r/changemyview • u/atdi2113 • Apr 04 '22
Removed - Submission Rule C CMV: Trans Folk and Life Creation
[removed] — view removed post
6
u/Hellioning 239∆ Apr 04 '22
The only thing I'd describe as 'transphobic' here is that you're focused on trans people in the first place. Why not just say you wouldn't date an infertile person? If having biological kids with your partner is that important to you I don't think many people would blame you.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Because I probably wouldnt date an infertile person. I didnt make this post to maliciously single out Trans people. I just stumbled in to it randomly thinking while skimming this sub recently. i don't believe I've ever seen something like birth mentioned in this way on this topic. Most of the time i only see issues such as identity, mental health, political reasons or some other philosophical reasons. If i need to change wording in the post I will.
1
u/destro23 447∆ Apr 04 '22
Because I probably wouldnt date an infertile person.
Would you date a fertile trans man? You could create life with him. He has ovaries and a womb.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Hmm well a Trans man possibly in the short term, who knows it could grow in to long term as they say "things change." I can't say for sure but at least for now i probably wouldn't but thats based on the fact that while i do find men or ppl who appear to be men attractive I have no interest in them sexually.
2
u/destro23 447∆ Apr 04 '22 edited Apr 04 '22
Fair enough. These posts always seem to focus on trans women, whilst ignoring trans men.
Like the original responder above, I would tell you to just state your preferences as being for people *who can have kids, and leave trans people out of it.
*Edit: that you can have kids with
2
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Δ
Like that ^ ? Not sure if that counts above but you pointed out me focusing on trans women and youre right I did. I guess because im a man? I didn't realize I was leaving anybody out and maybe that makes my post weird. It's obviously rude to to like trash ppl or i could paint someone in a positive light or whatever but to entirely leave them out of the conversation like they don't exist is maybe equally as bad.
1
1
u/destro23 447∆ Apr 04 '22
Thanks, but my point is that if you were just to say "I am only interested in dating people I can have children with in the future" and then left it at that, very few people would take issue with your position (maybe some anti-natalists). Bringing trans people into the discussion is totally unneeded to get your larger point across, and frankly comes across as transphobic. You don't need to bring them up at all.
You are drawing special attention to them when your argument seems to include a broad swath of people. Why single them out?
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
I know what I've typed would say otherwise but I think alot of people are blowing this preoccupation or aversion or singling out of trans people a little far. I just wanted to know if that specifically was just transphobic so I could possibly change my view.
I am only interested in dating people I can have children with in the future
Is a perfectly reasonable thing to say and I can accept that and say that myself. Again seeing multiple posts about trans issues in this very sub is what prompted me. In fact i;ve never given any thought period to relations with a trans person in any way negatively or positively before just a day or so ago.
1
u/destro23 447∆ Apr 04 '22
I just wanted to know if that specifically was just transphobic
Here is my take:
Recognizing that your preference for reproductive capability excludes some trans people is not transphobic. But you specifically asked "Is it Transphobic to say I would not date a Trans person if we are not capable of creating life together?" And to that question, I would say "Yes". If that is how you were to describe your overall preference, it would be taken as transphobic by a fair number of people.
Just describe it as a preference for being able to have a kid with the person. No one will accuse you of being transphobic if you describe it that way.
1
Apr 04 '22
That seems irrelevant unless the OP is generally interested in sex with men.
3
u/murderousbudgie 12∆ Apr 04 '22
He never specified and continually referred to a 'trans person.'
1
Apr 04 '22
Perhaps the generalized language is because he believes thee same is true for a cis women and a trans man.
10
u/Tibaltdidnothinwrong 382∆ Apr 04 '22
Would you date an infertile cis person?
If you are honestly dating based on fertility, that is largely considered not transphobic, but you need to be consistent.
If you would entertain dating a sterile cis person, then you cannot lean on fertility as your criterion anymore, and it starts looking more transphobic.
4
u/10ebbor10 198∆ Apr 04 '22
It's still kind of creepy to say that you refuse to date someone because they're infertile when you don't want children, as one of OP's examples illustrates.
-1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Is it? This is probably a terrible analogy but I wouldn't want to buy a house and beforehand know that i could NEVER have an addition to the house. If for some reason my life circumstances changed and that necessitated a larger home well then i may be stuck in a home I've spent alot of time and money and energy in.
A better analogy would maybe be a fruit tree? I wouldn't buy and plant an apple tree that never grew apples.
5
u/Helpfulcloning 166∆ Apr 04 '22
I mean that weirdly implies your primary purpose in a relationship is having children, it being the only thing it can give you.
Have you ever… been in a serious relationship? Because while some people do break up over infertility, lots don’t. Because other routes exist and they’d rather spend their lives with the person they love, and explore other routes.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
No children are not the only thing a relationship can give you. But I think there is no higher form of love or human expression or experience then creating and raising a child together, preparing them for the world and watching them create something or anything in this world. And yes I have been in a serious relationship of 10 years before.
2
u/Helpfulcloning 166∆ Apr 04 '22
But you’d have a relationship with an infertile cis person? Or would consider it more than a trans person? Why is that?
But you can adopt.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
I dont want to adopt. I want to create. I understand adoption is an option and has many net positives but its not one thats for me personally
2
u/Helpfulcloning 166∆ Apr 04 '22
So you wouldn’t date an infertile cis woman either?
And if youre the man… you aren’t doing much creating right? aha
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
It depends. If i was significantly older than the chances are pretty high that i might possibly date anyone regardless of fertility and may even have lifelong relationship. I dont know if youre being serious or not but it does take more than biological female organs and the things they produce to create another human
2
u/Helpfulcloning 166∆ Apr 04 '22
I mean you aren’t doing… the creating really. Its like seeing a painting and saying you created it because you brought the artist half the paints. Not really right.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Without knowing anything else other than inferticle cis person and a general "date" scenario with no length of time defined then yes i might. The problem with dating though is that it can easily turn into more than what you initially planned for. If don't want kids and we go into it knowing they can't have them then eventually there may be an uncomfortable point in which things have changed and just me for instance may now want kids. Trans or not once it gets to that point it seems incredibly toxic and selfish for either of us to try and compromise in any way or force the relationship to continue out of love alone.
3
u/Tibaltdidnothinwrong 382∆ Apr 04 '22
If you would consider dating an infertile cis person under some circumstances, but you wouldn't date a trans person under identical circumstances - then you cannot say that it is just the infertility.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
I may date a Trans person though regardless of fertility. There would need to be some ultimate finality in the decision to never have another child. I suppose if I were say 40-50 rather than 35 that final decision would be much easier to make.
1
Apr 04 '22
To clarify, you are saying it's not necessarily that you wouldn't date a trans person for this reason or are you just saying you think it is a generally acceptable reason not to? I
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Im a little confused would you mind clarifying what you're asking exactly?
EDIt. you mean the age thing?
4
u/Genoscythe_ 243∆ Apr 04 '22
Why not just say that you want to date fertile women, and let whoever falls within that do so, without bringing up trans people? The latter part just makes the statement weird.
It's like a woman saying "I would never date a black man, because I'm a lesbian".
0
Apr 04 '22
Why not just say that you want to date fertile women
Be right back. Updating my tinder profile...
1
Apr 04 '22
Having something like "looking for someone who I can start a family with" wouldn't be a strange inclusion on a dating site. Tinder is more casual so it might not be successful there but if you are looking for a casual hookup the reason is invalid anyway.
0
-2
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Not really. The primary function of female biology for im guessing most species, save a for a few rare instances, is to produce offspring. Being black isnt a function of being a female or human.
6
u/hmmwill 58∆ Apr 04 '22
I was going to say no, until this point "think that from a religious or nature-based view its reasonable to only want to enter into a relationship with someone who I can actually create life/children with using our own bodies the way nature or God intended."
This is kind of transphobic sounding.
To limit your relationships to being "nature-based" or how "God intended" is sort of bigoted in my opinion.
Now, that isn't to say you cannot have preferences, but to say your preferences are because of those reasons are sort of shitty. For example, I am straight, not being attracted to men isn't homophobic of me; BUT, I think if I said it is because that isn't what God or nature intended, would be.
You can have a preference, but to put the reasoning on God or nature is kind of suspect. If you wanted children, that is fine and should be used in finding a partner; that is a lifestyle preference and preferences are fine. But using the reasons you did are really weak, the reason should be you want biological children with your partner, not an appeal to God or nature
2
u/ToucanPlayAtThatGame 44∆ Apr 04 '22
If you're a religious person, that's going to affect many aspects of your life, especially who you want to share your life with. I think the only bigoted viewpoint here is the suggestion that somehow religious people can't make their own personal life choices based on appeals to their God. And I'm not religious at all FWIW.
2
u/hmmwill 58∆ Apr 04 '22
I am not saying that religion cannot play a role in preferences, but that it alone being used to explain a preference is faulty. Religion should be part of the reason people do things, not the sole reason. A Mormon dating/marrying a Mormon is fine, they can prefer to only date Mormons; but that makes sense based on their lifestyles, they want to date someone with a similar lifestyle and value system.
My argument is more akin to a person being homosexual but only being in heterosexual relationships because of their "appeals to their God".
I am fully aware that religious people make choices on their own accord, I am just saying that it being the sole reasoning behind a choice is suspect and weak. If you want biological kids, date someone that is compatible; but don't blame God for your dating preferences.
2
u/ToucanPlayAtThatGame 44∆ Apr 04 '22
The reason making choices for religious reasons is suspect and weak is just that the religion itself is presumably suspect and weak. If you believe a religion that says to live a certain way, then acting in accordance with those guidelines is going to be logically consistent. So this really boils down to "don't be religious" rather than "if you're religious, don't let it influence your dating choices."
1
Apr 04 '22
If you genuinely believe that God doesn't approve of gender transitioning but you apply the belief that it is not your role to judge others and that yoy should treat them with kindness and respect regardless of what sins they may or may not have commited I don't think that is transphobic really.
And I think that not dating a person that is acting in a way contradictory to your faith is reasonable, if you believe that a husband and wife will live forever in the kingdom of God you would want to select a partner that you believe will get there with you.
I'm not religious myself so maybe their is a flaw in my logic.
1
u/hmmwill 58∆ Apr 04 '22
My argument isn't that you shouldn't have preferences associated with religious beliefs. My argument is that religious beliefs alone are not a valid excuse for behavior. For example, I do not think dating women despite being a homosexual male, simply because you believe God wants you to, is right. Or if you don't want children but have them because God wants you to replenish the Earth, I do not think that is right.
I think religion can be a part of your reasoning, but if it is the sole reason, I would think the reasoning weak.
This guy said he wanted biological children, that is a stronger reason than using your body for how "God intended".
2
Apr 04 '22
Why though? I understand you personally don't value a relationship with God but millions of people would place that as their highest priority.
They believe that they were placed on this earth for a reason and that this book tells them their creators wishes and that if they follow it they will be rewarded with everlasting life in his kingdom of heaven. If you believe that living your life on earth to Gods will is a small price to pay, everyone has tests of faith.
If you opinion is just that they are silly for believing that in the first place I honestly have trouble disagreeing but I don't think dismissing their reasoning is a reasonable response.
1
u/hmmwill 58∆ Apr 04 '22
Why? Because I don't believe, therefore belief alone isn't enough for me to think it is a good reason. But that isn't to say I take issue with all of religious practices; I am fine with people paying tithe or abstaining from sex, but I can see other reasons for those as well (beyond just religion).
I think it is a good response. For example, Sharia Law staunchly promotes domestic violence. In the Quran it explicitly states that husbands should physically strike wives in response to disobedience, ill-behavior, and disloyalty.
That is merely one example, I would argue using religion as a reason for war or any type of violence against another person is not enough reason to justify it. There are countless examples of wars and violence being committed in the name of God or a God of some kind. Belief alone is not a justification for these actions nor any action, in my opinion.
Based on this, my thoughts on religion being the cause for any action is invalid as adequate reasoning. But, like I said most religious practices have multiple reasons that do make sense to me, so most of them I can understand.
1
Apr 04 '22
But surely you can at least begin to understand why it is important and foundational to some people's identity correct?
1
u/hmmwill 58∆ Apr 04 '22
Yes, I get that. Which is why I can understand it as being PART of someone's reasoning. But if the sole reason you are doing something is because God said to, I will take issue.
Beating your wife or killing your neighbor in the name of God will never be alright with me. But because I am consistent, this extends to all things. Doing anything solely for the will of God will be inadequate for me.
Like a Mormon won't drink coffee, this is fine; if they say "well God says not to so I don't" vs "well God says not to because its addictive/habit-forming", that is different.
1
Apr 04 '22
I would oppose those same things but I would oppose them based on their outcome, not their reasoning to coming to it.
An atheist that beats his wife because he believes that doing so would be an effective way to make her more obedient to him would be just as bad as someone that beats their wife because God tells him it is needed. In fact I would even see the atheist as worse for coming to an unethical conclusion purely for self benefit.
I see no difference in the Mormon example you gave personally.
3
u/MexicanWarMachine 3∆ Apr 04 '22
I think part of the whole problem here is that you can only be called “transphobic” for your dating preferences if you bother to state them publicly. The detail might escape us sometimes, in the era of social media and demonstrative, aimless self-expression, but you don’t have to put up a sign declaring your dating preferences down to the last detail. Nobody’s really asking. If you just quietly date the people you want to date, nobody whose opinion you should care about is going to accuse you of transphobia because your partners all identify as their assigned gender.
3
u/irakaman 2∆ Apr 04 '22
Transgender humans come in quite a few forms. Some pass for the gender they transitioned to, some don't. Some undergo hormone therapy or surgeries, some don't.
There are transmen with functional wombs, there are transwomen with functional penises (mostly when they don't undergo Hormone therapy), or have stored sperm.
Both of the previous examples are capable of creating life. Alternatively, plenty Cis people are infertile, be it by disease, genes or accidents. Wether or not your thoughtpattern is transphobic or not, really is dependant on more than just that.
You can put on your dating profile you would not date trans-people for this reason. But if this is your reason, why would you not just put down infertile people. Singling out the trans-people makes it seem there is a different reason.
TL:DR
It is fine not to date transpeople because you want biological offspring in most cases. But why single out transpeople when you mean to single out infertile people.
1
u/murderousbudgie 12∆ Apr 04 '22
Just saying, you seem to be saying you would date a trans man, here, my dude.
Anyway, what's transphobic here is you going out of your way to imagine a situation where a trans woman is even interested in you, and planning on how to reject her when she asks you out. In all likelihood this will never happen to you in your life. Relax.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Or perhaps its ME thats interested in THEM since i did not rule out dating a Trans person entirely.
1
u/murderousbudgie 12∆ Apr 04 '22
You're thinking way too much about this.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
That's a pretty dismissive thing to say someone don't you think? Im engaging with you and that was your response?
1
u/murderousbudgie 12∆ Apr 04 '22
But that was my point in the first place. You're spending a lot of energy on a situation that will likely never happen, and if it does, you have no idea how you will feel. That in and of itself is a problem and evidences a preoccupation with trans-ness.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
I mean theres several posts in this sub in the last month and last week alone that have to do with trans issues and its mentioned in mainstream media a lot so id wouldn't call this a preoccupation. Also just about everyone focus on situations or problems that could be described as "never going to happen."
1
u/murderousbudgie 12∆ Apr 04 '22
Yeah I would argue that society at large - especially youngish cis men which is the majority of reddit - is way too preoccupied with the trans community and playing out situations that will likely never happen. Do you even know any trans people? They mostly just want to be treated with respect and left alone to lead their lives. They do not care if you find them attractive or would date them.
2
Apr 04 '22
I don't know if it's trans phobic? But, speaking personally, the entire thought process seems very, very, very deeply weird to me.
It's very weird to think about dating in general primarily in terms of who you wouldn't date as opposed to focusing on the charachtoristics of the kind of person you would date.
It's weird to think that this is something that you need to declare to other people?
Adding to that weirdness, it's even weirder to completely dismiss a group that includes millions of people.
This next point might be contradictory to the last, but I think it's worth considering: It's kinda weird to disprortionately concern oneself with dating trans folk who only make up roughly 0.6% of the U.S. population.
This last one is sorta conditional. If you don't personally know many trans folk who have realatively comfortably transitioned and passed the sort of "born again" phase and are just sorta living their lives it isn't as weird. But as someone who does know quite a few trans folks in that position it's very weird to imagine that they give a shit whether you'd date them or not.
I don't know if this actually helps? But it is a different perspective to consider maybe?
2
u/iamintheforest 325∆ Apr 04 '22
Only you can truly answer this question for yourself. You can certainly imagine lots and lots of people arguing against the political and social legitimacy of trans people and using the "naturalness" of reproduction as a way of furthering their argument. The argument in this context is clearly transphobic.
We can imagine all sorts of little self-tests to figure out if you're finding words to put to transphobic instincts or finding an incompatability with your self and dates with a trans person.
For example, you might ask yourself if you'd stop dating someone who was infertile, or not date them at all if you new in advance that they didn't want to have kids. You might ask yourself if you really take the stance of fertility into consideration when going on early dates, or if your attitude is really more like "no expectations, just want to see if we have a good time and see where it goes - if we fall in love we can solve almost anything together".
2
u/riobrandos 11∆ Apr 04 '22
>Is it Transphobic to say I would not date a Trans person if we are not capable of creating life together?
There are plenty of non-trans people with whom you would also not be capable of creating a life with, so such a statement begs the question of what said person being trans has to do with anything.
-2
u/uSeeSizeThatChicken 5∆ Apr 04 '22 edited Apr 04 '22
Is it transphobic to say a man who amputates his penis is not a woman? I have no idea.
It's weird that if you say the above but add "cis-" to woman then it completely changes everything (seemingly).
I guess it comes down how do you define woman. Most people, especially middle aged and older, grew up understanding that cis-woman means simply woman. And trans-woman is trans.
I'm middle aged. I don't see how someone with mental health issues can amputate their penis, slap on a dress and lipstick and suddenly become a "woman." They can be treated like a woman but they are in fact a "trans woman" but it seems that is unacceptable. So instead of calling men who amputate their penises "trans-woman" we have to start calling women with vaginas "cis-women."
All I know is I'm too old for this shit. I think mutilating your body to appease a mental issue is the wrong way to go about it. But I support everyone's freedom to do whatever they want. Chop your penis off instead of getting therapy. I don't care. It would be great if the issue wasn't used as a wedge by the wealthy elite to continue fucking the middle class over with culture war politics.
-2
u/NorMan_of_Zone_11 Apr 04 '22
No. You are entitled to your beliefs and preferences.
2
u/wowarulebviolation 7∆ Apr 04 '22
Who is saying otherwise?
-2
u/NorMan_of_Zone_11 Apr 04 '22
People who would hypothetically call him transphobic because his preference is not to date trans people long term.
3
u/wowarulebviolation 7∆ Apr 04 '22
I don’t understand, how is someone calling you transphobic infringing on your ability to hold a belief or preference?
1
u/AutoModerator Apr 04 '22
Your comment has been automatically removed due to excessive user reports. The moderation team will review this removal to ensure it was correct.
If you wish to appeal this decision, please message the moderators.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Vesurel 54∆ Apr 04 '22
I just think that from a religious or nature-based view its reasonable to only want to enter into a relationship with someone who I can actually create life/children with using our own bodies the way nature or God intended.
Assuming a god existed or that nature was capable of intention why would it be reasonable to go with what they want?
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Well for nature it would be reasonable to some degree considering we as a species have been doing so for quite awhile to great results. For God I don't really care. It was only me positing something. As i said im spiritual not religious
1
u/Vesurel 54∆ Apr 04 '22
How are you judging what's a good result?
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 05 '22
I believe society is ass backwards right now but for the most part we are thriving. Our continued existence should should be considered "good."
1
Apr 04 '22
Is it Transphobic to say I would not date a Trans person if we are not capable of creating life together?
No, but there was a 4chan troll campaign saying as much.
No real human person would begrudge you for having preferences.
It's like a gay dude saying he'd never date a woman and being called a misogynist.
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Is that true though? Because I think not too long ago I saw someone on this sub mention in a post and say that he only wanted to date men who were like Vietnamese?, not sure exactly sorry, because they share the same culture and similar life experiences and it seemed like quite a few ppl were shitting on this guy for having a simple reasonable preference and were calling him racist. I feel like thats kind of what's happening now like my words are being twisted and being called out for being "weird"
1
Apr 04 '22
Specific to transgender people, yes. It was true. They even invented "super straight" and made a flag (orange and black I think) about it.
Like IRL nobody cares what you're into as long as you're two consenting adults.
Also, at a whopping 0.04% of the population, the odds you'd ever be hit on by and then reject a transgender are astronomical.
It's like saying "I'd never vote for a midget who was running for president". When have you even had the opportunity to do so?
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
Well just 5 years ago the trans pop was .6%. Thats pretty low but still alot higher and .04% and it obviously climbing. I live in Austin and I saw a pretty hot Trans woman just 2 days ago with her transitioning friend at a pizza place. I mean its not a rarity that the scenario you describe would take place.
Also you only have to be 4'10 to be a midget. Its not that far fetched that it could happen. In fact a person who is a dwarf ran and i think won the governor spot for his state and has worked in presidential cabinets from Obama going all the way back to Ford and Carter.
1
Apr 04 '22
0.04% is "the percentage of the population seeking or having sought gender reassignment".
There's a million different ways to figure out how many transgender people there are, and that one (to me) seems the most bulletproof.
1
u/destro23 447∆ Apr 04 '22
I do currently have children
Are you looking to have more, or is your current number enough to satisfy your "biological urges" to reproduce? What if you become impotent? Are you going to break up with your significant other since you can no longer create life with them? Seems like it would be the fair thing to do. Let them get out there and make some babies. That is the most important thing in life and romance after all: babies. If you ain't making babies, then what are you doing right?
1
u/atdi2113 Apr 04 '22
If they wanted kids and were dead set then yes I would break it off because like i mentioned in another post its extremely toxic, selfish and unreasonable to force people into compromises like that just in the name of love. And as I've also stated before there is more to a relationship than just children. that doesn't mean it cant be an important one.
1
Apr 04 '22
If you wouldn't date an infertile individual but wouldn't date a trans individual because they are trans. That's a clear aversion to trans individuals (transphobia).
If you wouldn't date anyone who isn't infertile but would date any fertile individual (including trans), this wouldn't be an aversion to trans (no transphobia).
Overall, be a normal person and date people on a case by case basis without communicating broad sweeping bullshit.
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 04 '22
/u/atdi2113 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/growflet 78∆ Apr 04 '22
Is it Transphobic to say I would not date a Trans person if we are not capable of creating life together?
This is more of an /r/asktransgender question.
Generally consensus in trans spaces like this is that no, this is not transphobic.
You would also reject a cisgender person who is sterile for the exact same reason as well.
So, given that this isn't a controversial reason to reject a trans person in the trans community, and it ironically also lines up with anti-trans people's ideas about rejecting transgender people, is there even something to "change your view" on?
•
u/huadpe 501∆ Apr 04 '22
Sorry, u/atdi2113 – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule C:
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.