Video and Response...

[CrziCricket]

So I was on facebook and an old teacher of mine had shared this article that is a response to a video that I will directly link as well.

Article http://www.dailywire.com/news/14681/not-sexually-attracted-both-penis-and-vagina-youre-amanda-prestigiacomo

Video

The thing is.... the article interprets what she says in odd ways (I know it is partly because it is the Daily Wire...) and I was a little skeptical of watching the video after the read...
BUT once I watched the video all she really wants to say is that you shouldn't say 'never' if you haven't tried, preferences and ideals are bound to change over time. Not to mention the fact that you can love a person no matter their changes.

I get that some people simply do not enjoy sexual encounters with different genitalia or body types, and that is totally okay. I also get that maybe we shouldn't be jerks about whether or not that is your preference. Most people do not go around telling the world and writing about why it's okay to not date someone who is overweight, but it's okay if they happen to no have the part you are expecting (except I feel it would be talked about and not a surprise by that point)?

I DO NOT like the fact that the article says trans women are not real women.... what makes a woman real? (I feel they are stuck on sex and not gender)

....I don't know where I was going with this.... I got pulled away in the middle of typing to help my daughter with her homework (I am staying at their house this week for a visit) and lost my train of thought...
All I can remember is that I was surprised by the video, and more so... the responses to the article...

[Gertrude]

I thought the video was a mess. I thought the article was cherry picking to suit a point of view. In a sense, both were facile and showed motivated reasoning and confirmation bias. Just once, I'd like to read an article or watch a video that doesn't revert to talking points and vernacular of a particular point of view or agenda. Just tell your own story in your own words.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CrziCricket]

I thought the video was a mess. I thought the article was cherry picking to suit a point of view. In a sense, both were facile and showed motivated reasoning and confirmation bias. Just once, I'd like to read an article or watch a video that doesn't revert to talking points and vernacular of a particular point of view or agenda. Just tell your own story in your own words.

Yeah, I was able to pull the points separately, but do not like acting as though someone speaks for the whole community... especially when it is most likely that you yourself do some of the things you are against...
Sadly I do not have the courage to poke the bear and say something to my ex-teacher about his comment on the cherry-picked info and his apparent un-okay-ness with trans people....
(might explain why he treated me weird in HS since I was dressing and acting much like I am now that I am so self-aware.)



I personally prefer males, now I do not know if the genitalia matters to me. My mister prefers females but says that he loves me for me and is willing to go through this process with me in the hopes that physical traits are not a deal breaker. But that is just him. I have a sister who simply doesn't find women sexually appealing (she apparently has tried to make sure lol)

[Gertrude]

Yeah, I was able to pull the points separately, but do not like acting as though someone speaks for the whole community... especially when it is most likely that you yourself do some of the things you are against...
Sadly I do not have the courage to poke the bear and say something to my ex-teacher about his comment on the cherry-picked info and his apparent un-okay-ness with trans people....
(might explain why he treated me weird in HS since I was dressing and acting much like I am now that I am so self-aware.)



I personally prefer males, now I do not know if the genitalia matters to me. My mister prefers females but says that he loves me for me and is willing to go through this process with me in the hopes that physical traits are not a deal breaker. But that is just him. I have a sister who simply doesn't find women sexually appealing (she apparently has tried to make sure lol)

I just think people relate to whoever they want and to put a term like transphobic on it makes no sense. I'll leave it at that. I think, somehow, as a community we need to agree on what's important and ditch the vernacular, talking points and pretenses. If we don't, then infighting ensues and we're looked at as the freaks that scream privilege from the other side of the room. We'll never persuade the opposition of anything by calling them idiots and worse. IMO, tell our stories and stick to facts in a way that everyone can understand. Jennifer Finney Boylan says people can't hate you if they know your story. We need to tell the general public our stories, even where we're not welcome. Look up a TEDx talk by Mark Wingfield. You'll get a sense of what I mean.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JMJW]

There's a category of transwomen who are physically indistinguishable from stereotypical cis males. Lets call it group 1. Now if one were to take just this group and exclude all other transwomen  - Would lesbians be transphobic for categorically excluding Group 1? On what basis would one say no, if one is arguing it is transphobic to categorically exclude a larger group of/all transwomen on the basis that transwomen are women? The only difference between the two groups of transwomen is appearance, and as appearance is a spectrum, at what point does it not become transphobic to discriminate? If the answer for both is that it's transphobic, than one is arguing for lesbians theoretically accepting people who are physically  indistinguishable from stereotypical cis men.

The bottom line is it either comes down to appearance, in which case lesbians can rationally dismiss transwomen who don't fit their subjective whim, or one is saying that categorical exclusion of any group of trans women is transphobic, regardless of appearance.

[Gertrude]

There's a category of transwomen who are physically indistinguishable from stereotypical cis males. Lets call it group 1. Now if one were to take just this group and exclude all other transwomen  - Would lesbians be transphobic for categorically excluding Group 1? On what basis would one say no, if one is arguing it is transphobic to categorically exclude a larger group of/all transwomen on the basis that transwomen are women? The only difference between the two groups of transwomen is appearance, and as appearance is a spectrum, at what point does it not become transphobic to discriminate? If the answer for both is that it's transphobic, than one is arguing for lesbians theoretically accepting people who are physically  indistinguishable from stereotypical cis men.

The bottom line is it either comes down to appearance, in which case lesbians can rationally dismiss transwomen who don't fit their subjective whim, or one is saying that categorical exclusion of any group of trans women is transphobic, regardless of appearance.

Very true and considering what LGBT people have endured, why the division? We're in the same boat, sink or swim.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TinaVane]

No people have a preference. Like I have a preference that I'm not sexually attracted to out of shape men so does that make me fat'phobic. Like some men not attracted to my skin and bones. Geez and this utuber is a joke


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk