Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but could someone please explain what’s wrong (/Gen)? It looks like someone posted asking what straight people felt more attracted to (in an odd way, not how I’d phrase that question), and someone gave their answer. Is it that last sentence? Just trying to better understand so I can be a better ally.
it’s that they’re reducing trans people to their genitals and saying they’ll date a man if they have the “right” parts but won’t date a woman who doesn’t. it’s objectifying, essentializing, and gross. trans men are men and trans women are women.
Is it because they’re saying that they are straight that makes it an issue? “I’m only attracted to women, and that includes pre op men” kind of attitude. I can see why that’s wrong, bit surprised at myself for not thinking of that on my own.
Or are you saying that having a genital preference in general is wrong? Would he have been wrong if he said he’d only date cis or post op women?
it’s that trans people aren’t defined by their genitals and trying to express attraction in terms of genitals is fucked from the start. you can’t see anyone’s genitals until you’re in bed with them – if you don’t want to have sex with someone until they’re post op, that’s fine, but saying you aren’t attracted to people with the wrong genitals reverses cause and effect.
this and the chaser shit not getting banned are I think the strongest arguments for defederation. I hope our admins/mods communicate this to blahaj.
Have the Blahaj admins made any statements about why this is tolerated? I know Hexbear is almost uniquely vigilant but idk why they’d allow it.
The admins will get to it when they finish their other important duties, like defending NATO
I haven’t seen anything and mods/admins who are in touch haven’t commented, at least that I’ve seen.
I’ve seen an admin respond to the shitty DM leaking behaviour, but the admins don’t seem interested in confronting the problem mainly.
Wwwwwwhaaat? They let chasers into a trans safe space?
When did the word “safe” get redefined to abjectly not safe?
https://hexbear.net/comment/3762972
when the brain worms telling you that you need the approval of cishets eat the part of your brain that gives you sensibilities.
Yeah this is setting off all sorts of alarm bells for me. That’s fucking insane and dangerous and I feel a bit sick knowing they lurk there now.
Fuck that instance, tell anyone left of Biden to jump ship before they end up getting horrid shit in their dms or much worse.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but could someone please explain what’s wrong (/Gen)? It looks like someone posted asking what straight people felt more attracted to (in an odd way, not how I’d phrase that question), and someone gave their answer. Is it that last sentence? Just trying to better understand so I can be a better ally.
it’s that they’re reducing trans people to their genitals and saying they’ll date a man if they have the “right” parts but won’t date a woman who doesn’t. it’s objectifying, essentializing, and gross. trans men are men and trans women are women.
Is it because they’re saying that they are straight that makes it an issue? “I’m only attracted to women, and that includes pre op men” kind of attitude. I can see why that’s wrong, bit surprised at myself for not thinking of that on my own.
Or are you saying that having a genital preference in general is wrong? Would he have been wrong if he said he’d only date cis or post op women?
it’s that trans people aren’t defined by their genitals and trying to express attraction in terms of genitals is fucked from the start. you can’t see anyone’s genitals until you’re in bed with them – if you don’t want to have sex with someone until they’re post op, that’s fine, but saying you aren’t attracted to people with the wrong genitals reverses cause and effect.