Homophobia and hypocrisy on hungangels

[MacShreach]

Don't worry about it.

Ah! Postmodernism! Cool.

[tstv_lover]

Great thread and excellent OP.

Perhaps the homophobia highlights instances of guys seeking to deal with demons/fears about their own personal sexual preference when lashing out at others. A case of "methinks he doth protest too much"?

As for guys who praise transsexuals who appear more feminine, I guess that's simply appreciation of eye candy without understanding the challenges and complexities facing each transsexual girl on a daily basis.

One aspect that I always find strange is that guys encourage transsexual girls in their femininity but a section of guys lose interest in transsexuals when they become post-op. If we want to encourage tgirls to fully explore their femininity then (for many) this will naturally lead to becoming post-op. Perhaps the reaction to a girl becoming post-op says more about the guy than about the girls.

The journey is different for everyone. My current transsexual girlfriend has opted to stay pre-op, which is her choice.

Anyway, thanks for raising these points.

[MacShreach]

On my experience in the LGB & T Community it exist the stigma between it. We can mention the TRANSPHOBIA as a the discrimination and intolerance towards a Trangender individual, I said it before, personally I lived and feel it before, and it more visible in the gay community. Don't get me wrong my bests friends are gays but... We Transgender for the most part take a role in LGBT community as a entertainers and that is way of we be part and blend I might be wrong but like I said in my personal experience.
And as SissyRachel stated " Notably, there is an unnecessary level of antagonism between the men who are attracted to transwomen and men who are attracted to other men".



Hope that this board entice other members to bring up their point of view with intelligence and sense.

*** Hugs ** Cinthya...

This is probably the most interesting post in this thread, IMO, well said, Cinthya. The fact is as is often observed, gay men are often happy to have the support of transgender people when they want to make up the numbers for political reasons, but at other times they don't want to know.

What has to be understood is that gay men, whether they are "out" or the type of gay man who chases transgender women in the hope that he can persuade one to penetrate him, simply do not regard transsexual women as women; they see them as men in drag.

Then, homosexual activists across the world have been pursuing a policy of "gay, straight or lying," and some have been involved in deliberately "outing" men against their wills (and frequently with catastrohic consequences.) To understand this you need to understand that what is sometimes called the "egalitarian" gay movement is a relatively recent phenomenon. Before the mid-20th century there was no such formalised group. However for the last forty years these men have worked hard to promote the view that homosexuality is about attraction to the physical presentation of the same gender. Hence the "clone" gay man. For these men, both the receiver of sex and the giver are equally homosexual. They have definitely done a great deal to further the status of gay men, and many see transgender women as gay men who are not playing by the new rules. There is a certain narrow-mindedness of attitude amongst these men (Peter Tatchell is a good example) that makes them intolerant of people who do not conform to what they see as the modern ideal of the gay man. Thus they resent transgender women, especially transsexual women, and they resent the men who are attracted to them, as they feel that these men are actually attracted to other men and should come out and be openly gay.

The reason for this is interesting in this context, and that is that central to the issue of male homosexuality is the penetration of a man by a penis. So the gay men we are talking about, look at a relationship between a transgender woman and a man, and say, (since they do not believe that a transgender woman is a woman) that this is a relation between two men, so both are gay and should admit this.

This argument, however, ignores the fact that while the egalitarian flavour of gay has been around for only a few years, anal sex has been around for as long as people have. However, until recently, in all the cultures I have researched this in, in relations involving anal penetration between two people with penises, one took the female role and the other the male. This was the case amongst the "mollies" of 18th-century London and their counterparts all over Europe; and it is in this relationship that the travestis of Latin culture have their roots; one partner is female (ie penetrated) and the other is male (the penetrator.) Much more importantly, however, is that in these cultures, and the travesti culture demonstrates this clearly, only the partner who receives the penis is seen as homosexual.

This view is sometimes claimed, by egalitarian gay men, to be "old-fashioned," but in fact it is not, it is simply another phenomenon. The wilful attempt by some modern gay thinkers to belittle transgenderism comes from their belief that it undermines the work they have done to make it all right to be "gay and masculine" and that "being gay does not make you less of a man." Well, that is true within their model, but the rigidity of their attitude leaves no room for transgender women.

This attitude affects transsexual women, who are not really within the "transgender" group in any case, especially once they achieve SRS. Transsexual women "overwhelmingly believe themselves to be women," therefore should be expected to behave like women, dress like women and have sex like women; unfortunately many gay men conflate this group with homosexual transvestite men (whom, I accept, may be feeling their way forward and be yet to discover that they are in fact transsexual) who enjoy sex with men.

This is partly because of what they see as the common factor; the penetration of a person with a penis by another penis; and under the egalitarian gay model, there is a case here.

However, when we think about transsexual women, we have to ask, "When did this person, who was born with boy bits, become a woman?" Well, it is certainly clear to me that a person who believes herself to be a woman and has a vagina, is a woman, irrespective of how she was born. And it is equally clear that a relationship between a man and such a woman is heterosexual.

So the question becomes, "At what point does the transsexual woman become a woman?" To me, to suggest that women are created on the operating table is ridiculous and flies in the face of everything I ever heard from transsexual women themselves. They were women long before their surgeries, indeed most say they always were; surgery was, for them, a matter of making their bodies conform to what they actually were.

Therefore it is quite possible for a heterosexual relationship to exist between a pre-operative transsexual woman and a man. But hang on--the pre-op transwoman still has a penis-- how can two people with penises be in bed together and be heterosexual? Well, if one is actually a woman, then this will be determined by the nature of the relationship; if the woman behaves as a woman, ie, is receiving in sex, and the man gives, then this is as close an approximation to heterosexual sex as we can manage under the circumstances, and while the man may not be quite as straight as a pulpit-basher, he's not necessarily homosexual. He's just ignoring a physical attribute of his lover that he's not interested in anyway.

What, however, if the centre of the man's attraction is not the woman's breasts, her face, her smile, her eyes, her feminine beauty, but her penis? Well, in this case, the man is either bisexual or homosexual because his attraction to the woman is a homosexual one--it's not her woman bits he wants, it's her boy bits. Or maybe both. It does not matter; men who obsess over penises are indulging in homosexual desire.

So, is there something wrong with being a man obsessed with penises? No. Is there something wrong with being gay? No; gay men should be proud of what they are. So is there something wrong with a man being in bed with a pre-operative transsexual woman and interested only in using her male equipment to penetrate him? No, there's not; it's just homosexual sex, and there's nothing wrong with that.

What, however, if the woman would far rather be penetrated, does not like people touching her boy bits, doesn't want even to be reminded that they are there? What if, for the woman, sex is a powerful and necessary reaffirmation of her womanhood, in which she is willingly taken by a strong masculine man? Well, that is fine; that is called heterosexual love.

What if the man, however, uses either his male dominance or his financial power to persuade the woman to behave in bed as she would were she still a man, to penetrate him with her penis? Well, this is a homosexual relationship, and if the man is causing the woman to behave in this way in disregard of her desires, of her need to be affirmed as a woman, then, effectively, it is an abusive homosexual relationship. Note: even though the man is sexually submissive in this case, he is still the dominant partner, since it is his will that the woman is obeying.

(And if any of you ever wonder why it is that so many transsexual women decry "chasers" this is the reason-- they are fed up with men trying to coerce them to behave like men in bed, instead of the women they actually are.)

There are men who are so utterly homophobic that they will never accept a simple truth; a man obsessing about an erect penis is indulging in a homosexual act, and if being penetrated by said erect penis is his preferred method of sexual gratification, he's homosexual. Some of these specimens infest this site.

It is with his denial of this that many "out" homosexual men, who recognise that his behaviour is at once homosexual and deeply homophobic, have grievance. They rightly say, "This man is gay; he's obsessed with penises, yet he will not admit what he is and accept it like a man."

Finally, what about the women? How does a woman feel when a man does not accept her for what she is, a beautiful, desirable woman, but instead, as soon as he knows she has boy bits, is on his knees yelling "Make me your bitch!" How does a woman feel when she realises that in order to satisfy men-- her clients, perhaps, either directly or via photography-- she will have to get her penis hard and that this will mean coming off her hormones? How does a woman feel, when the men who previously slobbered over images of her, when she finally gets what she has always dreamed of, her SRS, tell of how broken-hearted they are that she "has had the chop" and express in the most vile and pejorative terms which I see no need to repeat here, their contempt for her post-operative state?

I think even the cock-hounds know how much they hurt the women, and it is their deep-seated guilt that causes their shrill bitterness whenever their status is noted.

I do not pretend to be a saint, but one thing I do know; I love women. I always have. I don't really care how a woman got to be a woman, if she has the womanly things that ring my bell. Maybe I'm shallow for exulting female beauty; but I am a trained artist, a photographer; visual stimulus is very important to me. It's just the way it is. I was first attracted to transsexual women by a beautiful post-operative woman, and that remains my main interest. I see beautiful pre-operative women in the same way as I see a flower about to open, on the threshhold of blossom. And I was brought up in an old-fashioned way, to love and protect women.

So when I see men who are homosexual but too spineless to admit it (as if there was something wrong with it) and who abuse transsexual women to gratify their homosexual lust, I speak up.

If that appears to gay men as gay-bashing, I'm sorry. It's not, and I have no beef with you guys. It's cock-hound bashing. It's a totally different thing. Sort of like pest control.

[Tika]

It's critically important to remember the psychological aspect of being transgendered with respect to homophobia.

A transgender woman does not like being called a man, ever. It's offensive and denies who she is, her essence, her identity. Thus, there's often a reactionary stance taken to distance themselves from gay men. "I'm not like them", she says. "They're faggots. I'm a *real* woman!"

It's insecurity and self-loathing, defense of one's self and one's identity all coming out in hate aimed at others. Why do you think the first attack transwomen make on other transwomen is to call them "he/him" or attack their appearance? Denial of identity. "Oh you're just a brick/blocker". That person that I don't like isn't like me, they're a man, man!

Why do you think there are so many transwomen addicted to plastic surgery and silicone injections? They can't escape their bodies. They've gotten so obsessed with altering themselves to remove any trace of "manhood" that they go overboard. It's the same thing as the crossdresser with thousands of outfits, wigs, boots/shoes in their collection - just another way of trying to "prove" their femininity, temporarily versus permanently.

It happens with pretty much everyone. Transwomen look down on others - surgery chasers look down on others who don't have plastic surgery, we look down on crossdressers because they're just playing around with their "female life" and we live it 24/7. It's the nature of people in general to distinguish between self/other and sadly, use negative terms and thinking to make that distinction.

For real fun, try factoring in that there's a growing body of transwomen that are lesbian-identified. We're not in any way interested in men. We're attracted to women, whether GG or TG. That's a whole other can of worms, and I'd say that gets just as much if not more hate from the transgender and LGB community.

[MacShreach]

For real fun, try factoring in that there's a growing body of transwomen that are lesbian-identified. We're not in any way interested in men. We're attracted to women, whether GG or TG. That's a whole other can of worms, and I'd say that gets just as much if not more hate from the transgender and LGB community.

That's true-- there's no strict correlation between transsexualism and orientation and from the very sketchy info I've seen, transwomen seem to show a similar orientation mix to natal women, in terms of percentage-- so as the total number of transwomen grows, the number who are lesbian must also grow.

There was certainly one girl who used to post here-- I can't remember her name--who strongly identified as a transsexual lesbian. She certainly wasn't ostracised for that here, anyway.

Interestingly, in the UK, where the law has been fucked up as only we can, married couples now have to divorce before a transsexual partner's gender can be legally changed, which is going to haul us back, yet again, in front of the European Court of Human Rights-- why? because the religious nuts see it as an acceptance of homosexual marriage, since both partners would legally be the same gender...But they're the same people even if they stay married and don't bother with the legal gender change....And now people are being forced to abandon a fundamental right-- to remain married without interference from the state-- in order to access another-- to have the correct legal gender.....Bizarre. Oh well.

[TS JENNA]

teehee

[GinX]

A thorough sorting of the posts here will reveal a long discussion that attempts to ascertain and define what a homosexual is and what a homosexual is not. The current trend in thinking here appears to be that if you are a man and permit yourself to either be anally penetrated by or enjoy being anally penetrated a pre-operative transsexual than you are most definitely a homosexual.

This trend in thinking stems from age old social morays that automatically equate male anal penetration to homosexuality. If a man is willing to receive a penis into his anus, he must therefore be gay. This notion, though seen across many cultures, fails to take into account that human sexuality is a bit more complex than that and ignores the simple truth that a sexual act is neither inherently heterosexual or homosexual...to give it any such label depends solely on those involved and their perception and intent.

What does that mean? Does this mean a man can actually enjoy anal penetration and not be considered gay? Absolutely, especially when you consider his perception and intent. I'll be happy use myself as an example.

I have discovered that being anally penetrated is pleasurable to me. As such, I would be happy to be anally penetrated by a pre-op transsexual if she wanted to perform that act. In the eyes of many, my willingness to do so qualifies me as gay or-since I happily enjoy sex with genetic women as well-at the very least, bisexual. What these many fail to add into their equation, however, is the perception of those involved, to wit, she does not see herself as a man having sex with another man nor do I see myself as being penetrated by a another man. Another further consideration is the intent of the parties involved. If my intent was solely to engage in anal sex for the purpose of feeling like I was having sex with a man, then I would agree that this was merely latent homosexuality at work, but since I view anal sex as only a part of the entire sexual experience with her and since I possess no desire or intent to be sexually intimate with another male then it's plain to see there is "homosexual sex" happening because homosexual sex can only take place between two people who identify one another as being of the same gender.

I have the opinion that the reason this thinking has become so prevalent is that it is predicated by a fear that many transsexual admirers possess...namely, the fear of being associated with or being regarded as gay. It is worth noting that across the spectrum of the general population, pre-operative transsexuals are generally not regarded as women because they inherently possess male anatomy. While we here at HA disagree, the general population holds what we here find to be a rather distasteful opinion: that if you are a man and have sex with someone who claims to be female, but possesses male genitalia as well as other male physical traits, you are, in fact, having sex with another man...and that is homosexuality. I have no exact statistics to provide, but I can honestly say that for several years that has been the perception I have encountered and I am certain that many other people on this board can attest to the same.

Because of this perception, I believe there is a fear among transsexual admirers that will be labeled as gay even in the face of the fact they have never "bottomed" but only "topped". They realize the general population simply won't care. Thus, to avoid such an association, they make the attempt to move the spotlight from themselves onto those men who will engage in being anally penetrated by transsexuals and retreat to the claim that those are the REAL homosexuals, almost as if to say "I'm not the gay one, HE is."

I do not know if this issue will ever be solved. I don't even know if anyone will care what I have to say or if this will fall on dead ears. I can say, however, that until we as a people start thinking outside of the pre-conceived notions that we've been fed all our lives, debates like this one will rage through all time.[/i]

[Helvis2012]

Don't worry about it.

Ah! Postmodernism! Cool.

Yes, yes. Deconstructing the flimsy makes me laugh....sometimes.

[DL_NL]

Interesting topic. Really weeds out the intelligent from the less so.

[Justawannabe]

Great topic, great initial post.

I found GinX and MacShreach to have very interesting posts, even though there are some contradictions at first read.

Tika and Sissyrachael both posted about insulting the women on the board. One thing to keep in mind about insults, it often says nothing about the person throwing the insult, but much about what they think will hurt the other person.

At the risk of being on of the unintelligent I'll leave it at that.