A totally normal if not almost universal experience for human beings
The discussion continues.
Same. I feel like I’m being labelled here — as a gay man — as being somewhat problematic or “immoral” for being exclusively attracted to other men. I feel like I deal with enough of that kind of oppressive & invalidating rhetoric already, & I feel somewhat attacked by it tbh
Do you think it’s wrong for someone, who is sexually orientated to include men, not to date a trans man because he has a vagina?
I’ll just format the rest like play dialogue for ease of reading.
Harrop: I think choosing to be or not to be intimate with a man with a particular genital configuration or indeed any type of physical characteristic is a matter of personal choice, made by an individual for their own personal reasons, & a private matter for the individuals concerned.
McKinnon: That’s not quite an answer. Do you think it’s wrong or transphobic?
Harrop: It really depends on the basis for reaching one’s conclusion. Finding someone physically unattractive & thus excluding them as a potential sexual partner is not the same as invalidating & delegitimising their gender identity.
McKinnon: You’re still not quite answering my question. If someone is sexually orientated in a way that includes men, is it transphobic for them not to date a trans man with a vagina? This isn’t a question about consent.
Harrop: No I don’t think it is – it’s a matter of personal preference. Having preferences for certain physical attributes and characteristics, as a component of one’s sexuality, is a totally normal if not almost universal experience for human beings.
McKinnon: Fine. I think it is transphobic.
You can disagree with me, but the vitriol is not acceptable. I think it’s transphobic. I think it’s transphobic because genital preferences produce this outcome. This I think genital preferences are transphobic. Disagree. Fine. But at least understand my position.
Harrop: I think you’re entitled to your opinion Rachel, for sure. But I do think it lacks substance, and that it ignores multiple aspects of the reality of human sexuality. I figure we’ll just have to respectfully agree to disagree.
It seems to have ended there for now.
What’s fascinating about this is how Harrop can see it when it applies to him but it hasn’t – so far – caused him to budge a centimeter from his position that women who see it are hateful TERFs who need to be bullied and harroped out of public life.
I read through several times.
This discussion is deranged.
WTF is a “man with a vagina”? Is that like a pig with wings?
So does McKinnon spend much time having sex with women with dicks?
I know it’s been pointed out in previous posts, but the similarities to incel whining are so striking.
“Oh sure, you say you’re not a lesbian, but I’m a man and you won’t fuck me! Explain that!”
“You say you want to date nice guys but I’m a nice guy and you won’t date me.”
“I don’t agree with you that you’re a nice guy.”
“I AM TOO NICE AND YOU’D BETTER DATE ME OR ELSE!”
Billions of people had a genital preference before they’d even heard of transgender people, so it clearly doesn’t stem from a fear of them.
Try again, champion cyclist.
Amazing how polite Mister Mckinnon and Mister Harrop are being to each other — all that agreeing to disagree with no telling each other to die in a grease fire and no threats to get the other fired. Funny how men show such respect to men. Can you imagine EITHER of these guys treating a real woman with that level of respect? Me neither.
I’m not about to use the term genital preference.
My love for men has been obvious to me since I was 3 or 4, and it’s no preference. I would also challenge the notion that it’s focused on genitals. But it’s definitely focused on men.
Those humans possessing penis (peni?) coincidentally share many characteristics that turn me to jelly. And no women, even those I have kissed, cuddled and adored, have ever kept me awake wondering what they’re thinking or if they noticed that thing I did.
Preference, ha!
Wow look at McKinnon, “philosopher”, unable to follow a question more nuanced than the desired yes or no. So typical of that tribe.
Also,
What vitriol did this Harrop ever offer to trans people?
Also, nope, this outcome is produced by the erroneous claim that sexuality is concerned with people’s self-professed identity. A blatantly false claim; here in reality land, sexuality is concerned with people’s biological sex.
Oh and look at that flounce at the end: “But at least understand my position.” We do understand it. We’ve absorbed it and found “it lacks substance, and that it ignores multiple aspects of the reality of human sexuality.”
Which is a nice way of saying that trans theory has been examined and discovered to be bonkers.
#1 mikeb
Answer: it’s a woman claiming to be a man.