Wayne Brady Comes Out as Pansexual: 'I'm Doing This for Me' - eviltoast
  • Taffer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Hello, other trans person here questioning what part of my statement gave you the impression that I’m saying you have control over who you’re attracted to. The entire idea I’ve said several times now is that if your attraction to someone is only overridden by the fact that they’re trans rather than any actual physical or emotional traits they have, then at that point there’s nothing to do with your sexual, emotional, or physical attraction to someone and just boils down to a prejudice against trans people. Any trait that might actually determine someone’s attraction towards a person is not a single shared trait that all of us have.

    If you think that a relationship is the line where that prejudice is considered okay, that’s for you to decide and I wont stop you. Everyone is going to have prejudices regarding potential partners, I’m married but personally wouldn’t have dated someone with even vaguely conservative views for instance. But whether it makes cis people uncomfortable or not, it is prejudiced to ignore all attraction towards us just because we’re trans and for no other reason.

    • Velociraptor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Human sexuality is itself prejudiced. That’s the whole point of the queer movement. You are claiming that sexual attraction is never allowed to stop once it starts, but people do that all the freaking time over the most mundane reasons. The dealbreaker is absolutely allowed to be genitalia - it can also be a mole or an odor or a nose that you decide reminds you too much of someone who caused trauma or whatever. People are allowed their fluidity, especially once you start moving into less sex positive spaces. It is very much you saying we can control attraction to deny how sexuality operates.

      • Taffer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Human sexuality is itself prejudiced.

        Correct, people have their prejudices when it comes to partners. I think I’m starting to get the disconnect now. The comment I replied to stated that lack of attraction to trans people isn’t transphobic. I think people are reading transphobic in this sense as explicitly hateful, and I’ve been trying to state that while it might not be hateful, it is transphobic in the sense that it’s displaying a prejudice against trans people. Perhaps a misinterpretation of the term on my part, but I question if someone’s prejudice towards a trans partner stems from a level of internalized hate, conscious or not.

        You are claiming that sexual attraction is never allowed to stop once it starts.

        No I’m not, and if that’s really how it’s been coming across, then that’s a mistake on how I’ve been phrasing my argument.

        The dealbreaker is absolutely allowed to be genitalia - it can also be a mole or an odor or a nose that you decide reminds you too much of someone who caused trauma or whatever.

        I’ve been saying this over and over and I don’t know how else I can phrase it to make it clear that I don’t disagree with that idea. You’re allowed to have whatever deal breakers you want, but that deal breaker being solely that the person is trans is prejudice against trans people.

        It is very much you saying we can control attraction to deny how sexuality operates.

        Again, I’m not trying to say this and if that’s the position that’s coming across, then I made a mistake with my wording.

        We can argue till the cows come home about whether or not refusing to date a trans person is okay, but I’m not trying to argue the morality of prejudice against a trans partner(though obviously I have opinions about it). You and the other person who replied to me may think that the prejudice is okay, prejudice isn’t inherently negative. But the argument I’m reading from both of you is that it’s somehow not prejudiced, which is simply incorrect by the definition of prejudice.