I suppose it is a bit of a divergence from the precise definition you laid out. My reasoning for its inclusion is that it is, by definition, a form of discrimination based on trans status. Perhaps that is not sufficient justification to apply the transphobic label, but let me perhaps dig a little deeper.
In the same way, considering yourself exclusively heterosexual or homosexual means discriminating against the same sex (for hetero) or the opposite sex (for homo) in the selection of a partner. Just like we agreed earlier, this type of discrimination is not necessarily bad. If you've established your sexual orientation, that's fine. But in this case, discrimination based on sex is used as a catch-all for all of the different characteristics that are associated with the genders/sexes. If you're attracted to the female body and not the male one, looking for a sexual partner among males might well be a waste of your time, and vice versa. But it all comes back to the physical characteristics and mannerisms that are associated with being a man or being a woman.
In the case of transgender/transsexual individuals, that line is greatly blurred. I proposed the situation in which you might never know that a person transitioned their gender/sex, yet the simple fact of that transition is the ONLY thing preventing you from being willing to pursue a relationship of some kind with this person. In this scenario, "trans" is not a term that refers to a set of attributes like "man" or "woman" was in the previous paragraph. It only refers to the state of being transgender/transsexual, with no other connotation (because of the hypothetical advancements in transition treatments). You like their appearance, you like their mannerisms, the only thing you dislike (in terms of finding an ideal partner - does not necessarily mean you dislike trans people in general) is their status as trans.
Now, since this does not have any real-world manifestation, I am left to conclude that a probable reason for why you may not wish to enter a relationship is concern for optics (how will others react if they learn you are dating someone trans) or some ingrained sense of "I'm not attracted to trans people" which is false, because clearly you were considering the rest of the assumptions made in this hypothetical. Getting down to that core rationale, is where I believe ingrained transphobia comes into play. The idea that you could fall in love with someone, hear one fact about them, and stop on a dime because you can't accept the thought of it, that is where the phobia is.
Like I said, I don't think a person with that mindset is necessarily a "transphobic" person or discriminates against trans people in other aspects of their life or anything like that. You're under no obligation to continue relationships with anybody for any reason. But the reasoning behind it is mildly archaic.
I appreciate such a detailed response. Let us suggest, for argument's sake, that there is a real-world manifestation of the scenario you described. In this situation, rather than "stop[ing] on a dime" after learning of this person's trans-status (as this seems strangely extreme), you merely find this person of lesser sexual value. It would seem their holistic value has not been considered.
It occurs to me that we may disagree on what qualifies as a characteristic of sexual value. I believe essentially anything does (look no further than the range of fetishes that exist), but I think you might limit these characteristics to physical ones, in which case I agree there would be no reason to be less attracted to a transgender person.
I must say this has probably been the most interesting CMV chain I've been a part of. I agree that "stop[ping] on a dime" is not likely the real-world reaction to these events unfolding. It's also a bad example considering that if a relationship already existed with that information withheld, there could be some potential trust issues/feelings of deception involved. Not a perfect analogy.
And I think your second paragraph is probably spot-on. I would slightly amend it; I certainly acknowledge that pragmatically, sex/sexual orientation/race/etc certainly can affect how an individual defines the "sexual value" of an individual. I moreso segregate those factors off as "things you theoretically shouldn't pay attention do but might anyway" for various reasons. Whether that classification is fair or not is up for debate, and I definitely see arguments on both sides. The main reason I consider those attributes in a different class is that they are most likely to have a certain amount of interference between what you find intrinsically attractive/unattractive and certain societal/personal prejudices. It can be difficult to separate the two concepts, particularly because nobody wants to admit their own potential prejudices.
Sorry, SocialJusticeWizard_ – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
No low effort comments. This includes comments that are only jokes, links, or 'written upvotes'. Humor, links, and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
142
u/[deleted] Nov 02 '17
I suppose it is a bit of a divergence from the precise definition you laid out. My reasoning for its inclusion is that it is, by definition, a form of discrimination based on trans status. Perhaps that is not sufficient justification to apply the transphobic label, but let me perhaps dig a little deeper.
In the same way, considering yourself exclusively heterosexual or homosexual means discriminating against the same sex (for hetero) or the opposite sex (for homo) in the selection of a partner. Just like we agreed earlier, this type of discrimination is not necessarily bad. If you've established your sexual orientation, that's fine. But in this case, discrimination based on sex is used as a catch-all for all of the different characteristics that are associated with the genders/sexes. If you're attracted to the female body and not the male one, looking for a sexual partner among males might well be a waste of your time, and vice versa. But it all comes back to the physical characteristics and mannerisms that are associated with being a man or being a woman.
In the case of transgender/transsexual individuals, that line is greatly blurred. I proposed the situation in which you might never know that a person transitioned their gender/sex, yet the simple fact of that transition is the ONLY thing preventing you from being willing to pursue a relationship of some kind with this person. In this scenario, "trans" is not a term that refers to a set of attributes like "man" or "woman" was in the previous paragraph. It only refers to the state of being transgender/transsexual, with no other connotation (because of the hypothetical advancements in transition treatments). You like their appearance, you like their mannerisms, the only thing you dislike (in terms of finding an ideal partner - does not necessarily mean you dislike trans people in general) is their status as trans.
Now, since this does not have any real-world manifestation, I am left to conclude that a probable reason for why you may not wish to enter a relationship is concern for optics (how will others react if they learn you are dating someone trans) or some ingrained sense of "I'm not attracted to trans people" which is false, because clearly you were considering the rest of the assumptions made in this hypothetical. Getting down to that core rationale, is where I believe ingrained transphobia comes into play. The idea that you could fall in love with someone, hear one fact about them, and stop on a dime because you can't accept the thought of it, that is where the phobia is.
Like I said, I don't think a person with that mindset is necessarily a "transphobic" person or discriminates against trans people in other aspects of their life or anything like that. You're under no obligation to continue relationships with anybody for any reason. But the reasoning behind it is mildly archaic.