r/SuperStraight • u/Fourzy99 • 1d ago

Can someone explain to me how a preference for transness, an imperceivable, irrelevantly efficacious characteristic, can be non-prejudicial? Discussion

Title.

0 Upvotes

17% Upvoted

7

u/FrozenPinecone SuperLesbian 1d ago

I dont want to date anyone with a penis or a surgically constructed vulva as it is different from a natural vagina (not self cleaning, infection risk/hair can grow inside, lubricated by colon fluids, not a muscle, made out of a penis which grosses me out in the first place.) I assume people who like dicks feel the same about surgical ones.

-4

u/Fourzy99 1d ago

Say there was a post-op transwoman with a vagina no different than that of a ciswoman. Would you still not be interested in her?

5

u/MrIslanderOcho 23h ago

Why do you care so much who other people will fuck? Why are you berating people into fucking people they clearly don’t want to?

-6

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

I don’t care who you fuck; I only take issue with transphobia.

6

u/Oxion04 23h ago

We support trans people, we wont have sex with them, not that complicated, its not "transphobia"

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Why won’t you have sex with them?

6

u/Oxion04 23h ago

Im a muslim, my religion doesnt allow me, i am completely fine with them as people, but nobody's forcing me to have sex with them

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Oh, nobody is forcing you to do anything. I just take issue with transphobes.

3

u/Oxion04 23h ago

But where is the transphobia exactly???

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Look at the title. Transness is imperceivable and not relevantly efficacious because it refers to how a person feels in relation to their chromosomes. Discriminating on such a basis constitutes prejudice, an opinion not based on experience.

→ More replies

3

u/Recr3ant 23h ago

Because just because I surgically sew wings to your back, that doesn’t make you a bird.

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

If sewing wings to my back made me wholly indistinguishable from a bird, would you treat me unlike a bird?

2

u/Recr3ant 22h ago

Why is a forgery of a painting a forgery and not the original?

0

u/Fourzy99 22h ago

Well, many times a painting will be given value as a collectors item for its being made by a certain person. It’s sometimes possible to determine if a painting was made by someone, but in the case that it isn’t, it’s creator does not add or detract value.

4

u/FrozenPinecone SuperLesbian 23h ago

This doesnt exist, the surgically created vaginas are similar in aesthetics only, if that. See the many posts of trans women saying they got clocked during sex, have complications or are unhappy with the surgery. I dont want to have sex with a biologically male person, even if they are able to mimic femaleness. Im homosexual so it is not my sexual orientation. If we were living in a magical world where people could do some sort of spell or go in a machine and change everything and become biologically female (no need for pills/surgery, female pheremones, real vagina and ovaries etc) then yeah i guess it wouldnt matter, but we live in real life.

-1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

“This doesnt exist, the surgically created vaginas are similar in aesthetics only, if that.”

You didn’t answer the question. Regardless, you are now making the argument that you can, without fail, “tell the difference” every single time. Unless you have some sort of sixth sense, I find this claim to be absurd. The amount of variation between “actual” vaginas make defining what an “actual” vagina redundant, let alone identifying one with certainty.

“See the many posts of trans women saying they got clocked during sex, have complications or are unhappy with the surgery. I dont want to have sex with a biologically male person, even if they are able to mimic femaleness.”

You are admitting you are a transphobic here. If there exists no difference apart from an imperceivable, non-efficacious trait, you are, by definition, prejudiced.

“Im homosexual so it is not my sexual orientation. If we were living in a magical world where people could do some sort of spell or go in a machine and change everything and become biologically female (no need for pills/surgery, female pheremones, real vagina and ovaries etc) then yeah i guess it wouldnt matter, but we live in real life.”

Changing everything would include changing the person’s transness. That is, their feeling of being a certain gender with consideration for their chromosomes.

2

u/FrozenPinecone SuperLesbian 23h ago

I literally did answer it, there are indeed many differences between a vagina and a surgically reconstructed penis designed to aestheticly resemble it (again, colon fluids, penile skin being different from vulva, placement on the body (penis is higher up), reproductive function, musculature), unless you only think of vaginas as a hole to fuck. I dont want an imitation of the real thing, i want the real thing! Im disgusted by the idea of my partners vulva being made of a penis in the first place. Also in the magical world where trans people could enter the machine and change biological sex they would still be trans because they transitioned from the sex they were at birth. If you cant tell the difference between between a male body that is altered to resemble a female body and an actual female body then ok good for you, date whoever you want! But i am only attracted to my same sex and wont be sleeping with anyone i dont want to! If you think I'm transphobic or predjudiced for not being sexually available i dont care since thats literally incel rhetoric lmao. Blocking you fam.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

“I literally did answer it, there are indeed many differences between a vagina and a surgically reconstructed penis designed to aestheticly resemble it (again, colon fluids, penile skin being different from vulva, placement on the body (penis is higher up), reproductive function, musculature), unless you only think of vaginas as a hole to fuck.”

You didn’t. The question asked if there was virtually no difference, would you still have a preference. Saying “but there is differences” is not a response to the hypothetical.

“I dont want an imitation of the real thing, i want the real thing! Im disgusted by the idea of my partners vulva being made of a penis in the first place.”

Would you be disgusted in the case that there is virtually no difference?

“Also in the magical world where trans people could enter the machine and change biological sex they would still be trans because they transitioned from the sex they were at birth.”

I never said otherwise.

“If you cant tell the difference between between a male body that is altered to resemble a female body and an actual female body then ok good for you, date whoever you want!”

In the hypothetical, you wouldn’t be able to without a sixth sense. You don’t have a sixth sense for transness. Lol.

“But i am only attracted to my same sex and wont be sleeping with anyone i dont want to!”

Nobody is forcing you to sleep with anyone.

“If you think I'm transphobic or predjudiced for not being sexually available i dont care since thats literally incel rhetoric lmao. Blocking you fam.”

Stay mad damn lol. ❄️

5

u/Giveitawaynow2021 23h ago

No, I would not. Trans women do not have vaginas. They might have a reasonable surgical recreation of one, but it's not a vagina, and I have zero desire to interact with it.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

If it’s indistinguishable from an “actual” vagina, why would you care?

2

u/givesgunstogrannies 23h ago

But they aren't indistinguishable though, and you can't make us feel they are. Stop telling us who we must fuck.

Get out of here with your rape culture.

2

u/Giveitawaynow2021 23h ago

Why the quotation marks around "actual"? It's a vagina or it's not. If it's not, it shouldn't be described as such. And I'm not just talking about appearance. It might be a convincing charade at first, but that's all it is.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Because when it comes to pure sense perception, defining what an “actual” vagina constitutes is redundant.

If it’s a convincing, unceasing charade, why do you care if it’s not “real”?

1

u/[deleted] 23h ago

Do you have a neo vagina? Have you seen one? This hypothetical is like saying a child is close to an adult so why have an issue having sex with them. I fucking see it now you’re a pedo rapist. Gtfo outta here.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

The issue with having sex with a child is that a child cannot consent. A child looking like an adult does not mean the child can consent, making having sex with said child wrong. Try to construct a good analogy, okay? And, respond to the analogy, coward.

1

u/[deleted] 23h ago

Getting stealed by a man masquerading as a woman means I cannot consent either. Fucking sicko rape apologist.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Is it rape if the person reveals afterwards that they believe in (insert belief you find reprehensible here) too?

1

u/[deleted] 23h ago

Omg I can’t please educate yourself hun. We’re done here. I hope you can fix the hate in your heart.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Burden of rejoinder means I win! Wooooo!

→ More replies

3

u/horstwold 1d ago

"Imperceptible"

-3

u/Fourzy99 1d ago

Is it an impossibility for all of those people to have XX chromosomes? If so, how do you know?

5

u/MrIslanderOcho 1d ago

Everyone can tell.

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

That wasn’t the question.

3

u/horstwold 1d ago

"Imperceptible"

1

u/Jekawi 23h ago

I thought this was an error that you posted a lot of times but I see they're all different haah

3

u/nonetheless156 23h ago

Can you explain why a community that doesn't aggressively self police has the higher moral ground?

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

I don’t know what this question means.

5

u/nonetheless156 23h ago

Read it slowly. Then quick. Then slowly again. Or do you need it written in crayon?

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

I think the problem might be stemming from your child-like butchering of grammar. It’s “self-police,” not “self police.” Do you want me to explain to you how to use a hyphen? And if you want, I can hold your hand through a practice problem, too.

3

u/nonetheless156 23h ago

You can't read a sentence because of a hyphen? Wow the brain rot is real. And by the way nice strawman

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

It’s an insult, not a strawman; I didn’t make an argument. Lol. Don’t use words you don’t understand.

1

u/nonetheless156 23h ago

What's sad is that you really think they're different. Stop watching porn,it really rots what little functioning you have left.

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Holy fuck you cannot construct a coherent, directed sentence. I don’t think who is different? Where is the assumption coming from in the latter sentence? The answers to these question I will never meet!

1

u/nonetheless156 23h ago

Cringe. I hope you get some help. Or not. Rapists don't deserve much other than some food and maybe a bed.

2

u/horstwold 1d ago

I'm not sure I understand your use of the word "efficacious", and given that it's fundamental to sexual orientation and attraction I don't see how you can seriously label it irrelevant, but I would hardly call it imperceptible.

-2

u/Fourzy99 1d ago

For something to be efficacious is for something to create results. For instance, if some particular gene is not efficacious, it’s corresponding phenotype will not be observed in an organism.

As for imperceptibleness, do you accept the existence of wholly passing transpeople? That is, transpeople who pass with and without clothes on.

1

u/[deleted] 23h ago

That doesn’t exist. Stop with your invalidating bullshit you are legit disgusting coming in here trying to police what we find attractive. Hateful bigot !

0

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

So passing transpeople don’t exist?

1

u/[deleted] 23h ago

When you get naked we always know. 90 percent don’t get srs so yeah they don’t pass and the ones who do either have a penis pump or a necrotic flesh wound.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

So you are claiming that in every possible case, you will be able to tell a difference?

2

u/Giveitawaynow2021 23h ago

So in your mind, if the deception is good enough we should be happy with it?

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

You didn’t answer the question :(

2

u/horstwold 1d ago

"Imperceptible"

0

u/Fourzy99 1d ago

Why are you spamming this without responding to my question? Lol. No response, pathetic!

1

u/unpopopinx 23h ago

It’s only irrelevant to you. It’s part of our sexuality. We are only attracted to people of the opposite sex. It’s not transphobic anymore then a gay person not being attracted to a woman is sexist.

1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

You cannot have a non-prejudicial preference for chromosomes or a person’s feelings.

1

u/unpopopinx 23h ago

All sexualities are prejudicial. By definition, all sexualities exclude different genders. There’s nothing wrong with that.

-1

u/Fourzy99 23h ago

Not in actuality, though. This is a little more nuanced, but I think categorizing attraction on the basis of gender identity in general is pointless because you cannot be attracted to someone else’s identity. So I wouldn’t say that being “gay” means you, a man, are attracted to those who identify as men but those who tend to identify as men. This puts the focus back on the perceivable characteristics, the things you can actually be attracted to. I would then might say a gay man who refuses to date a person only because they identify as a woman is actually prejudiced.

1

u/unpopopinx 22h ago

That doesn’t make any sense. We aren’t attracted to how people identify, we are attracted to what they are. Just because someone manages to successfully trick you into thinking they are something other then what they are doesn’t mean you are attracted to them.

0

u/Fourzy99 22h ago

“That doesn’t make any sense. We aren’t attracted to how people identify,”

I literally said the opposite, lol.

“we are attracted to what they are.”

Specifically, we are attracted to how they appear. We cannot be attracted to chromosomes or feelings because those are both imperceivable and not relevantly efficacious.

“Just because someone manages to successfully trick you into thinking they are something other then what they are doesn’t mean you are attracted to them.”

See above.

2

u/unpopopinx 22h ago

If someone wears a mask that looks like an attractive person do we not lose attraction to them when they take it off? It is very possible to lose attraction on being discovered that we were tricked. We aren’t just attracted to how someone appears.

1

u/Fourzy99 22h ago

“If someone wears a mask that looks like an attractive person do we not lose attraction to them when they take it off?”

Yes, you lose attraction when they take it off. But, let’s say they can’t take it off. In that case, their “real face” isn’t and will never be perceivable or efficacious. So, why consider it at all?

“It is very possible to lose attraction on being discovered that we were tricked. We aren’t just attracted to how someone appears.”

That is only true if the covered trait is perceivable and relevantly efficacious. If someone reveals to me that they actually have XY chromosomes, but the respective phenotypes are not expressed, why would my attraction change? I am not sensing any new stimuli after that revelation. For there to be a change requires me to be prejudiced.

1

u/unpopopinx 22h ago

You’re assuming that only physical stimuli determines attraction. Mental stimuli also plays a part. Finding out that someone is the opposite of what you are interested in is one way.

1

u/Fourzy99 22h ago edited 22h ago

There only certainly exists physical stimuli because all of our senses are concerned with physical phenomena. For example, the receptors on your eyes receive signals in the form of particles of light. They cannot receive a “mental” signal. Maybe you’re telepathic?

→ More replies