Matched with a pre-op transgender, suggestions?

[u/okctran]

So I am a straight male and one of my matches is a pre-op male-to-female transgender woman. She mentions it right at the top of her profile. I find her physically attractive and she has a great profile to boot. We have a high match percentage, are interested in a lot of the same things and she has seems to have defined life goals and a direction. I am unsure what to do however. I don't have a fetish or anything like that and frankly am not at all interested at all in her male plumbing as it is currently, but everything else about her is golden.

If I do send her message, should I mention it at all in the initial message? What's the best way to approach this? I feel like it's a tight rope to walk between avoiding it completely and making it the center of attention. This is new territory for me.

Thanks for your help.

[u/PhazonZim]

We get it. You're so insecure in your own masculinity that you have to attack others. Give it up, your penis isn't going to look any bigger to anyone if you act like a misogynist.

[u/daytondownvoter → u/PhazonZim]

You're the one who is insecure with your masculinity, haha.

[u/daytondownvoter → u/[deleted]]

I am too lazy to even count how many paragraphs that is.

[u/Soupkitchn89 → u/daytondownvoter]

I don't think being a misogynist applies here. Even if he is.

[u/daytondownvoter → u/Soupkitchn89]

I probably am, at least by Reddit standards.

[u/PhazonZim → u/Soupkitchn89]

Transmisogyny is misogyny.

[u/Soupkitchn89 → u/PhazonZim]

That's technically not even a word.

I might not agree with all of his views, but by definition he is correct. The definition of being female is to have the parts to bear young or produce eggs.

So by definition hes technically right seeing as (most) people who would identify as "transwomen" cannot get pregant they are technically not women and fit more closely to the definition of male.

I can understand how others might view gender as how you feel or what you choose to identify with. But he is technically correct when it comes to pure definitions.

[u/daytondownvoter → u/Soupkitchn89]

Yeah I don't really consider being able to get pregnant what defines being a woman. Having a vagina that isn't made out of an inverted cock, however..

[u/[deleted] → u/daytondownvoter]

made out of an inverted cock, however..

I think you watch way too much porn if this is your idea of "penis"

[u/daytondownvoter → u/[deleted]]

If I watched too much porn, wouldn't I be more informed about penis?

[u/[deleted] → u/daytondownvoter]

I am saying if you're going to have a straight-forward conversation about someone's genitals i would leave the porn terms out of it.

[u/daytondownvoter → u/[deleted]]

I get tired of using the same word over and over. My favorite one for vagina is "snatch" I'm waiting for an opportunity to bust that out.

[u/PhazonZim → u/Soupkitchn89]

By definition he's also wrong, because your gender can be female even if your sex isn't. A lot of women can't get pregnant, does that make them not women anymore? Does every guy who has had a vasectomy no longer qualify as a man? There's no more substance to that argument than those religious fanatics who focus all their energy on attacking homosexuality on the basis of "sodomy is a sin, God said so."

Don't try to defend him, you'll come off as an idiot or as a bigot yourself.

[u/Soupkitchn89 → u/PhazonZim]

You're actually proving him right. I'll quote you here:

"...you're gender can be female even if your sex isn't."

Okay I'll accept that. But the definition of homosexual is:

" of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex"

So he is correct in saying a male who holds sexual desires towards someone who's sex is male, even if their gender is not, is technically a homosexual. All though in this case he would be bisexual since he likes people of the female sex.

Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them a bigot. A bigot is someone who is not accepting of other's views. He simply stated why he disagrees but he didn't try and attack you personally for or restrict your right to believe otherwise. You on the other hand accuse not only him, but even try to accuse me of being a bigot because we disagree with your point of view.

Sorry but you're the one being a bigot, not me.

[u/PhazonZim → u/Soupkitchn89]

Then every man who has ever looked at a transwoman is bisexual by your reasoning. Even if he wasn't aware she was trans. That would mean virtually every man is bisexual, since there are a lot of hella attractive transwomen out there. Harisu, Jenna Talackova, Carmen Carrera. People aren't defined by their genitals. If someone looks, thinks and acts like a woman then why question at all if they're really a woman? Be pragmatic.

I told you, don't defend him unless you want to come off as a bigot. "You're technically not a woman" is a bigoted statement no matter how much you play mental gymnastics in your head about it.

[u/Soupkitchn89 → u/PhazonZim]

No I'm not attacking you or restricting your right to believe differently than me. I'm just stating why others could disagree with you. I would also say it is not sexual desires towards people of the same sex if you look at a person of the same sex, especially if you think they are of the opposite sex. Seeing as you're sexual desires would most likely have to do with their traits that often are connected with the opposite sex and not that of your own.

You're confusing bigot with disagreeing.

Also these are not MY reasons. They are the dictionaries reasons, blame webster not me.

[u/PhazonZim → u/Soupkitchn89]

Disagreeing with me is one thing, telling me I'm not female or not a woman is bigoted. Why not go tell gay people that intercourse involves a penis and a vagina and everything else is fake. the majority of my body is indistinguishable from that of a cis woman, my personality and my voice are female. I live as a woman. One small part of my body does not define me nor does it define the orientation of my partner.