Some brilliant answers I will directly respond to in a few days. I would like to add, their first message to me, was simply:
'DTF?'
This wasn't the question you asked to start with. Your question was:
Now I am aware there are many stages/levels of transition. Is it fair, or even right, to ask someone how far they have transitioned? I am aware some people never "complete" a full transition. How problematic is "I only want to date someone who has fully transitioned".
Your original question made no mention of a hookup app or being propositioned for sex by a trans woman. Rather, your question was about
dating, and my answer was provided with that specific context of
dating in mind. Your followup post above, particularly this part:
So I am not the one turning the conversation overtly sexual. It started there.
feels like you're pulling a bait and switch, and I would advise you to be mindful of the impulse to defensiveness as a man when asking questions like this. Why are you coming into a thread to ask questions and receive the perspective of trans people, and then turning around and trying to score points like its a debate?
I am not attracted to cis men. I don't think many would consider me homophobic for this?
This is a category error. On the one hand we have a delineation according to established sexual identities: I am attracted to women, I am not attracted to men. This is very different from establishing a delineation
within that established sexual identity, particularly when that delineation happens to coincide with a routine form of oppression against the group being delineated against. "I am attracted to women, except when they have penises," singles out trans women in a way that places us distinct, or even apart from every other group of women. The word for this is "degendering," and it is a central part of transmisogyny, something which we experience on a daily basis. NinjaCow's comparison to asking a lesbian couple "who is the man and who is the woman," is apropos. The question reasserts a heteronormative assumption: that all relationships (even queer ones) necessarily resort to heterosexual dynamics. In the same way that this question is lesbophobic in that it is a direct rebuke of the validity of sapphic relations - an attempt to "straighten" queerness, the statement "I am attracted to women, except when they have penises" is transmisogynistic in that it is simultaneously a tacit affirmation of our non-maleness AND a denial of our femaleness. We are not properly women, but something other. An "except".
Firstly, thank you for taking the time to answer.
and you are making assumptions about how I communicate and date. For example have you heard of the dating app Feeld? Within it you literally list sexual wants and needs. Its part of the very first step. We don't need to go on a few coffee dates before its "proper" to ask if the person likes X,Y or Z. That's why you've matched. Why go on several dates before realising that sexually, you were never compatible?
Again, these were not things you asked in your original question. Your question was: "is it appropriate to ask a trans woman you've matched with on a dating app how far they've transitioned?" And the answer to that was, no, it's not appropriate. As to this specific app, I don't think it really changes the question? "trans" is not a sexual want or need, or at least it had better not be, or else I would think there are much larger problems with this app. Likewise, it is, again, one thing to clarify what sort sexual acts you like, or don't like in the bedroom, and quite another to ask invasive, dehumanizing questions about a person's (
especially a woman's) body. Like I think we can all understand it would be creepy and misogynistic if a man asked a woman what her BMI was, whether she's had breast augmentation, or what her BWH measurements were as part of a pre-sex vetting process, so why would you feel comfortable putting this question in a separate category? As I said before, if you aren't interested in trans women, don't match with them! When they ask if you're DTF, say "no, I'm not." Speaking for myself (and again, I'm a lesbian), if a woman asked me a question like that, I would find it pretty weird, it would give me "the ick." I would think, "we haven't even gotten to the bedroom yet and she's already being this weird about my transness, what's she going to be like
once we get to the bedroom?" I would much rather commit my energies to someone who is excited about being with me, not someone whose excitement is conditional pending further review.
I don't agree there is a double standard at all,
To call attention to this again: you've come in here to get a trans perspective on something you were thinking about, and I gave you my perspective on it as a trans woman. So what are you arguing with me about? Are you trying to get me to give you permission to ask this question to the trans woman you matched with? If you need clarification, or if you have follow-up questions, then ask them. But this is not a debate, it's not a discussion. There's nothing you need to "convince" me of here. That's not the purpose of this thread.
In a very crude manner, I consider sexual compatibility one of the main pillars of a healthy relationship and so communication on it is important early. If there are significant hurdles to the basics, I would hope a partner discloses these without prejudice.
I would certainly agree that sexual compatibility is very important, but there's a difference between sexual compatibility (what kind of acts you do or don't like, whether you're into kink, how frequently you want to have sex, the use of protection, etc.) and asking these sorts of objectifying, deeply personal questions about a person's body or medical history.
To actually give more context to the actual scenario, the trans woman that I matched with, immediately asked me "DTF?". And I had to pause and consider.. that's where I realised I needed to know, but realised I didn't know how to politely ask.
From my perspective, if you have to pause to consider like that, if your downness is conditional on the absence of a penis for a woman you otherwise are attracted to, then I would not consider you down to fudge. I think bringing that sort of energy into the bedroom would not make for a very fun time for either of you.
I certainly wouldn't have lead with it unprovoked, but would have done eventually on a first date if it wasn't proactively offered.
Sex/dating/hookups are very scary for a trans woman: the potential for humiliation or violence are extremely high for us,
especially when it comes to cis men. I think what you'll find is that most trans women will disclose that information to a potential sexual partner upfront, purely in the interest of keeping themselves safe. Where I bristle is at a feeling of entitlement to know or be told this information. It is of a kind with a lot of the ways cis men tend to view, talk about, and act entitled to women's bodies broadly, but especially transfeminine bodies.
This immediately reminded me of a scene in one of my favourite movies that was a good example of what you are describing... the scene in
Trainspotting where Begby hooks up with a trans woman, which is exactly the kind of portrayal of trans women as predatorily alluring.
I mention it not so much because of that scene, which is violent and disturbing (like much of the film), but because of Ewan McGregor's speech immediately prior, about sexuality, which I always found profound, and intriguing, albeit blunt. I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on this?
NSFW
TL;DR - He says "No guys and no girls, just wankers... sounds great to me."
EDIT: My question for the group I think stems mainly from the discussion about the process of transitioning and the problematic nature of the question about "fully transitioned". The speech leans into the notion of gender fluidity. Is that in line with, or contrary to trans identity? Or something else I have not considered? I guess another way of asking... Is trans identity rigid in terms of gender identity?
Trans means simply that one's gender identity differs from that which they were assigned at birth. If that describes you, then you are trans. This would apply as much to a transsexual like myself who previously identified as he/him, now identifies as she/her, and is using medical processes to change her sex characteristics; as it does for a nonbinary person who uses they/them pronouns and doesn't take HRT; as it would for someone who initially identified as a she/her trans woman, but over the course of their transition realized their identity aligns better with that of a they/she nonbinary transfemme and ceases HRT, satisfied with the changes that have already occurred but wishing no further changes; as it would for a genderfluid person whose pronouns and presentation change from day to day, week to week, or month to month.
"Fully transitioned" isn't problematic because there isn't
ever an endpoint to transition. Indeed, many trans people
do consider their transition more or less complete upon vagino/phalloplasty. Rather, the issue is that the phrase sort of assumes that transition constitutes some grand, monolithic cursus honorum which every trans person subscribes to and pursues. And again, while the presumed cursus does apply to many trans people, it does not apply to everyone. Trans people aren't a monolith, we don't all want the same thing. Our goals, our expectations, our identities, even what is logistically possible for us, differ, and can even change or be changed as the process begins. When I started, I didn't know if I wanted to go on HRT. I didn't know if I wanted bottom surgery. I didn't even know what name I wanted to have. Now I do.
EDIT 2: Going back again... upon reflection, McGregor's speech seems to maybe be more about attraction and sexuality/sexual preference rather than gender per-se, especially given the encounter Begby has immediately after. So now I have to ask, as a threshold matter, whether what Renton (McGregor's character) is discussing is relevant here? Again, I would like to hear any thoughts, even if it is just to tell me I am off base.
Cis men who talk like this character weird me out, tbh. I think particularly alarming about that scene is that the single gender he imagines will be a male-coded word for someone who masturbates. Patriarchy is a hierarchical system whereby violence is used to dominate women in order to extract their sexual, reproductive, domestic, etc. labor to the benefit of men. Consequently gender is constructed by society in a way to reify and benefit that hierarchical extraction process (i.e. a lot of categories, qualities, and markers having to do with submission, subservience, deference, childrearing, homemaking, etc are ascribed to Womanhood, while strength, leadership, domination, violence, aggression, etc. are ascribed to Manhood). When we say we want to abolish patriarchy, what is meant is the deconstruction of the male and female binary as-such, and a reconstitution of gender which does not facilitate hierarchical domination. In MacGregor's fantasy, the current arrangement of gender constituted single-mindedly around male sexual pleasure is eventually to give way to...an arrangement of gender constituted single-mindedly around male sexual pleasure. Which is frequently what it ends up sounding like when cis men talk about gender abolition. It feels like they don't really understand the nature of the system they are claiming to want to abolish
"]https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif[/IMG]
![https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif[/IMG]](https://forums.civfanatics.com/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif[/IMG]){kind=link}