Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hmmm, well this is where the rubber meets the road, actually. It’s your opinion that they are not that gender, that they are simply “claiming” to be that gender - but in Kentucky, specifically (as it varies from state to state) the law is that if a physician signs off that the person has has reassignment surgery, they can amend their birth certificate to state that they are that medically reassigned gender.
So if the state recognises that person as a female, how are you going to prosecute that that person is a male?Medically and legally speaking, they are not.
If that person is a woman right down to their major identity documents, and have no male primary sexual characteristics - hormone therapy changes male characteristics including tone of voice - then is it really trickery and deception? As far as that person is concerned, they are now 100% the gender listed on their BC and passport.
You are really just pointing out the obvious - that law or medicine doesn't decide what gender is when it comes to having sex, only the other party gets to decide.
The very obvious solution is for the State to stay out of thinking sex can be changed -it really isn't important for transgender to be recognised legally or medically, only that people have the right to live as they feel, as long as it doesn't impinge on the rights of others.
You are really just pointing out the obvious - that law or medicine doesn't decide what gender is when it comes to having sex, only the other party gets to decide.
The very obvious solution is for the State to stay out of thinking sex can be changed -it really isn't important for transgender to be recognised legally or medically, only that people have the right to live as they feel, as long as it doesn't impinge on the rights of others.
But at some point as with all rights they infringe upon each other.
E.g., you have the subject of this thread. From his point of view you have a confused man wearing a dress and makeup and pretending to be a woman. He definitely did not consent to nothing with no man and feels his rights have been infringed. For the transgender woman, however, she identifies as female, presents herself as female.
Admittedly, I don't exactly get your point. Say I'm a homosexual guy and see a not very well endowed women wearing some jeans and a t-shirt with a short haircut and figure that she's male. We're at a dive bar and make out before going back to my place where I discover my mistake. Gross, she's not a male at all. Because I consented to making out with what I thought was a guy have I been sexually assaulted because only I can decide? Seems kind of odd. I consider myself male regardless of whatever any sexual partner may think. I'd assume most people think that way. For this tomboy lady at the bar, does she have to wait until some partner comes along to assign her a gender? Like I said, I don't get the point exactly.
Major aspect? Its a critical aspect. SEX involves genitals, its part of the definition, they may be your own genitals or someone else's, but, they're critical components of sex.
Lying about you income, marital status, isn't material to consensual sex, unless one party demands evidence of it before consenting. However to lead someone to a conclusion that very well may be VERY material to someone's consensual agreement to sex is very material, if it were not, then a gay guy getting a BJ from some girl dressed like a twink wouldn't be an issue, a lesbian getting finger banged by a feminine guy dressed like a lipstick lesbian wouldn't be an issue. However they're very much issues, because sexual orientation isn't a conscious choice. The whole issue violates the concept of informed consent.
Really? So the bathroom switcheroo* thats been done many times is perfectly ok, because the unknowing and possibly unwilling subject of the switch got what they asked for? Or switching between vaginal and anal without additional consent, because you know they agreed to have sex.
(* switcheroo, is where one person who initiated the encounter switches with another person in the bathroom before they've engaged in sex with the other participant. Its illegal and is considered rape).
In all honesty I'm completely at a loss to comprehend your overall opinion. We're not talking morning after buyers remorse, but deliberate and wilful deception about perhaps the most material aspect of sexual consent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1
Physically, you do not have a different kind of sex depending upon whether or not the person has killed someone in the past. Physically, you don’t have a different kind of sex depending on whether the person is married or not. However, a male getting a blow job by a woman is engaging in heterosexual sex and a man getting a blow job from a man is engaging in homosexual sex - those are two very different things. A person has a right to determine the gender of the person they have sex with and in this case, unlike in most interactions between transgendered individuals and cis individuals, what gender they think their sex partner is matters more than what gender that partner feels they are. A person who gives consent to engage in heterosexual sexual activity with a female is not automatically giving consent if it turns out that person was born a male and failed to tell them. They have not been given the opportunity to give consent.
It is like sexual harassment only in the sense that YOU don’t get to define whether they consented or not based on your comfort with transgendered individuals - it should only be based on THEIR comfort with them.
Okay...I've changed my mind to agree with you two.
The reason why failing to disclose the existence of one's genitalia, if one appears to be a different sex than one's anatomical sex is, if one is going to have sexual contact with another person, even if the sexual contact doesn't involve the sex organs, is because not doing so will cause a great deal of trauma to a large percentage of society...and most people will know this, or they should.
When I make comments like I've previously made, it's typically because of my weird emotional detachment. I don't relate well to trauma. I'll eventually roll around to understanding it after a few days though, in my slow-moving, philosophical, detached way of looking at things.
I appreciate your patience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii
No it isn't a form of rape. It's no different than someone lying about their weight on an online dating profile. Maybe a bit dishonest, at the absolute worst (and if no one asked if they were transgender, I'm not sure I'd say not bringing it up was even dishonest)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii
Like it or not, we live in a society where gender is more fluid than some people want to admit. When in doubt, ask and clarify things up front. In the original post, they said the two people consented to sex, when not under the influence of any substances. My opinion? No one was forced, no one was coerced, no one was under the influence of a foreign substance, and the two people consented.
If I lie about aspects of myself that are very likely to result in trauma of another person, if they discovered those aspects of me, I'm being predatory. People who get preyed upon will often either resort to legal punishments, or violence. Oftentimes the best way of dealing with these situations is to outsource things to the government, so as to avoid violence.
Now, people often aren't upfront about marital status, weird scars other people may find gross, etc. That can potentially be even more traumatizing. However, there are reasons to not be upfront about those issues other than being intentionally predatory. A person might not think the scar is a gross as another person would. Two people often engage in flings too, and just never mention their marital status...and that's just kind of accepted.
On the other hand, if we see someone who looks like a certain sex, we're probably going to assume they are of that sex.
Okay...I've changed my mind to agree with you two.
The reason why failing to disclose the existence of one's genitalia, if one appears to be a different sex than one's anatomical sex is, if one is going to have sexual contact with another person, even if the sexual contact doesn't involve the sex organs, is because not doing so will cause a great deal of trauma to a large percentage of society...and most people will know this, or they should.
When I make comments like I've previously made, it's typically because of my weird emotional detachment. I don't relate well to trauma. I'll eventually roll around to understanding it after a few days though, in my slow-moving, philosophical, detached way of looking at things.
I appreciate your patience.
If I lie about aspects of myself that are very likely to result in trauma of another person, if they discovered those aspects of me, I'm being predatory. People who get preyed upon will often either resort to legal punishments, or violence. Oftentimes the best way of dealing with these situations is to outsource things to the government, so as to avoid violence.
Now, people often aren't upfront about marital status, weird scars other people may find gross, etc. That can potentially be even more traumatizing. However, there are reasons to not be upfront about those issues other than being intentionally predatory. A person might not think the scar is a gross as another person would. Two people often engage in flings too, and just never mention their marital status...and that's just kind of accepted.
On the other hand, if we see someone who looks like a certain sex, we're probably going to assume they are of that sex.
That is it, absolutely. This is especially the case where the person’s genitalia gets manipulated either orally or manually by the trans individual only to be told their trans status after the act’s completion. One of the reasons it is dangerous for the trans person, particularly trans females, is the non-trans person may react to that emotional trauma by physically assaulting them.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
I dont agree. You can stop at anytime. When you realize a person is not the gender you thought, stop. Stop/NO, nullifies your consent.
Sex is not a contract. It is an intimate interaction where upon engaging you have to opportunity to view the goods. In 99% of the cases that should end the deception.
What I think is one can rarely be tricked into having sex with the same gendered person.
bj's in which someone looks down and sees male genitalia can result in the stuff of nightmares.
The person giving the bj should have realized that in advance, and taken steps to explain their would-be-surprising physiology in advance, or else they'll be risking causing needless suffering.
There is no non-predatory reason not to disclose to another person that I have male genitalia, if I look like a woman, and am about to have some kind of sexual contact with them.
On the other hand, when I ask a woman if they have male genitalia, that's probably going to offend that woman quite a bit. That's not an option in most instances.
That is it, absolutely. This is especially the case where the person’s genitalia gets manipulated either orally or manually by the trans individual only to be told their trans status after the act’s completion. One of the reasons it is dangerous for the trans person, particularly trans females, is the non-trans person may react to that emotional trauma by physically assaulting them.
You are really just pointing out the obvious - that law or medicine doesn't decide what gender is when it comes to having sex, only the other party gets to decide.
The very obvious solution is for the State to stay out of thinking sex can be changed -it really isn't important for transgender to be recognised legally or medically, only that people have the right to live as they feel, as long as it doesn't impinge on the rights of others
It isn't? Says who? You? Certainly not transgender people who have gone to great pain and expense to be recognised for their gender reassignment in all forms.
You think that because you don't recognise that it's possible to medically alter your gender that that should inform the entire debate. Well your opinion is not the only one that counts.
What doesn't really matter is that you think the state should stay out of it - the state does indeed legally and medically recognise a change of gender, right down to major identifying documents such as birth certificates and passports, and that ship has sailed.
There is no legal requirement for a someone who has medically and legally transitioned from their birth gender to disclose that fact to a third party in any circumstance whatsoever, as far as I know. Having sex when you are a woman in every criteria is not infringing upon the right of others.
A baby is assigned a gender at birth purely based on visual identification of genitalia. No one knows at that point if the baby will grow up with any gender related issues or if there is anything deeper going on biologically, hormonally or neurologically to interfere with their assigned gender.
Being identified as a newborn infant is obviously - given how many people in how many cultures historically have ended up identifying with the opposite gender to the point of completely transitioning to the opposite of that assigned gender - not the end of the story for everyone, and that person shouldn't be legally/morally held to that one standard for the rest of their lives. IMHO.
It isn't? Says who? You? Certainly not transgender people who have gone to great pain and expense to be recognised for their gender reassignment in all forms.
You think that because you don't recognise that it's possible to medically alter your gender that that should inform the entire debate. Well your opinion is not the only one that counts.
What doesn't really matter is that you think the state should stay out of it - the state does indeed legally and medically recognise a change of gender, right down to major identifying documents such as birth certificates and passports, and that ship has sailed.
There is no legal requirement for a someone who has medically and legally transitioned from their birth gender to disclose that fact to a third party in any circumstance whatsoever, as far as I know. Having sex when you are a woman in every criteria is not infringing upon the right of others.
A baby is assigned a gender at birth purely based on visual identification of genitalia. No one knows at that point if the baby will grow up with any gender related issues or if there is anything deeper going on biologically, hormonally or neurologically to interfere with their assigned gender.
Being identified as a newborn infant is obviously - given how many people in how many cultures historically have ended up identifying with the opposite gender to the point of completely transitioning to the opposite of that assigned gender - not the end of the story for everyone, and that person shouldn't be legally/morally held to that one standard for the rest of their lives. IMHO.
Just more bully talk to justify sexual predation based on ignoring the sexual orientation of others..
Like most people, I don't have an issue with people who identify as transgender, that's their business, but I don't need the State or doctor Bob to tell what a real woman is.
When it comes to sex, I'm only interested in real woman, and if a transgender can't give a stuff about another person's orientation, to the point of only revealing their secret after sexual contact, then that is grooming and sexual assault based on uninformed consent.
Bullies and rape enablers put the wants of the transgender, above the rights of others to decide for themselves to decide what a real woman -this is where the slippery slope of transgender rights leads to, not an enlightened society where everyone's right to make informed choice is honoured, but a power imbalance where only one party gets to make an informed choice, in a situation that directly tramples on the other person's ability to make decisions based on their right to practice their sexual orientation.
But at some point as with all rights they infringe upon each other.
E.g., you have the subject of this thread. From his point of view you have a confused man wearing a dress and makeup and pretending to be a woman. He definitely did not consent to nothing with no man and feels his rights have been infringed. For the transgender woman, however, she identifies as female, presents herself as female.
Admittedly, I don't exactly get your point. Say I'm a homosexual guy and see a not very well endowed women wearing some jeans and a t-shirt with a short haircut and figure that she's male. We're at a dive bar and make out before going back to my place where I discover my mistake. Gross, she's not a male at all. Because I consented to making out with what I thought was a guy have I been sexually assaulted because only I can decide? Seems kind of odd. I consider myself male regardless of whatever any sexual partner may think. I'd assume most people think that way. For this tomboy lady at the bar, does she have to wait until some partner comes along to assign her a gender? Like I said, I don't get the point exactly.
The point is simple - the transgender only gets to believe for themself that they are a female, everyone else gets to decide for themselves.
Rape is based on consent, and in this case the alleged perpetrator of the assault did consent. The fact he came back again backs that up. The fact that he might have gotten duped or didn't do his homework on the partner he picked up for sex is not criminal.
As others have mentioned, it's not different than finding out the woman he got the BJ from was married, or had a terrible STD. In those cases he may have withdrawn consent had he known the information, but that's no justification for assault. He was looking for sex and didn't really care about the other person's background enough to learn more about them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
