LGBTQrstuv: Bisexuality & Transgender - John Corvino
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 мар 2013
- Sometimes the "alphabet soup" of LGBTQ etc. can seem confusing. Here John Corvino explains some basic distinctions between sexual orientation and gender identity while making a few observations about bisexuality and transgender.
Dr. John Corvino, also known as the "Gay Moralist," is a writer, speaker, and philosophy professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. He is the author of What's Wrong with Homosexuality? and the co-author (with Maggie Gallagher) of Debating Same-Sex Marriage, both from Oxford University Press.
Find the book here: amzn.to/ZuIF2A.
Video by Chase Whiteside. Read more at JohnCorvino.com.
Thank you for including us bisexuals. I've met quite a few people holding false stereotypes, misconceptions, and a non-understanding, both straight and gay/lesbian.
Mark Wilkie Hahah very detailed. Have fun sticking it in the "blood n' eggs" outlet, but if thats what you call a rectum i doubt you get any.(not to mention you copied and pasted this reply throught this comment section no doubt)
So if man is sterile and could not produce sperm or has testicular cancer he should be killed or discriminated against? or what about a woman with ovarian cancer. What if an individual does not want children and news flash heterosexual couples do anal as well and your also assuming that all gay people do is do anal, some gay people don't ever have sex in there whole lives so how does your "Gay sex is not natural therefore gay people shouldn't exist". Why are you so concerned about how they don't go together, you doing a lot of thinking about gay sex for someone who doesnt like them not to mention. And as final note your eyes right now are doing something that isn't natural you looking at a manufactured screen on a manufactured website made out of 1's and 0's and red blue and green light your eyes evolved out of survival to forge for food and look but it doesnt mean you have to use them exclusively for that and its your choice, so dont be a dickhead it its what it is.
Many people hold misconceptions about bisexuals and transgenders so an informative episode like this is the first step to build a conscious society
I am sure there are many who appreciate what you have selected to do on the net. I am certainly one of them. Great job, sir.
maybe its because ive only started investing in trying to understand my self and my identities and learn more about the lgbt comunity for the past 3 or so years, but its so impressive to me how this guy, 10 years ago was so knowledgeable and accepting in topics that are still issues today within the lgbt comunity itself sometimes. The fact that 10 years ago you acknoledged that some trans people like myself dont feel the need to have surgeries is mind bogling to me, especially since you are not trans yourself. Love your stuff man, its a shame that you dont upload anymore apparently. Your video "whats morally wrong with homosexuality?" is one of the things that set me off on my "self discovery" and "self acceptance" journey about 3 years ago, so all i have to say is thank you, your awsome.
John, I really appreciate you and your videos. You are very patient in explaining LGBTQ+ 101-type topics. But thank you for this video in particular. Absolutely essential. Signed, an openly pansexual Protestant minister
This is one of the best explanations of bisexuality I have seen. As a bisexual man married to a woman, I really appreciate watching a gay man (who is incidentally totally hot...) address some of the assumptions people make about bisexuals.
Make it make sense
@@silentghost751 make what make sense?
@@silentghost751John did just that in this video. Maybe watch it with an open mind instead of just going after people in the comment section.
@@jacklukasewycz1316bi
@@Iamthatis137he just said a claim. Didn’t explain with logic
Thought the ending was the best part.
Great vid!
Thank you very much for this. Even Ls and Gs can be very nasty when it comes to Bs and a little thought-provoking, educational conversation can go a long way in influencing the way that a person thinks about and treats another.
There's something I don't get from trans people. I've been sometimes taught (by lgbt people) this notion that what you wear doesn't define whether you belong to one sex or another and that gender roles and social behaviours are all just inventions of the society we live in. So what does really "feeling a girl" mean if there is no way to define what a girl should look or act like. I mean, seriously, I respectfully find this as an inconsistency. Why should a man who "feels like a girl" wear dresses if that's not what actually makes him a girl... I don't know if you're getting what I say. Anyone else has the same doubt? Wouldn't doing that mean replaying, repeating and promoting the gender stereotypes lgbt people are mostly against?
Hi, Alann. Let me try to explain. What makes trans people trans usually isn't what they like/wear or necessarily how they feel. I've never felt like a specific gender and I think this is the case for most people. Trans people usually have dissasociation or a general bad feeling towards their body or societal role, there are different studies that try to find reasons for this. Trans people brain scans are something you could look up. It's not a definite answer, but there are so many factors that go into the developement of a persons sex characteristics before and after birth that things going wrong, isn't really suprising.
This incongruence between brain and body is what makes us trans, not how we conform to gender roles.
About gender roles:
Some trans people are gender non conforming after their transition, because what you like to wear or who you love really has nothing to do with your gender. Some trans men like to wear dresses, this doesn't make them less trans, because they have gender incongruence. Also doesn't make them less of a man, because some cis men also like to wear dresses. And of course, like John already said, trans people can also be gay, which means they would have been considered straight before transitioning-
I'm just trying to be happy. That happens to be in a more or less stereotypically male kind of way, people usually don't take an issue if born males do that, but because I'm a trans man I'm promoting gender stereotypes? No, I'm just being myself.
@@senf3719 Hi Senf! Thanks for trying to explain the subject, I feel it a bit clearer now
I do get what you’re saying and are genuinely curious about. You’ve touched on something very deep and diverse in understanding and perspective. Please don’t take anything one person or group says or does as universal truth. There is massive and contentious debate and disagreement on this within “the community” itself (mostly online). As a queer person who has done a lot of digging, listening, and research on this subject I conclude that it is super complex and may be subjective and that’s ok. I am a male presenting individual (only saying that because I like my hair short and like “men’s” clothes- I’m a creature of familiarity and comfort) who is non-binary. After years of vague thoughts, feelings, and experiences I have determined I am non-binary or at the very least neither or genderqueer (as in outside the “norm”). My husband is not what you would expect a typical male to be and I follow RUclipsr Frederic Chen now who is a queer commentator and he identifies as a man even though he wears makeup, pearls, extravagant jewelry, “women’s” clothes, and dresses and such. He and my husband are both gender-non-conforming. This confused me as well even just recently. Does that mean I’m a man after all and fit into that gender? Am I just queer and non-conforming? I’ve asked myself that question repeatedly and the answer is always no (now that I have a lot more education and awareness and self-awareness than I used to). It’s all a lot more complex than many people make it. I personally don’t care what pronouns are used to refer to me (usually he) as long as it’s done respectfully. I would prefer to have it switched up but that’s unrealistic. However, I do very much care when people call me man or boy or male or a guy or sort me into that category. Mainly because that means things to people. Because you see me as a guy or even a gay guy, I’m supposed to… XYZ; for example, be strong and capable of lifting and moving heavy things easily (I struggle just as much with this as the average cis women apparently does). Just one example. When people identify me as such, I correct them. Just as my husband or any man would correct people if they referred to him/them as a woman or even non-binary. I have more of a problem with expectations. If gender roles determined by perceived biological sex didn’t exist I probably wouldn’t have the struggles I do and I might not feel the need to differentiate myself. That’s a certain group of nb/ trans people I belong to, definitely not all or even most. However, what makes me the same as all other trans people is I do not identify with/as and am not the kind of human being I was designated at birth and perceived as and thought of myself as during the first ~2/3 of my life (I’m 36). That M just doesn’t work for me and doesn’t refer to who and what I am. It was confusing to me at first too. For a while actually. But it is what it is. I personally see it as just super complex. I know people have a problem with it being subjective, but it should be. We should recognize subjectivity and self-determination as more valid than it is seen as. As much as we have commonalities and universalities, everyone is unique and can/ will have different experiences and perspectives and thoughts and feelings and sense of self. For me, it’s important to not be identified as a man even though I look like one and identify as not fitting into the M/F binary at all, because that is other people determining my whole existence and… no thank you. I am not against gender roles and trans people conforming to established means of presentation, mannerisms, etc as their self-identified gender. What I am against is people pushing rigidity of existence on everyone else and dictating how they’re supposed to dress, act, behave, talk, be. Because it’s a thing. That’s what the restrictive social construct of gender is that we fight against. Humanity is much more wonderfully complex than many people perceive it to be.
I hope this helps and gives you more insight on your personal journey of understanding. Much love!
Probably one of the first videos I watched the had an accurate description of bi-sexuality.
How did I not find this sooner? Great!
I love your channel! Thank you so much!
Is there a transcript of this video? I love it but I don't know if my FB folks are going to sit through the whole thing. If I share a transcript, they'll take a look at it.
First of all, I'd like to say thank you for giving me some explanations for my mother when I try to explain it to her. I recently came out of the closet to her, and her lack of education when it comes to bisexuality as opposed to homosexuality is astounding. I would love to see a video here about biphobia within the LGBT community.
The only time I was made to feel less than about my sexuality (I was 17 , claimed Bi, now I know I'm Pan), was from a lesbian who told me to "Pick a side".
My heart still breaks for my hurt kid-self.
Once again, John, excellent discussion. And, hell, I thought I'd already subscribed to your channel, but apparently not! So I just did! Anyway, as I bisexual man, I really appreciate this discussion. I knew I was bisexual (or, indeed, pansexual) at about age 14! And I know first-hand that bi guys (and gals) have had to deal with crap a lot of the time, from both hetero-normative folk as well as (at least occasionally) gay people! Sheesh! But, anyway...thanks again & keep up the good work!
This video made me subscribe
Just read the following, shortly after watching Corvino's video: "In Batgirl #19, on sale today in both print and digital formats, the character Alysia Yeoh will reveal that she is a transwoman in a conversation with her roommate, Barbara Gordon (aka Batgirl). Taking care to distinguish Yeoh’s sexual orientation from her gender identity, Batgirl writer Gail Simone noted that the character is also bisexual." So nice to see this treated with respect and fairness.
Very good point there are distinctions. There are also similarities in our experiences.
Moar T-shirts! :D
Well done, John :)
hi jhon, a need your videos with subtitulos in spanish
;)
Best Regards
Where can I find this research?
You, sir, are the funniest academic alive.
Well said. Bravo John.
I enjoyed this video. Thanks for making it. I am Bisexual.
thank you pastor
I don’t get why the IAA is added sometimes because there’s a plus for a reason
You sir, have your noggin' screwed on just right. I am going to save this vid for future reference.
I adore you, I really, really do...
Friendly reminder: The LGBT Alliance is a logical contradiction.
It should first be noted, that I am not the only one to note the irreconcilability of 'gender identity' and sexual orientation. For instance, a self-professed Lesbian tweeted this out in May of last year, "When biological sex is replaced with subjective 'gender identity' you erase gays and lesbians, who rely on these biological definitions."
She came up with this insight (as have many others--I can give more instances upon request) entirely without my influence. How? Because it's fairly obvious. Sexual orientation rests upon the affirmation of physiological sex, and 'gender identity' rests upon the denial thereof. That's a glaring contradiction, which cannot be resolved by saying that 'gender identity' and physiological sex both can determine man- and womanhood. This solution only serves to justify the notion that there are 'natural' men and women and people who pretend to be men and women and thereby contradicts the trans dogma that trans men are men and trans women are women.
The trans line is very clear. Transmen and transwomen insist that their man- and womanhood is not a whit less real than that of cismen and ciswomen, and if that claim can make any sense at all, then there must be only one cause for man- and womanhood. Two or more causes would justify separate categories (and separate facilities) for transpeople, and they have made it abundantly clear that this is transphobic bigotry. Thus the only way to give transpeople the recognition they feel that justice demands is to supplant the notion of physiological sex entirely with the wholly subjective notion of 'gender identity'. But, again, once you do that, then the concept of sexual orientation makes no sense whatsoever.
If you don't believe me, then check out this much-discussed video below. This transwoman does not use this language, but it's very clear that he wants to scrap sexual orientation altogether and replace it with 'gender orientation'. For him sexual orientation can be nothing more than cissexist and, hence, transphobic 'genital preferences'.
Again, the bottom line is that the concept of sexual orientation makes sense only on the premise that physiological sex is what makes a man a man and a woman a woman, and it is precisely this premise that the trans lobby vehemently denies. Thus, there is a glaring contradiction within the LGBT Alliance.
ruclips.net/video/k5GYlZKfBmI/видео.html
Actually recent research suggests its more to do with how your brain is wired from when you are growing in the womb then you being brought up for at least identifying as a gender, this is then influenced by the social normalities of how the gender behaves in society as to how you wish to act, but the "feeling" is hardwired pretty much, and it can be very, confusing aslo, for example, people who are bigender, and have noticable shifts in gender identity over time.
Bi now, gay later.
Thank you 😊
God is not mocked! It's learned behavior.
Smart. He have this style in speaking that makes him sound very convincing. Or maybe he's just stating facts. Whatever it is, he needs to have his own segment on a radio station! XD
There's more overlap than you mention. Transgendered people were very involved in the Stonewall riots; drag shows in the gay community (drag performers aren't necessarily trans, but some are); many gays and lesbians don't meet gender expectations; other than an MTF and FTM dating, trans people's relationships are always gay according to *someone*; etc. Many issues are very different (particularly the surgery/hormones issues), but it's not a coincidence that we're allies.
I think the one I don't get is the "Q" for Questioning. I think it's great to reach out to these people but this should be a transitory state--it seems like it would take a lot of work to go through your life as questioning.
What does transgenderism even have to do with homosexuality?
If a girl wanted to be a guy, she/he might be attracted to girls. So when the transition hasn't been made yet, they could be considered homosexual.
Strength in numbers i guess
@@rachelhoare7787No, because chemically and surgically alternating somebody's appearance is cosmetic. Nothing more.
I remember that story, though I haven't read the book he wrote. Keep in mind, he was born a heterosexual male and wanted to do typical masculine things, and he essentially grew up as a guinea pig. It's too much of a leap to conclude that he had a gender identity in the womb when there is no reason to think that a fetus has any kind of personal identity at all.
I do want to read that book though, even if case studies are hard to generalize to the main population.
"Gender identity" is how you identify mentally. Your SEX is your physical characteristics as in what's in your pants, chromosomes and hormones. Your GENDER IDENTITY is what you identify mentally, as in you feel like a boy/girl/other/mix. So if your SEX is male and you FEEL male, your GENDER IDENTITY and SEX would match, making you cisgender. If your SEX is female and you FEEL male, then the two would be at odds, making you transgender.
Hope that helps! :D
I’m not gonna lie somtimes I can be a little bit more conservative during other issues but when it comes to the lgbt community I am always liberal
I was drunk kinda curious loll
And so, everyone must feel this way because it's how you feel?
Normalization of the gay and Lesbian identities requires the abolition of all heterosexist standards, but the intelligibility of these identities requires the notion of physiological sex which can be defined only within a reproductive, i.e. heterosexist, context. Normalization, therefore, can come only at the expense of intelligibility.
Daniel A. Kaufman, a professor of philosophy at Missouri State, writes:
If ‘man’ and ‘woman’ are gender identities, rather than sex identities, then each category is sexually heterogeneous, including people with male and female sex organs. This has given rise not only to a group of people who identify as “lesbian,” despite having male genitalia, but to some gender-identity activists accusing homosexuals who refuse to have sex with trans-women or trans-men of being transphobic. Some gay and lesbian activists have shot back that they are homosexuals, not homogenderals, and the argument, predictably, has turned ugly, with accusations and slurs being hurled from one side to the other, all of which has been detrimental to both communities; the sort of conflict in which there are only losers and no winners.
You are the first cis, white, gay man that I can confidently say gets it.
thats a kool way to do it
New quote, it's a lot to put in a t-shirt
The idea that one can feel an identity doesn't make any sense to me. Identity comes from knowledge through socialization. My gender identity isn't a feeling. It is something that I simply accept because its meaning matches my physical body whether I like it or not. Cisgendered, I've noticed, is a term trans activists use to describe those who have not had sex changes or hormone replacement therapy.
Yeah I was the Bi now lesbian later tbt. I still had tried it with a man just to see if it was me, but know, I am very much into women.
the way the ceter in my university deals with the run away acromym isue is by calling itself the LGBT* center, the key is the * wich is a stand in for every other posible letter(and there are a LOT).
is this "the onion"
I'm just waiting for some guy to say, "Nobody calls ME 'Sis'!"
I made a pun. I suspect you may have missed it. Also: "Battybattybats" is correct ... it's "cis."
Perhaps sexuality is the distinguishing factor between "girl likes cars" and "girl likes girls"?
Thanks for this. I can acquaint the LGBTQ+ to the BkBnWhRdYw+ community. Each is individually unique, but some are interracially mixed and identified as such.
Why, when people want to debate the T, are they labelled Transphobic? Stonewall, for instance, has lost huge support by taking this stance.
"Come to understand themselves as a man or a woman".
If gender characteristics are entirely relative the culture they are living in, then anything that steers from the norm is transgender. So if transcending ones own biological-gender culturally specified characteristics are the only things that make someone transgender then its no different than when a biological-girl likes playing with cars. Essentially MANY people would be transgender and the difference would only be how far in the spectrum.
I'll try one more time to get you to explain to me how the identities of the LGBT Alliance do not rest on mutually contradictory premises. How the deuce does sexual orientation even make any sense on the premise that 'gender identity' and not physiological sex is the basis of man- and womanhood? For instance, how does Lesbianism have any meaning if this person is a woman?
ruclips.net/video/argNVR5HVgE/видео.html
It’s #LGBTQIA+ community . Would love to see you in a discussion with #TSMADISON
Nope it's spelled CIS. Cis-Atlantic, Cis-Siberian, etc. Cis is the prefix that's the opposite prefix to Trans that English inherrited thousands of years ago from Latin. Less useful though so it's used less and less people know it. Hence it's Cisgender, Cissexual, etc and anyone taking issue with it can go argue with the ancient romans because the prefix is older than the English language.
1. Accepting gays and Lesbians means accepting sexual orientation which assumes that physiological sex is the basis of man- and womanhood.
2. Accepting transpeople entails the denial that physiological sex is the basis of man- and womanhood.
3. Acceptance of sexual orientation affirms physiological sex, and acceptance of transpeople denies it.
The LGBT Alliance is a logical contradiction. Quod erat demonstrandum.
it is just sex.....why can't anyone "accept" that............I hope everyone and anyone can understand this............just because YOU like it....doesn't mean I do.........I like what I like and if you don't like it....then turn around and pay attention to what you do like...........
i heard about that. at first i thought they were talking about barbara being a transgender and i was extremely upset because i felt like i was deceived all this time but then i learned that it was some other character that i'd never heard of and i didn't care so much anymore.
But John, are you TOP or BOTTOM, or do you flip???
So transgendered people outnumber cisgendered people? Sweet! Party at leojboby's house! :D
Hey, Dr. Corvino, would you please, pretty please, explain to me how sexual orientation makes any sense on the premise that 'gender identity' and NOT physiological sex constitutes man- and womanhood?? I really, really need an answer because without one I just do not know how I can stop being a bigot. I want to affirm and celebrate the identities of gays and Lesbians, but I can't do that without the concept of sexual orientation, of which I can make no sense without assuming that physiological sex is what makes a man a man and a woman a woman. But if I assume that, then the identities of transpeople, which I need to affirm and celebrate as well, make no sense at all because those identities are premised upon the flat denial that physiological sex determines man- and womanhood. So, to affirm transpeople requires the denial of physiological sex, but such a denial makes nonsense out the concept of sexual orientation and thereby renders the identities of gays and Lesbians meaningless. Thus, affirmation of transpeople requires homophobia. But the affirmation of gays and Lesbians requires the affirmation of physiological sex and that's just vile, hateful transphobic bigotry. Will you, Dr. Corvino, please, help me out of this dilemma? Please? I don't wanna be a bigot. I don't wanna be a bigot!
And Cisgendered actually means that your gender identity matches the sex you were born with. In other words--a non-transexual.
That's "Sys". Sysgender,
Suggesting violating God's commands is not compassionate advice to those involved in sexual behaviors outside those that God allows! Whether you choose to believe or not, God is not mocked! What next, pedophilia is okay?
Things are not all that harmonious in the LGBT Alliance: ruclips.net/video/hEoLzKLj_kc/видео.html
Would someone please explain to me how sexual orientation makes any sense on the premise that 'gender identity' and not physiological sex constitutes man- and womanhood?
This conundrum causes me untold confusion and lots of sleepless nights. Because I really do not know how I am ever going to stop being a twisted bigot and finally join rational, civilized society. Once again, I really want to accept, celebrate, and affirm the identities of gays, Lesbians, and bisexuals, but I do not know to do that without the concept of sexual orientation. And I do not know how that concept makes any coherent sense at all without assuming that physiological sex is the basis of man- and womanhood.
But I also want to accept, affirm, and celebrate the identities of transgender people, and I can't do so unless I deny the premise of sexual orientation. Yet, if I do that, the identities of gays, Lesbians, and bisexuals (not to mention the heterosexuals) make no sense to me at all, and that makes me a bigoted homophobic barbarian. So, then I have to affirm that physiological sex is what makes a man a man and a woman a woman, but then I am a vile, irrational, troglodytic transphobic bigot.
It seems that the LGBT Alliance has made it logically impossible to avoid twisted bigotry. What am I missing here?
Help me, please, because I don't wanna be a bigot. I don't wanna be a bigot! Waah!
To be very honest if your struggling to understand all of this it doesn't make you a bigot infact bigot doesn't really mean anything nowadays and is thrown around loosely. It doesn't matter if you understand what sexual orientation or gender identity is about and what it means what matters is that you treat all human beings with the same dignity and respect they deserve and to not put them down and to respect what ever lifestyle, sexual orientation, gender idenity or sexual orientation. I think that your over thinking this and are worried about being a bad person just treat others youd treat. Does that help?
No, it does not help. It just begs the question. To respect gays and Lesbians, I must accept the concept of sexual orientation, which presumes that physiological sex is what makes man- and womanhood, and it is precisely this presumption that transgrender people regards as transphobic. But if I respect trans people, then I must deny that physiological sex is what makes man- and womanhood, but this makes nonsense out of sexual orientation and by extension the identities of gays and Lesbians. Thus, treating trans people with respect entails disrespect for gays and Lesbians, and vice versa. Nothing you wrote resolves this dilemma.
Paul Rhodes sticking your penis in a fecal outlet can only be described as disgusting for civilized species like humans.
That does not answer my question.
What is a "gender identity"? Unfortunately, because your explanation of transgender depends on gender identity, and gender identity isn't explained very well, transgender remains not very well defined.
Bi now, gay later.
he he
For trangender people to have what they want, namely recognition as the gender with which they identify, the basis of man- and womanhood must switch from biological sex to 'gender identity'. Otherwise, transgender men will never be acknowledged as real men and transgender women will never be recognized as true women. But how the deuce, then, would sexual orientation make any sense if the basis for man- and womanhood were 'gender identity' and not biological sex? I would love to hear Dr. Corvino's answer to this question.
If you are for gay rights, then you accept the concept of sexual orientation. But sexual orientation presupposes a genital basis to manhood and womanhood. This directly contradicts the central premise of gender identity. Therefore, the very concept of sexual orientation is transphobic.
If you support trans rights, then you accept the concept of gender identity. That concept locates the basis for manhood and womanhood (and whatever) in the mind, making the body irrelevant to one's identity as a man or a woman (or whatever). This just makes complete nonsense out of the concept of sexual orientation and thereby erases the identities of Gays and Lesbians. Thus, support for the transgender community entails homophobia.
How the deuce is transgender theory compatible with justice for gays and Lesbians? I am still trying to figure this one out. Perhaps, an enlightened person as you profess to be can help me out. On one theory, transgender people inhabit gender rôles different from the gender assigned at birth. But this makes their identity depend upon the very thing that is the source of oppression for gays and Lesbians, namely heteronormativity. So, that won’t do at all.
Another theory, that seems to be vogue right now, states that gender identity has absolutely nothing to do with gender stereotypes, such as manner of dress or behaviour, and can have nothing do with any parts of the body because gender identity obviously often conflicts with the gendered interpretations that society has imposed upon the penis, vagina, XX and XY chromosomes, and so on. But this means that gender identity can correspond to nothing other than a wholly private feeling.
This theory does successfully divorce gender identity from that monstrous archenemy of the gay and Lesbian cause, heteronormativity, but in doing so makes one’s gender identity wholly opaque to all others for gender identity can have no reliable markers. Any possible marker you name will conflict with other claims that transgender or gay and Lesbian activists want to make. If you say that the penis identifies the male, then that contradicts that claim of the transwoman that she was always a woman, even when she had a penis or even if she still has one. And if you say that dress and behaviour constitute gender identity, you are once again bringing back the greatest oppressor of gays and Lesbians, that vile villain heteronormativity.
Therefore, gender identity must be nothing but a wholly private feeling.
But if it is that, then how the deuce can a wholly private feeling be the source of attraction? Attraction must be communicable in a way that a wholly private feeling is not. If gender is completely subjective, then how does it make sense for a straight man to say that he is attracted to women or a Lesbian to say that she is attracted to women? It makes more sense to say that you are attracted to sadness or anger because at least those feelings have, what gender identity apparently lacks, an objective correlative (See, T.S. Eliot is useful for something) that can be communicated.
You can still say, I suppose, that a straight man is attracted to vagina and a gay man is attracted to penis, and that erotic relationships have nothing whatsoever to do with gender identity at all. But would this not reduce all romantic relationships to the fetishizing of body parts? And wouldn’t that just fly in the face of the insistence that gay and Lesbian relationships are not fetishes or perversions but instead loving relationships of mutual respect? True, gender theory, on my account, would reduce ALL romantic relationships, homo- AND heterosexual, to the status of mere fetishes, and that’s a genuine equality, I suppose, but it comes at the price of making everyone, except the sexually abstinent, a fetishizing pervert, and I thought you guys wanted an equality of dignity and respect and not this kind of equality of fetishes and perversions.
What am I missing here?
... No, transgender people are transgender because their neurological "map" of their sexual characteristics (which is what is meant in scientific terms by the word "gender") doesn't match up with their actual physical sex characteristics. This causes a near-constant psychological discomfort known as dysphoria. Some people, including some trans people, misrepresent this as having to do with gender roles or gender as a "feeling" but those people are misinformed.
The claim that the brain has certain sexual characteristics is very much in dispute. www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds
Paul Rhodes Yeah, I've read all that stuff before. Having a neurological map of how you expect your body to look isn't necessarily the same as having obvious anatomical differences between male or female brains, or having areas of the brain that can obviously be linked to different behaviours in men or women, which is what people always dispute. It is the prevailing view of the medical community that transgenderism has its basis in neurological differences, and besides, just as there are studies which claim not to find any significant differences in male and female brains, there are also studies that claim to show evidence of such differences. So until the evidence is settled definitively, it is both my personal view and the view of the medical professionals involved in this area, that the hypothesis of a neurological cause of gender dysphoria (which, no matter what you chose to think of trans people themselves, is a real thing that people objectively experience) is the one that best explains the phenomenon.
Good that you admit that the science is not settled. But there's another problem. Even if it were, it still does not tell us why neurological difference should take precedence over really obvious sexual differences below the neck.
Paul Rhodes Because your brain controls everything in your body (more or less), as I'm sure you know. It's well known that when people lose a limb, many of them feel a "phantom limb", often for the rest of their lives. Equally, there are some people with a condition whereby they feel convinced that a limb they do have shouldn't be there at all, and they will often go to extreme lengths to resolve this dissonance (I believe you can imagine what I mean).
All of these examples, along with more common conditions such as anorexia, are examples of times when the brain's neurological map of how the body should look has failed and is out of sync with how things actually are, causing extreme body dysmorphia, of which gender dysphoria is just one type.
For many of these conditions, allowing the person to resolve this conflict through body modification would be obviously harmful (like letting an anorexic person lose weight) and they can be resolved through therapy to a certain extent, but all the evidence in the case of trans people shows that they will never stop feeling dysphoria unless they transition, that transitioning is an uncomfortable but safe process and that *not* allowing trans people to transition dramatically increases their chances of suicide. Whether or not some people (not necessarily saying you here) feel that trans people's existence messes up their preferred gender theory is irrelevant.
Hey, Dr. Corvino, when are you going to admit that the LGBT Alliance is not a just a union of different interest groups but actually constitutes a blatant, logical contradiction?
Here's Riley J. Dennis basically saying that the very notion of sexual orientation is bigotry. And from the standpoint of 'gender identity', can you say that he is wrong? If 'gender identity' is what constitutes man- and womanhood rather than physiological sex--and transpeople must say this if their identity claims are to make any sense--then romantic discrimination based on anatomy can only be a fetishistic as racial romantic preferences because in both cases you are not basing your preference upon what is essential to an identity but only what is incidental or accidental to it.
ruclips.net/video/2X-PgHSZh6U/видео.html
And here is somebody you know (you were in one of her videos) having to defend her Lesbianism against transactivist claims that her Lesbianism, premised as it is on physiological sex, is transphobic.
ruclips.net/video/5jbF62sx-Ps/видео.html
I could give many more examples of Lesbians calling transactivists homophobic, and transactivists calling Lesbians homophobic. Why is this happening if the doctrine of 'gender identiy' and sexual orientation are easily reconciled? I would really like to know.
Get a life, bro.
Because God said not to engage in homosexuality. Enough said!
@Rejector God bless!