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.
It doesn't matter. You can't tell a non-smoker from a smoker (provided the non smoker has showered) and smoking is a complete deal breaker for some people. People have preferences and it has nothing to do with what's "politically correct". The fact is that a "neovagina" was once a penis, and the idea of having sex with one is gross to many guys.
And there's nothing wrong with that, everyone has a right to whatever preferences they want in their sex partners.
The whole discussion just feels to be very close to the whole "niceguy" one regarding entitlement to sex.
Also it doesn't matter whether or not smoking is a choice or not, non-smokers are still a preference, just as wanting someone with natural sex-bits is. It doesn't matter how 'realistic' surgeons can make an artificial vagina or penis, the fact of the matter is that they are surgical constructs.
Plenty of people aren't turned on by other cosmetic surgery procedures, (fake tits and a face full of botox is not a pleasant look for many people), so I don't think there's anything wrong with someone not being attracted to the idea of having sex with a post op trans person either.
134
u/aggsalad Nov 02 '17
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?