this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
21 points (81.8% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

7254 readers
210 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.


6. Defend your opinion


This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There's this rising narrative going around that if you ask specifically for a CIS partner, you're a transphobe. That could be true for some people but it's not fundamentally related to bigotry. Moreover, this narrative, the "if you only want a CIS mate then that is prejudice" is trampling on one of the most important rights a person can have: the right to choose who they want to get intimate with.

First of all, transmen are in fact men and transwomen are in fact women. Let's get that out of the way. This isn't a foot in the door for "trans this really isn't that" narratives. What this is about it is the freedom to choose who you want to be intimate with. That right is sancrosanct, it is absolutely inviolable.

And yes, there's plenty of issues that make transgender dating a special issue. If someone reveals their TG status they can be open to hate crimes and even deadly violence. However all marginalized groups are special in their own way. As a black man I don't think it's racist if a woman says she doesn't want to date a black man. I face oppression, too. My class is special in its own way. One group isn't more special than the other. None of us have the right to force ourselves upon those who don't want to be intimate with us, even by omitting who we really are.

Really, if you have to deceive or hide who you are in order to date someone, do you really want to date them? I wouldn't. That's not fair to you and you're denying them their right to choose who they want. What do you think will happen when the person wants a CIS mate and they discover the truth? They're going to get pissed and dump you. Now you have to shame them into staying with you: "If you loved me for real this wouldn't bother you"... that's not going to convince anyone. They're either going to leave, or they'll resent you forever. That's just how it is. You can be mad at that but that's about as effective as protesting the rising of the sun. There's just no way to win once you've gone down that road.

"I want a CIS mate" is not the same as "trans women are not women" - one is a preference, the other is harmful prejudice. On the flip side CIS people who do date trans people shouldn't be shamed for their choices either. A man should be free to date a trans woman and not catch flak about it. Trans people should be able to be openly trans and not face hate speech or threats to their well-being. This, without any exception whatsoever.

The fundamental fact is when you shame or worse abrogate people's right to choose who they want to get intimate with, it's not going to end well for you. All you're going to get is people who resent being coerced or bullied to date people they don't want to. And that's not something the country, or the world, will ever put up with. Except that right now, most people don't imagine they can be labeled a transphobe just for wanting a CIS mate. And unpopular opinion: that should be nipped in the bud.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

First of all, transmen are in fact men and transwomen are in fact women.

Sweet, then you have no problem and are open to dating anyone in your preferred gender.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, I am not open to date the vast majority of folks in my preferred gender. Age, language, whether they're a good person, shared hobbies, shared culture are all factors. Why isn't cisness a legitimate factor?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

It is. You just can't virtue signal about how everyone is equal while expressing such a preference.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Shorthand for cisgender. It's an ancient word that's come back into common use in the last decade.

Trans is a Latin root for "on the opposite side of", so transgender means "opposite of [birth] gender".

Cis is the antonym root that means "on the same side as", so cisgender means "the same as [birth] gender".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Uhm, those platforms don't filter by your sexual preference?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Uhm, yes they do. It's one of the preferences you set for your profile.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So why do they have to ask for a CIS partner?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

A trans woman will specify she is female on a given platform. She is likely to have different genitals than a person would expect, that person having only been with cis women. Hope that clears it up.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Dude, most dating apps place trans people in a entirely third category. Usually it's a third box after male/female and I promise, nobody cares if you leave it unchecked. You're missing out on wonderful, self-realized, adventurous individuals IMHO but nobody is calling you a transphobe simply because you prefer cis women, calm down. You're exaggerating greatly and absolutely parroting anti-trans hysteria here. Shit like this is exactly why a trans person might not come out on the first date

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

While I agree it's certainly fine to have preferences there is also etiquette to consider. Transphobia at it's core is a belief that the very nature of being trans is somehow lesser than or repulsive. Transness is a very wide spectrum that has a bunch of different presentations so simply discarding the entirety of the category is transphobic.

It's more helpful to think of things more in terms the individual things that you are looking for and your deal breakers. Like if your major beef is about physicality there are trans people who retain their physicality and fertility of their birth sex. The feild of trans presentation is really wide. Trans people also generally understand dating as a series of hurdles in finding someone who will give them a chance. Having people just shut down the entirety of the category regardless of any potential reasons they might actually fit what you are looking for contributes to a pervasive fear a lot of trans people have about never finding romantic acceptance. "No trans people!" stands out of a request like a flat out condemnation of anyone who might so much as request a different pronoun rather than just as a personal preference.

An example of something inclusive but still firm on preferences would be something like saying - "I have a female genital preference, want to keep the door open to having children of your own one day and prefer people who present in a very feminine way" ... Because you still haven't discluded all trans people. You've just made it clear that you have a genital and presentation preference and you have a life goal that makes perfect sense. She/they AFAB non-binary partners who are generally femme presenting are rare but still exist and you are communicating your needs in a way that doesn't place a value on how someone internally feels about their gender.

Breaking down the root of transphobia is hard. It demands that we remove a value judgement off of being trans. This at some level means an internal assessment of where you might be open to trans partners and keeping the options open. Like if you are not okay at all with any form of transness because you have a core belief that we are just too much work with our pronouns and our weird way of self conceptualizing ourselves, that's transphobia. ...

Trans is an umbrella term for a group of people so internally diverse that virtually every combination of sexual physicality, gender presentation and gender identity is somewhere represented. Writing off every potential person in the category basically is saying that there are zero concessions you will personally make because even the smallest most unnoticeable presence of trans identity in a person regardless of their physicality or personality is completely repellant to you... Which while it IS a preference is still fairly hostile to trans acceptance.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As someone who doesn't care about race gender or what genitals you have or had if i were dating, I agree.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

one is a preference

Maybe for some. But for most it's not even a preference it is a sexual orientation. A preference can be negotiated. A sexual orientation is just the way that you are.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

The problem with this rant is that it is inherently transphobic. I am in agreement that all preferences should be available though. If you only like blind midget pirates that should be a fucking option goddaamnit.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's hard to believe that this narrative you claim exists actually does.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe it does, though not to a really significant degree. I've had similar arguments with people over expressing the same opinion. And you can see some of those arguments even being made in this thread.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

I was on dating apps a lot a couple of years ago. I don't think it ever came up, but if it did it would've been one weirdo that I would've promptly blocked and forgotten about.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (12 children)

You should, of course, have your preferences, and your deal-breakers, and whatever else. So if you find someone you are interested in is trans, and that's a deal-breaker for you, that's fine.

But there is a difference between that and putting in your bio "No Trans People." Is being trans your only deal-breaker? What makes that a deal-breaker worth calling out, but not others? Before you put "No Trans" in your profile, I would ask you to consider that, if you are an athletic person and want an athletic person, would "No fat women" be something you would feel comfortable putting in your bio (even if that was a deal-breaker for you)? What would you think of someone who puts "No black people" in their bio?

If they have any sense, they will let you know either in their profile, in conversation before-hand, or during the first date or so (before things get intimate), and you can politely end things, just like if you found out they were Scientologists or several levels up in an MLM (or both). Hell, it may take until a third date, like finding out they don't just like, but can relate to Olivia Rodrigo's music. (In fairness, those three were objectively bad, but I don't know any of your non-trans related preferences, so I had to go with some things most people should consider deal-breakers).

The point is, people look for and look out for a lot of things, but I only ever hear people complain about it being rude to put "No trans." It kind of makes it clear that the person saying it has a particular issue beyond just dating preferences.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tact does matter. That is why I say "seeking cis man/woman" is better than "no trans man/woman". "No black people" is bad, "prefer SWM/SWF" is better and acceptable IMO (disclaimer: I'm black), "looking for athletic man/woman" is better than "no fat people", etc., just my opinion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I take your point, and agree. The positive (as opposed to the "No xxxx") seems generally to be more polite.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Before you put “No Trans” in your profile, I would ask you to consider that, if you are an athletic person and want an athletic person, would “No fat women” be something you would feel comfortable putting in your bio (even if that was a deal-breaker for you)?

I can see if someone is overweight, of a certain skin color or whatever other visible indicators you mention, and simply not like their profile, so a match would not occur.

I cannot (necessarily) see if someone is trans, so a match would potentially still happen.

So mentioning the "obvious" can be seen as harmful since you are effectively calling people out, while mentioning the "invisible" is merely stating a preference to reduce false positives.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

You can change your weight. You can't change who you are. Lesbians don't want men. People not attracted to trans people cannot just chose to be attracted to them. And I have no oreferencws but do understand that sexuality is not something you chose.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Every single thing you've said demands specific rebuttal. But I think it would be exhausting and you're not worth it.

Nearly everything you compare is actually a visible trait, where being trans isn't. Nobody's going to be tricked into dating anybody they don't want when all the attributes are visible up-front. I can SEE if somebody is athletic. I can SEE if somebody is black. I can SEE if somebody is obese.

Quit pretending there's something wrong with having preferences. You're delusional and you have no right to pretend that anybody owes anybody anything except honesty up-front in a dating context.

You actually think somebody who is not interested in a trans person OWES a trans person a date "just in case". Frankly, get your head out of your ass.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey can we please be civil here?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Lol, they're a transphobe. Being civil isn't a strong suit for that kind of person.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What makes that a deal-breaker worth calling out, but not others?

Being trans doesn't necessarily show outwards unlike being fat would. If I'm looking for a guy that doesn't automatically mean this includes FTM.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Neither does a micro penis (or serious erectile dysfunction) and that might be a deal breaker for you. But it would still be rude to say "No small dicks, and don't message me if you can't get it up." But is it worth addressing, prior to being intimate? Absolutely.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Maybe people should be direct and stop being afraid to list their preferences because they're afraid of insulting someone.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You may be right, but if someone writes "no trans people" or "no d*cks smaller than 25cm" or "no crybabies" or "no n*ggers", then if you are some of the mentioned, you wouldn't want to communicate to that person anyway. If you are not, then you still likely wouldn't.

It's a natural flow of communication in my opinion. Let people write what they want.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

This isn't a first amendment issue, or an issue of what people should be allowed to say. It's a question of etiquette, and not being rude. The thing is, saying each of those things would drive away more than just those specifically excluded.

To give a better example, if I were on a dating site and saw a woman who said "No guys under 6 ft," and I were taller than 6 ft, I still wouldn't want anything to do with that woman. It give a completely different vibe, however, to say "I really like tall guys." I get, though, that there's not a positive equivalent for the original question.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›