Stop twisting - they were born women. Being unlucky enough to suffer with infertility does not make them less of a woman. They are a completely different category to transwomen.

:clap1:

And if you haven’t got the basic respect to do that, it says something more about you than it does any type of trans person. It’s just ignorance.

I'm not twisting.

I'm pointing out why not just say born women to begin with since the ability to bear children is completely irrelevant.

It’s equally ignorant to try to label people who would not date a trans. No-one is obligated to date a transgender - choice is not just limited to this one small group.

You can’t help who you fall in love with - when Amanda Barrie got married, do you think she figured she’d be married again to a woman at the age of 79?

I'd just like to point out that saying "trans women are women" is not the same as saying "trans women are the SAME as non trans women"

It gets said all the time as a way to debunk the argument that trans women are women but I don't view it like that at all.

Trans/cis/black/white/gay/straight/bi... all labels that describe something about a person that isnt related to choice and all highlighting differences in those people, but all can still be considered 'women' in my view. And all can be referred to as either 'women' or "label prefix + women" depending on the conversation if a differentiation is needed in order to discuss that difference. I know the 'trans' one is particularly contentious and this is all a fairly new way of thinking and if you disagree with that then I understand that, but the misinterpretation that saying 'trans women' somehow takes something away from non trans women really bothers me because its not what's meant by it at all.
We do get very hung up on words and labels, I'd suggest that for a trans person those words and labels aren't all that useful since they tend to fall on the perimeter of them, and creating a seperate grouping for them isn't all that helpful since the reason they begin a transition is because of their feeling of being the opposite gender, a trans man doesn't feel like a trans man, he becomes a trans man because he feels like a man. Most of this talk about semantics is just about trying to find a way of including a group of people into society and that should be the priority of these words, not trying to use them as a way of excluding. Or using them to misconstrue what is actually being meant.


I do feel like this is probably off topic though [emoji23] but I wanted to clarify that. It's fascinating seeing all the different views on this, I probably would have predicted the complete opposite for the poll result tbh. I do think the whole argument that happened earlier was just because of people wanting to understand each others views, I know I would have had those same questions but only out of interest and curiosity, nothing malicious. Anyway I know for myself that I consider myself to be gay, I'm attracted to men, but I think our words simplify sexuality to a greater degree than what it actually is. And could I be attracted to somebody that doesn't fall within the norm for that grouping that I'm in, sure, I know I've seen very attractive trans men that I haven't realised were trans men, so at the point of finding out they are trans I think I would just explore it and those feelings and see what happens. Might turn out for whatever reason that I'm not able to continue with it but I wouldn't shut down the idea of it. Honestly what's the worst that will happen? At best it could be a great relationship that I never would have expected would happen.
I don't actually think it comes down solely to sexual preference or sexuality anyway, so much as it comes down to whether or not you view the trans person as being the gender they intend to be. And if you don't then I think it would make sense why you wouldn't be able to continue with it. And if you do, then it's not something that has any bearing on your sexuality.
Issues of gender (and sexuality) are things that are so confusing and outside the realms of us being able to fully understand them though... which is why I think these trans convos always kind of explode [emoji23]

I would have too. Especially on here, where it is predominately younger members. Since its apparently only us old dinosaurs who believe male and female are real distinct categories of people :laugh:

At a guess I'd suggest that that might explain why the result for yes is higher than in the study I posted yesterday? I don't know though, could also just be our small sample size [emoji23] I don't think age necessarily has to be a big factor in it. I think from the comments there are a range of views between younger and older members.
I do consider male and female to be different categories btw... I just think it's all more complicated than that when discussing trans, but we could go round and round [emoji23]

If that’s right for Amanda that’s fine. It wouldn’t be right for me and it wouldn’t be right for many others. And no one has the right to judge anyone for not feeling the same way as them on this. People on here have tried today though.

:clap1:

That was one hell of a discussion though :laugh:

Romantically it could be great and can work. But as someone said (I can't remember who, it's like 15 pages lol), physically I won't find it attractive (that is the lower part...). I believe it would be less of an issue in the case of being attracted to women, with transwomen not facing the same difficulty down there.
It feels like it's a bit superficial addressing this "area", but romantic and sexual attraction go hand in hand...

sure

:clap1: Yes of course they are