Why is this considered transphobic?

7ts not the terminology is the fact. Its considered transphobic because youre not acknowledging their gender, youre saying that a transwoman is not a woman, thus saying that her identity isnt real. If you said a gay man wasnt a real man but you didnt dislike them in any way, that would still be quite homophobic would it not?

youre saying that a transwoman is not a woman, thus saying that her identity isnt real.

So funny people trying to separate sex and gender. Sex is gender! Born with a penis? You're a man.

You can throw a dress on and slap on some rouge..... Still a man.

You can mutilate your penis and have it inverted...... Still a man, just one who mutilated himself.

It doesn't mean we can't treat these people with kindness and respect just like anyone else who has delusional beliefs, but don't expect to colour in an apple with orange paint and then expect me to call it an orange..... It's a painted Apple.



Posted from TSR Mobile

Her "identity" is just a mind-game she's playing with herself. I can identify as a helicopter if I want to, but it doesn't make me a helicopter.

People use that 'analogy' thinking they're being clever when really they're showing a ridiculous lack of understanding of gender and identity and are simply parroting other people's lack of understanding and bigotry.

People use that 'analogy' thinking they're being clever when really they're showing a ridiculous lack of understanding of gender and identity and are simply parroting other people's lack of understanding and bigotry.

I don't think I'm being clever at all, it's an incredibly simple analogy.

It's a matter of definitions. If your definition of woman is "feels like a woman", then transwomen are women. If your definition is "was born female", they're not. It really is as simple as that.

I don't think I'm being clever at all, it's an incredibly simple analogy.

It's a matter of definitions. If your definition of woman is "feels like a woman", then transwomen are women. If your definition is "was born female", they're not. It really is as simple as that. Now, personally, I see no reason to believe the former is a more valid definition than the latter, and you're not qualified to tell me otherwise.

The only thing he's not getting is the fact that he would have to be mentally ill and really believe he's a helicopter for this analogy to work.

Which is why "transphobia" isn't a thing, so don't worry about being it.


Posted from the TSR app - no updates since 2013!

Mentally illness is by enlarge a social construct I.e what is acceptable behaviour or what is abnormal behaviour.

This is abnormal behaviour


Posted from TSR Mobile

I think what the OP was trying to say though is that he probably wants to date someone who is female by sex and gender (I'm not sure what the correct wording is regarding separating sex and gender out, so apologies if I got the wording wrong!)

But as I was saying I think the "average joe" on the street desires their partner to have the same sex as gender, i.e. their genitalia to match the gender they identify as. I'm sure you can imagine that in the two most common gender fluidity examples (M to F and F to M) there could easily be issues either romantically or sexually, both pre and post-op.

I mean a person will obviously want to date someone who identifies as the gender they desire (it would be strange for a straight guy to date a F to M person because they were originally F), but without being crude, they probably also want body part compatibility so pre-op (M to F) this would bring about very obvious issues, and post-op they might not be comfortable with medically constructed genetalia.

Hope I'm being clear. Not singling you out by the way! Just thought it was a good post to quote (and I wanted to confirm what you meant )

So there's this new series that has started in the UK called 'Boy meets Girl'. It's about how this guy and a transwoman meet and whatever - don't think I'll be watching it, but it's had good reviews.

Anyway, in the series, he accepts what she is and continues to date her.

But what if I was in the guy's situation and I said no, that I wouldn't want to date her... is that transphobic?

If my reasoning is because I want to date a woman?

If you want people to accept transgenderism, shouldn't we have to accept that a lot of people, like me, don't want to date them?

I don't look down on transexuals. I think they're incredibly brave and should be allowed to do whatever they please... but I feel trapped if I deny them.

Yeah, this makes perfect sense. To clear up anything, "sex" is determined physically by your genitalia, and as far as I know you can be male, female or different degrees of intersex. This is where you possess an amalgam of chromosomes, genitalia or/and gonads from both sexes (EG You might have traditionally female XX chromosomes but also have testicles.)

On the other hand, gender is a spectrum and is determined mentally, with the extremes of either side being completely female/complete femininity and completely male/ complete masculinity. Trans people are a different gender to their sex.

I understand the point you are making, but his wording is still transphobic. What he might want to say to avoid any offense, would be, "I want to go out with someone who has female sex organs and identifies as female." but that is a bit long-winded.

On the other hand, gender is a spectrum and is determined mentally, with the extremes of either side being completely female/complete femininity and completely male/ complete masculinity.

No, it isn't. Gender isn't even a thing, male chimps play with trucks and female ones play with dolls. The gender is a spectrum crap is a way to justify endorsing a mental illness.

There is no evidence whatsoever to support your idea that being transgender is a mental disorder. As for this chimp study, I would like to see some sources or else I cannot take it as being true and hence a valid support for your argument. I would think that chimps had no understanding of traditional gender roles in humans and so if this study actually exists, I am sure that chimps of certain sexes choosing to play with specific toys would be due to the colour or situation of the toy, and not due to their sex.

As for your comment on gender, if gender was the same as sex, then there wouldn't be two different words. Also, you saying that gender isn't a thing doesn't make gender not a thing. Your comment is altogether ridiculous and close-minded, please don't expose other people to these opinions again.

THE definition of being a woman is feeling like a woman and wanting to be seen as a woman.

And just because you make an analogy doesn't make it a good one.

I'm getting so sick of writing these posts but there's an endless tsunami of people who can't be bothered to do any research and just believe their ridiculous dogma.

Dr. Paul R McHugh: transgenderism a "mental disorder". Sex change "biologically impossible". People and scientists who support it "collaborate with and promote a mental disorder". Dr McHugh works for John Hopkins University, the institution which pioneered sex change services in the first place.

A study done on chimps and rhesus monkeys provides evidence in favour of "gender roles" being natural and biologically predetermined.

>you saying gender is not a thing doesn't make gender not a thing
Saying I'm a woman doesn't mean I actually have a uterus wherein I could gestate a foetus. What's your point?

>don't expose people to your opinions
I'd like to say you're treating me like some sort of HIV patient, but they get better treatment.