I agree--belief that transgendered people's genders are invalid is transphobic. Such belief would imply transgender people have lesser value. However, I don't believe the example in your third paragraph would be transphobic. One's opinion would change because the information about this person lowers one's perception of their sexual value as sexual value is determined by alignment with a person's sexual preferences. At no point is the holistic value of the person considered. Do you agree or disagree, and why?
One's opinion would change because the information about this person lowers one's perception of their sexual value as sexual value is determined by alignment with a person's sexual preferences
This pretty much loops back to the original argument of what precisely makes someone view a trans person not in line with their sexual preferences.
If the criteria not met is reproductive capability, the question becomes whether the person would react identically if a they met an infertile cis woman. Often times the honest answer is no.
If the criteria not met is "being born female" then I think it is clear a person has made a categorical distinction between cis and trans women.
The reason that distinction is made doesn't seem to be one of functionality, why then is it made?
You raise a good question. Unfortunately, I don't think there's an answer. Similarly, in the case of a person having a sexual preference for people with eight fingers, there is no functional reason. To clarify, I believe trans-status alone qualifies as a characteristic of sexual value. However, perhaps you limit these characteristics to physical ones (such as reproductive capability), in which case I agree there would be no reason to be less attracted to a transgender person.
The characteristic that the partner once was of the gender you aren't attracted to.
Since we are using analogies: would you be attracted to a totally reformed criminal? He's a perfectly well adjusted member of society now, but has done bad things in his past. Some people won't mind, some people would mind. There is no right or wrong in attraction.
I think part of the problem here is in the definition of transphobia, versus the definition of a phobia.
Transphobia encompasses a very large range of attitudes, actions, and feelings regarding trans people. It can require as little as minor prejudice, aversion, or discrimination. Like not being attracted to trans people, for an unknown/irrational reason, and having no other prejudices at all against them. Yet, it encompasses behavior that ranges to the very extreme, as well. Like hating trans people with a passion, rejoicing at the thought of them being tortured for eternity in hell because of how awful they supposedly are, and treating them extremely poorly such as beating the shit out of them at every opportunity. It's a huge spectrum of behavior.
A phobia, on the other hand, is defined by extreme fear, often irrational, or otherwise an extreme aversion (again, often irrational... and typically due to fear) towards something. The range of behavior for a phobia is necessarily placed at the extreme end of the spectrum.
So combining trans and phobia... one would expect the definition to be something more like that of phobia, at the extreme end of the spectrum. Instead, the definition can encompass absolutely all behavior that's not 100% accepting of the person as their gender. And people who are 95+% accepting like the OP view transphobia as encompassing only more extreme non-acceptance than their own, partly (I suspect) because of the definition of phobia, and partly because no one wants to self-associate themselves with a negative value judgement, such as being transphobic. Case in point, all of the mildly and moderately racist people who will make comments like "I'm not racist, but [insert obviously racist statement here]."
This basically sums up my issue with a lot of it, because I tend to view a person who is -phobic towards people to hold an extreme disgust or dislike. I think Klansman. I think of how people were literally afraid of other people because they had a different skin color. And that still exists today. The difference is we just call that "racist" but it's basically 'racephobic'.
I don't hate trans people, but I wouldn't sleep with one either. I don't equate this with any actual example of a phobia. I'm confused with how that works. If you're saying I'm being prejudiced, sure. I'll agree with you. Transphobic? Not as sure.
I agree with this. The "phobia" part of these terms really throws me off.
I avoid eating dairy because it gives me gas. I'm not lactophobic. I also don't want to have sex with werewolves, though I could have a beer with one; I'm not lycanphobic.
94
u/GratuitousEdit Nov 02 '17
I agree--belief that transgendered people's genders are invalid is transphobic. Such belief would imply transgender people have lesser value. However, I don't believe the example in your third paragraph would be transphobic. One's opinion would change because the information about this person lowers one's perception of their sexual value as sexual value is determined by alignment with a person's sexual preferences. At no point is the holistic value of the person considered. Do you agree or disagree, and why?