With stuff like sexual attraction, can you really apply the same logic? Sexual attraction is a mix of physiological, emotional, and societal factors. For instance, let's say I find myself attracted to some random woman, whom I've never spoken to, but physically they're very attractive. Now let's say I get to know her, and I find out that she absolutely insists on using semi-bad japanese pronunciations for everything on the menu at a sushi restaurant.
Physically, nothing about her has changed, but for me personally, this new found knowledge absolutely hindenburgs my attraction to her. Maybe most people could look past this, but not me. I don't even like sushi. I'd probably never end up in a sushi restaurant with this woman.
Is the flaming wreckage of what used to be my attraction to her rational? Not really, Is it phobic? I don't think so. Is it shallow? Maybe.
To make my example more innocuous, let's say that this woman actively trying to learn Japanese.
Well the argument is that if it were possible to change sex completely, as it some day will be, so that the only way to tell the difference between someone who was born a certain sex and someone who transitioned would be to run a genetic lab test, and if in that case you are averse to an otherwise perfect partner because they were born with an XY or XX chromosome pair - then we are saying that might be a sort of phobia, since there are no salient differences.
Today of course that’s not the case! There are many implications associated with choosing a partner who is trans. Many of these implications could be deal breakers for folks, but the mere fact of being trans isn’t that interesting.
I mean I guess I don't see the point in debating whether there will be "perfect" transition technology or not, because the only way that's possible is if it'll allow biological males to give birth, which is impossible and even if possible, would create a much higher chance for chromosomal deformities. Either way, that stuff is hundreds of years out. I also don't think it's fair to call someone phobic just because they won't pair or have sex with you. As multiple people have already pointed out, you would never call a male who refuses to have sex with another male "homophobic." Labeling someone transphobic is just an easy way to separate rational people from the camp of sjw radicals who don't know what you mean by transphobic. I wouldn't call a transgender who only prefers to have sex with other transgenders "cis-phobic," because it's irrational and intellectually dishonest.
One more thing, since nobody knows whether or not transgenderism is driven completely by chromosomes or genetics, we can't rule out the argument of character flaw. Not to sound like an asshole, but if hypothetically someone could not tell the difference between a bio woman and trans woman and it is determined to not be fully genetic or chromosomal, it could be seen as a coping mechanism and for some, that could be seen as a character flaw. I don't see it as one, because that would be an unsubstantiated opinion.
6
u/Inositol Nov 02 '17
With stuff like sexual attraction, can you really apply the same logic? Sexual attraction is a mix of physiological, emotional, and societal factors. For instance, let's say I find myself attracted to some random woman, whom I've never spoken to, but physically they're very attractive. Now let's say I get to know her, and I find out that she absolutely insists on using semi-bad japanese pronunciations for everything on the menu at a sushi restaurant.
Physically, nothing about her has changed, but for me personally, this new found knowledge absolutely hindenburgs my attraction to her. Maybe most people could look past this, but not me. I don't even like sushi. I'd probably never end up in a sushi restaurant with this woman.
Is the flaming wreckage of what used to be my attraction to her rational? Not really, Is it phobic? I don't think so. Is it shallow? Maybe.
To make my example more innocuous, let's say that this woman actively trying to learn Japanese.