We see you're not registered!

By creating an account on Exhale, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Royal Blood

If A Guy Is Dating A Transgender Girl! Would You Identify Him As Straight?

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry, honey, but you're missing the point. Most of the behaviours you're criticising are due to homophobia.

 

Homosexual men have been considered for centuries as too feminine, and, sadly, it's quite logical that a lot of gay guys are rejecting "fem" ones because they fear what they represent (same for "butch" lesbians); in Iran, the government is still pressuring gay men to be operated to become women... Some gays and lesbians (but in my opinion, not many) do not believe in bisexuality for mostly two reasons: first, they can be jealous (for instance, a bisexual gay can have a heterosexual life without having to come out and live in the open with a guy), but second, it's because it's blurring the simple topology/categories they created (heterosexual/homosexual), with people that can feel less attracted to men, but still attracted enough to fall in love with one once, etc (One of my friend is always saying that there are no real heterosexuals or homosexuals, just different types of bisexuals, from 1% hetero-99% homo to 50-50). For transsexuals, it's a bit of the same idea as rejecting "fem" gays or "butch" lesbians" + the fear of something blurring the categories.

 

In my opinion, all these behaviours are completely or partially linked to homophobia.

 

PS: I'm completely against these behaviours, but I just wanted to explain that's it's not "pure hate" coming from nowhere, but more an internalised hate, due to sociological and cultural reasons, linked to homophobia.

I basically agree w what you are saying but

I disagree w your friend's comment...there are definitely hetero & homosexual people.

 

it's not a question of % unless you are bisexual, and even then percentage is not a very good way to describe sexuality...it's far more complex than that. Using numbers to describe something as personal and complex as human sexual identification just doesn't work. One example, say you are 50/50...at what point would you be able to say 51/49 is more accurate? What do you use to rank the score? How many people you've had sex w from each gender? Your own subjective score? Does oral sex equal less points than full sex? Does lust hold more value than love? At any point, purely based on chance you could fall in love or begin seeing more of one gender...does that change your score? If your score can change then it is reason to believe that the argument that people are born gay is false...which so many people would have issues with. Giving your sexuality a number is fine, if that is your choice, but no one else has the right to place their identity beliefs on another.

 

Also there are more ways to identify sexually than just homo, hetero, & bi...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still, you know he is a man, why would you want a date someone who is/was a man and pretend he is 100% female instead of dating an actual girl, I think that's because he has this attraction to men but yet he finds women's body sexier... which is totally fine, I mean there's nothing bad about it but I would't call him "straight", not at all.. because I can't call him a woman, even tho he looks and feels like one which is great but just call it as it is

Because you can't help who you fall in love with. Anatomy is such a small part of what makes someone "male" or "female." There are spiritual, emotional, psychological, etc. aspects that make someone male or female. That's how trans people know from a very young age that their anatomy doesn't match with who they really are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I basically agree w what you are saying but

I disagree w your friend's comment...there are definitely hetero & homosexual people.

 

it's not a question of % unless you are bisexual, and even then percentage is not a very good way to describe sexuality...it's far more complex than that. Using numbers to describe something as personal and complex as human sexual identification just doesn't work. One example, say you are 50/50...at what point would you be able to say 51/49 is more accurate? What do you use to rank the score? How many people you've had sex w from each gender? Your own subjective score? Does oral sex equal less points than full sex? Does lust hold more value than love? At any point, purely based on chance you could fall in love or begin seeing more of one gender...does that change your score? If your score can change then it is reason to believe that the argument that people are born gay is false...which so many people would have issues with. Giving your sexuality a number is fine, if that is your choice, but no one else has the right to place their identity beliefs on another.

 

Also there are more ways to identify sexually than just homo, hetero, & bi...

Sexuality has long been measured on the 0-6 Kinsey Scale. 0 being completely straight, 3 being equally attracted to both sexes, and 6 being completely gay. 1&2 would still be straight but I guess you would classify them as "experimenters" or "open-minded." 4&5 would be the same for gays. Of course--as you mentioned--there's no concrete way to measure someone on a scale, but the scale provides us with the fact that sexuality is FAR too complicated to classify in neat little categories. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I met a guy in Hongkong who dressed up as a girl and acted like one, but was completely straight and had a GF.

 

----> that's why eliminating gender stereotypes is so important. As long as there has to be a thread like this one even discussing the matter, there will always be hate.

 

However, I have to admit that I, myself can't eliminate those stereotypes that I have, for various reasons (education, upbringing, experience, media,...). I can pretend, but deep inside me I feel like there are borders and limits that are hard to be crossed... Otherwise every human would be a hermaphrodite from birth...

 

I know that might be considered narrow-minded by some, but at least I'm honest about it. Also, I would never discriminate against anyone who's not sharing my opinion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sexuality has long been measured on the 0-6 Kinsey Scale. 0 being completely straight, 3 being equally attracted to both sexes, and 6 being completely gay. 1&2 would still be straight but I guess you would classify them as "experimenters" or "open-minded." 4&5 would be the same for gays. Of course--as you mentioned--there's no concrete way to measure someone on a scale, but the scale provides us with the fact that sexuality is FAR too complicated to classify in neat little categories. 

My problem w that scale is it tries to encapsulate human sexual orientation, and then measure it w numbers. It's pointless, unless you personally see that and identify w it. Some people are asexual, not attracted to either sex, and in fact not sexual. Some people are attracted to inanimate objects. Some people only lust for situations. The list, I'm sure goes on past my wildest imagination. Some people's attractions change sporadically or overtime. Attraction isn't the be all end all of sexuality either. Lust and love are different and there are variations of both among individuals. 

 

Numbers are an abstract concept for a personal thing, it tries to rank qualitative facts as quantitative, and imo it dehumanizes the individual. It may work on a broad social level...but at the level of the individual, it does not do justice. A gay person does not need to say they are 100% gay, they are just gay. Trying to take back a percentage of the "gay" is just weird and meaningless (unless of course it is their own personal way of identifying themselves). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem w that scale is it tries to encapsulate human sexual orientation, and then measure it w numbers. It's pointless, unless you personally see that and identify w it. Some people are asexual, not attracted to either sex, and in fact not sexual. Some people are attracted to inanimate objects. Some people only lust for situations. The list, I'm sure goes on past my wildest imagination. Some people's attractions change sporadically or overtime. Attraction isn't the be all end all of sexuality either. Lust and love are different and there are variations of both among individuals. 

 

Numbers are an abstract concept for a personal thing, it tries to rank qualitative facts as quantitative, and imo it dehumanizes the individual. It may work on a broad social level...but at the level of the individual, it does not do justice. A gay person does not need to say they are 100% gay, they are just gay. Trying to take back a percentage of the "gay" is just weird and meaningless (unless of course it is their own personal way of identifying themselves). 

I completely agree with everything you said. The scale isn't intended to be perfect, but it helps people grasp the concept that there is more out there than "gay" and "straight" as far as sexuality goes. It also acknowledges asexuality as well, but the scale is used to measure a person's homosexuality/heterosexuality--no one pretends the scale is all-encompassing of human sexuality. It is a very limited tool that only seeks to examine an extremely small subject in the vast field of sexuality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I met a guy in Hongkong who dressed up as a girl and acted like one, but was completely straight and had a GF.

----> that's why eliminating gender stereotypes is so important. As long as there has to be a thread like this one even discussing the matter, there will always be hate.

However, I have to admit that I, myself can't eliminate those stereotypes that I have, for various reasons (education, upbringing, experience, media,...). I can pretend, but deep inside me I feel like there are borders and limits that are hard to be crossed... Otherwise every human would be a hermaphrodite from birth...

I know that might be considered narrow-minded by some, but at least I'm honest about it. Also, I would never discriminate against anyone who's not sharing my opinion...

If i'm correct! The guy you met, is probably crossdresser! Most of the time they are straight men

At least you give a proper opinion, and thats why i would respect you more(if we disagreed on something!)

Because you don't go for the easy blow/attack!

You also see it with homophobic people, most of the time they are too obsessed with sex part or the genitals, ass haha!

Just like hate comments you read here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem w that scale is it tries to encapsulate human sexual orientation, and then measure it w numbers. It's pointless, unless you personally see that and identify w it. Some people are asexual, not attracted to either sex, and in fact not sexual. Some people are attracted to inanimate objects. Some people only lust for situations. The list, I'm sure goes on past my wildest imagination. Some people's attractions change sporadically or overtime. Attraction isn't the be all end all of sexuality either. Lust and love are different and there are variations of both among individuals. 

 

Numbers are an abstract concept for a personal thing, it tries to rank qualitative facts as quantitative, and imo it dehumanizes the individual. It may work on a broad social level...but at the level of the individual, it does not do justice. A gay person does not need to say they are 100% gay, they are just gay. Trying to take back a percentage of the "gay" is just weird and meaningless (unless of course it is their own personal way of identifying themselves). 

I know you cannot measure and say "I'm 10 % gay and 90 % straight", but I used figures like 1 %-99 % just to show what my friend believes, that there are no 100 % homosexuals and straights, because one will always, at one time, feel a bit attracted to their gender or the other gender, even it's not strong enough to make them having sex or a wanting a relationship. I agree with you on the meaningless figures, but I think theories like the Kinsey scale can help people understand better other people's sexuality, and be more tolerant.

 

(I know it may be wishful thinking)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you cannot measure and say "I'm 10 % gay and 90 % straight", but I used figures like 1 %-99 % just to show what my friend believes, that there are no 100 % homosexuals and straights, because one will always, at one time, feel a bit attracted to their gender or the other gender, even it's not strong enough to make them having sex or a wanting a relationship. I agree with you on the meaningless figures, but I think theories like the Kinsey scale can help people understand better other people's sexuality, and be more tolerant.

 

(I know it may be wishful thinking)

I'm not sure ya get where I'm coming from...there are definitely gays and definitely straight people. It only makes sense to say someone isn't 100% either orientation if that is how they personally identify themselves. Otherwise, if a person is gay they are gay...it's not a relative thing. Plenty of people identify only one way, and that is for them to say not anyone else. 

 

Scales to measure sexuality are flawed and only tools most likely used by sociologists to get an idea of demographics. On an individual level they mean very little. Tolerance involves co-existence and education, and scales play such a minor role in education and can in fact be used for sinister purposes. There is obviously nothing wrong if you personally see yourself on a gay/strait continuum...but likewise, it's equally valid to those who identify themselves subjectively without the confines of outside influences.

 

Part of the reason I dislike the scale is that it implies that gay is the opposite of strait...which in fact is a weird way of looking at things and has negative consequences that divide & pigeonhole. And a 1-99 is just a more rigid version that tries to be precise in measuring "gayness" or "straitness", when the reality is it is still a 1 dimensional scale of something that is probably almost always 3D. The subjective is what is at stake here. Expanding the complexity of human sexuality beyond objectifying & labeling people is a much more humanitarian goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol um what? She DID have the surgery, way before they got together? Watch her Transgender Q&A part 2 video, first question.

Case closed, she's a girl and he's not gay. Moving on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.