A thought experiment involving psychological gender and physical love.

Asry

I initiated this debate in work as the three lovely people I sit with are awesome and we have had many a random and stupid and just idiotic conversation.

This is important to stress. Idiotic and inane conversation.

I'm very interested in quantum mechanics and thought experiment and will be asking this question completely objectively as such.

OK. Here Goes.

Background:

1) A cis male was in the act of having carnal relations with a biological woman.

2) The woman is thinking about how she feels she's missing part of her anatomy, a vital part of who she is.

3) She's thinking about being male and does she feel male, and does this feel right for her.

Question being:

Is the cis man having carnal relations with

a) a woman
b) a transgender person
c) the moment in-between.

Therefore is there a moment in-between being both or neither?

Garys Xbox

If you were having relations with a woman or man and they were imagining they were a Gay Fish, would that be Beastiality?

Asry

Garys Xbox wrote: »

If you were having relations with a woman or man and they were imagining they were a Gay Fish, would that be Beastiality?

Emmmm. I dunno. My mom thinks bisexuality is the same as beastiality. But that's not very relevant here. And my mom has been gravely misinformed.

Also, you're a pot-stirrer.

EDIT: It's not beastiality. Beastiality is only applicable if the person doing the ...action...is a person and not an animal. Because animals don't know what beastiality is. Therefore if you were having carnal relations with a woman who was thinking she was a fish, it wouldn't be beastiality, no. It's sad that I actually thought this out.

FURTHER EDIT: Get back on track. The first post and already my question is derailed.

Garys Xbox

Pot-stirrer? Not at all Sir/Madam. I stir in the cup.

azezil

It all depends if the man is aware of the biological woman's state of mind and or if he fully understands what that means.

So potentially any of those answers is possible.

Garys Xbox

I work with a guy and he is having a 'Skype' Relationship with a 'Woman' in America, Ohio. He is head over heals for this chick. The thing is tho, This 'Woman' is really a man. Now with all the sex messaging that has transpired between the two involved would that make my colleague a homosexual?

Asry

Se,, I don't know. I guess that should go to the philosophy forum?

But it makes me thinks of those massively multiplayer games online, like World of Warcraft, where it's well known that men playing as men have virtual relationships with female characters who are also, in fact, played by men.

Things are blurring more! Awesomesauce.

Annasopra

Garys Xbox wrote: »

I work with a guy and he is having a 'Skype' Relationship with a 'Woman' in America, Ohio. He is head over heals for this chick. The thing is tho, This 'Woman' is really a man. Now with all the sex messaging that has transpired between the two involved would that make my colleague a homosexual?

what do you mean by 'this woman is really a man'? Do you mean F2m or m2f?

Shakti

Asry wrote: »

Is the cis man having carnal relations with

a) a woman
b) a transgender person
c) the moment in-between.

Therefore is there a moment in-between being both or neither?

How aware is he of his partners thoughts and feelings at the time and in general?

MrTsSnickers

I'd say "a", simply because the woman hasn't actually identified herself as someone who is transgendered, either to herself or to her partner. Now if they had a conversation and she said that she felt that she was missing something and then identified that she felt as though she should have been born male, that's a different kettle of fish.

WonderWoman!

mango salsa wrote: »

what do you mean by 'this woman is really a man'? Do you mean F2m or m2f?

was just wondering that myself

baby and crumble

a few things come to mind here.

1) it is my belief that the world is socially constructed. Therefore, there is no objective truth when it comes to the physical world, only our perceptions of the world. We can never be 'outside' our perceptions to know any 'truth' that may or may not exist. "Science" is a collection of mutual and corroborated perceptions of phenomena in the world.

2) If the world is socially constructed, then really, there is no answer to this question, because the answer(s) reside in the two actors in this scenario.

3) There is of course another option- that there are 3 realities at play; the reality as percieved by the person making love, the reality as percieved by the person being made love to, and the 'objective' observer, us. However, we each of us bring our own realities into play, when interpreting data. So, for the person making love, their reality may be that they are making lve to a woman, as the perceptions they have at that point in time (a penis in a vagina) correlates with what they know of man-woman sex. The person being made love to, may feel they are a woman who wants a penis for the period of lovemaking, or feels their anatomy is fundamentally wrong, and may see themselves and transgendered. The reality of the observer will, much like the person making love, will base their perceptions on the available data: penis in vagina= man-woman sex.

So really, following that line of enquiry, there are 3 realities, none of which are knowable for the other 2. All are equally valid.

:cool:

Sonics2k

mango salsa wrote: »

what do you mean by 'this woman is really a man'? Do you mean F2m or m2f?

My guess is that he meant it's a Man pretending to be a Woman. Y'know the old internet joke.

yawha

Pretty simple I would have thought. A transgendered male with a female body is having sex with a cisgendered male with a male body.

It is heterosexual sexual intercourse. Sex is between the legs, gender is between the ears. Sexuality, as I understand it, is to do with what physical sex, not which "brain gender" you are attracted to.

Personally, I don't think one's "brain gender" has anything to do with personality or behaviours. I think any differences are culturally derived.

Rather, from what I understand of "brain gender" and transgenderism, it's more to do with one's innate feeling of whether they should be male or female, or how your brain "syncs" up with your body, if that makes any sense...

I imagine I'm going to be corrected on some of this. Honestly, I don't understand everything to do with gender and sexuality fully, I thought I did, and got quite interested in the subject, but it turns out the more I read about it, the more confusing it becomes.

Asry

Shakti wrote: »

How aware is he of his partners thoughts and feelings at the time and in general?

Oh, he wouldn't be, I suppose. It doesn't matter what he knows or thinks - only in what is and what is not. I mean in the objective nature of reality.

Asry

baby and crumble wrote: »

a few things come to mind here.

1) it is my belief that the world is socially constructed. Therefore, there is no objective truth when it comes to the physical world, only our perceptions of the world. We can never be 'outside' our perceptions to know any 'truth' that may or may not exist. "Science" is a collection of mutual and corroborated perceptions of phenomena in the world.

2) If the world is socially constructed, then really, there is no answer to this question, because the answer(s) reside in the two actors in this scenario.

3) There is of course another option- that there are 3 realities at play; the reality as percieved by the person making love, the reality as percieved by the person being made love to, and the 'objective' observer, us. However, we each of us bring our own realities into play, when interpreting data. So, for the person making love, their reality may be that they are making lve to a woman, as the perceptions they have at that point in time (a penis in a vagina) correlates with what they know of man-woman sex. The person being made love to, may feel they are a woman who wants a penis for the period of lovemaking, or feels their anatomy is fundamentally wrong, and may see themselves and transgendered. The reality of the observer will, much like the person making love, will base their perceptions on the available data: penis in vagina= man-woman sex.

So really, following that line of enquiry, there are 3 realities, none of which are knowable for the other 2. All are equally valid.

:cool:

Baby, you rock my mismatched Pennys socks so hard right now and have cheered up my morose Saturday morning no end

yawha

baby and crumble wrote: »

So really, following that line of enquiry, there are 3 realities, none of which are knowable for the other 2. All are equally valid.

How do you know there are 3 realities? If all truth is subjective how do you know that both parties involved are actual conscious entities outside of your own reality?

Asry

yawha wrote: »

How do you know there are 3 realities? If all truth is subjective how do you know that both parties involved are actual conscious entities outside of your own reality?

But if none of which are knowable for the other 2, there's no way of knowing if there's 3 or not.

Again, thought experiment. But I would agree with the logic of your statement - none of us knows for any surety whatsoever if any of this is real at all.

Kanoe

Asry wrote: »

1) A cis male was in the act of having carnal relations with a biological woman.

2) The woman is thinking about how she feels she's missing part of her anatomy, a vital part of who she is.

3) She's thinking about being male and does she feel male, and does this feel right for her.


Is the cis man having carnal relations with

a) a woman
b) a transgender person
c) the moment in-between.

Therefore is there a moment in-between being both or neither?

are you not really asking if this woman is a transgender man in the process of figuring it out?

she could just be having shítty sex.

Kanoe

Asry wrote: »

Therefore is there a moment in-between being both or neither?

should have highlighted this part of the question. Think I answered this elsewhere but if it helps..


http://gender.wikia.com/wiki/Genderqueer

is a catch-all term for gender identities other than man and woman, thus outside of the gender binaryand heteronormativity.[1] People who identify as genderqueer may think of themselves as one or more of the following:
both man and woman
neither man nor woman (genderless, agender)
moving between genders (gender fluid)[2]
third gendered or other-gendered; includes those who do not place a name to their gender[3]
having an overlap of, or blurred lines between, gender identity and sexual orientation[4][5]

baby and crumble

yawha wrote: »

How do you know there are 3 realities? If all truth is subjective how do you know that both parties involved are actual conscious entities outside of your own reality?

Very good point. For all I know I'm the only person who exists, ever. After all, that's the only thing anyone can logically argue, (assuming of course you ascribe to social constructionism). Cartesian logic FTW!

deirdre_dub

Sonics2k wrote: »

mango salsa wrote: »

Garys Xbox wrote: »

I work with a guy and he is having a 'Skype' Relationship with a 'Woman' in America, Ohio. He is head over heals for this chick. The thing is tho, This 'Woman' is really a man

what do you mean by 'this woman is really a man'? Do you mean F2m or m2f?

My guess is that he meant it's a Man pretending to be a Woman.

Well, given that the relationship has occurred over Skype, and given that Gary's friend has fallen head over heels in love, then if it is a man pretending to be a woman (as opposed to a transgender person), I'd have to say that Gary's friend is definitely gay, and likely involved in some pretty kinky sex .

Sonics2k wrote: »

Y'know the old internet joke.

No - I don't. I'm aware of tons of internet transphobia that makes the lives of trans people hell that many pass off as "jokes".

Shakti

Asry wrote: »

Oh, he wouldn't be, I suppose. It doesn't matter what he knows or thinks - only in what is and what is not. I mean in the objective nature of reality.

His 'belief'(A) is one of three variables (more if you like) in your thought experiment and unlike the other two it is clearly defined ie. he believes he is a cis-male having sex with a cis-female
ie.
A = cis-male
A = having sex with a cis-female.

The second variable.....his partners 'belief' and 'identity' (B) is as yet less clearly defined at least to us the 'observers' but they do belief they are having sex with a cis-male.
B = male/female/trans/no gender/third gender/questioning/gender non conforming.......
B = having sex with cis-male.


The third is the 'observer' (C) ie. 'us' who are required to make a judgement based on the information provided and our own internal equation or view of gender and sex which can be complex and vary quite a lot depending on who runs the experiment.
C= ?

Therefore I would say you could have a different answer each time depending on who runs the experiment.

If you provided more concrete values for B's 'belief',
'gender-identity', and view of 'gender' I think it would provide you with more constant outcomes depending again on what the observer brings to it themselves.

nb. I am in no way when I say 'observer' referring to Neils Bohrs or his work.


So whats your conclusions having run your experiment?

Sonics2k

deirdre_dub wrote: »

No - I don't. I'm aware of tons of internet transphobia that makes the lives of trans people hell that many pass off as "jokes".

Apologies for off-topic post, I just wanted to apologise to deirdre_dub in case my comment was mis-understood.

When I mentioned the old internet joke, I was referring to men pretending to be women online, usually for the reason of winding someone up, cyber-sex, and in the case of numerous online games, getting things for free.

My comment had absolutely nothing to do with transgender.

WonderWoman!

guys I'm totally thick so this conversation is probably way out of my league so I'm going to wander round till I can understand it better;)

deirdre_dub

Sonics2k wrote: »

When I mentioned the old internet joke, I was referring to men pretending to be women online, usually for the reason of winding someone up, cyber-sex, and in the case of numerous online games, getting things for free.

One of the most dangerous myths about transgender people is that we are deceivers - that we do what we do in order to deceive people. It is a dehumanising and dangerous meme.

My comment had absolutely nothing to do with transgender.

OK - accepted - and apology accepted too.

scholar007

Asry wrote: »

I initiated this debate in work as the three lovely people I sit with are awesome and we have had many a random and stupid and just idiotic conversation.

This is important to stress. Idiotic and inane conversation.

I'm very interested in quantum mechanics and thought experiment and will be asking this question completely objectively as such.

OK. Here Goes.

Background:

1) A cis male was in the act of having carnal relations with a biological woman.

2) The woman is thinking about how she feels she's missing part of her anatomy, a vital part of who she is.

3) She's thinking about being male and does she feel male, and does this feel right for her.

Question being:

Is the cis man having carnal relations with

a) a woman
b) a transgender person
c) the moment in-between.

Therefore is there a moment in-between being both or neither?

A "biological woman" who the man is supplying what she is missing so everyones happy.

baby and crumble

scholar007 wrote: »

A "biological woman" who the man is supplying what she is missing so everyones happy.

That makes no sense. Having a penis in her is not the same as having a penis yourself... Or am I missing your point?

scholar007

baby and crumble wrote: »

That makes no sense. Having a penis in her is not the same as having a penis yourself... Or am I missing your point?

Probably

baby and crumble

Ok, well what is your point? Clearly not everyone in the scenario is happy, as the 'female' is actually not sure if being female is right for her, etc...

scholar007

baby and crumble wrote: »

Ok, well what is your point? Clearly not everyone in the scenario is happy, as the 'female' is actually not sure if being female is right for her, etc...

Well to be honest - if the female is not happy about being female, there is shag all she can do about it. You can't grow a penis overnight,no matter what websites say you can. If a fella isn't happy about being male, then he has options.......:)

deirdre_dub

scholar007 wrote: »

Well to be honest - if the female is not happy about being female, there is shag all she can do about it. You can't grow a penis overnight,no matter what websites say you can. If a fella isn't happy about being male, then he has options.......:)

For some strange reason, transgender people do not define the genders by what is or isn't in one's pants. A male is not defined by the presence of a penis, and a woman is not defined by the presence of breasts and vagina (or, should I say, the absence of a penis :rolleyes: ).

The cisgendered community is obsessed with what is and isn't in the pants of transgendered people. Speaking for myself, surgery isn't the most important thing by a long shot. Medically, the most important thing is HRT, and personally, the most important thing is social transition.

Shakti

scholar007 wrote: »

Well to be honest - if the female is not happy about being female, there is shag all she can do about it. You can't grow a penis overnight,no matter what websites say you can. If a fella isn't happy about being male, then he has options.......:)

for someone with a tag like "scholar" you know feck all about gender, how hard is it to be this chronically misinformed?

baby and crumble

scholar007 wrote: »

Well to be honest - if the female is not happy about being female, there is shag all she can do about it. You can't grow a penis overnight,no matter what websites say you can. If a fella isn't happy about being male, then he has options.......:)

While I completely agree with Deirdre on this one, technically, a womans clitoris is made up of EXACTLY the same 'material' as a penis, and so if you do want to gt into the specifics of what's in the pants, then it's perfectly possible for the surgery to take place.

But gender isn't just about having a penis or a vagina. If someone is miserable, hating herself, hating what is happening, how is a 'shag' going to help, honestly?

Annasopra

scholar007 wrote: »

Well to be honest - if the female is not happy about being female, there is shag all she can do about it. You can't grow a penis overnight,no matter what websites say you can. If a fella isn't happy about being male, then he has options.......:)

I didn't know there were websites saying you could but you seem to know a lot about them

WonderWoman!

mango salsa wrote: »

I didn't know there were websites saying you could but you seem to know a lot about them

I lol'd

yawha

How far has phalloplasty come, actually? Do there exist techniques to create neopenises which facilitate natural erections yet?

Annasopra

We had quite a number of rows back in December when people started bringing the issues of genitals into discussions about transgender issues. Bringing genitalia into discussions can be very offensive to transgendered people. I would ask that posters be aware that discussions around genitalia can cause offence and if there are any reported posts I will step into moderate

Asry

Yep I'm talking about psychological issues here, genitalia. Just to keep that point clear.

As a funny aside, my lovely pseudo-husband and I were changing the spare bed over the weekend where I set him this question. He immediately stopped putting on the pillowcases and kind of stared at me and then said -
"So, this is what you think about during sex, right?"

I protested and said the question was completely hypothetical but he wasn't convinced at all and continues to look at me strangely when he thinks I'm not looking.
He thinks I want a penis and that was my way of breaking everything to him!!

Kanoe

Asry wrote: »

Yep I'm talking about psychological issues here, genitalia. Just to keep that point clear.

As a funny aside, my lovely pseudo-husband and I were changing the spare bed over the weekend where I set him this question. He immediately stopped putting on the pillowcases and kind of stared at me and then said -
"So, this is what you think about during sex, right?"

I protested and said the question was completely hypothetical but he wasn't convinced at all and continues to look at me strangely when he thinks I'm not looking.
He thinks I want a penis and that was my way of breaking everything to him!!

honestly that was my first thought too, not you specifically but the hypothetical woman in the hypothetical scenario.

Asry

Kanoe wrote: »

honestly that was my first thought too, not you specifically but the hypothetical woman in the hypothetical scenario.

I don't entirely understand what you mean. Brain function low from tech support! Does not compute! Insert food here!

Kanoe

Asry wrote: »

I don't entirely understand what you mean. Brain function low from tech support! Does not compute! Insert food here!

sorry, didn't really explain well. I just had a visual of some poor lass laying there thinking about her lack of penis while having sex and all I could think was the earth must have been really moving for her.

WonderWoman!

Kanoe wrote: »

could think was the earth must have been really moving for her.

Sorry - before I can reply I have to know exactly what you were trying to say

Kanoe

WonderWoman! wrote: »

Sorry - before I can reply I have to know exactly what you were trying to say

think I was trying to say hahaha..ahh. I was trying to say the sex must have been mind blowing.


*gives asry a banana

WonderWoman!

Kanoe wrote: »

think I was trying to say hahaha..ahh. I was trying to say the sex must have been mind blowing.


*gives asry a banana

Ahh I get you now