The Gender and Sexual Minorities Thread II: So Many Wonders

Aurora · Post by **Aurora** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:39 am

That rule is dumb just hide it behind a giant hidden thing and put a disclaimer in giant letters.

Factory Factory · Post by **Factory Factory** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:46 am

I wrote a big ol' effortpost but then rules and oy. Momar can do it better though.

(?) · Post by **Momo** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:48 am

Aurora wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:39 am
That rule is dumb just hide it behind a giant hidden thing and put a disclaimer in giant letters.

I actually like this better. Effortpost incoming. Fire yours off PFF, you might give me more to ramble about

Ragnar · Post by **Ragnar** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:51 am

Sweet, I was curious about that.

Factory Factory · Post by **Factory Factory** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:59 am

FARTS, I lost it :C

Here's the summary:

This talks about sex some!

BackgroundPony · Post by **BackgroundPony** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:59 am

It amazes me how this crazy idea that pleasing your female partner is some great secret ever came about. It took me a little bit of anatomy knowledge and simple attentiveness with my first partner to figure out. The idea that it's nearly impossible was probably cooked up by some lazy dude once long ago and then just propagated to the other lazy dudes because it's a great excuse for dudes to be lazy.

Factory Factory · Post by **Factory Factory** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:04 am

I think it more likely comes from the Victorian English, some of the most repressed, perverted, and downright loony-about-sex people ever. I mean, first they stop believing in the female orgasm, then they develop the theory of hysteria, a mysterious disease whereby women become restless and irritable but they seem to respond really well to massages between the legs until they have a "hysterical paroxysm" and for some reason they seem much calmer now! What a mystery.

I'm not sure if it's more or less dumb than the version the Greeks thought up, that the uterus was a living critter that sometimes wandered and pushed your guts around all willy-nilly.

Scuderia · Post by **Scuderia** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:29 am

Watch where you step.

Madeline · Post by **Madeline** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:39 am

Dangit, there's a uterus in the back garden again, tearing up all the sweetpeas. The dang things just won't sit still!

Snow Drift · Post by **Snow Drift** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:41 am

Darn it people, now I'm imagining a uterus migration and it is making me giggle like an idiot.

Ragnar · Post by **Ragnar** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:57 am

[quote="Snow post_id=49236 time=1372398098 user_id=1]Darn it people, now I'm imagining a uterus migration and it is making me giggle like an idiot.[/quote]
In my head, they ambulate by hopping forward like ferrets.

(?) · Post by **Momo** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:03 am

(Hidden for frank discussion of sex in a clinical and non-titillating fashion, and tangential rants about feminist sexual politics)

First off, yes this is an exaggerated stereotype. Many MANY men are incredibly transfixed with their partner's pleasure. The whole penis size thing alone is an entirely male construct as well. Yes, there are a few 'size queens' out there but for a lot of women, average is more than fine. Any sex therapist can tell you that 99% of his or her clients unsatisfied with penis size are men unsatisfied with their own. For most people on the receiving end of a penis, size is only a small part the overall pleasure, and there is sure as hell such a thing as too big. Most men boast about their ability to pleasure women, and longevity and technique are major points of insecurity - even if that insecurity is largely unspoken. Hell, the whole stereotype may be a cultural expression of that insecurity. But maybe I'm reaching.

Yes, there are people who do really give no shits about anyone's pleasure but their own, but they're narcissistic assholes outside the bedroom too.

Second point on simultaneous orgasms - this is a big, big misconception that leads to a hell of a lot of sexual dysfunction. Everything I've read says the same thing: Simultaneous orgasm is an impossible ideal. Yes, you'll get it once in a while. And yes, it's fantastic. But it's also like winning 20 bucks in the lottery. Yes it's going to happen eventually, but no it's not going to happen every time. And you know what? Niether will orgasms. Yes, even sometimes the man. A key component of a healthy and modern sexual attitude is that orgasms are not the goal. The goal is in getting to orgasm. Sex is about the stimulation, the exploration, the closeness, and where present, the love. Sex shouldn't be big serious hard work. It should be fun, laid back, and free of expectations. And it's a funny thing: You can actually have easier orgasms if you don't focus on them.

Disclaimer before I go on: There are many, many causes both physical and psychological for sexual dysfunction. I by no means wish to devalue any persons who may have a sexual dysfunction whether mentioned below or not, nor people who are asexual, transgendered or bi/gay.

Most women have little trouble achieving orgasm, given enough time. It's just that they usually take longer than men, so you will need to be at it longer. But by that same token, female orgasms tend to be a little more elusive than men's. Both of these lead to the misconception that women are 'impossible' to please. In reality it just takes a little work and a little knowledge. And it doesn't need to be textbook knowledge. It's better if it's not. She knows how to stimulate herself, and that technique will work best on her alone. So communicate with every partner.

Big caveat here, though, and it ties back in with the idea of simultaneous orgasm: one reason that some women can't achieve orgasm is that there is too much of an emphasis placed either on her or her partner on the event. The WORST dirty talk you can say to a woman is "I wanna make you come". Not only can make give off bad vibes, but it places a lot of pressure on the woman to perform. And yes, some men get this too. Just as fears of longevity can psych a man into premature ejaculation. The latter situation generally doesn't come up as often with women because they tend to be more easily multiorgasmic. But these aren't so much dysfunctions as normal foibles that happen to everyone.

Another big reason that women can sometimes have difficulty achieving orgasm is an overdeveloped sense of shame around having sex. Misogyny does a looooooot to tell women they're horrible dirty sluts for having even self-delivered sexual pleasure. Hell, did you know that up to the 50s, clitoral stimulation was considered by most American culture to be considered "lesbian" behaviour? It's not a well-known fact because they were all super uptight about sex in the media anyway, but yes. It was gay in the same way that male anal prostate stimulation is STILL considered by modern culture to be gay (pro tip: it isn't. it's actually great to a lot of straight men. Not all of them, though). But yeah, the only 'straight' way to have an orgasm was through vaginal stimulation. And not all women can reach orgasm from vaginal stimulation alone (everyone's pleasure is wired differently).

Our Bodies, Ourselves really did a lot for women to break the twisted misogynist stigma attached to women enjoying sex, but it's still to the point that the number of girls so ashamed of their vulvas that they simply don't take the time to educate or familiarize themselves with their own bodies is practically pandemic. Remember that really funny video game about teaching female-bodied people to masturbate? Not so funny now, huh? The level of ignorance perpetuated by shame is astounding. Some women can't find their clitoris, and plenty of others think the g-spot is a myth (pro tip: it isn't. it's actually great to a lot of women. Though not all of them. See above regarding vaginal stimulation). So yeah, it's a wonder so many chauvinists complain about women being literally impossible to please.

Honestly, the best way to ensure you both get pleasure is to not focus on orgasms too much, and to be aware of and respond to your partner's wants, needs, and comfort level. Make sure you're both relaxed, having fun and are in a good headspace. Overvaluing or mysticising the orgasm can trigger performance anxiety or shame, so don't be all serious. Sex can be intense and heavy with passion, but that's not the same as serious. Communicate outside the bedroom about it, preferably when you're not horny. And learn to respond to each other's body signals in the bedroom. The key to good sex is nonverbal communication skills. This is why a healthy sex life is important to a relationship - it's one of the most intense nonverbal conversations you'll ever have with another person.

For more on the size thing, check out Sex Nerd Sandra's episode: Does Size Matter? I really recommend listening to the whole back catalog if you're at all interested in sex education, it's a wonderfully informative series, and it's LGB and trans-aware. She uses great language like "male-bodied person" instead of "man" to describe penis havers. Something I should have done more in the above section, but the original question was on cisgendered heterosexual perspectives, and I'm a little rusty on my sex ed lingo.

Preview edit: Hysteria is also a pretty funny British movie about the invention of the vibrator... Even if it does suffer from the problems common to feminist movies focus-grouped into appealing to a mainstream media.
(Hidden because it's the trailer to a pretty funny British movie about the invention of the vibrator)

PhoolCat · Post by **PhoolCat** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:29 am

One thing that has always puzzled me about this whole evolutionary discussion:

(hidden for sextalk)

Lazy · Post by **Lazy** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:34 am

Kinda along with what Momar said-

Many men feel that if they do anything but PiV sex to get a woman off, they've failed-it's unmasculine to them to get a woman off any other way, and failing to make her cum via PiV is unacceptable. Which of course leads to really unfair, unrealistic standards for everyone involved. It's no wonder so many men lie about their sexual prowess and so many women end up faking orgasm, when a majority of women can't get off without clitoral stimulation but at the same time there's this idea that doing anything besides penis->into vagina is unmanly and submissive, especially going down on a woman. I may be gay but even I know that anyone who's having only PiV sex is likely having some pretty bad sex.

By the way: I don't remember how I originally found it, but this is super interesting.

I think seeing different(and more extreme) gender roles and ideas about sex from other cultures helps to highlight how strange all of this stuff is.

Some choice bits:

The biggest difference is that sex in Japan is not a mutual sharing experience with both partners spontaneously doing whatever they feel like or enjoy whenever they feel like doing it. Sex has rules and sex has roles just as every social interaction in Japan has rules and roles. There is an active partner and a passive partner. Active means moving; passive means unmoving. In heterosexual sex, the active partner is always male, and the passive partner is always female. In gay sex you work out your roles beforehand: the seme is active, the uke is passive (for gay guys); the tachi is active, the neko is passive (for gay women). If you are familiar with seme/uke conventions from yaoi manga, you can use them as a way of relating to what I’m talking about, because those conventions are not a fictional construct, randomly decided upon by a group of yaoi mangaka. Straight people have sex like that too, in reality.

So there is an active partner and a passive partner, which causes various flow on effects. You can’t have “Whoo-hoo! Go for it!" sex because both partners are constrained by their roles. The passive partner (obviously) because she can’t move, and the active partner because he has to take care of the passive partner, instructing her on what to do and exerting himself so that she has a good time.

I also can’t emphasise enough just how passive the passive partner is. The way a woman kisses is by submissively opening her mouth, not moving her tongue unless she is cued to do so; if she’s really feminine she won’t open her mouth at all, until she’s told to. Sometimes women will move around a (very) little during sex, but mostly not at all. The slang term for a woman who lies completely still in bed is maguro (tuna). For me, with my western sensibilities and preconceptions, calling someone a ‘tuna’ in bed sounds like an insult, conjuring up images of cold dead fish, but in Japan that word has a very positive connotation. Tuna’s an expensive delicacy.

Part of what was so bamboozling the first time I had sex in Japan was that I didn’t know there was a Way of Sex, with strict gendered roles, and I just was happily doing my own thing, throwing my partner into total confusion. Seiji told me much later that dating me made him feel like he was gay, because I was active in bed, and he couldn’t connect that with anything except masculinity.

Also-

PhoolCat wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:29 am
(hidden for sextalk)
If early/quick male orgasm/ejeculation is such an evolutionary advantage, why does it turn us into comatose vegetables for several minutes??

Factory Factory · Post by **Factory Factory** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:42 am

Uh... I do not think that's a universal experience, PhoolCat.

PhoolCat · Post by **PhoolCat** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 5:00 am

Welp, I live and learn

I by no means thought it completely universal, but anecdotal evidence from friends and colleagues led me to believe it widespread

Madeline · Post by **Madeline** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 5:39 am

Would age have anything to do with that? I don't mean that in a nasty way, it's just that younger men are more hormonal and might have a much shorter refractory period. So it's probably easier for an 18 year old to recover quickly than a 40 year old.

PhoolCat · Post by **PhoolCat** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 5:47 am

Nope, it's been like that since I was one of them young men with the hormonals

Madeline · Post by **Madeline** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 5:57 am

FWIW it's not the first time I've heard somebody say that it makes them sleepy.

Demeh · Post by **Demeh** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:06 am

I wouldn't call it being a comatose vegetable aside from being really relaxed, afterwards. It's not really different from the feeling you get after having eaten a big meal, and as sexual arousal, resting and digesting are all associated with the parasympathetic nervous system, so it's not really weird that we're not pumped up and bouncing around after sex, even though we might have been actually bouncing around during the act. It just makes me wanna lie down, snuggle and cuddle, really. And yes, sometimes I fall asleep fairly quickly

West Filly · Post by **West Filly** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:33 am

I received a letter from the psych nurse today. It was just to let me know that I was being referred to my GP, which I already worked out myself after a bunch of phone calls.

They said that it'd be my GP who needed to deal with my gender identity. They wanted me to speak to her about it soon, but I've already done that.

What's significant about this letter is that they say "I want you to speak to the GP to treat your gender identity" and then "you can speak to us if your situation becomes despairing". I think they're able to see that my gender identity, while not the only source of stress and depression, is central. It sounds like they're taking me seriously, and maybe that's as a result of me being a bit of a jerk to them over the phone.

But that's not why I'm overjoyed today. I'm overjoyed because I've just received the first letter ever that addresses me with "Dear Zara"

doodlesplat · Post by **doodlesplat** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:39 am

Madeline · Post by **Madeline** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:45 am

[quote="In post_id=49247 time=1372419207 user_id=130]I received a letter from the psych nurse today. It was just to let me know that I was being referred to my GP, which I already worked out myself after a bunch of phone calls.

They said that it'd be my GP who needed to deal with my gender identity. They wanted me to speak to her about it soon, but I've already done that.

What's significant about this letter is that they say "I want you to speak to the GP to treat your gender identity" and then "you can speak to us if your situation becomes despairing". I think they're able to see that my gender identity, while not the only source of stress and depression, is central. It sounds like they're taking me seriously, and maybe that's as a result of me being a bit of a jerk to them over the phone.

But that's not why I'm overjoyed today. I'm overjoyed because I've just received the first letter ever that addresses me with "Dear Zara"[/quote]

That's wonderful! Congratulations, Zara.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:48 am

[quote="In post_id=49247 time=1372419207 user_id=130]I received a letter from the psych nurse today. It was just to let me know that I was being referred to my GP, which I already worked out myself after a bunch of phone calls.

They said that it'd be my GP who needed to deal with my gender identity. They wanted me to speak to her about it soon, but I've already done that.

What's significant about this letter is that they say "I want you to speak to the GP to treat your gender identity" and then "you can speak to us if your situation becomes despairing". I think they're able to see that my gender identity, while not the only source of stress and depression, is central. It sounds like they're taking me seriously, and maybe that's as a result of me being a bit of a jerk to them over the phone.

But that's not why I'm overjoyed today. I'm overjoyed because I've just received the first letter ever that opens with "Dear Zara"[/quote]

Grats Zara!

Off topic, thanks for the response everyone. I knew the topic was going to be rather personal and private to talk about, but I guess quite a few people here were interested in learning about it.

This part hidden again because sex blah blah blah...

But anyway, I gotta get to work. Thank you again everyone.

Madeline · Post by **Madeline** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:53 am

Snowfire wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:48 am

Grats Zara!

Off topic, thanks for the response everyone. I knew the topic was going to be rather personal and private to talk about, but I guess quite a few people here were interested in learning about it.

This part hidden again because sex blah blah blah...

One of the reasons I was thinking about this was because... well for the first time I found a woman who I find very attractive and also has never had a boyfriend. She's six years younger than me (21), and she's very smart, funny, and beautiful. The only potential problem is that she works at Starbucks with me... and she's one of my managers. I don't know if that would work out because a) I work with her, and b) I don't know if Starbucks has a "no dating other partners" policy.

Anyway, I wanted to know about the orgasm stuff because, if we did start dating, and we DID eventually get to sex, I wanted to make sure I was "doing it right".

I'll admit, before Momar posted his really long post, I was thinking that if a guy was having sex with a girl and she didn't orgasm, it was a failure on the guy's part. I didn't realize that orgasms were something that didn't necessarily needed to be achieved every single time, as long as both people were enjoying it. Because that's what I would want with my girlfriend. As long as she's happy, that's all that matters to me.
But anyway, I gotta get to work. Thank you again everyone.

One thing I would caution you on: It's generally not a good idea to date co-workers because if something goes bad in your relationship it can cause huge problems at work, and vice versa. So be careful.

Aramek · Post by **Aramek** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:13 am

[quote="Pony post_id=49241 time=1372408979 user_id=54]Uh... I do not think that's a universal experience, PhoolCat.[/quote]
You must be doing it wrong.

Lilli · Post by **Lilli** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:14 am

[quote="In post_id=49247 time=1372419207 user_id=130]I received a letter from the psych nurse today. It was just to let me know that I was being referred to my GP, which I already worked out myself after a bunch of phone calls.

They said that it'd be my GP who needed to deal with my gender identity. They wanted me to speak to her about it soon, but I've already done that.

What's significant about this letter is that they say "I want you to speak to the GP to treat your gender identity" and then "you can speak to us if your situation becomes despairing". I think they're able to see that my gender identity, while not the only source of stress and depression, is central. It sounds like they're taking me seriously, and maybe that's as a result of me being a bit of a jerk to them over the phone.

But that's not why I'm overjoyed today. I'm overjoyed because I've just received the first letter ever that addresses me with "Dear Zara"[/quote]

Awwwww, you story is making me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

This is really cool!

PhoolCat · Post by **PhoolCat** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:18 am

Aramek wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:13 am
You must be doing it wrong.

Yeah, probably - but wth, we're still having fun on the rare occasions things actually happen!

[quote="In post_id=49247 time=1372419207 user_id=130]I'm overjoyed because I've just received the first letter ever that addresses me with "Dear Zara"[/quote]

And now so am I!

(?) · Post by **Momo** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:30 am

Snowfire wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:48 am

Grats Zara!

Off topic, thanks for the response everyone. I knew the topic was going to be rather personal and private to talk about, but I guess quite a few people here were interested in learning about it.

This part hidden again because sex blah blah blah...

One of the reasons I was thinking about this was because... well for the first time I found a woman who I find very attractive and also has never had a boyfriend. She's six years younger than me (21), and she's very smart, funny, and beautiful. The only potential problem is that she works at Starbucks with me... and she's one of my managers. I don't know if that would work out because a) I work with her, and b) I don't know if Starbucks has a "no dating other partners" policy.

Anyway, I wanted to know about the orgasm stuff because, if we did start dating, and we DID eventually get to sex, I wanted to make sure I was "doing it right".

I'll admit, before Momar posted his really long post, I was thinking that if a guy was having sex with a girl and she didn't orgasm, it was a failure on the guy's part. I didn't realize that orgasms were something that didn't necessarily needed to be achieved every single time, as long as both people were enjoying it. Because that's what I would want with my girlfriend. As long as she's happy, that's all that matters to me.
But anyway, I gotta get to work. Thank you again everyone.

This will likely be a problem because companies generally have a big problem with someone dating a subordinate. If she's your manager, you'll likely either need to transfer or find a new job. If you get promoted, however, the policy might relax a little. Apparently Starbucks has a pretty rigid fraternization policy.

Lazy wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:34 am
Kinda along with what Momar said-
By the way: I don't remember how I originally found it, but this is super interesting.

I think seeing different(and more extreme) gender roles and ideas about sex from other cultures helps to highlight how strange all of this stuff is.

Some choice bits:

This is pretty terrible and misogynist. But hey, I learned something new.

[quote="In post_id=49247 time=1372419207 user_id=130]I received a letter from the psych nurse today. It was just to let me know that I was being referred to my GP, which I already worked out myself after a bunch of phone calls.

They said that it'd be my GP who needed to deal with my gender identity. They wanted me to speak to her about it soon, but I've already done that.

What's significant about this letter is that they say "I want you to speak to the GP to treat your gender identity" and then "you can speak to us if your situation becomes despairing". I think they're able to see that my gender identity, while not the only source of stress and depression, is central. It sounds like they're taking me seriously, and maybe that's as a result of me being a bit of a jerk to them over the phone.

But that's not why I'm overjoyed today. I'm overjoyed because I've just received the first letter ever that addresses me with "Dear Zara"[/quote]

This is great and long-overdue news. I'm glad you're making progress. Isn't it great how nice it feels to have someone acknowledge your feelings?

cobalt impurity · Post by **cobalt impurity** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:49 am

Snowfire wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 7:48 am
This part hidden again because sex blah blah blah...

One of the reasons I was thinking about this was because... well for the first time I found a woman who I find very attractive and also has never had a boyfriend. She's six years younger than me (21), and she's very smart, funny, and beautiful. The only potential problem is that she works at Starbucks with me... and she's one of my managers. I don't know if that would work out because a) I work with her, and b) I don't know if Starbucks has a "no dating other partners" policy.

Anyway, I wanted to know about the orgasm stuff because, if we did start dating, and we DID eventually get to sex, I wanted to make sure I was "doing it right".

I'll admit, before Momar posted his really long post, I was thinking that if a guy was having sex with a girl and she didn't orgasm, it was a failure on the guy's part. I didn't realize that orgasms were something that didn't necessarily needed to be achieved every single time, as long as both people were enjoying it. Because that's what I would want with my girlfriend. As long as she's happy, that's all that matters to me.
But anyway, I gotta get to work. Thank you again everyone.

I can almost guarantee you that any major company like that is going to have a clause in everyone's contract about managers not dating their subordinates. It's also usually a bad idea to try and date someone you work with all the time.

(?) · Post by **Momo** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:58 am

My corporation has some pretty stringent policies, too. But really, it only applies to people within your own department. If you work in a different section of the same building, it's generally fine. And nine times out of ten, it is none of the company's business. It's when it affects your work that it becomes the company's business, and nobody wants that to happen.

Also, given the homophobic bile of the average YouTube commenter, they've gotta be pretty pissed about the frontpage.

Hey you guys. Homophobe tears? They're pretty delicious.

Aramek · Post by **Aramek** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:59 am

PhoolCat wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:18 am
Yeah, probably - but wth, we're still having fun

No, no, I'm with you. If you don't instantly go unconscious you must be doing it incorrectly.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:06 am

Guess I'll have to wait 5 more years to find someone else.

Octavia · Post by **Octavia** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:21 am

PhoolCat wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:29 am
One thing that has always puzzled me about this whole evolutionary discussion:

(hidden for sextalk)
If early/quick male orgasm/ejeculation is such an evolutionary advantage, why does it turn us into comatose vegetables for several minutes??

(?) · Post by **Momo** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:51 am

Octavia wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:21 am

Because as long as you are still able to spread your DNA, that's all that really matters for evolution to occur. Female preying mantises sometimes eat their mates, which doesn't seem like a good evolutionary trait, but since it happens after the deed is done, reproduction still occurs and the trait stays.

Snowfire wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:06 am
Guess I'll have to wait 5 more years to find someone else.

Nonsense. That girl came into your life pretty unexpectedly, right? So will the next one. If you want to take up actively looking for a partner, you may want to check out the romance thread.

CapacitorPlague · Post by **CapacitorPlague** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:00 am

I just wanted to say congratulations, Zara. I know you've gone through hell and seeing your tenacity cause things to go well is inspiring.

Ninetails · Post by **Ninetails** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:05 am

So I was wondering - has anyone heard Macklemore's song about gay marriage?

This actually played on the radio last week once. I haven't heard it since, and I'm not really a fan of his music, but I'm rather impressed that he wrote a song so blunt about gay marriage.

West Filly · Post by **West Filly** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:24 am

Momar wrote: ↑
Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:30 am
This is great and long-overdue news. I'm glad you're making progress. Isn't it great how nice it feels to have someone acknowledge your feelings?

Especially in an official context. It's certainly a thing when my GP feels the need to say the words "you're not mad, okay."

In other news, the UK courts have made a ruling on a certain case. This ruling has the trans community scratching its heads and asking some difficult questions. Hidden for sexual content.

There's a person called Scott. Scott was assigned as a female at birth.

Scott has stated a desire to have their sex changed away from their current female state. It's possible, and likely, that Scott is a trans man (but this isn't stated in the court records).

Judging by the pronouns that the justices use in their reports, Scott has not had their gender legally recognised: In the UK, if you have been living full time for 2 years, and meet certain other criteria, you can receive legal recognition for you gender. As I have said, judging by the pronouns that are stated in the reports for this case, Scott has not had their gender legally recognised. But whether or not they intend to, or have made progress toward this, is not stated.

Scott met a girl over the internet. Scott and this person, called "M" in the legal documentation, engaged in a relationship and eventually met. M states that she believed Scott was a man at the time. Scott and M desired to have sex, and M went to buy condoms. Scott, at the time, was wearing what the justices report as "a strap-on dildo which resembled a penis". Scott penetrated M with the strap on.

M later learned that Scott was physically a female, and says that she felt physically sick at this revelation.

In UK law, if sex is not consented, it's an offence (obviously). There are clauses that state that consent is void if

- you intentionally deceive someone about the nature of the relevant act.
- you impersonate someone known to the complainant.

Scott was found guilty. However, Scott pleaded guilty and was advised to plead guilty.

Everyone is scratching their heads. Was Scott guilty because they deceived someone about the nature of the act (deceptively using a dildo?) Was Scott guilty because they didn't disclose that they were physically female? Was Scott guilty because their male identity is not legal, and so this would be impersonating the male persona that M consented to having sex with? Was Scott guilty because the judge saw that M was distressed about the event and found a way to 'get some justice?'

What everyone is wondering - If I'm trans, and I go stealth, do I risk getting prosecuted for rape if I do not disclose trans status? Is that just pre op? Is that pre legal gender recognition? Basically, what actually happened in this case, and what does it mean to us?

Truth being told, we don't particularly know about Scott and M, it's just that this series of events has put the (stealth) trans community on edge. We want to have a clear answer to the question "is consent void if I do not disclose trans status?"

Factory Factory · Post by **Factory Factory** (?) » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:31 am

Huh. That is a real humdinger. If I were British and Trans*, I'd be kinda terrified

I'm beyond thrilled that you've found some supporting medical folks from within the NHS though. If anyone deserves a good turn, it's you, IWF.

Pineapple · Post by **Pineapple** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:34 am

Oh yes, I love Macklemore and this is one of my favorite song.s

The official video is really damn beautiful too