This blog has previously covered the “cotton ceiling” – the idea that having a preference for partners of a specific biological sex is bigoted and transphobic. The idea is particularly often used against lesbians. This piece on the website “Feministing” explains why women are wrong if they have a preference for only dating people with vaginas.
The author admits that some women do not want to date bepenised individuals because of traumatic experiences. Don’t worry though, your trauma isn’t reality-based! Sex also isn’t about bodies.
I get why a lot of female assigned folks exist in this frame for reasons that aren’t overtly about undermining trans identities.There’s a ton of gender based trauma out there, and I understand that folks associate this with cis men, and not with trans men. But that’s not a reality-based approach to gender. A lot of that trauma gets easily linked to genitals, but this isn’t about bodies, it’s about patriarchy.
The author then goes on to explain that it’s not okay to process trauma in a way that excludes people with penises:
My trans brothers deserve better than sex in a frame that undermines their identities. This doesn’t mean queer cis women and gender non-conforming female assigned folks can’t fuck trans men, but then they owe it to these guys to reframe their sexuality in a way that’s not undermining – to recognize that they sleep with men, and to question why they’re OK with sleeping with trans men and not cis men. I just don’t think it’s OK to process your sexual trauma in a delegitimizing way through the bodies of folks who’ve often faced tons of trauma at the intersection of gender and sexuality.
The author then goes on to blame female people (trans men) for the fact that male people (trans “sisters”) are being “pushed out”, that it, excluded from some people’s dating preferences.
I do put a little more responsibility on trans men for letting this frame push their trans sisters out. This approach to sexuality totally erases trans women by excluding us from the group of sexually existing queer women.
Finally, the author concludes, people disagree with having their sexual preferences questions because they are “puritanical”.
There’s a lot of resistance to thinking about the politics of sexuality in this way, which I totally get. Our sexualities are our own, they’re personal, and in such a puritanical world any critique of sexuality can seem messed up. But our desires are absolutely influenced by our cultural context. When you really look at the way patterns of desire map onto what bodies are privileged and what bodies are marginalized, it becomes obvious that our desires are political. I am absolutely not about critiquing the way one person falls for another. The problem is with a community trend. When we leave sexuality trends unexamined, sex becomes a space where privilege and oppression run amuck.
Some people not wanting to fuck some other people = oppression.
And it’s not just one person saying this. Here is a blog post by someone explaining at length why it’s not okay to have sexual preferences when those preferences do not include penises:
-A person should never experience a total loss of attraction to another person after learning their genital status. That’s a clear, and inarguable sign of transphobia at play. Simply knowing a person’s genital status is no excuse for such a monumental loss of attraction to a person.
-Being solely attracted to genitals is transphobic. Requiring engagement with specific kinds of genitals is fetishistic.
So, basically, being homosexual or heterosexual is fetishistic. It is not allowed to prefer people of one particular sex when looking for a sexual partner, according to this (and many other) transactivists.
Here is another writer who talks at length about how it is not okay to prefer partners of one specific sex:
Then there is the other side of the coin: some cis women might have an issue or feel uncertain about hooking up with a woman who has different genitalia than her own. First of all, you should never feel pressured to do anything you don’t want to do or that you’re even unsure about. If you aren’t comfortable or you just aren’t into it, say no.
That having been said, if genitalia is the one and only reason for not being into someone, I do think it is worth thinking through that.
Are you a women who does not want to be sexually involved with penises? You should think about this. You’re not allowed to simply say no, according to the (male) author. You have to really think about why.
On reddit, a poster asks the question if it’s possible to respect trans people even if one doesn’t want to date them. Some replies:
If you are not interested in dating trans people, you have a problem you should overcome.
In this thread in a lesbian subreddit, a commenter weighs in:
In this discussion, another poster offers their opinion on “genital preferences”:
Having boundaries and simply saying “no” is now just a “flimsy cover for not challenging transphobia”.
Puke!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Insane ravings of delusional men.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When I was growing up I was taught to be heterosexual. This is just more of the same.
Male trans (deceptively called “trans women”) are “women.” This is a perfect example of what Mary Daly called the strategy of Biggest Lies, which men have been using since time immemorial. Goddess, that woman knew what she was talking about.
LikeLiked by 3 people
When I was growing up I was taught to be heterosexual (oriented toward penises). This is just more of the same.
“Men (deceptively called “trans women”) are women.” This is a perfect example of what Mary Daly called the strategy of Biggest Lies, which men have been using since time immemorial. Goddess, that woman knew what she was talking about.
LikeLike
These transwomen know perfectly well what a lesbian is and means. They delude themselves in order to get bio women (lesbians) to date them. Especially when ofcourse transwomen can want bio women, but bio women cannot. They make me nauseous.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Really, Riverstreet! Why is it ok that these bio men can pressure us to date them, but we should not pressure them to date each other, and leave us alone?
LikeLike
Reporting that information from this site was used to communicate to the Board of Education of Fort Worth ISD. I’ve been writing about the death of Josh Alcorn, connecting it to the President’s May 13th directive which enables students to transition without parental knowledge or consent.
I believe it is time for the authors of the gender critical blogosphere to write to, call the White House.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow look, more rapey bullshit!
It’s a classic patriarchal reversal. MTTs who are autogynophiles are the ones who have the obsessive fetish for lesbians. Being homosexual or heterosexual is not a fetish. There’s no such thing as a woman with a penis.
Well, the nice thing is that MTTs never get what they want. Any woman who willingly sleeps with them is by definition not a lesbian. They know this, that is why they keep complaining. Plastic surgery can never give them the body of a woman, or change their narcissistic, violent, male behavior and thinking.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not only can plastic surgery not give MTTs the body of a woman (or FTTs the body of a man), but our current medical technology can’t even give them a good enough approximation of a woman’s body for them to pass with their clothes on. (I suspect this is why, when offered a “3rd option” restroom or locker room, they pitch a fit about the bathroom not supporting their “identity”. If they can’t pass so we don’t notice, they want to make it impossible/illegal to give away the fact that we do notice)
LikeLike
[…] We have seen before on this blog that many transgender activists think lesbians should have sex with penises because the owner of the penis feels like a woman inside. It’s a girl’s dick, after all! People should think about their sexuality really deeply, so that they can realize that they want to … […]
LikeLike