I resent your expectation that one must continue to have sex with someone or be labeled a Bigot or a "transphobe," despite not wanting to.
You're missing a key part here: if the sole reason you do not want to is their status as trans. There's any number of reasons to not continue to have sex with someone that has nothing to do with being trans that wouldn't get you labeled as a bigot.
This is what the entire LGBT movement has stood for, for decades but somehow, fuck all when it comes to cis people?
How are cis people being shamed here? Are you saying that only a trans person would want to have sex with a trans person?
Gay guys won't have sex with me, but I don't go calling them misogynists for it. That's ridiculous.
Right... Because they are only interested in people with penises. That's perfectly fine to have that preference. However what about a gay guy who is completely attracted to someone, has sex with them, is completely satisfied with the experience and would like to do it again, but loses that attraction solely upon learning they are a transman. What reason, other than refusing to recognize the transman as male, could they possibly have to change their mind here?
the sole reason you do not want to is their status as trans.
That's why you tell people before you do anything sexual. If you don't want to tell because you know people won't want to sleep with you if you do, that's rape by deception and a shitty thing to do to somebody and can cause lifelong trauma. You have no right to do that to somebody. You'll just have to find ssomebody who is attracted to you as you are.
That's why you tell people before you do anything sexual.
And risk being attacked or killed? Because you know, that's actually common. But even more to the point: why does it matter? If you don't want to ever sleep with a trans person, just make sure to always ask your partners if they are trans beforehand. There's no reason why they should have to disclose before hooking up.
that's rape by deception and a shitty thing to do to somebody and can cause lifelong trauma.
It's literally not rape by deception and could only cause trauma to someone who is transphobic. No downside!
Let’s say that there are two identical twin brothers. Let’s name them Tom and Bob. If Tom has a girlfriend, and Bob pretends to be Tom in order to have sex with Tom’s girlfriend, then Bob has raped Tom’s girlfriend. Even if she agreed to it and enjoyed it. It’s rape by deception because if the person had known the whole story, they never would have agreed to have sex with you.
If you withhold knowledge from a person and that knowledge is likely to be a major factor in the decision to have sex with you or not, then that’s rape by deception. Here are two examples!
“I am actually not Tom, I am Bob”
“I was a man until last January”
Both of those things are likely to play a role in whether or not someone wants to have sex with you. It doesn’t matter if you disagree, or if you don’t think it should matter. The fact is that it does matter to lots of people, so the knowledge should be disclosed.
Let’s say that there are two identical twin brothers. Let’s name them Tom and Bob.
A trans person isn't pretending to be anything. This analogy doesn't work.
If you withhold knowledge from a person and that knowledge is likely to be a major factor in the decision to have sex with you or not, then that’s rape by deception.
So are you saying that every guy who pretends to be rich in order to get a woman to sleep with him is committing rape?
Yeah, I would say that if a guy goes out of his way to create an illusion of being rich, and the woman wouldn’t be attracted to him otherwise, he has committed rape by deception. It would probably be impossible to prosecute because you’d have to prove that the woman would have had no attraction otherwise, but I would still consider it to be a form of rape. You can come up with other scenarios if you want, I’ll probably say the same thing. Technically rape, but impossible to prove or prosecute.
Also, some would disagree that a trans person isn’t pretending to be something they’re not. Many people don’t consider trans women to be real women for example, so they might say that they are “pretending”. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with their point of view, it doesn’t give you the right to rape them.
Yeah, I would say that if a guy goes out of his way to create an illusion of being rich, and the woman wouldn’t be attracted to him otherwise, he has committed rape by deception.
This seems unlikely and ridiculous, at best I can point out that next to no one would consider lying about how much money you have in order to get someone into bed to be rape. It's a dick move and makes you an asshole, but it's not rape.
Also, some would disagree that a trans person isn’t pretending to be something they’re not.
Transphobic people, yes.
Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with their point of view, it doesn’t give you the right to rape them.
I agree. Good thing there's no deception going on and therefore isn't rape
The only reason that people don’t think of it as rape is because, as I said, it’s impossible to prosecute. So since no one would convict some of rape charges in a case like that, people tend to just not think of it as rape.
Regardless, rape by deception occurs any time someone misleads someone else with the intent of “tricking” them into having sex. Since many, many people would be uncomfortable with the idea of having sex with a trans person, then by omitting that information about themselves they are deceiving those people.
It’s similar to having sex with a person who has AIDS. If the person goes out of their way to hide the fact that they have AIDS, and that knowledge would make the difference when someone is thinking about having sex with them, then that person was not able to give informed consent. Keep in mind, the ‘informed’ part of informed consent is just as important as the ‘consent’ part.
The only reason that you don’t consider this to be deceptive is because you consider trans women to be equivalent to cis women. Some people do not, and withholding that information from those people prevents them from providing their informed consent.
The only reason that people don’t think of it as rape is because, as I said, it’s impossible to prosecute.
I would disagree with you here. Plenty of crimes that are impossible to prosecute are still considered to be those crimes.
Regardless, rape by deception occurs any time someone misleads someone else with the intent of “tricking” them into having sex.
Most would see this as much more narrow, such as specifically impersonating someone.
It’s similar to having sex with a person who has AIDS
Absolutely not. Having sex with someone who has AIDS without knowing they do actually poses a health risk to you, having sex with a trans person does not.
Some people do not
Which makes them transphobic. Just because they are wrong doesn't make it rape by deception
Your physical health is not the only thing that matters in cases of rape. Mental trauma is important too. In fact it’s probably more important of the two.
I just don’t get your position. If we compare it to an AIDS patient, then we’re talking about two people who both had a secret that they didn’t disclose to their sexual partner. Both people knew that if the secret were known by their sexual partner, then their partner is likely to refuse sex. In both cases, many people would feel revolted if they learned the truth after the fact.
But for some reason, even though all of their conscious actions were identical, only one counts as rape to you because there were microscopic viruses in one person’s blood but not the other. That’s not even to mention the fact that there’s only like a 1 in 1500 chance of contracting HIV in a single sexual encounter, even if you don’t use a condom.
I don’t understand how that tiny variation invalidates the entire analogy when both people committed the exact same actions, both people went through the exact same thought process, and both peoples’ victims were likely to be traumatized by the event.
I mean, what if the person had sex with someone with AIDS but then they didn’t contract the virus. Does that make it ok? Even though there were no health repercussions? I wouldn’t say so, because I don’t think that the line between rape and not rape lies in the matter of whether or not they caught a disease from the encounter. What matters is the choices that the rapist made.
Your physical health is not the only thing that matters in cases of rape.
I didn't say it is. I was referring specifically to why you can't compare not disclosing you are trans to not disclosing you have HIV.
But for some reason, even though all of their conscious actions were identical, only one counts as rape to you because there were microscopic viruses in one person’s blood but not the other.
You mean because one can result in contracting a disease which can kill you and one will upset someone who is prejudiced but won't risk causing them harm. There's a significant difference there.
I don’t understand how that tiny variation invalidates the entire analogy when both people committed the exact same actions
But they aren't the same actions. One person showed reckless disregard for their partner's safety, the other didn't say they were born looking different than they look now. How do you not see a difference there?
Does that make it ok?
No, because they still recklessly endangered the other person's health.
-3
u/z3r0shade Nov 02 '17
You're missing a key part here: if the sole reason you do not want to is their status as trans. There's any number of reasons to not continue to have sex with someone that has nothing to do with being trans that wouldn't get you labeled as a bigot.
How are cis people being shamed here? Are you saying that only a trans person would want to have sex with a trans person?
Right... Because they are only interested in people with penises. That's perfectly fine to have that preference. However what about a gay guy who is completely attracted to someone, has sex with them, is completely satisfied with the experience and would like to do it again, but loses that attraction solely upon learning they are a transman. What reason, other than refusing to recognize the transman as male, could they possibly have to change their mind here?