Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Op-ed: My Attraction to Trans People Is Not a Fetish
No one should feel they need to be closeted about being attracted to transgender people.
BY Diane Anderson-Minshall
October 02 2013 5:00 AM ET

http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2013/10/02/op-ed-my-attraction-trans-people-not-fetish (http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2013/10/02/op-ed-my-attraction-trans-people-not-fetish)

The backs of the magazines sometimes had small, grainy ads for more fetish magazines, bondage gear, and what we used to call party lines. One of my favorites, that I'd flip to, were ads for "->-bleeped-<-s." These women, who had both beautiful breasts and real penises, fascinated me. At the time, I had no idea how that was possible biologically, but — and without these words to explain it — I was drawn to the dichotomy that existed in each of these persons, of very obvious female and male sex characteristics.

When I was graduated to home video porn, I rented some of the stuff labeled "->-bleeped-<-," all of which was presumably aimed at straight men. But since that dovetailed with my coming out as a lesbian and then as a feminist, I evenutally stopped renting and stopped talking about my history of attraction to this type of adult film star, in part because I learned that "->-bleeped-<-" is highly derogatory to trans women. It equates all trans women with sex work, it fetishizes trans women who are pre- or nonoperative, and it lets straight men buy porn with penises without confronting their homophobia.

The word "->-bleeped-<-" was an invention of the porn industry, though it's been employed plenty by the entertainment industry, popular culture, academics, and rabidly antitrans scholars like Janice G. Raymond.

I belong to a social meetup for Trans women.

Once a month we meet at a happy hour. It's a good way for me to meet other trans girls and be around the only people in the world who truly understand how I feel and why I live the way I do.

A few months ago, we started invited "trans-oriented" men to these gatherings. It's been a very positive addition. While I'm not there to meet men (but if the right guy happens to be there...), I do talk with them. They tend to be a bit shy, but generally polite, ordinary guys who are very respectful of us.

I personally would love to meet a woman for whom my *ahem* "non-standard equipment" would not be a deal breaker. I've never been in a relationship before, and sometimes I get so lonely...

This was a phenomenal article. I truly considered my own attraction to trans men to be fetishistic, but now . . . not so much. It's good to know there are others out there like me, and good to know there are people attracted to people like me. That just because the subject may be considered taboo, there's nothing shameful or weird about it. It just is.

Quote from: Kristal on October 09, 2013, 02:08:25 AM
I personally would love to meet a woman for whom my *ahem* "non-standard equipment" would not be a deal breaker. I've never been in a relationship before, and sometimes I get so lonely...

Actually at the happy hour in Sept., there was a transguy there who said something similar.

(Good looking guy too. A shame he was 20 years younger than me. Still, I might give him my number if I see him again...)

Interesting article, interesting statements.

But it's (very honestly) written by a born woman and lesbian.

It would be very interesting if a born man/straight/bi guy would make  openly statements about his Tlove.

I think it's something entirely different for born women to be openly Tlovers than it is for born men.....

Quote from: Dahlia on October 11, 2013, 04:30:34 AM
Interesting article, interesting statements.

But it's (very honestly) written by a born woman and lesbian.

It would be very interesting if a born man/straight/bi guy would make  openly statements about his Tlove.

I think it's something entirely different for born women to be openly Tlovers than it is for born men.....

Yes. I also have thought that women's sexual orientation is more diverse than men's.

Barbie~~

There was a discussion about this with regards to trans men a while back. My point, which applies here to this lesbian woman, is that it's actually somewhat vanilla and not very fetishistic to be attracted to people with genitalia that is directly compatible with your own. You could argue that a straight male attracted to a pre or non-op trans woman might seem more like a fetish, but a gay woman attracted to the same is arguably more vanilla and is simply bucking lesbian stereotypes of penis-phobia. This is all said with no judgment toward fetishes. After all, I have a few of my own that might make some folks blush. I certainly don't consider the fact that I'm sometimes attracted to trans men (in addition to cis men) to be one of them.

If (and obviously only if) a trans woman feels little to no dysphoria about bottom parts and is comfortable doing traditional things with them, then that's nothing more than taking advantage of compatible plumbing. Is it a fetish when a straight couple engages in the missionary position? Of course not. It's the most vanilla thing they can do. Then why is it suddenly a fetish if a same-sex couple happens to be able to as well? The parts are evolved to feel good from that. Is there something in the gay rulebook that says traditional vanilla sex is a no-no? The trans rule book?

The word "fetish" is one of those that is used a lot of different ways by a lot of people. It could mean something you obsess about (sexual or otherwise) or it could describe anything non-vanilla which has the potential to turn you on, in which case it's probably VERY common. Most people have something non-vanilla that might turn them on but that they don't obsess about. A sexual obsession form of a fetish implies that you can't really get turned on and enjoy sex without it. My "fetishes" are of the other variety and that's how I tend to use the word. The obsession type seems to have more negative connotations, particularly now that lots of things are actually becoming more vanilla, like bondage.

Op-ed: My Wife Is a Trans Am
Jacob Anderson-Minshall, October 14th

My hat goes off to Diane Anderson-Minshall, not because she's my wife, but because she continues to write truthfully about her feelings, share her opinions, and expose the private details of her life. And she continues to do so even when she's been attacked for expressing things that are entirely personal.

The LGBTQ community can be a very unforgiving and unfriendly space... We say that we want to have diversity and that we're accepting... But we also quickly attack anyone who holds opinions that don't match our own, often resorting to character assassination rather than simply providing counterpoints to their opinions or arguments.

Too often, we eat our own, attacking our allies more than our common enemies. This tendency can quash all discussion about certain topics, especially when it comes to trans issues.

Like everyone else, Diane has a right to have her own sexual turn-ons and turn-offs as long as they don't harm someone else. I don't understand how that's offensive to anyone else, but I do know Diane is mortified to have drawn such cutting criticism for merely being open about her own sexuality — and asserting her right not to have her attraction dismissed as "a fetish."

http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2013/10/14/op-ed-my-wife-trans-am (http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2013/10/14/op-ed-my-wife-trans-am)

"The LGBTQ community can be a very unforgiving and unfriendly space. Especially online. We say that we want to have diversity and that we're accepting of all the queer colors of our rainbow. But we also quickly attack anyone who holds opinions that don't match our own, often resorting to character assassination rather than simply providing counterpoints to their opinions or arguments."

This is an interesting statement.  I have found that "groupthink" is detrimental in the long run.  It is a sort of false cohesiveness, and leads to stagnation, rather than growth.

I enjoy the diversity of opinion I find here.

Quote from: Red Leicester on October 14, 2013, 04:34:20 PM
I enjoy the diversity of opinion I find here.

I do too.

Though I  get disappointed time to time that people who are oriented toward sexual attraction to pre-op trans women are labeled as "->-bleeped-<-s". I've heard them called "disgusting" and many worse things in various posts. I tend to agree with the people in these various articles - preference for transgender partners is no better or worse than bisexual, pansexual, gay, straight, asexual or any other orientations.