LGBTAI+ Question and Discussion Thread III: Third Time's A Charm

[JNAProductions]

Question: I'm running a genderfluid character in a PbP here on the forum. They're biologically female but have lost most attachment to their gender, and switch freely between male, female, or androgynous.

I figured I'd be playing them much as I would a normal person, obviously, but also (since they're a sneaky, deceptive type) switching genders as need be to play into stereotypes. Acting masculine when they need to intimidate someone, playing the girl card when they need to seem demure and suibtle, etc. etc.

I guess my main question is thus: Are there any big pitfalls I'd need to avoid to not be offensive with this character? Anything obvious that I might miss, not being genderfluid myself, that would be a jerk move?

[WarKitty]

In your crusade to stop the fetishization of trans people's bodies, you've pretty well turned the corner into "and all sexual attraction to trans people is fetishizing, so nobody should be attracted to trans people" (because you can't seem to conceive of a way your friend could be attracted to a trans person and not be creepy) and driven right into a wall.

I would recommend, instead of getting defensive, that you sit down and carefully re-read your posts asking yourself "Is there any conceivable way that what this says is transphobic? Does this leave any room for anybody to be attracted to trans people without being called creepy?" as you go along. It might help you get some perspective on why you're receiving the pushback you are.

Right - that's what people are reacting to. It comes across very much as "being attracted to a trans person is a fetish." Or at least that someone needs special justification to be attracted to a trans person despite their transness. And then you were getting very defensive and coming across as since you didn't mean badly nothing you said should be criticized.

[Zendy]

Well, in my native language we have to uppercase every word that is short for something for example if I say fem as in the short for feminine I have to write it FEM, sorry it’s just a habit.

I went out with them tonight, and she is nice, I guess he really isn’t seeing her as an object of his fetish he just likes her.

Maybe, I used to look up to him as a masculine ideal and the fact she is trans made me uncomfortable for me being insecure if that’s what a idealized ideal of a straight manly man would do, to my unconscious he wouldn’t go out with a trans. woman, but he has to live his life not live up to my sick expectations of idealization.

Maybe… Not sure, that’s something she said, not sure if I agree 100%.

The fact is that I only tough it was weird the fact she was trans. be the reason he gave me to be with her, just as weird if he dated her because of her hair or any physical attribute but that seems to be a thing people do so I’m sorry if that sounded transphobic.

In your crusade to stop the fetishization of trans people's bodies, you've pretty well turned the corner into "and all sexual attraction to trans people is fetishizing, so nobody should be attracted to trans people" (because you can't seem to conceive of a way your friend could be attracted to a trans person and not be creepy) and driven right into a wall.

I never said that and I can't see how you can read that form what i have write, can you elaborate? I only said that IN THIS CASE it looked weird, in this case he said he wanted to be with her becuase she was trans. and girls with d**** are hot and turn him on.

If soemone is dating a trans. person because they love her for her personality and ideas that's great more power to you.

[Knaight]

If soemone is dating a trans. person because they love her for her personality and ideas that's great more power to you.

Again, this criteria excludes the possibility that trans people can be physically attractive at all outside of a fetish, leaving only personality based options. It's the exact thing people are criticizing.

[Zendy]

Again, this criteria excludes the possibility that trans people can be physically attractive at all outside of a fetish, leaving only personality based options. It's the exact thing people are criticizing.

But a guy liking a cis woman just because of her body is just as problematic.

[Vinyadan]

To go on a tangent, I have recently often read that you can't say "a transexual" or "a transgender", because they are adjectives. However, English can turn adjectives into nouns (substantivized adjectives) -- see "my racist uncle is a racist". Is there a derogative value to substantivization of adjectives? I think of "the rich", "the poor", "the happy few", "the loved dead", or, as a singular, "the extravagant", "the unearthed".

So what difference is there between "black (or trans or ____) people" and "blacks" or "trans"?

And between "blacks" and "the blacks"?

My mother tongue isn't English.

[WarKitty]

But a guy liking a cis woman just because of her body is just as problematic.

Eh, a lot of relationships start because someone is physically attracted to the other person. I wouldn't say that by itself is problematic.

[The Extinguisher]

Question: I'm running a genderfluid character in a PbP here on the forum. They're biologically female but have lost most attachment to their gender, and switch freely between male, female, or androgynous.

I figured I'd be playing them much as I would a normal person, obviously, but also (since they're a sneaky, deceptive type) switching genders as need be to play into stereotypes. Acting masculine when they need to intimidate someone, playing the girl card when they need to seem demure and suibtle, etc. etc.

I guess my main question is thus: Are there any big pitfalls I'd need to avoid to not be offensive with this character? Anything obvious that I might miss, not being genderfluid myself, that would be a jerk move?

Personally, I would not do the thing you said about switching genders to play into stereotypes. You dont need to perpetuate the idea that masculine=aggressive and feminine=passive, especially when they have no bearing on your characters gender. Genderfluid is a fairly broad term, and I would certainly do some research and read up on things that genderfluid people have to say. Think about what being genderfluid means to your character. And most importantly, don't let other players at the table ignore or dismiss your characters nonbinaryness. If your character uses they/them pronouns, or switches from he/him to she/her then tell the other players and enforce it.

To go on a tangent, I have recently often read that you can't say "a transexual" or "a transgender", because they are adjectives. However, English can turn adjectives into nouns (substantivized adjectives) -- see "my racist uncle is a racist". Is there a derogative value to substantivization of adjectives? I think of "the rich", "the poor", "the happy few", "the loved dead", or, as a singular, "the extravagant", "the unearthed".

So what difference is there between "black (or trans or ____) people" and "blacks" or "trans"?

And between "blacks" and "the blacks"?

My mother tongue isn't English.

I mean, you're right, in that its something that can be done. But it shouldn't, because its rude and dehumanizing. It others the group, and it's especially harmful in the case of marginalized groups who have been and often are treated as "less than people"

(I have similar thoughts on "the poor". It may not seem bad but think of describing an individual as "a poor")

[The_Snark]

To go on a tangent, I have recently often read that you can't say "a transexual" or "a transgender", because they are adjectives. However, English can turn adjectives into nouns (substantivized adjectives) -- see "my racist uncle is a racist". Is there a derogative value to substantivization of adjectives? I think of "the rich", "the poor", "the happy few", "the loved dead", or, as a singular, "the extravagant", "the unearthed".

There isn't an inherent derogative value to that process, no. However, doing this with gender, race or orientation has picked up some strong negative connotations by association - it's often done by people who are clueless and/or prejudiced.

Edit - Extinguisher makes a good point about othering too; this probably explains how it picked up those associations. By now, though, I think the association is more widespread; if someone refers to "females" or "the gays" in casual conversations, most people will not consciously pick at the implications of their choice of terms, but they will be reminded of that weird guy at university who treated women like space aliens, or their elderly homophobic relatives, or some such.

[lio45]

"CIS" is correct if you are writing in some dialects of latin, in which all letters were capitalized before lower-case letters became the standard. If you're writing in modern english, though, non-acronyms aren't supposed to be in all caps.

text that's not in caps...
GOOD POINT. IF YOUR CAPS LOCK IS ON, THEN "CIS" IS PERFECTLY CORRECT. ;)

[lio45]

... in this case he said he wanted to be with her becuase she was trans. and girls with d**** are hot and turn him on.

If he's turned on by girls with *****, then of course they have to be trans to qualify. It's not just a fetish in this case then. It's much closer to sexual orientation than to merely a fetish within a given sexual orientation.

[Sobol]

a masculine ideal

When I think of an "idealized ideal of a manly man", I think of a guy who doesn't let others decide what he should and what he shouldn't like. If he wants to see a ballet, he goes to the ballet.

[Astrella]

The comment made me raise my eyebrows a bit; but like, he's taking pictures with her, going out with her and from what it sounds it doesn't look like he reduces her just to that aspect of her. Like, it's okay to be attracted to a specific feature as long as that doesn't come at the expense of the person that comes with it. If he like, only cared about her cause she was trans, hid that they were dating, would say, be controlling around transition stuff cause he wants her bits to stay as he wants them to, then I'd be worried. I get being alarmed a bit but try to have a look at their whole relationship; most relationships will have a thing that'll draw you to the other person initially.

[Cizak]

So what difference is there between "black (or trans or ____) people" and "blacks" or "trans"?

Well one contains "people" and the other one doesn't.

[Jormengand]

Question: I'm running a genderfluid character in a PbP here on the forum. They're biologically female but have lost most attachment to their gender, and switch freely between male, female, or androgynous.

I figured I'd be playing them much as I would a normal person, obviously, but also (since they're a sneaky, deceptive type) switching genders as need be to play into stereotypes. Acting masculine when they need to intimidate someone, playing the girl card when they need to seem demure and suibtle, etc. etc.

I guess my main question is thus: Are there any big pitfalls I'd need to avoid to not be offensive with this character? Anything obvious that I might miss, not being genderfluid myself, that would be a jerk move?

You could have asked the genderfluid person you are literally dating directly.

If the character is playing into stereotypes for their advantage, but not at the expense of the actual gender they are at the moment, then fine. So long as the character is obviously aware they're doing it.

Also, "Biologically female" is not the wording you're looking for. Especially since brains are just as biological as gribbly bits. "Normal person" isn't the wording you're looking for to describe cis people, either...

But honestly, I think you're trying to be too clever with the genderfluidity. Don't try to overplay the fact that they're genderfluid; just let it be a thing.

[super dark33]

I have a question about how to support trans people, and would love to do so in PMs.

I guess i can say i have empathy, but i dont have that much knowledge about the problems trans people face to actually help in any meaningful way other than simple gestures of support, which are always hit-or-miss depending on the situation and person.

[JNAProductions]

You could have asked the genderfluid person you are literally dating directly.

If the character is playing into stereotypes for their advantage, but not at the expense of the actual gender they are at the moment, then fine. So long as the character is obviously aware they're doing it.

Also, "Biologically female" is not the wording you're looking for. Especially since brains are just as biological as gribbly bits. "Normal person" isn't the wording you're looking for to describe cis people, either...

But honestly, I think you're trying to be too clever with the genderfluidity. Don't try to overplay the fact that they're genderfluid; just let it be a thing.

Well, sometimes I want other opinions.

And yes-they're not playing the meek woman because they think women SHOULD be meek, but because it's to their advantage.

What phrase should I use instead? "Born female"?

And oki.

[Lissou]

What phrase should I use instead? "Born female"?

"Assigned female at birth" (AFAB for short).

[JNAProductions]

"Assigned female at birth" (AFAB for short).

Feels a bit anachronistic, but okay.

Does it matter that, for a time, they did identify as female? I would imagine not, since that's not who they are anymore, but was wondering.

[Lissou]

Feels a bit anachronistic, but okay.

Does it matter that, for a time, they did identify as female? I would imagine not, since that's not who they are anymore, but was wondering.

Well, I'm a cis person but I was still assigned female at birth. It doesn't necessarily mean that the assignment doesn't match the gender. And you don't need to use that during the roleplay if they're not words they would be familiar with, but when talking about the character in real-life, then real-life terms apply. This being said, D&D is fantasy and therefore not real, so "anachronistic" doesn't really apply. Some things in D&D are Middle-Age like, sure, but many are pretty moderns (gender equality for instance), so you can absolutely have a society in D&D that would know about nonbinary gender and possibly use these specific terms. I'm not super familiar with PbP, is there a DM? If so, you can ask them about the setting, maybe you can find a term that sounds more "D&D-like" that's along the same lines as AFAB.

[JNAProductions]

Oh yeah, it's no big deal. I doubt it'll come up much in actual play, and OOC, it's totally fine to use AFAB.

If it does come up in play, I'll figure out something with the DM. (The DM is, actually, genderfluid themself, so I'm sure they'd be able to lend a hand.)

[Astrella]

I have a question about how to support trans people, and would love to do so in PMs.

I guess i can say i have empathy, but i dont have that much knowledge about the problems trans people face to actually help in any meaningful way other than simple gestures of support, which are always hit-or-miss depending on the situation and person.

Hi, feel free to pm me. :)

[Shamash]

Feels a bit anachronistic, but okay.

Maybe she can say she was "born with a famale spirit" or "born with a woman's soul"? Or maybe "with a faminine heart"? Hardly ideal but still I think the best a medieval fantasy society can get.

[The Extinguisher]

Personally, I wouldn't use AFAB or anything like it at all. If your character is genderfluid then it shouldn't matter what gender they were assigned, just what gender they are.

[Themrys]

If he's turned on by girls with *****, then of course they have to be trans to qualify. It's not just a fetish in this case then. It's much closer to sexual orientation than to merely a fetish within a given sexual orientation.

I thought the consensus among the most progressive transactivists and -allies was that lesbians who are attracted to women with vulvas are vulva fetishists - how is a man who is attracted to girls with penises different?

[2D8HP]

....Some things in D&D are Middle-Age like, sure, but many are pretty moderns (gender equality for instance), so you can absolutely have a society in D&D...

Then as now, I believe some societies had more and some less gender inequality.

The Scandinavians, for example, were known to be more equal (as attested to by Arab traveller Ibrahim ibn al-Tartushi for example).

In fact some Viking graves, that contained weapona as grave goods and consequently were originally thought to have held men (Assigned male at excavation?), were actually women ("shieldmaidens"/skjaldmær).

---

Something that's puzzled me for awhile is the continuing fight for acceptance of LGBT+ in society.

Back when I attended Berkeley High School in the 1980's I had "out" and "trans" friends and classmates, and I don't remember anyone making a big deal about it (it wasn't till I went to work in the San Jose area in the early 2000's that I heard much bigotry).

I thought these battles were over and done with in the 1970's, what happened?

[Recherché]

Part of the issue is that this acceptance still isn't around everywhere. You were in an area ahead of its time and there are still places in the deep south where being openly queer let alone trans is extremely dangerous. Somewhere around 40-50% of homeless kids are LGBTQA+ and of those half were kicked out of their homes.

Another issue is that even where things were okay socially they haven't always been so good legally. (Not going to get into detail because of forum rules) They're getting better in many ways but there are still issues with the law sometimes.

[Coidzor]

I thought the consensus among the most progressive transactivists and -allies was that lesbians who are attracted to women with vulvas are vulva fetishists - how is a man who is attracted to girls with penises different?

I imagine because they're not choosing to be a condescending, shaming ass about a difficult subject like those "most progressive" people have decided as their favored course of action. Labeling people as fetishists is a political move to stigmatize and take away the legitimacy of their sexual desires.

[Astrella]

I imagine because they're not choosing to be a condescending, shaming ass about a difficult subject like those "most progressive" people have decided as their favored course of action. Labeling people as fetishists is a political move to stigmatize and take away the legitimacy of their sexual desires.

The issue here is that there's a certain group of lesbians that insist that being a lesbian means being attracted to vulvas, which is fine by itself; however, a woman dating a trans woman (with a penis) is just as valid a lesbian as any other. And that's where the issue comes from, because I imagine to most lesbians being a lesbian means being into women; and while it's fine to not want to date people with a penises, reducing being a lesbian to being attracted to a certain set of genitals feels reductive.

[Coidzor]

The issue here is that there's a certain group of lesbians that insist that being a lesbian means being attracted to vulvas, which is fine by itself; however, a woman dating a trans woman (with a penis) is just as valid a lesbian as any other. And that's where the issue comes from, because I imagine to most lesbians being a lesbian means being into women; and while it's fine to not want to date people with a penises, reducing being a lesbian to being attracted to a certain set of genitals feels reductive.

So the issue is that they're being *******s and trying to police a term, not who or what they're sexually into.