Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Tick
It probably wasn't meant this way, but this statement feels like it minimizes the process someone would need to go through when faced with the woman you love becoming the man you love. Maybe it's the use of quotes. Or maybe it is simply the tone I am reading into it because of the quotes.
I don't think someone becomes more difficult to love because of who they are but they may not be someone who you can be in love with if they are a man and you are not attracted to men or they are a woman and you are not attracted to woman. Makes sense to me. It's not about the person being harder to love because of who they are.
|
I used quotations because of the title of the article in question, which is
Loving a Trans Man Isn't Easy. Funny enough, I feel like that statement minimizes what trans people go through before finally making the decision to transition. The decision to transition is who they are. The reason transitions are so painful to family and friends to begin with is because of the nature of society, not because of the nature of the trans person.
If they are no longer sexually attracted to their partner, then the decision should be fairly simple: to end the relationship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Tick
No-one needs to put up with phobic language surrounding their identity. However, sometimes pain and anger make us see things in a very myopic way. It does not justify it, but it might, in this case, allow that perhaps the person who used the language is not necessarily transphobic just insensitive. Or not. And trans people or any people for that matter don't have to put up phobic language surrounding their identity because the person using it is hurting or dealing with a partner's transition or whatever. Maybe her husband will because he understands her pain and wants to make allowances or maybe he won't but surely no-one else needs to even consider putting up with it or making allowances at all if they don't want to. And how will she know she is acting in way that is transphobic if no-one tells her. If people explain that what she is saying is hurtful and transphobic and she refuses to accept this and find another way to say the same thing then she IS simply transphobic.
|
The reason I started commenting on this thread is not because of what her husband may or may not be feeling. It's been stated before that he commented that he doesn't take offense to the use of the word tranny because it's a part of his identity. My issue is with the way she talks about a group of "rah rah tranny people", not her husband. We have to remember that this is not a blog. This isn't a forum post. This is an article in a popular Canadian lesbian and gay newspaper. Something tells me that she isn't completely oblivious to how her words can hurt others. The comments by other Vancouverites has told her that those words were offensive to others, if she hadn't figured it out by the time she wrote the article. In fact, the reason the two statements were made seem directly in response to the kind of people who would call out those kind of statements as transphobic. She seems to see making those statements as a part of her grief. Others see it as transphobic because she is not directly talking about her own coping process, but her anger against others who would even use the word transphobia against her.
If they incorrectly called her transphobic because of the fact that she had to cope with her husband's transition and not immediately feel alright with it, then she should have just said she doesn't like being called transphobic because of her uncertainty or feelings of grief over the transition. She doesn't need to reply to them with statements that
are transphobic.
My reasons for participating in this thread are
not about her grieving process or to criticize it. That is not transphobic. This is
not about whether or not she finds her husband attractive or not. That is not transphobic. This is
not about whether she ever considered or ever will leave her husband because he is a transman. That, I don't see as transphobic. It's the two statements she made, that I've been pointing out, which carry with them a lot of transphobia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Tick
However, it sounds like there is more than her language that is upsetting. It sounds like the idea that someone would be harder to love because of who they are is also a hurtful idea. But I don't think it is about who someone is at all. It might feel that way. But it is not about being harder to love it is simply that people cannot choose what they are sexually attracted to and who they fall in love with. If it is possible for a person to continue to be in love with and sexually attracted to their spouse after transition then i"m sure they will be thrilled. But I don't think it is a choice. And I'm fairly positive that it won't be any harder one way or the other to love the person. They just may not be able to be IN love any longer.
|
If the person you love is no longer "easy" to love, or is "harder" to love because of their transition (aka: who they are), which is what the title states, then I don't see the point of the relationship anymore. That's just me. It's not about it being "hurtful," as you say, but I just don't see the point of maintaining that kind of relationship. Some people work it out, that's good for them. Others don't and they split. Good on them, too. Leaving a relationship because your partner is trans isn't transphobic. At least they're being honest and admitting that they don't want that kind of relationship. I'd prefer that to being told I'm not "easy" to love. But to each their own on that point.