A Tale for the Ages

“Henlo I am big twuck pwease give me wots of woom tank u :)”

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/study_suggests_medical_errors_now_third_leading_cause_of_death_in_the_us

This was from an old secret radfem blog of mine I deleted awhile back. I decided to make some changes and additions.

“What if you met someone great, had tons in common, they seemed perfect, but they turned out to be a trans woman with a penis. You’d really stop everything because of that? You’re reducing their entire existence to their genitals.”

Yes, this is called a deal breaker. It seems many people collectively forgot about this. For example, one common deal breaker is wanting or not wanting children. It’s hard to compromise on. If someone rejects me for my desire to not have kids, are they reducing me to my lack of desire to have children? No, it’s just something that makes us not compatible, despite everything else. The genital preference discourse falls under sexual compatibility. Sexual incompatibility is typically a deal breaker, as it can be difficult to compromise on. Sexual compatibility can mean tons of sex, no sex, certain kinds of sex only, etc. The point is, having a penis can be a deal breaker.  “You don’t need sex to have a happy relationship.”  Come on, we’re not 10 anymore! Some people do need sexual intimacy with their partner to be in a happy relationship. This isn’t shallow, it’s a normal, human desire. Now, this doesn’t mean someone is entitled to sex from their partner at all at any time, but it means, again, sexual compatibility is important and sexual incompatibility will often be a deal breaker. This also isn’t saying relationships without sex aren’t happy or aren’t real, but the reality is most people do want sexual intimacy with their partner.  On top of that, do you really think most trans people want to be in a relationship without sexual intimacy either? It’s actually kind of offensive to me as a trans person, that some people feel we’d be better off in a relationship with no sex because our partner isn’t into our body, than single.  As if we’re that desperate. That would feel so terrible on both ends. Is this really your idea of a healthy relationship? One where both partners have sexual desires, but can’t express them with each other? One where your partner is cringing at your body? Can you imagine the blow to a dysphoric person’s self esteem that’d be? Can you imagine how awful their partner would feel?

“You’re attracted to women, some women have penises. Not into to penises/into only to vaginas is not a sexual orientation.”

No one said that was a sexual orientation, and a person is allowed to have a penis be a deal breaker. Being attracted to women does not mean attracted to every single woman. One someone says they’re only attracted to penises or vaginas, they mean they aren’t sexually interested in those genitals. They mean it’s a deal breaker. You’re splitting hairs and missing the big picture. Edit: I have about a dozen comments saying being attracted to a single set of genitals is a sexual orientation. I do not agree sexual orientation is primarily about attraction to people’s genitals, I believe it is about attraction to the actual person. Especially when they argue that we reduce people to genitals or are genital fetishists, I’m not going to say attraction to genitals is a sexual orientation when saying attraction to people that are male, female, or both serves the same function. Feel free to make your own post and copy whatever you need if you don’t agree with any of the arguments presented and need changes for reference.

“Lesbians are just gendering genitals. They just need to examine why they don’t like penis.”

“Gendering genitals” is not the only reason ever someone may not like penis. Why can we not accept that some people just don’t like dick? Has it occurred to people that maybe a penis is inherently sexual, and as such some people might simply not be into it? Some women don’t like clitoral stimulation for instance and some men don’t like PIV sex, so why can’t some people just not like penis?

It’s also a huge insult to act as if lesbians haven’t examined why they don’t like penis. Lesbians are at risk for corrective rape, abuse, abandonment, and all sorts of oppression due to their sexual orientation. Why would they not spend nights wondering why they don’t like penis? Lesbians may even go as far as pretending to like penises for safety. “No one is saying you have to have sex with a trans woman.” Sure, maybe no one is saying it outright, but that’s the effect when you’re telling young, vulnerable people who have a strong desire to help oppressed people and avoid harm that they’re bigots if they don’t like penises. There have been young women beating themselves up for not being into penises. There have been young women who have talked about how they had sex they didn’t want to for fear of being prejudiced.  “I don’t see people saying this. TERFs are just exaggerating a reasonable request to look into why we have the preferences we do, and twisting it into some conspiracy to coerce lesbians into sex and making up lies.” You haven’t seen it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there. There are entire receipt blogs dedicated to cataloging this stuff. It’s not an exaggeration. 

“A trans woman might not even want to use her penis.”

Some people are uncomfortable with the idea of merely facilitating the arousal or orgasm of a penis, even if it’s not directly involved in the sex act.

“You’re conceited. Why do you even think a trans woman would want to sleep with you?”

You’re the ones who created the cotton ceiling, you’re the ones who keep making (often violent) posts about how lesbians are transphobic for not liking dick, you’re the ones who complain about lesbians not dating/fucking you. We’ll stop talking about it as soon as you stop using coercive tactics as a form of activism, aka shaming women for not consenting to sex they don’t want, find uncomfortable, or even find triggering. This is akin to gas lighting. 

“A trans woman’s penis is different from a man’s penis. It’s a woman’s penis, not a man’s penis.”

That’s just magical thinking and semantics. They’re all structurally the same. Make a line up of trans women’s penises along with non-trans men’s penises and you can’t tell the difference. It’s not an issue of male or female penis, it’s the penis entirely.

“If you’re not into penises, just pretend it’s a big clit. You wouldn’t reject someone just because they have a big clit, right?”

A penis isn’t a big clit. There’s more to a vulva and the entie female sex than just a clit.  

Furthermore, women who do have larger clitorides are often subject to surgeries reducing the size of it. It’s seen as a detriment or abnormality rather than an uncommon but natural variation. This is often done non-consensually at a young age. They may also experience shaming, harassment, and have their sex questioned, which may also lead to them getting unnecessary surgery. This won’t happen to your penis. It’s an insult to these women, many of whom have been coercively put through unnecessary surgery, to make this comparison because you don’t have potential access to every lesbian.

“Lesbians reject trans women but sleep with trans men all the time.”

Oh? I thought ~sexuality is fluid~ though? What relevance is this here anyway?

“By excluding a pre-op trans woman from her dating/sex pool, that lesbian is denying trans women their womanhood and is committing an act of violence.”

Not fucking or dating someone does not deny someone their womanhood, nor is it an act of violence. You are literally saying that self validating your womanhood is more important than someone’s comfort, boundaries, wants, needs, and/or emotions during sex, that is the opposite of womanhood and non-violence if anything.

“Lesbians use penis shaped sex toys, so I don’t believe they just simply aren’t into penises. It’s just transmisogyny.”

Straight men give themselves hand jobs so I don’t believe they really don’t like hand jobs from other men. This is the same argument lesbians have been hearing forever. A dildo is not a flesh and blood penis attached to a person. It’s made of silicone and plenty of sex toys lesbians use aren’t even penis replicas so much as generic dildo shapes.

“Lesbians who don’t like penises and won’t have sex that involves one should die.”

I’ve made several posts about this exact problem. Pushing the “hearts not parts” notion is wildly homophobic and implies that it’s a choice.

Gay people have been literally raped, tortured and killed for their same sex attraction and saying it’s about ~the person~ and not their sex is almost telling them they chose that for themselves.

If you don’t like it or don’t agree, that’s fine. I won’t edit it to say homosexuality is just attraction to specific genitals though.

A straight woman doesn’t see men as just a bunch of walking penises but she will only be attracted to ~people~ who have them, aka males.

Lesbians are attracted to female people. It doesn't mean they see women as walking vaginas, but vaginas are a primary female sex characteristic that males don't have. Attraction to exclusively female people is what defines lesbians, and female people do have vaginas.

However, people generally aren't attracted to genitals in the same sense they're attracted to a person, that's what I'm getting at in the post. Yes, female people have vaginas, so part of being attracted to female people is (almost always) being interested in vaginas. However, as you said, people don't see who they're attracted to as walking genitals, so saying sexual orientation is just, "Attraction to genitals" is just kind of an odd way to go about it.

The purpose of this post is a guideline on how to effectively debate and discuss this with people who spew "genital preference stuff" to convince bystanders and possibly them. So wording is important. Yes, I guess you could define it like that, but there's really better ways... Like saying attracted to female people, as I've said, because it gets across the exact same thing in a better way for this context. Especially when you consider how easily they'll twist your words and when you consider they're coming at you with the notion it's vagina fetishism. You're going to have a very hard time establishing with them what you mean when they already have vastly different ideas about sex, gender, and sexual orientation. It's also just easier to misinterpret. Like how I said people aren't attracted to genitals in the same way they are actual entire people? That's how they're going to read it. They're going to read it as saying you're attracted to genitals just like you are entire human beings.

So, in short, to clarify, my argument in the post is two fold:

1. Even if we, hypothetically, consider trans women within lesbian's sexual orientation, "genital preference" should be fine as it'd be a simple sexual incompatibility based deal breaker. This is pointing out a weakness within their own logic and belief system.

So just because you don't understand the arguments of either side and have no idea of the beliefs and demographics of both sides, doesn't mean they're formally or even functionally allied. You have a biased, outsiders viewpoint, don't forget that.

What evidence do you have that "they're okay with that" anyway? I've seen it "pointed out" and the typical response is transmeds pretty annoyed that they're supposedly associated with radfems.

http://gen.lib.rus.ec

http://textbooknova.com

http://en.bookfi.org/

http://www.gutenberg.org

http://ebookee.org

http://www.manybooks.net

http://www.giuciao.com

http://www.feedurbrain.com

http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=380

http://www.alleng.ru/ 

http://www.eknigu.com/ 

http://ishare.iask.sina.com.cn/

http://2020ok.com/

http://www.freebookspot.es/Default.aspx

http://www.freeetextbooks.com/

http://onebigtorrent.org/

http://www.downeu.me/ebook/

http://forums.mvgroup.org

http://theaudiobookbay.com/

Look at this. Look at the EFFORT this took.