Seventeen has gone downhill fast the past few months. I already decided I'm going to stop reading it when my subscription runs out. This month's issue features an article "My Boyfriend Turned Out to be a Girl." My first reaction was that this was going to be very transphobic and that I should read it to write this blog. Boy, was I surprised.
The story is that Sheri received a text message from a number she didn't recognize. She responded asking who it was. He said his name was Derek and he attended a high school an hour away from her. They started chatting through text and then on the phone. Finally they met in person and went on their first date. "I had dated other guys, but for the first time, I knew I was in love." Derek and Sheri then dated throughout the rest of the school year and that summer. He told her he wore chest bandages due to a baseball injury and didn't want her to touch him below the belt because he wanted to take things slow. He went to college and they talked on the phone and saw each other once a month. But during Christmas break he broke up with her because he heard that she cheated on him.
She later found out he was the one that cheated and the girl persuaded him to break up with her. Derek and his new girlfriend came to Sheri's house to pick up his things. She threatened the new girlfriend to get out of her house and Derek threw her on the couch. Sheri went to the neighbors to call the police and they came to the house. They asked her to identify him and they said "No, that person is Dana Smith. You may know her as Derek, but her driver's license and social security number belong to Dana, female."
Five months later Sheri received several text messages from Derek apologizing. She called him to ask for the truth. He told her that he felt like a guy his whole life and was waiting to have the surgery to officially become one. He said he lied because he thought she would leave him. "The thing is, I would have stayed with him if he'd been honest. I loved him that much.
I was expecting a story where she broke up with him because he was transsexual. However, they broke up before she knew that. She even says "But it was Derek's lies that really broke my heart." However, the title of the article is problematic. They refer to him as a girl. If the title has be "My Boyfriend Turned Out to be a Transsexual" that's fine but they identify him as his psychically sex, not his true gender identity.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Transphobia in Seventeen... Wait Not So Much.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16776
Your forgetting the bottom part. Where they compare him to perverts, drug addicts and older men dating younger women without telling them about the children they have. Needless to say, extremely transphobic.
"The thing is, I would have stayed with him if he'd been honest. I loved him that much."
Because cis-gender people are entitled to know the medical/body history of the people they date even when such knowledge can place them in danger?
its not just the title that's problematic, its the entire premise.
I think people are entitled to know the gender-orientation of their significant other.
While I do understand the problems with being required to be up front with people regarding transgender matters -- it is simply not fair to date someone under false pretenses.
People have the right to choose the person that they date, and even if their motives for not wanting to date transgendered individuals are completely wrong and transphobic ... they have the right to make that decision regarding their own sexuality. It is not fair, for instance, for a homosexually-defined cis-female to be coaxed into sexual activity with an anatomical male because she mistakenly believed her partner was cis-female.
People have the right to require that their partners be cisgendered (or transgendered) -- just as much as they have the right to date only women, only blondes, only hispanics, or only people over 6'0". The right to choose the identity of your mate is a fundamental right, and while discriminatory motives can certainly be questioned, it is simply not reasonable to outlaw discrimination in mate selection.
kbz
There is nothing false about presenting as the gender you identify with. Transgender people aren't lying when they don't come out to you, they may simply feel that their body is none of your business.
Yes, people have the right to choose who they want to date, but people also have the right to keep personal information about their body private.
And no one is talking about outlawing discrimination is date selection. *eye roll*
How about this - from now on, you are obligated to tell every person you date your full medical and genetic history - because if you don't, than you're obviously a liar.
>> There is nothing false about presenting as the gender you identify with. Transgender people aren't lying when they don't come out to you, they may simply feel that their body is none of your business.
The person having a relationship with a transgendered individual should be allowed to decide for themselves whether there is anything false about "presenting as the gender you identify with". It is entirely unethical for a transgendered individual to determine on behalf of their partner whether the fact that they are transgendered matters or not.
And, if you're entering into a romantic/sexual relationship, their body is kind-of your business (at least in some respects). Friends, acquaintances, random passers-by, strangers, etc. have no right to such information ... a romantic interest or sexual partner have every right to that information.
>> Yes, people have the right to choose who they want to date, but people also have the right to keep personal information about their body private.
So people have the right to choose who they date, but they don't have the right to all of the information required to make an educated choice? Nice.
>> How about this - from now on, you are obligated to tell every person you date your full medical and genetic history - because if you don't, than you're obviously a liar.
Oh, come on. Nobody's asking anyone to disclose full medical or genetic histories. But, if you were not born into the gender you present as ... your partner has a right to know that information and decide for him/herself whether they're OK with that. Anything less is fraudulent.
kbz
kmz, it's a basic human right for trans people to determine when, how, and with whom they come out. If the thread continues accepting this basic premise, cool.
I would certainly agree with your statement about transgendered individuals coming out whenever, however, and to whomever they want. I would simply add the proviso that, if you're not ready to come out to a particular individual -- you're not ready to be romantically or sexually involved with that individual.
The right to bodily integrity is inherent to both parties in the relationship. Transgendered individuals should not be forced to come out, and their relationship-partners should not be led unknowlingly into a relationship that they don't fully understand. Even if someone's hang-ups are absolutely transphobic, they have the right to decide for themselves whether they want to have a romantic relationship with a transgendered individual.
So, while I agree wholeheartedly with your premise -- I believe transgendered people have an ethical responsibility to provide full-disclosure to their romantic partners.
And, honestly, if you believe your romantic partner may have a problem with you being transgendered -- its probably better for everyone to find out before getting too involved. It seems to me that it would be far more dangerous to come out to a homo/transphobe AFTER you've been in a romantic relationship than before -- he's likely to be FAR angrier that he was duped into behavior which he (wrongly) finds morally repulsive. As repugnant as is his position would be ... he has the right to make that choice in his own life.
kbz
"if you're not ready to come out to a particular individual -- you're not ready to be romantically or sexually involved with that individual."
That's not up to you to decide.
Transgender people have the right to decide for themselves when or if they want to come out, including to romantic and/or sexual partners. Period.
"Even if someone's hang-ups are absolutely transphobic, they have the right to decide for themselves whether they want to have a romantic relationship with a transgendered individual."
No.
If someone comes out to you as being transgender, you can break up with them. I'd say anyone who would do that is a transphobic asshat, but no one is obligated to stay in a relationship they don't want to be in.
That doesn't mean that whenever you enter a relationship with someone, that person looses their right to privacy just because you might not approve of some private aspect of their life or body.
There is no "right" to not date someone who is transgender, just like there is no "right" not to date someone who's had an abortion. People keep their right to privacy even when they enter romantic relationships.
"And, honestly, if you believe your romantic partner may have a problem with you being transgendered -- its probably better for everyone to find out before getting too involved. It seems to me that it would be far more dangerous to come out to a homo/transphobe AFTER you've been in a romantic relationship than before -- he's likely to be FAR angrier that he was duped into behavior which he (wrongly) finds morally repulsive."
That's also not up to you to decide.
Transgender people have the right to decide for themselves when or if it is safe to come out. Period.
>> If someone comes out to you as being transgender, you can break up with them. I'd say anyone who would do that is a transphobic asshat, but no one is obligated to stay in a relationship they don't want to be in.
So ... as a non-transperson, I retain the right to break up with someone for being trans AFTER they decide to tell me, but not the right to know whether they're trans BEFORE consenting? This is ridiculous. INFORMED consent is the only kind of consent ... if I wasn't fully informed, I didn't consent.
>> That doesn't mean that whenever you enter a relationship with someone, that person looses their right to privacy just because you might not approve of some private aspect of their life or body.
They have their right to privacy. But, if you're seeking my consent for a sexual relationship, I have a right to be fully informed before giving consent. A transperson may withhold whatever information they like ... they simply may not enter into an uninformed sexual relationship.
>> There is no "right" to not date someone who is transgender, just like there is no "right" not to date someone who's had an abortion. People keep their right to privacy even when they enter romantic relationships.
I have a right not to date someone for any reason I want.
>> That's also not up to you to decide.
In a sexual relationship between a transperson and a cisperson ... what "right to decide" does a cisperson retain? According to you, they lose the right to informed consent, they lose the right to decide whether to enter a relationship with a transperson at all, they lose the right not to be defrauded into giving consent ... do they retain any rights to decide at all? Do transpeople hold all the rights? Can transpeople decide FOR THEIR PARTNERS whether their trans-status is important to their partners?
I don't think so.
>> Transgender people have the right to decide for themselves when or if it is safe to come out. Period.
Yes. But, I retain the right to KNOW before I CONSENT. You said earlier that I do not have the right not to have a sexual relationship with a transperson ... but, transpeople do not have the right to a nonconsensual relationship with me. If a transperson is going to obtain consent from someone, that consent cannot be obtained absent full disclosure.
You don't have to come out. But I don't have to consent. If you want actual consent, you have to inform. If you don't inform ... you've possibly just had sex with someone against their will (because they didn't know what they were doing).
kbz
Right to bodily integrity? Bodily integrity has little to do with who you date. And if they're voluntarily having sex with someone (with no coercion, etc), their bodily integrity is still intact. The idea that trans people are so icky that people have a right to avoid them, and that trans people are duping them by not disclosing their trans status is transphobic. Very transphobic.
(Should trans people disclose their trans status? Probably, for our own safety, given how many transphobic people are out there. But that's our personal decision to do so.)
Yes, people have a right to date who they want. A person who doesn't want to date trans people can exercise that right by breaking up with someone when they find out they're trans, and not dating out trans people. Same as someone who doesn't want to date black people, or people who've had hysterectomies, or people who've had abortion, or people who've had divorces, or people with disabilities, etc.
I agree that it is your personal decision to come out ... but it is my personal decision whether to have a sexual relationship with a transperson. Withholding that information from a sexual partner is completely unethical.
Thus, if you're not comfortable being honest about your status to a particular individual -- you shouldn't be having a sexual/romantic relationship with that individual. This is the ONLY way the rights of both parties are preserved ... including the right to privacy for a transperson, and the right to fully informed consent of their sexual partners.
kbz
To me, this is a question of consent. I have an EXTREMELY hard time believing anyone on a feminist site would exempt transgendered individuals from obtaining full, enthusiastic and INFORMED consent from their sexual partners.
Does consent only need to be informed consent when the sexual activity is between two cisgendered inviduals? Is uninformed consent even consent at all? Is the violation any less morally reprehensible because it comes from a transgendered person who didn't feel comfortable informing their partner?
kbz
"To me, this is a question of consent. I have an EXTREMELY hard time believing anyone on a feminist site would exempt transgendered individuals from obtaining full, enthusiastic and INFORMED consent from their sexual partners."
What are you talking about? no one is saying that transgender people have the right to rape their partners.
Not disclosing your transgender status is not rape.
Even if I'm a racist asshole that doesn't want to have sex with anyone who isn't 100% white, its not rape if someone who "passes" as white has sex with me, even if they aren't fully white.
It's coerciion, especifically if they KNEW you would not have sex with them if they were white. It's NO different than if this person had any other physical or genetic trait that you didn't want to be associated with.
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DECIDE WHO AND WHAT KIND OF PERSON GETS TO ENJOY YOUR BODY!!!
Period.
I mean if you're a transwoman who wants a cisman and someone expliots that desire as a transman just to say "you have no right to bed a cisman" THAT would be asshatery no matter how you cut it.
It's the same if it happens to a cisperson.
>> Not disclosing your transgender status is not rape.
Obtaining consent under false pretenses is not consent. If someone consents with the understanding that they are consenting to sex with a ciswoman, and their significant other is hiding their transgendered status ... that isn't consent.
If they did so KNOWING that the person wouldn't consent if they knew they were trans -- that's rape.
kbz
"Obtaining consent under false pretenses is not consent. If someone consents with the understanding that they are consenting to sex with a ciswoman, and their significant other is hiding their transgendered status ... that isn't consent."
No one has the right to know someones transgender status, including romantic partners. If someone is so prejudiced that they don't want to have sex with a trans person, and unwittingly does it anyway, its their problem.
A persons transphobia is no ones problem but their own. It's certainly not their partners problem, separate from how it effects them.
"If they did so KNOWING that the person wouldn't consent if they knew they were trans -- that's rape."
No.
This is what rape is:
Rape is sexually violating someones body without their enthusiastic consent. Maybe they were too drunk to consent, maybe they were unconscious, maybe they were scared of being hurt if they said "no", maybe they did say "no", maybe they are an employee and scared of loosing their job and health insurance if they say "no", or maybe a weapon or threats of violence are being used against them.
Rape has nothing to do with whether or not you are informed about the private details of your partners life - information that you are not entitled to.
Things like whether they've had an abortion, their ethnic/racial history, whether they have a genetic condition or a medical condition, whether they are neurotypical, and the physiology they were born with are all private information - unless they choose to share it.
Choosing not to disclose this type of information, even lying about it when asked, does not make it rape - because no one is entitled to that information.
You simply do not have the right to withhold information that would be fundamental to your partner's decision as to whether to consent to sex.
Fundamentally, my argument is as follows ...
If I don't know, I can't consent. If I can't consent, you can't have sex with me. Thus, if I don't know ... you can't (ethically) have sex with me. It is as simple as that.
I don't have a right to know anything about you, and you don't have the right to have sex with me until I can give informed consent. If you don't want to tell me ... that's your business. You must choose between telling me and having sex with me, or not telling me and not having sex with me. The choice remains yours as to whether to come out or not.
That is the ONLY way to obtain full, informed, enthusiastic consent.
kbz
It is never the job of a transgender person to cater to their partners transphobia.
Lets take you're argument to its logical conclusion, shall we?
If I don't want to have sex with blonds, and a blond with dyed hair has sex with me, by your argument they've raped me.
If I don't want to have sex with anyone who has had surgery, and someone who had surgery to correct a facial deformity has sex with me, by your argument they've raped me.
If I don't want to have sex with anyone who has been sexually abused, and someone who has been raped in the past has sex with me, by your argument that person raped me.
It's not rape, I'm not entitled to know that information, and my prejudice is not their responsibility.
Being informed about the private information of your partners life has nothing to do with consent. Informed consent does not include the requirement to be informed about private information that you wouldn't otherwise be entitled to.
The idea that you need to know private information about a person such as their race, medical history, or transgender status, in order to consent to sex with them, is a product of your prejudice and bigotry. That's your problem, not theirs.
No one has the obligation to cater to your prejudice.
This comment really upset me. I don't want to have sex with someone who is HIV+, but my sexual partner decides I don't have the right to know that. I "unwittingly" have sex with them and contract HIV myself, but that's my problem because I had no right to know that in the first place? I think things that are directly related to sexual relationships (biological sex, sexual orientation, STD status, etc.) ideally should be shared with all sexual partners.
STDs are a bit different, because they can actually harm you. Unknowingly having sex with a trans man won't give me a disease.
In our hypothetical scenario, are us cis-folks even bothering to ask our sex partners whether they are trans? Or are we just going on the assumption that they are lying by default...? I'm kind of getting the latter vibe from the STD comparison, which seems really cis-centric and privileged to me.
"This comment really upset me. I don't want to have sex with someone who is HIV+, but my sexual partner decides I don't have the right to know that. I "unwittingly" have sex with them and contract HIV myself, but that's my problem because I had no right to know that in the first place?"
There is another thread below about HIV. I agree with you that HIV+ people should disclose their status before having sex, unless doing so would put them at risk.
However, being transgender is not a deadly contagious disease.
Frankly, the comparison is offensive.
"I think things that are directly related to sexual relationships (biological sex, sexual orientation, STD status, etc.) ideally should be shared with all sexual partners."
The only one of those I agree with is STD status.
I assume by "biological sex", you mean whether someone is cisgender or transgender. No one is suggesting that its OK for people to go around mascaraing as the opposite sex in order to get laid, but that's not what transgender people do. Transgender people are simply expressing their gender identity, and there is nothing dishonest about it. If you can't tell that they used medical intervention to correct their body, you don't need to know.
Keep in mind though, most transgender people have their own safety issues to think about, and most are very careful about making sure their partners aren't transphobic before entering a sexual relationship with them.
I don't think its necessary to know someones sexual orientation. I want to know that my partner is attracted to me, but it doesn't matter who else they are attracted to. Its not any of my business. Even if they aren't attracted to me, its not different in any moral way than when anyone else has sex with me who isn't really all that interested.
Not for nothing, but not knowing the medical history of the people you date can place *you* in danger, in a variety of ways. There is a certain point in a relationship where I think you're obligated to disclose things like your phys. and psych. genders not matching up.
Not that I'm defending the article. Haven't read it, and given where it was published, I'm sure it was pretty horrible.
OK, if you have HIV you should probably tell your partner before having sex with them, unless doing so would place you in danger.
Being transgender is not dangerous to your partners, and your body is none of their business - unless you want it to be.
Did you really just say "probably"? And then say that it's okay to withhold that information if disclosing it would put you in danger?
No.
I would agree with you if you were talking about a job, or some kind of recreational activity, or some such. If you have an STD of any kind, you are obligated to inform your partner before initiating sex. To do otherwise puts your desire for sex above your partner's right to health, which is not cool.
The partners of transgendered people have been assaulted, but that's not the danger I was thinking of, and I really didn't want to analogize being transgendered with having an illness of any kind, because it's not; it's just another part of the human experience. I apologize for the ambiguity in my comment. I should have tried harder to be clear.
I'm cisgendered, and have always found one of the most delightful parts of any romantic relationship is that I am actually offering up my body to be shared, as is my partner. I assume there's some of the same with transgendered folks, but they obviously have a lot more at risk, so I'm sure it's a much more delicate dance.
"Did you really just say 'probably'? And then say that it's okay to withhold that information if disclosing it would put you in danger?"
OK, I'll give you that. I have a bad habit of making understatements. However, I still only see it as an obligation when there are no power dynamics that make the HIV positive person vulnerable.
Sex is definitely an important part of romantic relationships for me as well. I don't think any transgender person would want to "surprise" me by waiting until then to tell me about their situation. Think of the risk they would be putting themselves in.
Obviously, in situations where they haven't finished transitioning the conversation needs to happen before things get sexual, but it is up to them to decide when they feel comfortable with that. And if I can't wait that long, then I need to find someone else.
However, I still only see it as an obligation when there are no power dynamics that make the HIV positive person vulnerable.
What do you mean by this? Are you talking rejection?
However, I still only see it as an obligation when there are no power dynamics that make the HIV positive person vulnerable.
I must be misreading you, because I simply can't believe that anyone, anywhere would say that there are circumstances in which not telling a sexual partner that you have HIV is acceptable.
Rape springs to mind, as do similar coercive situations. If you have good reason to fear that the person who wants to have sex with you will become violent if thwarted, I don't think that you have a moral obligation to inform them of your HIV+ status. I'm betting that's what Elana meant.
yes, that was the general type of situation I was referring to.
I really don't understand how that comes into the discussion about a consensual act between a cis woman and a trans man.
And, for that matter, when an HIV+ person isn't vulnerable at disclosure.
A rapist is not a sexual partner.
I think most people are violent after finding out at the next HIV testing that they are positive and their "loving" partner stuck the kife in their backs to be sure they could get laid without incidence.
I think once you decide to have sex with someone and they ask you questons about your status you're obigated to tell the truth beforehand. Not wait until they are infected too. That's a horrible thing and in many places a fucking crime.
Wow. So men who have HIV and get a woman pregnant might not tell her for his own safety. Fuck the safety of the woman, her health, her life and that of her unborn child's. Simply disgusting. Seriously.
If they were close enough to engage in sexual acts, they should be close enough to discuss things like genitals as, you know, they'd presumably be touched.
It's sad that Derek felt he couldn't tell Sheri that he was transgender, and the title of the article is certainly upsetting.
That said, Derek sounds like a major douche. Bringing your new girlfriend to pick up your things from your old girlfriend? Douchey. Being violent to your old girlfriend when she complains about having said new girlfriend in her house? Abusive.
Derek's treatment of Sheri was foul.
If he didn't LIE to hide being transsexual then those defending his choice not to tell her would have a point. But lying about your body an dabout intimacy is bad.
He strung her along , she fell in love with him- only for him to cheat on her at the first chance with someone he OBVIOUSLY had no qualms being much more honest with.
Then he brought the new girlfriend to Sheri's house.
Then he PHYSICALLY ASSAULTED SHERI (domestic violence anyone?).
Oh and he "lied because he though she would leave him" is another friggin lie! If that's how he felt explain the cheating, the flaunting of the cheating and total disregard for her feelings and then the phyiscal assault.
Nevermind, it can't be explained away.
I would certainly agree with your statement about transgendered individuals coming out whenever, however, and to whomever they want. I would simply add the proviso that, if you're not ready to come out to a particular individual -- you're not ready to be romantically or sexually involved with that individual.
The right to bodily integrity is inherent to both parties in the relationship. Transgendered individuals should not be forced to come out, and their relationship-partners should not be led unknowlingly into a relationship that they don't fully understand. Even if someone's hang-ups are absolutely transphobic, they have the right to decide for themselves whether they want to have a romantic relationship with a transgendered individual.
So, while I agree wholeheartedly with your premise -- I believe transgendered people have an ethical responsibility to provide full-disclosure to their romantic partners.
And, honestly, if you believe your romantic partner may have a problem with you being transgendered -- its probably better for everyone to find out before getting too involved. It seems to me that it would be far more dangerous to come out to a homo/transphobe AFTER you've been in a romantic relationship than before -- he's likely to be FAR angrier that he was duped into behavior which he (wrongly) finds morally repulsive. As repugnant as is his position would be ... he has the right to make that choice in his own life.
kbz
This was intended to be a reply to Courtney in the above sub-thread. Sorry for the misplacement.
kbz
The fact is that Sheri has every right to choose who she dates based on their sex and gender. Just as Derek does as well. And the truth is that regardless of how Derek identifies in a romantic relationship trust is the first building block of the relationship. And he broke that trust.
In any relationship you have to reveal things about yourself that might be embarrassing or something you feel might not be accepted. (example: credit card debt, family secrets etc) Everyone takes that risk. From what is seems like Derek was emotionally(because he lied and brought his new girlfriend to see Sheri) and physically abusive...NOT Sheri.
While I agree the title could have been written differently, we have to remember that not everyone reads feminist/lgbtqia literature and not everyone knows the correct terminology etc. We're all learning and the fact that they published this in seventeen magazine is a pretty big deal. They didn't publish stuff like that when I was a teenager.
KBZ- you're transphobic comments indicate that you just don't get it.
"Oh, come on. Nobody's asking anyone to disclose full medical or genetic histories. But, if you were not born into the gender you present as ... your partner has a right to know that information and decide for him/herself whether they're OK with that. Anything less is fraudulent."
I have always been a woman. But I was born with a male body. I have a female body now. Personally I don't want to have sex with a bigot, but I'd probably work that out about you well before we got to the point of me considering whether to tell you about this particular piece of my medical history. Your position is clearly cis-sexist - only cis women are truly women, only cis-men are truly men.
If someone is transgendered, as opposed to transsexual - say a woman with a male body, to at least some extent, then you would tend to notice..
Personally I'm bisexual, so I don't really get the hang ups some people have about having sex with someone with the wrong shape body. It's the person that matters, surely?
"Personally I'm bisexual, so I don't really get the hang ups some people have about having sex with someone with the wrong shape body. It's the person that matters, surely?"
I'm also bisexual, but I still want to be sure that I'm attracted to people as the gender they identify with, even if I could be attracted to them otherwise.
>> KBZ- you're transphobic comments indicate that you just don't get it [...] Personally I'm bisexual, so I don't really get the hang ups some people have about having sex with someone with the wrong shape body. It's the person that matters, surely?
Your heterophobic/homophobic comment shows you just don't get it. Heterosexuality and homosexuality are not "hang-ups" ... they are sexual orientations and they are just as valid as your bisexual orientation. The gender of a sexual partner does matter to some people. Heterosexuals and homosexuals have the right to their sexual identities, and they have the right not to have those identities exploited by a transgendered individual that is not being forthright.
You state your argument as if you are arguing "you don't have the right to have medical information about my transgendered status." This is an accurate statement, but this is not the argument we're having.
Your actual argument appears to be "I have the right to have sex with you without informing you my transgendered status". You have no such right. You have unilaterally placed your right to privacy above my right to informed consent.
To be in an ethical consensual sexual relationship, a transgendered person must choose between one of two paths -- (1) tell their partner and have sex with them, or (2) don't tell their partner and don't have sex with them. Those are the only two ethical choices.
kbz
"Heterosexuals and homosexuals have the right to their sexual identities, and they have the right not to have those identities exploited by a transgendered individual that is not being forthright."
And just how are transgender people "exploiting" other people's sexual orientations?
Transgender people are simply being themselves and you're either attracted to them or you aren't. If you aren't attracted to them, no one is forcing you to date or have sex with them.
If you are attracted to a transgender man, you are attracted to a real man. Likewise, if you are attracted to a transgender woman, you are attracted to a real woman.
If a heterosexual woman is attracted to a real man, how has her sexual orientation been exploited?
The only way you could possibly make that argument, is if you don't believe transgender men are real men, or that transgender women are real women.
The only way you could possibly make that argument is if you somehow believe that cisgender identities are more valid than transgender identities.
Your cissexism and transphobia are obvious.
>> And just how are transgender people "exploiting" other people's sexual orientations?
Procurement of consent by hiding information is exploitative, it is as simple as that. Absent full-disclosure, fully-informed consent has not been obtained.
It is simply not up to you to decide whether someone else's sexuality has been exploited. Perhaps it doesn't matter, perhaps it does ... it is not your decision to make whether this information should matter to someone else.
kbz
"Procurement of consent by hiding information is exploitative, it is as simple as that. Absent full-disclosure, fully-informed consent has not been obtained."
Earlier you had said "Nobody's asking anyone to disclose full medical or genetic histories. But, if you were not born into the gender you present as ... your partner has a right to know that information and decide for him/herself whether they're OK with that. Anything less is fraudulent."
These two statements are mutually exclusive.
A persons transgender status is their medical and genetic history.
A man or woman's need for medical intervention to correct their body is their medical history. Likewise, whether their chromosomes are XX, XY or anything else, is their genetic history.
You are demanding that transgender people reveal their medical and genetic history as a prerequisite for sex.
Maybe you don't believe people have to disclose all of their medical and genetic history, but you do believe that you are entitled to at least some of that information.
So, what is the difference? By what criteria do you decide what information you need to know and what information is private? And what makes you feel so entitled to decide what medical/genetic information people have to disclose to you?
Keep in mind that we aren't talking about contagious diseases that you could catch.
What other medical/genetic information do you feel entitled to know in order to give "informed consent" to sex?
Genetic predispositions to diseases? Blood type? Previous pregnancies? Previous abortions? Racial history going back X number of generations? Whether or not they have an invisible disability? Whether or not they've ever had cancer? Natural hair color? Whether they take acne medication? Whether or not they've ever had surgery for any reason? Whether or not they've ever had a cavity, and if so how many?
Do you really believe that hiding this type of information is exploitative?
If so, then you actually do believe that people have to reveal their full medical and genetic histories in order to have sex.
If not, then you are treating transgender people by a different standard. Why?
I specifically stated that people should disclose that which will likely be fundamental to consent being granted. This qualifies. Dental cavities don't.
I thought that was clear.
kbz
I know there's a lot of debate in this thread about whether a trans person should be required to admit that they're trans to a cis person they're in a relationship with, but I think one thing that we can ALL agree on is that it didn't warrant the comparisons to guys lying about drug use, children, etc. which to me was what gave the article a transphobic tint (along with the title). What Sheri wrote was not, to me, transphobic.
Personally, as a straight cis woman, if I were dating a pre-op transman and sexual activity was on the table, I would prefer that he come out to me before we start ripping clothes off so I could make the decision whether I wanted to have sex with him or not. That's the only situation where I think you could really make the case that not coming out is deceptive, as opposed to the transperson's choice to decide who he/she can trust with the information. You can say that people shouldn't get in a relationship if they can't be open with their partner about that stuff, but suffice it to say that in relationships, trust builds over time. In most cases, you don't go into the relationship knowing them completely and having them know you completely, and being able to trust them with everything. And so I can see why a transperson would be hesitant to reveal the truth until after they really had built up a strong level of trust with their partner.
Derek sounds like he's fairly insecure for other reasons (for one, the cheating) so I'm not surprised he was hesitant to tell Sheri about his trans identity.