Gender Identity and Orientation (casual talk)

This is kinda late to the party @Ajax but I actually forget that you're Trans all the time, because I just think of you as male.

 

I agree 100%. People who make up labels or identify as the newest most off the wall thing and make it their mission in life that everyone know and respect them for it are... well, suffering from special snowflake syndrome. lol xD I also agree that if something happens and no harm was meant by it that making a huge deal about it is just perpetuating why people who are different are always seen as just that - different. When in most situations we would like nothing better than to blend in. Those people ruin it for all of us.

But of course there are situations where something hurtful can be said or done and of course I think it's important to educate and make people realize why it's not okay to say or do things like that. But in most situations yeah, I agree, everyone just needs to chill and accept everyone else and be cool.

That's really interesting about the article though. I've never heard of siblings being likely to also transition. But I have seen what seems like an influx of trans people in general - especially on Tumblr/internet in general. If someone identifies as trans I would never want to invalidate or question that, but sometimes I do wonder if it has become a "fad" or if it's actually that people who had always questioned themselves are finally feeling confident enough to come out/embrace it. Who knows. I certainly don't. I just know everyone ought to get along.

 

(Editing and emphasis mine)

Specifically touching on the Pansexual thing (since that's what my experience is): I used to consider myself Bisexual until I looked into it more. Definitely agree that the two terms are very close and are often conflated. Here's the difference: Bisexual (in my understanding) is being attracted to the two binary, traditional genders - male and female. Pansexuality is "gender blind".

Now, I know this is something of a hotly debated issue in some circles. There are people insisting that Bisexuality is not attraction to men or women only, and that it is simply attraction to more than one gender. Well, look at the roots of the words. Bi- as a prefix refers to "two", and Pan- as a prefix refers to "all" or "of everything". So, if people made the term Bisexual and didn't mean only two, they did it wrong according to Latin. Or perhaps these people are Pansexual and just don't want to accept the term, I don't know.

This really is the only area in which I get specific about labeling. Usually I say screw it to labels since it gives me a headache. The Latin roots of the words spelling out their meanings very clearly, however, is why I get so peeved when people blatantly ignore it. They are clearly not the same thing.

 

I'm not sure how to identify myself really. I'm attracted to cisboys, cisgirls, trans boys (at any stage), trans girls (at any stage), femboys, and some genderfluid as well as agendered people (Case-by-case). Pansexual MIGHT be a better term for me, I don't really know, or care that much. Bisexual is hard enough to explain in my little farming community.

 

Totally understand about it being hard to explain. That's the other headache of labels (and imo, the worst one.) Finding that "perfect label" for yourself doesn't mean much if using it in conversation causes the other person to enter some kind of brain dead confusion state. Sometimes, if I say I'm pansexual, I may as well have just said I was an alien another planet lmao. Either that or they're a smartass and they say "Oh, so you're attracted to pans? Hurr hurr." You got it, bud. Nailed it.

 

That's why my forum title is Proffsional Slut. It's the most accurate thing I could think of

 

Loool
I bet the nonstick ones get your motor running FIERCE

 

Gonna jump in with the pansexual thing here. (just to note, my spellcheck is flagging the word pansexual as I type this :U )

I am BASICALLY pansexual, but I call myself bisexual because that's where my primary attraction lies, and it's easier to explain. I don't think there's really any trans person out there who says "Oh, they're only bisexual, so I have no chance" though I could be wrong, and anyone can feel free to correct me on that.

Another, and more important reason I only call myself bisexual is because that labels what SEX I'm attracted to, not gender. I like boy parts, and girl parts, but if you have some sort of oozy nonbinary mating teeth down there or something (yes, that's a joke) I'm probably not going to be into it. As far as what GENDER I'm attracted to, that's really just one more aspect of a person's personality, and falls more into what my "type" is than my sexuality.

Really it comes down to how you use the terms.



On an unrelated note, I find that trans or nonbinary people who get upset over gender questions on things like insurance forms or at the doctors office are a little ridiculous. If they're asking for that information, they have a REASON to ask for that information. In the case of insurance and doctors, they want your biological SEX, as men and women are at different health risks for many diseases. Just look up the difference between a male and female heart attack if you aren't sure what I mean.

 

This exactly.
I feel like a lot of times, people are getting 'gender' confused with 'personality'.
People argue that girls and guys should be treated equally, and can enjoy the same things (boys with babrbies, and girls with monster trucks) but then, those same people will go ahead and say 'Well, I knew I was tras when I was younger because I always wanted to wear a pretty skirt when I was a little boy'

So like, what? You just contradicted yourself.

And same with the doctor stuff. Your BODY is male or female (in most cases) You must label yourself as that for important medical reasons because it's FACT, and there are chemical and hormonal differences that can affect things. Being a male in your mind does not change your body's chemistry.

 

I don't particular care for when people equate clothing with masculinity and femininity.
Dresses are for girl? then whats with kilts
Pants are for guys? then whats with women in skinny jeans
High heels for womenz? tell that to the Englishmen back in the 1800s

like really, clothes just keep you from being naked, they don't really mean anything :X

 

I quit on the whole sexual orientation thing. I'm attracted to individuals, not groups, I guess is the way I'd explain it.

 

I agree so much. If someone really wants me to label my sexuality then I would suppose I'd call myself demisexual, but even then the label doesn't exactly define every aspect about how I feel toward other people romantically or sexually. I just like who I like! People come in all shapes and sizes and if I happen to get to know someone really great, then I'll consider taking the next step toward a romantic relationship. Sometimes I feel like more of a grey-a, sometimes I feel like maybe I'm just pansexual. But what it really boils down to is that if I like you enough and if I think you like me, then heck yeah I'm going to give it a shot. I don't care about the labels or the rest.

 

I am one of those people that gets frustrated at the "gender" question, @MurphyAlter, on forms but not for the reason you mentioned. I understand needing to know biological sex, but most forms actually ASK for "gender," then proceed to only offer "Male" and "Female" as options. I know why your biological sex would be relevant in regard to medical information, but then they should ask for that rather than your gender, which is not relevant. But also they should honestly have it as a fill-in, because if you look at hormone balance, people who are transitioning will have different hormones in their system, could potentially have different health risks. Also people who are trans* have more psychological risks. So it's never just cut and dry.

Also @Vitani, I think a lot of trans people say that because it's easier to explain it that way to other people. Like, I have no idea what complex issues being trans has caused people, and I can't relate to it. But I can kinda understand an explanation that they like trucks or dolls. I can kinda relate to that. But I really don't think it's possible to just in a quick sentence say "I knew I was trans because ____."

 

Hehe doncha love loopholes???

I'm starting to agree with you. Bi is kind of narrow for what best describes me. Similar to my taste in music. I rarely like bands or genres, but there are thousands of songs I love. Better to just go with what makes me happy than to try and generalize ^^

 

I understand where you're coming from.

As far as I'm concerned though: Bisexuality, in any form or subset, is the attraction to something other than the singular binary of attraction, which is Male or Female. Bisexuality and it's subsets cover attraction to both sexes, transgender, genderfluid, etc. Bisexuality (and you're somewhat correct is saying that the word refers to "two", in which case I would gladly change to saying Pansexual instead of Bisexual in this, as again, I see them as almost exactly the same thing) is just whatever attractions aren't within the Heterosexual/Homosexual singular binary. Bi (or Pan) is a multiple attraction. You experience attraction to both Females and Males. That can include cisgender, transgender, genderfluid, etc, as far as I understand because all of those are somewhere in the spectrum of Male to Female (both physically and internally).

Because everyone is unique. One "Bisexual" person can like males, transmales, transfemales, and genderfluid guys. Another can like females, transmales, transfemales, and males. Another can like genderfluid and transmales. Another can like transfemales and males. Etc. It's just no the singular male or female.

Heterosexuality is attraction to a female. Homosexuality is attraction to a male. And Bisexuality (or Pansexuality if you want that term to change) is attraction to everything in between.

And straight/gay people can be attracted to transgender/cisgender/etc as long as they follow the singular binary. Male or Female. So a straight female could like a male, transmale, genderfluid boy, etc. A gay female could like a female, transfemale, genderfluid female, etc. And so on.
If that made any sense.

 

I've just given up trying to explain to people what pansexuality is. It got irritating after the 500th "so ur into kitchen utensils? LOL" joke. That, and most people are too dense to understand that there's anything more than male/female or penis/vagina, despite proving the existence of people who literally don't fit into either narrow bracket.

That said, I really don't understand why people put so much reliance in orientations. You're attracted to whoever or whatever you're attracted to, you don't really need a singular general definition to enclose an entire category of differentiation between body parts, IMO. That's mostly what I believe pansexuality defines. Or, as I've seen it said: "Pansexuality is attraction, one might say, that focuses on who the target of affection is, rather than "what", as do other sexualities", and "Hearts, not parts."

Adherence to strict definitions of sexuality was the cause of some substantial grief through my teens. I would have times where I felt extremely attracted to males and not females, vice versa, and sometimes both. The way I came to deal with it was to understand that I didn't need to fit into those labels, nor did they explicitly define my interests, but it's sad that I had to come to that conclusion myself after years of torment.

I've had some quite infuriating conversations with people who between us experienced an obvious chasm of difference in understanding. My perspective is that if you like/are attracted to someone, you like/are attracted to them. It doesn't matter how many times you chant or insist that your sexuality doesn't align with that feeling, it's still happening. The words you believe describe you won't change that.

What absolutely baffled me is when people said things like (for example) if they were straight and found out that the person they were attracted to had male genitalia, they would no long be attracted to them. Or that if they found out that their partner had male genitalia, they would break up with them. I'm sorry if this sounds reasonable to anyone, but what the fuck?

Surely if you're attracted to someone, you're attracted to them for who they are, unless you go around asking people what's in their underwear before you decide or announce that you like/are attracted to them. But the responses I was getting from people, quite overwhelmingly, is that in terms of attraction, genitals meant more to them than the person. That tells me that these people are attracted to/more concerned with types of genitals, not the person who has them. (Funnily enough, when phrased this way, almost all of them were extremely quick to try and denounce it.) Potentially, I believe, because it threatens their idea of their own sexuality. And I find that quite shocking and somewhat disgusting, to think of how many relationships are literally built upon one having a penis and one having a vagina, and not much more. It just doesn't seem healthy to me.

Perhaps it's just my perspective and/or sensitivity, but it really doesn't sit well with me, knowing how shallow the majority of people can be in these situations because they're raised to believe that their own sense of sexuality matters more than the emotions of other humans.

 

This might not be entirely relevant... But, today in times of surgeries, hormone treatments and such... It's kind of easy to change what one has in their underwear. If you love the personality of a person, and that person decides to change their gender, are you still attracted to WHO this person is, how he/she behaves, reacts to different things? Or were you attracted to what it's genitalia are like.

 

I wouldn't exactly say "easy", but I get what you're saying. The thing is though, if people find out that what is now a vagina used to be a penis, I find that tends to have the same effect on them as not having SRS in the first place. If anything, they get more annoyed when they find out because they think they've been tricked in some way, perhaps moreso than outright being met with a penis. Which is kind of stupid, but hey, people are like that.

Personally, I see it being no different to divulging information about any past surgeries. It's nobody else's business and it's up to the individual to divulge if they feel comfortable enough doing so.

That's basically what I was saying, that most people don't particularly give a damn about the person as long as they get the genitals they assume the recipient of their attention has. Primarily, I believe, because of the self importance those most people place on their own idea of their sexuality.

 

I don't think it's quite fair to judge someone for wanting to be with someone of a specific biological disposition. Like, what if it's really important to someone to have biological children with their partner? That's something that's really important to me, so I always knew I'd settle down with someone with that capability. It doesn't mean I'm not attracted to people who aren't, but it's something that's important to me and the life I want to lead. Sometimes you can love someone but their life won't match up with yours, and you can see that in a lot of things, not just sexual orientation. For instance, a related topic would be polyamory/monogamy. If you are strictly monogamous and you are mutually in love with someone who is polyamorous, you probably won't be able to make it work and that's not really the fault of either person. But back on the subject of gender/sexuality. I honestly believe that there are people who are a very strict, specific, sexual orientation, and there are people who are not. I am not strictly one orientation, and I don't really understand it, as I'm sure they wouldn't understand me. I don't think someone breaking up with someone else because their genitals weren't what they expected is the same thing as saying that their genitals are more important than who they are. I'm sure there are quite a few ignorant people who are just turned off by trans people and would be insulted or horrified or whatever if they were to end up dating someone like that, but that doesn't mean that anyone with a narrow sexuality is also narrow-minded.

 

Oh, I covered that in the conversations too. The matter of no biological offspring wasn't often used as a reason for absolute rejection. The forefront of the whole rejection usually stemmed from the issue of recreational sex and sexuality, like worrying "but wouldn't that make me gay?".

That, and the subject I am talking about is mostly regarding sexuality, attraction and emotion, not necessarily lifestyle compatibility. As in, sure a relationship might not work out because they both have the same genitals so wouldn't be able to have biological children, but I found that the rejection was way before that concern. More that those people were offended that they had been "taken in" by some devious trickery, often turning abusive or violent in the process; something that I do not expect happens as often with partners who may discover later on that they are unable to produce children themselves due to a variety of potential and "natural" problems.

It's more a case of difference between "Wow, she's really pretty. I want her to have my children." as opposed to the undoubtedly more common "Wow, she's hot. I wanna get to bang her." I know which I've had the misfortune of having to hear most often.

Furthermore, and I don't mean to offend, but is it usual to enter a relationship or romantic/sexual endeavor with the expectation of biological offspring as a primary intention? The times I've heard people talking as though it is for them, it came across as kinda creepy to me.