If it turned out your partner was transsexual...

Post Reply New Topic

I agree with Roman. This is something that needs to be discussed before any intimacy has happened.

For one, an intimate relationship does not necessarily have to involve sex, so the highlighting of the sexual factor may not apply.

Now, if a person has got to a certain point in a relationship where they are so attracted to their partner that they have the desire to have sex with them, the sexual desire is already there. The fact that they are unaware that they are a transsexual is irrelevant. At that point where they are unaware of the person's past, they harbour sexual desire for their partner. This may then be erased due to the fact that the person is aware of their partner is a transsexual, but it does not mean that the person did not feel attracted to a transsexual person. It just means they no longer are attracted to them. Most people, I would assume, would not have sex with their partner without feeling any sexual desire towards them.

In short, if you felt sexual desire towards your transsexual partner before you knew they were a transsexual, you were sexually attracted to a transsexual person, whether you like the idea or not.

Alright fine I'll rephrase "the expectation of transwomen is to enjoy the same level of romantic interest from straight men that would expected of a biological woman of similar looks, age and personality while taking into account that each straight man has his own phenotype that he will gravitate towards" - how's that?



Thank you Roman, I envy your ability to express thoughts.



The "boner test"?

As I write this I am reminded of a very cruel reality show I saw advertised once. It was similar to the Bachelor-type shows, except in this case the bachelor was purported to be a multi-millionaire, the tv network pulled out all the stops, set him up in a sweet mansion, gave him nice cars and all that. The idea being once he had selected a girl he would have to tell her that he's actually not a millionaire, he's just a plumber or something to that effect. I don't know how the show played out, maybe she dumped him, maybe she decided to stay. The whole premise of the show only works because "social status" - in that case money is a factor in a woman's attraction for a man. (I said a factor, not the only factor, NAWALT - let's not get into this argument now).

Her attraction for him was partially contingent on his being rich and accomplished. On having the truth revealed her attraction to him changed. Maybe enough to dump him, maybe she weighed up his other qualities and decided to stay. It changed nonetheless. Her previous feelings are largely irrelevant as they were based on a falsehood. What matters are the feelings for the man now, the ones based on a truer picture of him.

Another example. A woman falls deeply in love with a man. He is caring and kind. Her love is contingent on those qualities. A year into the relationship he has become distant, neglectful, bangs hookers and occasionally smacks her around. Turns out he is just a jerk, when they first met he was on his best behaviour because he wanted to get into her pants. She fell in love with a man who didn't really exist. Now that his true nature is revealed her love for him fades.

Now onto your example. As you have noticed heterosexuals' attractions are hugely (MASSIVELY for men) contingent on the object of their attractions being the desired target gender. Upon unveiling the truth their attractions will change, rarely positively. I'm not going to deny the original attractions existed, but they were based on false assumptions, on the original persona (of which assumed gender is a massive part) and therefore do not count for much.

I'm a straight guy, for reference.

Even if they were post op and looked like a perfect woman, I still wouldn't be able to handle the fact they used to be a man. It'd just weird me out too much.

I have nothing against homosexuals/transsexuals, it's just not my thing.

The crux of this particular debate rests entirely on what one considers to be "truth."

You feel a person's "true gender" is reliant upon their having, or not having, a Y chromosome. Transsexuals don't agree that the presence or absence of a Y chromosome is what determines their "true gender." That's what people are "nitpicking" in your posts. If I really wanted to, I could even expand this discussion to include what constitutes a person's "true self" seeing as different schools of philosophical thought have greatly divergent opinions on what the definitive factors are when determining a person's "true self." According to some, there is no such thing as a "true self" at all.

HOWEVER, as a transgendered person myself, I've observed that "sexual attraction" is typically not based on philosophy, or logic. It's based on emotion, instinct, and base animalistic processes. I could come up with many arguments on why it's illogical for you to not be attracted to people with a Y chromosome, but it would be irrelevant as, as I've already said, "attraction" is not based on "logic." Attempting to frame "sexual attraction" in terms of what people should and should not be rationally attracted to would be futile.

As a suggestion, when communicating with transsexuals, you might do better if you said, "I prefer not to be involved in a physical relationship with a person who has a Y chromosome, or anyone with male secondary sex characteristics." When you use terms like "real man" or "real woman," regardless of your personal opinions on the subject, you're probably going to incite debate with the gender-variant set. Most transgendered people have a slightly different way of using language in regards to "sex" and "gender."

Take care.

I've thought and thought over this subject and having seen F to M and M to F, it may depend but I honestly don't think I'd care. As long as I was to a degree physically and emotionally attracted to them, I don't think it would bother me and I'm not even bisexual I don't think. But again it would depend on the circumstances and situation. I kind of would like an honest partner but I guess it would be hard for someone who feels physically and emotionally of another sex. Then again, I never understood this notion to conform to a certain gender but maybe because I personally find it sometimes stressful to be a female. That is just my own perception though.

As for other aspects like wanting children, I'm not planning to ever have children. If I do and if it wasn't expensive, I'd most likely adopt.

Well said. I wonder if transexuals make people fear what define as feminine or masculine. It seems...and this is just me that some people really believe being a gender means they are suppose to conform to a certain standard of roles naturally. But I speak of the homophobics and people who have a hatred for transexuals. For those who wouldn't be interested, I'm assuming this is more a preference than it is a hatred.

The brain is actually not at all genderless ("sexless" is the word we're looking for).
That being said, if I'm not mistaken, most transsexuals according to some studies have the brain of the sex they feel they belong to.

Thank you for expressing that so well. I absolutely agree with everything you said (although that is probably not too surprising )


Quite possibly. This is, of course, the same sort of argument that's used to explain homophobia.


Maybe. It's contentious. There has to be a reason for G.I.D. and the brain is the obvious place to look for it. Unfortunately, brains can only be fully investigated post-mortem by which time most trans peeps have fallen off the "statistical radar" simply by having been fully assimilated in their acquired gender. fMRI and PET scans produce mixed results. For every 5 pieces of research that say one thing, there are another 5 that say something completely different.

I have refined my worldview slightly during the course of this thread. I no longer view (f.e.) a transwoman as a man who thinks he is a woman and has surgically altered his body. I view them as neither male nor female, someone who was not born neatly conforming into one category (I don't know whether this is more or less offensive than my previous thoughts).

(Warning highly offensive conjecture) I was never surprised that transsexuals do not view gender like the rest of the species, I imagine it is a way of coping with the cards they are dealt. Humans are social, herd creatures. "Neither a man nor a woman like 99% of the species? Well then let's redefine what it means so I can be included." - alas it rarely has any effect beyond a polite nod. I refer back to my earlier posts where I say that transsexuals would be better learning to accept themselves as they are, not putting themselves through risky surgery in an attempt to become something they can never be.

[If Noop is reading, this kind of lofty philosophical redefining of gender and what constitutes a woman or a man is another example of what I was referring to when I said people were trying to "shame me into desiring transwomen"]



I more or less agree, what I am not sure is what I said that prompted you to write this comment. I wonder if you are referring to my examples in my previous post. I wasn't trying to suggest "the heterosexuals" in that example have some kind of rational thought process "Hmm she was born a man. I will suppress my sexual attraction for her". The knowledge that ones partner is not their presented gender invokes an emotional, instinctual, animalistic response that (usually) destroys any attraction that was there. It's no more logical than when a woman's attraction fades for a man who has lost his social status. It just is.



Any discussion like this is going to lead to some hurt feelings no matter how I phrase it. How about this though: I see the species as divided into 3 categories, men, women and anomalies (thanks Tuttle ) . I cannot romantically or sexually link with either men or anomalies.

Wooo-Hoooo!! !! ! Progress indeed


And suddenly back to square one You make it sound as though trans peeps wake up one day and think "Hey! Let's undergo major surgery for the hell of it". It doesn't work like that. It is a life-long battle. Surgery is the result of absolutely not being able to accept yourself. It takes many, many years, a lot of therapy and counselling, the risk of losing your friends, family, career to make that sort of decision. Ultimately, though, there is no choice. There is no decision to be made. Surgery is the only answer.


Being trans is no more of an anomaly than being Aspies, ASD, bi-polar etc etc. It's just the way it is for the individual concerned. At some level everyone is a genetic anomaly.

I've been following this thread fascinatedly. I think I'm so interested because I'm not sure I can really pinpoint my gender. I was born female, I'm very clearly female when you look at me, but that doesn't mean anything to me mentally (other than I love the fact that I could give birth). I have some things in common with other "women", I have some things in common with men, but all in all there is no communal idea of female gender or male gender that I ascribe to certainly, emotionally or mentally. It's probably because I don't feel out of place in my natural body, but to me, there is no: well, I'm female. "Female" is a label that was given to me through our language. I have no way of knowing what's inherently female. I'm just me. I have a strong identity as me, but the labels that get applied to that identity are meaningless to me.

I do get very angry when people try to impose "understood" gender roles on me, though.

I hope I haven't offended anyone. I'm terrible with converting ideas in my head to the written word.

If we're talking about a short-term encounter, I'd probably just walk out and laugh about it later. If this was not revealed prior to entering into a relationship, it would be a much bigger problem. In this case, I would feel deceived. I'd have to seriously question the trustworthiness of someone who'd withhold that big a secret. And from a practical standpoint, not being able to have children would be an absolute deal-breaker. So even if attraction could somehow have built to the point where I could look past it aesthetically, it wouldn't matter. Rather than play with people's emotions who were never viable partners, I feel it would be best for any partner to know this from the very start.

You're assuming that you would know.


Apart from the generally insulting nature of this comment which suggests that trans people are not "aesthetic", why would you choose to sleep with someone who you didn't find attractive?

Personally, I identify as female because I want to give birth and be a mother. However I explicitly don't identify with feminine, and in fact get upset if people try to call me feminine only because I'm female. I don't feel like its necessary for a female to want to be a mother, but I view it as if someone wants to give birth then that is enough to be considered female despite possibly not being feminine and not fitting in with gender roles and such.

rib, I did not mean that as a general statement. I meant only that i personally would lose attraction because they fall outside of my sexual orientation.

OK. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

What I don't understand though, and perhaps someone can explain this to me, is why should sleeping with specifically a post-op m2f transsexual (not a pre-op, not a genderqueer or anyone else on the TG spectrum), who has all the right girlie bits in all the right places, make you feel as though that changes (or questions, or raises doubts about) your sexual orientation?