There’s this rising narrative going around that if you ask specifically for a CIS partner, you’re a transphobe. That could be true for some people but it’s not fundamentally related to bigotry. Moreover, this narrative, the “if you only want a CIS mate then that is prejudice” is trampling on one of the most important rights a person can have: the right to choose who they want to get intimate with.
First of all, transmen are in fact men and transwomen are in fact women. Let’s get that out of the way. This isn’t a foot in the door for “trans this really isn’t that” narratives. What this is about it is the freedom to choose who you want to be intimate with. That right is sancrosanct, it is absolutely inviolable.
And yes, there’s plenty of issues that make transgender dating a special issue. If someone reveals their TG status they can be open to hate crimes and even deadly violence. However all marginalized groups are special in their own way. As a black man I don’t think it’s racist if a woman says she doesn’t want to date a black man. I face oppression, too. My class is special in its own way. One group isn’t more special than the other. None of us have the right to force ourselves upon those who don’t want to be intimate with us, even by omitting who we really are.
Really, if you have to deceive or hide who you are in order to date someone, do you really want to date them? I wouldn’t. That’s not fair to you and you’re denying them their right to choose who they want. What do you think will happen when the person wants a CIS mate and they discover the truth? They’re going to get pissed and dump you. Now you have to shame them into staying with you: “If you loved me for real this wouldn’t bother you”… that’s not going to convince anyone. They’re either going to leave, or they’ll resent you forever. That’s just how it is. You can be mad at that but that’s about as effective as protesting the rising of the sun. There’s just no way to win once you’ve gone down that road.
“I want a CIS mate” is not the same as “trans women are not women” - one is a preference, the other is harmful prejudice. On the flip side CIS people who do date trans people shouldn’t be shamed for their choices either. A man should be free to date a trans woman and not catch flak about it. Trans people should be able to be openly trans and not face hate speech or threats to their well-being. This, without any exception whatsoever.
The fundamental fact is when you shame or worse abrogate people’s right to choose who they want to get intimate with, it’s not going to end well for you. All you’re going to get is people who resent being coerced or bullied to date people they don’t want to. And that’s not something the country, or the world, will ever put up with. Except that right now, most people don’t imagine they can be labeled a transphobe just for wanting a CIS mate. And unpopular opinion: that should be nipped in the bud.
No one actually does this.
Do you think trans woman WANT to date someone who isnt into them? No. Stop being cringe.
You say this but it’s been a problem for myself and friends dating. After talking for a while I find out somehow and then they’re all like “this isn’t how I wanted you to find out!” Uh, how about being honest and upfront and letting me give informed consent?
99% of all trans women will absolutely tell you up front that they are trans bc they aren’t trying to get unalived by someone in a trans panic. Which btw is still a legal defense in over half the states of this country
You should, of course, have your preferences, and your deal-breakers, and whatever else. So if you find someone you are interested in is trans, and that’s a deal-breaker for you, that’s fine.
But there is a difference between that and putting in your bio “No Trans People.” Is being trans your only deal-breaker? What makes that a deal-breaker worth calling out, but not others? Before you put “No Trans” in your profile, I would ask you to consider that, if you are an athletic person and want an athletic person, would “No fat women” be something you would feel comfortable putting in your bio (even if that was a deal-breaker for you)? What would you think of someone who puts “No black people” in their bio?
If they have any sense, they will let you know either in their profile, in conversation before-hand, or during the first date or so (before things get intimate), and you can politely end things, just like if you found out they were Scientologists or several levels up in an MLM (or both). Hell, it may take until a third date, like finding out they don’t just like, but can relate to Olivia Rodrigo’s music. (In fairness, those three were objectively bad, but I don’t know any of your non-trans related preferences, so I had to go with some things most people should consider deal-breakers).
The point is, people look for and look out for a lot of things, but I only ever hear people complain about it being rude to put “No trans.” It kind of makes it clear that the person saying it has a particular issue beyond just dating preferences.
Every single thing you’ve said demands specific rebuttal. But I think it would be exhausting and you’re not worth it.
Nearly everything you compare is actually a visible trait, where being trans isn’t. Nobody’s going to be tricked into dating anybody they don’t want when all the attributes are visible up-front. I can SEE if somebody is athletic. I can SEE if somebody is black. I can SEE if somebody is obese.
Quit pretending there’s something wrong with having preferences. You’re delusional and you have no right to pretend that anybody owes anybody anything except honesty up-front in a dating context.
You actually think somebody who is not interested in a trans person OWES a trans person a date “just in case”. Frankly, get your head out of your ass.
Not sure if you stopped reading halfway through, but I mentioned 2 clearly visible things and 3 not visible things, specifically because I recognize it’s not immediately obvious from pictures.
Or maybe you started reading on the second paragraph, because I clearly said it’s fine having preferences (including trans or not). I also never said anything about “owing” a trans person a date, just in case or otherwise. There’s no problem with it being a deal breaker. You’re reading things I didn’t say.
I think it’s telling, though, that you use the word “tricked.” It shows, like my whole comment was saying, that you view being trans as different from other deal breakers, if you think somebody going on a date with a person they didn’t realize was trans was the trans person “tricking” them.
This was the best explanation of how this is hurtful that I think you could possibly put together. I came into this thread skeptical of this being a real concern. This changed my mind. Thank you.
What makes that a deal-breaker worth calling out, but not others?
Being trans doesn’t necessarily show outwards unlike being fat would. If I’m looking for a guy that doesn’t automatically mean this includes FTM.
Neither does a micro penis (or serious erectile dysfunction) and that might be a deal breaker for you. But it would still be rude to say “No small dicks, and don’t message me if you can’t get it up.” But is it worth addressing, prior to being intimate? Absolutely.
You may be right, but if someone writes “no trans people” or “no d*cks smaller than 25cm” or “no crybabies” or “no n*ggers”, then if you are some of the mentioned, you wouldn’t want to communicate to that person anyway. If you are not, then you still likely wouldn’t.
It’s a natural flow of communication in my opinion. Let people write what they want.
This isn’t a first amendment issue, or an issue of what people should be allowed to say. It’s a question of etiquette, and not being rude. The thing is, saying each of those things would drive away more than just those specifically excluded.
To give a better example, if I were on a dating site and saw a woman who said “No guys under 6 ft,” and I were taller than 6 ft, I still wouldn’t want anything to do with that woman. It give a completely different vibe, however, to say “I really like tall guys.” I get, though, that there’s not a positive equivalent for the original question.
It’s as if you haven’t really read what I wrote, repeating what I said with that disagreeing tone.
Isn’t it better that people get to show their inner asshole in their profiles so that you can just ignore them and move on instead of them having to hide it because of “etiquette” and then you’re only going to find out later after you’ve already invested time and effort into them?
If someone not wanting to date a person under 6ft is a red flag to you, then isn’t it good that you found out right away? Imagine if they didn’t say this and you only found out when she calls the waiter a manlet on your 3rd date.
would “No fat women” be something you would feel comfortable putting in your bio (even if that was a deal-breaker for you)?
Why not? Women can put “no short people/manlets” why can’t I put “no fatties/giantesses?” I fail to see how they differ.
And that makes them bigots as well. This is not a this or that. If someone says attracted to men but no short people, they are also a cunt of a person and probably not someone you want to date.
If I am attracted to you, then it does not matter height, weight, etc…
If someone says attracted to men but no short people, they are also a cunt of a person and probably not someone you want to date.
Well facts, that’s actually what I always say. But let’s be honest women body shaming men is still a lot more culturally acceptable than the reverse and often people are hypocritical when it comes to this topic. You sound cool, but it is a topic that deserves to have attention brought to it, as not everyone is as cool.
Neither are acceptable, especially when it’s propagating ugly labels. All of it is really unnecessary. Swipe left on people you aren’t attracted to, and if you talk to someone and find a dealbreaker, politely disengage without making them feel shitty or othered. It really isn’t that difficult.
Before you put “No Trans” in your profile, I would ask you to consider that, if you are an athletic person and want an athletic person, would “No fat women” be something you would feel comfortable putting in your bio (even if that was a deal-breaker for you)?
I can see if someone is overweight, of a certain skin color or whatever other visible indicators you mention, and simply not like their profile, so a match would not occur.
I cannot (necessarily) see if someone is trans, so a match would potentially still happen.
So mentioning the “obvious” can be seen as harmful since you are effectively calling people out, while mentioning the “invisible” is merely stating a preference to reduce false positives.
Tact does matter. That is why I say “seeking cis man/woman” is better than “no trans man/woman”. “No black people” is bad, “prefer SWM/SWF” is better and acceptable IMO (disclaimer: I’m black), “looking for athletic man/woman” is better than “no fat people”, etc., just my opinion.
Many women already put “over 6 foot only” or “only swipe if you have abs” so why not let people filter out what they don’t want before wasting time and money and emotion on a date and talking
And they are wrong for that as well. That sounds like someone I wouldn’t want to be friends with or date bc they reduced someone down to their body parts and not who they are as a person.
Abs do not define someone, abs don’t make someone a better person or have a better personality.
While I agree it’s certainly fine to have preferences there is also etiquette to consider. Transphobia at it’s core is a belief that the very nature of being trans is somehow lesser than or repulsive. Transness is a very wide spectrum that has a bunch of different presentations so simply discarding the entirety of the category is transphobic.
It’s more helpful to think of things more in terms the individual things that you are looking for and your deal breakers. Like if your major beef is about physicality there are trans people who retain their physicality and fertility of their birth sex. The feild of trans presentation is really wide. Trans people also generally understand dating as a series of hurdles in finding someone who will give them a chance. Having people just shut down the entirety of the category regardless of any potential reasons they might actually fit what you are looking for contributes to a pervasive fear a lot of trans people have about never finding romantic acceptance. “No trans people!” stands out of a request like a flat out condemnation of anyone who might so much as request a different pronoun rather than just as a personal preference.
An example of something inclusive but still firm on preferences would be something like saying - “I have a female genital preference, want to keep the door open to having children of your own one day and prefer people who present in a very feminine way” … Because you still haven’t discluded all trans people. You’ve just made it clear that you have a genital and presentation preference and you have a life goal that makes perfect sense. She/they AFAB non-binary partners who are generally femme presenting are rare but still exist and you are communicating your needs in a way that doesn’t place a value on how someone internally feels about their gender.
Breaking down the root of transphobia is hard. It demands that we remove a value judgement off of being trans. This at some level means an internal assessment of where you might be open to trans partners and keeping the options open. Like if you are not okay at all with any form of transness because you have a core belief that we are just too much work with our pronouns and our weird way of self conceptualizing ourselves, that’s transphobia. …
Trans is an umbrella term for a group of people so internally diverse that virtually every combination of sexual physicality, gender presentation and gender identity is somewhere represented. Writing off every potential person in the category basically is saying that there are zero concessions you will personally make because even the smallest most unnoticeable presence of trans identity in a person regardless of their physicality or personality is completely repellant to you… Which while it IS a preference is still fairly hostile to trans acceptance.
You are confidently explaining being trans wrong to someone who literally explained trans completely correct, and you look incredibly silly.
Being trans is not exclusively the opposite of your genetic sex. Being trans is not identifying as your assigned gender at birth. This includes non-binary people, and also doesn’t exclude intersex people, who wouldn’t fit into your definition, since the gender binary doesn’t have an apt comparison, especially because we assign genders based on our genitals (which, again, may not correlate to our genetic sex!)
The point is that gender is technically kinda arbitrary, and it affects more things beyond one of each of these can make a baby.
I am more confused now than before.
I’m not likely to ever date again, so this is simple curiosity, but… I have no interest in playing with anyone’s penis but my own. Isn’t “CIS-only” shorthand for that? Should it require an essay to dance around the topic? Your example language is clinical and entirely misses the point: it’s OK to normalize lesbians being allowed to not want to try dick, but not ok for CIS men to not want to?
I’ve probably misunderstood your point. I feel as if OP is saying that everyone has a right to have preferences, and nobody should be villified for what they want consenting-adult-wise.
You are very much misunderstanding my point.
Let me give you an example of what this shorthand is like. Say you are a person who lives for going out mountain climbing and any partner you have is one you want to be able to join you out in that sphere. So you write on your dating profile “NO Disability” or “Only fully abled people” - The field of disability is very wide encompassing both physical and mental disability. Someone who is missing a finger or has autism for instance is still gunna be able to keep up so it is kind of ableist to just assume every disability under the sun isn’t going to be able to keep up with you on a mountain but the people who read “no disability” are going to be reminded that there are people out there who are ablist scum and anything short of perfect neurotypicality and physical ability makes you virtually unlovable in their eyes.
Being Trans is equally a wide field. For instance, if your problem is not wanting to interface with dick would you still date a trans man who isn’t going to transition? In that instance you have someone who presents and conceptualizes themselves as a man but the body is still female. But maybe your heart of hearts desires someone who does not present as a man which is equally a valid preference.
So then what about a non-binary person? Non binary is under the umbrella term of trans and there is a whole host of different presentations. Like you can have a person who never transitioned and doesn’t even present outwardly as any different than a cis person… But they may be agender and feel like gendered expectations are harmful, they may be fluid and their presentation changes from week to week but they still don’t have a penis. A lot of non binary trans presentations are fairly outwardly invisible and I know a fair amount of guys with non-penis genital preferences of the “not even a little bi-curious” variety who are dating non binary and trans masculine trans people. There is a fair amount of enbyphobia and erasure out in the world at present. A lot of people tend to be so trans and enbyphobic that they think all of us are basically just something they never want to interact with or even spare a thought for so enbies see a lot of general transphobic rejection.
The concept that “CIS ONLY” is only screening out people with different sex characteristics than what you are looking for is a feature of transphobia via ignorance. It’s not coming from a place of cruelty but it’s still saying that just identifying as any form of trans is a dealbreaker because any form of acceptance is too much. Because if you can’t handle even the thought of a romantic partner asking for you to use a gender neutral pronoun even if they have never so much as touched a horomone or a scalpel yeah, you are kind of adverse to trans people in a more endemic zero tolerance sense in which case calling you transphobic isn’t someone being mean, it’s describing your aversion in the same way a hydrophobic surface repels water.
Ok, fair enough; it’s a complex topic. So how, without writing a dissertation on your preferrences, do you state your preferrences on apps where users get maybe seconds of eyeball time before being swiped? What’s a useful shorthand that fits in a profile?
You’re bucking tens of thousands of years of evolution designed to have us making fast decisions based on limited information. I applaud you for it; bias and bigotry will be a hard yoke to shrug. I don’t see how your advice, which mandates a complex statement about a complex topic, helps OP answer their question about a dating app.
I think you are correct in your idea, however, according to this person, the issue is using Trans as a blanket statement to exclude the entire spectrum in this category. You don’t want to play with anyone else’s penis, totally your right. What about a transwoman with women genitalia? If that is still not your preference, then truly ask yourself why? If someone is not into black men, they wouldn’t say they are not into men.This is a broader topic about our perception of a group of people than just dating preferences.
Oh. I see; the objection comes from using CIS, because OP not wanting a trans woman is not kosher. Your question about introspection implies that something is wrong with a person who does not want intimacy with transwomen.
So, I understand the delicacy; trans people are in the middle of a fight for validation and their human rights. Any rejection or indeed distinction between a born-woman and trans-woman is fraught. I’m also well aware of the Paradox of Tolerance, and that inolerance cannot be tolerated.
OTOH, we’re talking about what peopl want in the bed room. Would you also suggest a gay person “truly ask yourself why,” implying that there is something wrong with their personal, bedroom-privacy interests? I’m not suggesting all sexual preferences are healthy, or equal, but we’re talking about consenting-adult sex - who are you, or is anyone to judge OP for their preferences?
This is how I read OP’s question: why are they villified for stating their personal sexual preferences?
You don’t date trans women because you are a bigot.
I don’t date trans women because I have a menstruation fetish. We are not the same.
Disclaimer: this is a joke. I have been in a relationship with a trans woman.
Doubt you’ve even ever met a trans woman. We don’t want to sleep with you either.
