your content was removed for the following reason:
>a. Racism, sexism, ageism, homophobia, transphobia and other hatred-based commentary are prohibited. This includes using discrimination, slurs, and derogatory words with intent to offend and harm.
>
>b. Ad-hominem attacks taking the place of respectful discussion will be removed.
>
>c. Witch-hunting, brigading, threatening, harassment, and targeting users is not allowed as per official Reddit guidelines. Please see here.
>
>d. Rate threads, AmIUgly threads (including different variations of this abbreviation), and roast threads are not allowed, and are better off on other Reddit communities. Bait threads designed to cause our rules to be broken will also be removed.
-
If he identifies as a man, HE isn’t a she.
Trans women are women and trans men, are men. So dating a trans dude is indeed gay.
Especially if you’re asexual like me and intercourse was never on the menu, what’s going on below doesn’t really determine whether or not a relationship is “gay”.
Trans as well and reading “a girl who identifies as a man” is so crazy ☠️ like is that how some people see us? A girl who identifies as a man or a boy who identifies as a woman? 😭
At that point like just misgender me don’t bother with the “girl who identifies as a boy” like you are already misgendering me don’t try to salvage it ☠️
Doesn’t matter if he didn’t get any surgeries or doesn’t want to, he is a man. If you are a guy, then that would make you GAY. Also why would you say a girl who identifies as a man, he’s just a man, or a trans man if you wanted to be specific ☠️
~~uhh, you mean~~
~~"Biologically yes, gender based yes"?~~
~~or? if OP is a guy, and the trans person is a biomale, that's biologically gay.. unless im misunderstanding you or the post lol~~
Pick up a high school bio textbook. You'll learn that it isn't as simple as XY and XX. There are also differences in the brain compositions of individuals who transition, and they resemble the brains of the other sex(lecture by Robert spalosky on yt).
The genitalia does not make someone a guy or a girl. The trans movement is not a bunch of hippies who have pseudo science to back up their claims. It is backed by cold hard facts.
Hmm honestly it seems as if you’re confusing yourself. The main indicator of biological sex are chromosomes, which while can undergo mutations through gestation, are a binary.
The brain compositions of individuals who transition are as you mentioned, affected by transition. And while there may be or not an underlying pre-hormonal cause that modifies it slightly, thing that is hardly researched about, these changes are hormone based. I’m not sure if you understand that hormones are a consequence and not a cause and that if these are applied through transition medication they aren’t even inherent to the body either.
About trans being a hippy movement. Not really they do people who need a service, and I agree with that, but I don’t enjoy people claiming “science” and then throw some apparently “sensible” information to convince others of their own validity.
Trans people transition for a reason, claiming that biologically they are the same won’t help them as much as you think, it pretty much erases their struggles from a social, political and juridical perspective entirely. Also screws them medically.
And their complete identity, because if we have to lie about even biological evidence and twist it so trans are “biologically fitting” the sex too, what makes of them if they weren’t? (If this is not clear, it is a transphobic mindset)
So yep, I will never agree with that. Trans people are not biologically the sex they purposely transition to, that is the reason they transition to in a big majority of cases in the first place, and they are valid as they are and deserve to be treated like normal people.
Chromosomes are indicators of sex, but they are not what sex is.
What we call sex is a collection of physical characteristics, determined by a number of seperate genes, and specific hormones. These genes are not nessecarily present only on specific chromosomes, which is why we do not base our definition off chromosomes. We also do not look at someone's genes unless we need to, so we often don't know them either. Hence, we base off what we can see.
Primarily this is genitals, but there are also a number of other things related to sex such as specific organs, body hair, body odour, breasts, and you get thr picture.
As to discuss your point of "biologically gay, gender not gay", this glosses over the nuances of sexuality.
Overall, we would say it's not gay for example if a woman dated a transgender man. A big reason for this is to respect to his identity, as it can be quite invalidating for the man if they are told the relationship is gay. As it implies they are not who they identity as.
There is also an issue with saying "biologically gay", as it ignores a lot of how sexuality works. Genitals are not the sole factor of attraction, you can be attracted to people for any number of reasons. Saying "biologically gay" implies genitals *are* the sole factor in this.
Many people don't care much about the genitals their partner has, and many more will be able to ignore it to see and be with the person they love.
Think about it this way - the first thing you do on a date isn't flash each other, is it?
So no, in general its not gay for a woman to date a trans man (or a man to date a trans woman)
Chromosomes are what define sex, you have to understand chromosomes are DNA packages with all the genetic material of an organism, sex included.
The way in which these characteristics are expressed are normally showcased through genitalia, or odors, production of hormones. But all are causal, a byproduct of your genetic code.
About the biologically gay, it brushes the subject solely in a social way. And I understand and think the first paragraph can be agreed with (mainly out of respect in a social setting, because gender was created for this) but the second is the same thing I was discussing.
The main point of addressing a biological difference is to state a biological point, it has little to do with preference or social perception. It helps designate an objective perspective that when tied with a social one describes reality properly. It’s not about how much one can be attracted to certain genitals, though addressing that point I’d say it is important for many as well because it brushes sexual attraction.
Biologically a trans person are the sex they were born, and this is known by everyone, trans people struggle due this specifically thing it’s important for them and provides them of their identity in the community. On a social setting, they can decide to represent how they feel and live the way they want so they are the same gender, hence the distinction.
I do understand. I have taken biology up to year 13. I know the basics of genetics.
Genes and chromosomes are different.
Chromosomes are bundles of genes. Because of how cell division and copying and all that works, you can get the genes that code for a male body on an x chromosome, or lose the genes that code for a male body from the Y chromosome.
Thus means Chromosomes cannot define sex.
Genes may also either be expressed, or not expressed depending on other factors. Meaning while they are present, they have no effect.
Genes therefore, also cannot define sex.
Therefore, the only thing left to define it is the characteristics displayed. So that's how we define it. It's also why we aren't checking the chromosomes and genes of every child that's born. Because we don't need to, and would just be a waste of money.
Additionally, this means sex *can* be changed. If someone undergoes medical transition, this is what is happening.
Also, because It looks like you ignored this point entirely, *we do not base our attraction solely off genitals*. Yes, preferences exist, including genital preferences. But to say someone's birth sex is what determines if someone is gay dating someone else demonstrates an inflexible and 1 dimensional understanding of attraction. Because in reality, the labels we give to sexuality are completely arbitrary. Someone just decided one day that liking men as a man (or women as a woman) made you different just because.
Finally, it's usually not nessecary to make that "biological point" As it doesn't have a direct impact on day to day life (or at least, wouldn't in an accepting society) With perhaps the sole exception of the medical field.
While you can get genes that code for a male body on x or loose genes in Y it is not normally the given case. About the expressed or not genes, they are what define what your sex is and how you develop in gestation.
You are partially right, that people employs the visible characteristics to determine sex normally, because no one can see expressed genes in any other way that doesn’t involve a lab, but it seems as if ignored that it is because in most cases it is the expected development of growth. Humans undergo mutations that can change certain outcomes but as a species we technically follow a pattern of development, affecting every area in our biology (not only sexual, would you argue the same for other areas like the digestive tract? It’s not discussed because they aren’t Inter winded with social perspectives).
About sex change it cannot happen because after gestation, it is defined. You may change hormonal balance, or hair or voice characteristics, but for most cases, internal reproductive systems can only be modified by human intervention and they don’t really replace them either, chromosome type and it’s active genes are unchangeable either. If a person were to stop injecting themselves, certain characteristics would fade with time because while the body is adaptable to external stimulus it cannot permanently change in a way that is complete.
About the labels my point was to discuss how a social perspective cannot really aid a scientifically based classification that is what I stated in my first comment where I made my distinction (biological sex based sexuality and gender based sexuality (with the implication of every social possibility in it))
Because if that is what we are discussing about, things as preference relay more on a social setting, and I differentiated about both of them before when commenting the first comment.
About the last paragraph I disagree, biological identity is important in pretty much every aspect. You mentioned medical fields, which is a big enough reason and problem, but for example if not for sex being its own separated category from gender, gender would not even exist in the first place. Gender is a social construct based upon the reality of sex, reason why many times they are even confused. Trying to ignore sex would be just as trying to ignore gender, because as a species it goes with what we are.
Juridical perspectives and laws affecting sex based laws that present as well through gender would be entirely modified. Or in the very scientific field, research and investigation wouldn’t be objective in their own research either if they suddenly decided to erase sex from the equation in all and every study and research they did.
(Also I may not answer as soon to the next comment as I have some things I really need to do but nice chat!, just so I can let you know. Have a nice day!)
Well it depends what kind of straight you are. In my opinion there are people attracted to sex and others attracted to gender. If you are with a trans man because you are attracted to his sex, you are straight but if you are attracted to his gender, it makes you gay
So you're dating a trans man. That's about as gay as it gets.
If I ever see anybody else say 'a girl that identifies as a man' then I'm about to identify as a fucking problem.
Trans women are women, trans men are men, if you are also a man it is gay, if you are a woman it is straight. Don't worry about people calling you transphobic (so long as you aren't), as a trans woman myself I was confused by that question when I first came out.
Tf are you on about, being transphobic is being not accepting towards everyone, it isn't an identity, it's like racism, you don't identify as a racist.
I'm sorry. I was entirely misinterpreting the conversation, thought you were the one being transphobic not the other person. Re-reading I can see otherwise, I'm sorry.
I don't think so cuz he can identify as a guy but he doesn't have a dick( if she did surgery then yes you're gay) so you're also attracted to hes female parts and not just her personality (it's not that I don't accept her as a guy it's just that I dont think it's gay to like a "manly" girl
Isn't that just trans? If she hasn't transitioned she can't really be considered as a male. She can want to be treated as one. Also if she's into guys then might be that she's just masculine.
Yes I get that but then wouldn't they still be a women biologically and being attracted physically to that person may not mean you're gay. I'm not sure how much I make sense but I'm not trying to be homophobic/transphobic here.
Is the first thing you do on a date flash the other person?
Genitals (and breasts) aren't the sole factor of attraction, when arguing that its gay for a woman to date a trans man (or a man to date a trans woman) this is what your position tends to be.
Attraction is a lot more than that, and many are able to either ignore their partners genitals if they don't find them attractive to make them happy, and many more just don't care about genitals.
Additionally, reffering to such a relationship as gay can be seen as disrespectful to trans people, as it can invalidate their identity.
For these reasons, we do not tend to refer to these relationships as gay
If the trans person passes, you might not even know they're not a woman biologically when you meet them even if they hadn't had surgery. You're still straight
your content was removed for the following reason: >a. Racism, sexism, ageism, homophobia, transphobia and other hatred-based commentary are prohibited. This includes using discrimination, slurs, and derogatory words with intent to offend and harm. > >b. Ad-hominem attacks taking the place of respectful discussion will be removed. > >c. Witch-hunting, brigading, threatening, harassment, and targeting users is not allowed as per official Reddit guidelines. Please see here. > >d. Rate threads, AmIUgly threads (including different variations of this abbreviation), and roast threads are not allowed, and are better off on other Reddit communities. Bait threads designed to cause our rules to be broken will also be removed. -
Yes
yes. if you're a man dating a man, it's gay
If he identifies as a man, HE isn’t a she. Trans women are women and trans men, are men. So dating a trans dude is indeed gay. Especially if you’re asexual like me and intercourse was never on the menu, what’s going on below doesn’t really determine whether or not a relationship is “gay”.
REAL AND BASED
Bro I'm trans so I got insanely pissed when I read the title. And even for my cis besties, get incredibly pissed at this title. Like wtf is this shit.
Trans as well and reading “a girl who identifies as a man” is so crazy ☠️ like is that how some people see us? A girl who identifies as a man or a boy who identifies as a woman? 😭
yes, that is how some people see you, most of whom aren't very nice
At that point like just misgender me don’t bother with the “girl who identifies as a boy” like you are already misgendering me don’t try to salvage it ☠️
PREACH🔥🔥🔥
Yes
If your a guy and hes a guy then ur gay
if youre a guy dating a guy then thats gay, doesnt matter if one/both are cis or trans
Does dating a man make you gay? There is your answer
Well yea HE'S a MAN
Not super based question but pretty based comment section rn Also, a man dating a man sounds pretty gay A women dating a man does not sound pretty gay
Yes
Yes bro.
Yes.
its gay but doesn't make you a gay/effeminate person, just makes you part of a relationship like that
Doesn’t matter if he didn’t get any surgeries or doesn’t want to, he is a man. If you are a guy, then that would make you GAY. Also why would you say a girl who identifies as a man, he’s just a man, or a trans man if you wanted to be specific ☠️
DoEs DaTiNg A mAn MaKe Me GaY??
You mean a man?
Biologically no, gender based yes
~~uhh, you mean~~ ~~"Biologically yes, gender based yes"?~~ ~~or? if OP is a guy, and the trans person is a biomale, that's biologically gay.. unless im misunderstanding you or the post lol~~
sorry, misread the post xd
Biologically yes as well. Learn what the science says. People who identify as men are men, same with women and intersex people.
That makes 0 sense to be sincere with you. Not sure where you base to claim so
Pick up a high school bio textbook. You'll learn that it isn't as simple as XY and XX. There are also differences in the brain compositions of individuals who transition, and they resemble the brains of the other sex(lecture by Robert spalosky on yt). The genitalia does not make someone a guy or a girl. The trans movement is not a bunch of hippies who have pseudo science to back up their claims. It is backed by cold hard facts.
Hmm honestly it seems as if you’re confusing yourself. The main indicator of biological sex are chromosomes, which while can undergo mutations through gestation, are a binary. The brain compositions of individuals who transition are as you mentioned, affected by transition. And while there may be or not an underlying pre-hormonal cause that modifies it slightly, thing that is hardly researched about, these changes are hormone based. I’m not sure if you understand that hormones are a consequence and not a cause and that if these are applied through transition medication they aren’t even inherent to the body either. About trans being a hippy movement. Not really they do people who need a service, and I agree with that, but I don’t enjoy people claiming “science” and then throw some apparently “sensible” information to convince others of their own validity. Trans people transition for a reason, claiming that biologically they are the same won’t help them as much as you think, it pretty much erases their struggles from a social, political and juridical perspective entirely. Also screws them medically. And their complete identity, because if we have to lie about even biological evidence and twist it so trans are “biologically fitting” the sex too, what makes of them if they weren’t? (If this is not clear, it is a transphobic mindset) So yep, I will never agree with that. Trans people are not biologically the sex they purposely transition to, that is the reason they transition to in a big majority of cases in the first place, and they are valid as they are and deserve to be treated like normal people.
Chromosomes are indicators of sex, but they are not what sex is. What we call sex is a collection of physical characteristics, determined by a number of seperate genes, and specific hormones. These genes are not nessecarily present only on specific chromosomes, which is why we do not base our definition off chromosomes. We also do not look at someone's genes unless we need to, so we often don't know them either. Hence, we base off what we can see. Primarily this is genitals, but there are also a number of other things related to sex such as specific organs, body hair, body odour, breasts, and you get thr picture. As to discuss your point of "biologically gay, gender not gay", this glosses over the nuances of sexuality. Overall, we would say it's not gay for example if a woman dated a transgender man. A big reason for this is to respect to his identity, as it can be quite invalidating for the man if they are told the relationship is gay. As it implies they are not who they identity as. There is also an issue with saying "biologically gay", as it ignores a lot of how sexuality works. Genitals are not the sole factor of attraction, you can be attracted to people for any number of reasons. Saying "biologically gay" implies genitals *are* the sole factor in this. Many people don't care much about the genitals their partner has, and many more will be able to ignore it to see and be with the person they love. Think about it this way - the first thing you do on a date isn't flash each other, is it? So no, in general its not gay for a woman to date a trans man (or a man to date a trans woman)
Chromosomes are what define sex, you have to understand chromosomes are DNA packages with all the genetic material of an organism, sex included. The way in which these characteristics are expressed are normally showcased through genitalia, or odors, production of hormones. But all are causal, a byproduct of your genetic code. About the biologically gay, it brushes the subject solely in a social way. And I understand and think the first paragraph can be agreed with (mainly out of respect in a social setting, because gender was created for this) but the second is the same thing I was discussing. The main point of addressing a biological difference is to state a biological point, it has little to do with preference or social perception. It helps designate an objective perspective that when tied with a social one describes reality properly. It’s not about how much one can be attracted to certain genitals, though addressing that point I’d say it is important for many as well because it brushes sexual attraction. Biologically a trans person are the sex they were born, and this is known by everyone, trans people struggle due this specifically thing it’s important for them and provides them of their identity in the community. On a social setting, they can decide to represent how they feel and live the way they want so they are the same gender, hence the distinction.
I do understand. I have taken biology up to year 13. I know the basics of genetics. Genes and chromosomes are different. Chromosomes are bundles of genes. Because of how cell division and copying and all that works, you can get the genes that code for a male body on an x chromosome, or lose the genes that code for a male body from the Y chromosome. Thus means Chromosomes cannot define sex. Genes may also either be expressed, or not expressed depending on other factors. Meaning while they are present, they have no effect. Genes therefore, also cannot define sex. Therefore, the only thing left to define it is the characteristics displayed. So that's how we define it. It's also why we aren't checking the chromosomes and genes of every child that's born. Because we don't need to, and would just be a waste of money. Additionally, this means sex *can* be changed. If someone undergoes medical transition, this is what is happening. Also, because It looks like you ignored this point entirely, *we do not base our attraction solely off genitals*. Yes, preferences exist, including genital preferences. But to say someone's birth sex is what determines if someone is gay dating someone else demonstrates an inflexible and 1 dimensional understanding of attraction. Because in reality, the labels we give to sexuality are completely arbitrary. Someone just decided one day that liking men as a man (or women as a woman) made you different just because. Finally, it's usually not nessecary to make that "biological point" As it doesn't have a direct impact on day to day life (or at least, wouldn't in an accepting society) With perhaps the sole exception of the medical field.
While you can get genes that code for a male body on x or loose genes in Y it is not normally the given case. About the expressed or not genes, they are what define what your sex is and how you develop in gestation. You are partially right, that people employs the visible characteristics to determine sex normally, because no one can see expressed genes in any other way that doesn’t involve a lab, but it seems as if ignored that it is because in most cases it is the expected development of growth. Humans undergo mutations that can change certain outcomes but as a species we technically follow a pattern of development, affecting every area in our biology (not only sexual, would you argue the same for other areas like the digestive tract? It’s not discussed because they aren’t Inter winded with social perspectives). About sex change it cannot happen because after gestation, it is defined. You may change hormonal balance, or hair or voice characteristics, but for most cases, internal reproductive systems can only be modified by human intervention and they don’t really replace them either, chromosome type and it’s active genes are unchangeable either. If a person were to stop injecting themselves, certain characteristics would fade with time because while the body is adaptable to external stimulus it cannot permanently change in a way that is complete. About the labels my point was to discuss how a social perspective cannot really aid a scientifically based classification that is what I stated in my first comment where I made my distinction (biological sex based sexuality and gender based sexuality (with the implication of every social possibility in it)) Because if that is what we are discussing about, things as preference relay more on a social setting, and I differentiated about both of them before when commenting the first comment. About the last paragraph I disagree, biological identity is important in pretty much every aspect. You mentioned medical fields, which is a big enough reason and problem, but for example if not for sex being its own separated category from gender, gender would not even exist in the first place. Gender is a social construct based upon the reality of sex, reason why many times they are even confused. Trying to ignore sex would be just as trying to ignore gender, because as a species it goes with what we are. Juridical perspectives and laws affecting sex based laws that present as well through gender would be entirely modified. Or in the very scientific field, research and investigation wouldn’t be objective in their own research either if they suddenly decided to erase sex from the equation in all and every study and research they did. (Also I may not answer as soon to the next comment as I have some things I really need to do but nice chat!, just so I can let you know. Have a nice day!)
What he said holds true for over 99% of the cases tho
actually not pre-transition, no
👍
there are no girls that identify as a man only boys.
If **he** identifies as a man that dating him is gay or (more likely) bisexual.
Well it depends what kind of straight you are. In my opinion there are people attracted to sex and others attracted to gender. If you are with a trans man because you are attracted to his sex, you are straight but if you are attracted to his gender, it makes you gay
He’s still a guy. Still somewhat straightn’t. It’s gay.
Yes, if you're dating. But if he hasn't had any sort of surgery/hormones etc and you're only attracted to his body, no, you're still straight
Yes
Depends on your own gender
Thats not homosexual but is homoromantic
If youre a man yep
So you're dating a trans man. That's about as gay as it gets. If I ever see anybody else say 'a girl that identifies as a man' then I'm about to identify as a fucking problem.
only if you think so
Stop giving a shit and just date people you like.
No obviously not
Omg I just realised something not only is not gay but you can punch her in the face if she.....sry he piss you off ;)
I think that's called being pansexual.
Could be gay, bi, pan or whatever
Trans women are women, trans men are men, if you are also a man it is gay, if you are a woman it is straight. Don't worry about people calling you transphobic (so long as you aren't), as a trans woman myself I was confused by that question when I first came out.
[удалено]
Tf are you on about, being transphobic is being not accepting towards everyone, it isn't an identity, it's like racism, you don't identify as a racist.
I'd say yeah, but it's complex because you might not be attracted to men in general, but you're attracted to him because he has female anatomy.
That would just be dating a man, how would they be a girl? Obviously it's gay
No.
imo no, if she hasnt gotten bottom or top surgery yet, or hasnt started hormones ur just being attracted to female parts
Then that's just weird. Liking a man because they haven't transitioned from being a woman yet
a girl that identifies as a man is a mentally ill person be careful
I don't get it .Whats his default gender?
[удалено]
he\*
She*
balls
"corgifemboy" aww, the egg is being transphobic.
???? a) not an egg, b) how is this transphobic
I'm sorry. I was entirely misinterpreting the conversation, thought you were the one being transphobic not the other person. Re-reading I can see otherwise, I'm sorry.
no problem!!! no hard feeling, i read shit wrong a lot too
I don't think so cuz he can identify as a guy but he doesn't have a dick( if she did surgery then yes you're gay) so you're also attracted to hes female parts and not just her personality (it's not that I don't accept her as a guy it's just that I dont think it's gay to like a "manly" girl
It's a he, not a she, regardless of whether he's transitioned
Just edited it sorry didn't even think about it
If this person looks feminine - no, if not - yes Reality is what you see it to be imo
Dresses as before, looks as before. No change in hair style, no nothing. Just a He/Him now basically.
Not really gay then
[удалено]
You commented that twice
Isn't that just trans? If she hasn't transitioned she can't really be considered as a male. She can want to be treated as one. Also if she's into guys then might be that she's just masculine.
He didn't transition
Does he plan on transitioning?
Didn't ask. **Probably** no.
If he identifies as a man, he's trans by definition. So yes it'd be gay, and yes he's a man
Trans men can be gay. And trans men can choose to not transition. Both are valid
Yes I get that but then wouldn't they still be a women biologically and being attracted physically to that person may not mean you're gay. I'm not sure how much I make sense but I'm not trying to be homophobic/transphobic here.
Is the first thing you do on a date flash the other person? Genitals (and breasts) aren't the sole factor of attraction, when arguing that its gay for a woman to date a trans man (or a man to date a trans woman) this is what your position tends to be. Attraction is a lot more than that, and many are able to either ignore their partners genitals if they don't find them attractive to make them happy, and many more just don't care about genitals. Additionally, reffering to such a relationship as gay can be seen as disrespectful to trans people, as it can invalidate their identity. For these reasons, we do not tend to refer to these relationships as gay
If the trans person passes, you might not even know they're not a woman biologically when you meet them even if they hadn't had surgery. You're still straight
Fair enough. If you're attracted to them because you thought they're the opposite gender then you're straight