how to use it".

[The Steel Magnolia]

Firstly, it's intersex, secondly, "they' is an acceptable gender neutral pronoun. 'It' is dehumanizing.

'It' is talking about one person. 'It' stole my TV (vs. 'They stole my TV) is a different meaning.

Yes, sounds less friendly but done with that intention. We have to discourage people from becoming transgenders. I am for non-taxpayer funded propoganda campaigns discouraging the transgender surgeries.

Yeah no.

[Grad Duchy of Luxembourg]

And because at least 75% of them are teenage aspies your main defensive move is trying to engage them in conversation.

Actually diganosed-officially-by-psychiatrist Aspies or self-diganosed? If it's the former, I take slight offense to that.

Well, we know all about you taking offense and reporting flamings and what not, don't we?

[Agymnum]

My main question to those who say no would be:

Is it because they didn't tell you until after you started dating, or is it because you find something unappealing about them not being a woman/man their whole life?

If it's the latter, then I can wager that your issue is that you can't have sex with them without imagining them as the opposite sex, which probably kills the mood if you're not a pansexual.

[The Steel Magnolia]

gender and sex are the same thing

From Mirriam-Webster:

sex

either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures

gender

the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

You may notice the difference.

'It' refers to INANIMATE OBJECTS. NOT PEOPLE.

I think that represents a problem with the English language. There is no gender-neutral pronoun that is not derogatory when used to refer to a person. When using pronouns, all people must be referred to as either male or female unless you're willing to risk insulting them by using a pronoun with derogatory connotations. This is especially a problem for genderqueer people. I think there should be a non-derogatory gender-neutral pronoun.

They works fine.

[Agymnum]

"The Men from the Internet" sounds like the least terrifying gang ever.

Is this terrifying?

Their name is Anonymous, not "The Men from the Internet".

Anonymous sounds way, way more menacing.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Back to the OP, we've been through this before and probably will again and again for a long fucking time. If you don't think you're compatible with somebody because of their actual, currently existent and relevant sexual characteristics, then that's fine. If you think trans people are on some fundamental level forever tied to their birth sex and categorically consider them "icky" for this reason, no matter how compatible they'd otherwise be, then yes, that's pretty shitty and a problem on your part.

[Nadkor]

Is this terrifying?

(Image)

No?

[Grad Duchy of Luxembourg]

Warning: I've only read the OP.

I won't date someone who's had a sex change. I'm just not attracted to them.

Ofcourse, the real reason that I won't date a transperson (male to female, the other way around is even more out of the question) is because she'd be all like "When I still had a penis, I knew how to use it".

Sounds like you have a complex.

[Agymnum]

Their name is Anonymous, not "The Men from the Internet".

Anonymous sounds way, way more menacing.

No?

It doesn't?

I always thought it did.

[Individuality-ness]

Actually diganosed-officially-by-psychiatrist Aspies or self-diganosed? If it's the former, I take slight offense to that.

Well, we know all about you taking offense and reporting flamings and what not, don't we?

Yes, but I was asking for clarification on that point. Technically, I'm not seeing it as rule-breaking.

[The Blaatschapen]

Ofcourse, the real reason that I won't date a transperson (male to female, the other way around is even more out of the question) is because she'd be all like "When I still had a penis, I knew how to use it".

Sounds like you have a complex.

I don't.

[Choronzon]

No?

What, a bunch of acne ridden neckbeards in Guy Fawkes masks doesn't frighten you?

[Grad Duchy of Luxembourg]

Sounds like you have a complex.

I don't.

Whoa. slow down there. That confirms it for me!

[The Blaatschapen]

I don't.

Whoa. slow down there. That confirms it for me!

That's just a wrong decision on your part.