• 1st panel : spongebob in a stand caption reads “Single trans woman”
  • 2nd panel : a huge crowd gathered around spongebob
  • 3rd panel : spongebob adds a little paper on his table saying “I don’t use my penis”
  • 4th panel : the whole crowd left.
    • Chloë (she/her)OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      131 month ago

      At some point I think it’s just better not to tell people you’re trans , like If you have a neovagina and pass there is literally no visible difference.

      • Ada
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 month ago

        I have no desire to blend in to cishet society. I spent too long hiding in a closet to just get in to a new one, even if it is more comfortable than the old one

        • Chloë (she/her)OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 month ago

          You make a good point 👍🏻 I was moreso arguing for not disclosing you’re trans in situations it might be difficult. I whole heartedly agree with you otherwise<3

      • Norah (pup/it/she)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 month ago

        Bottom surgery leaves a fair few scars, and neovagina’s don’t always function in the same way. This might work for trans women that are straight, but I doubt it would work for those that are sapphic. Someone’s going to notice if they’re eating you out (please enjoy my dumb joke about men not giving head).

        • Ada
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 month ago

          I had bottom surgery 7 years ago, and my scars are pretty much invisible these days.

          That being said, I still don’t think people would mistake it for a cis vagina in the long term

        • Chloë (she/her)OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 month ago

          I’ve heard that even a gynecologist could be “fooled”, there is a lot of info about neovaginas out there I’m not sure what is true and what isn’t :/ (Joke enjoyed c: )

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 month ago

        That sounds rather dangerous. There seems to be a not-insignificant number of people who would get irrationally angry at being tricked into having “gay sex” and thus being turned gay, and the only way they know to ungay themselves is through violence.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 month ago

          I dont understand how you guys think its okay to trick someone like that. How can you not respect a partner like that? How would it be irrational to be very upset by that?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 month ago

            I say irrational to describe the degree of anger. Being upset about it? Sure. I don’t expect to understand it, but I can accept that it’s upsetting to some people.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                31 month ago

                Of course. There’s the obvious requirement of consent before the act and continuous consent throughout the course of the act. Things become a lot less straightforward when it comes to revoking consent after the fact. I’m not convinced that violence is ever warranted in these scenarios.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  2
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Violence is never warranted but theres no confusion about consent. You cant get consent if you arent giving the terms to consent to. Consent means an understanding. This isnt iTunes terms and conditions.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 month ago

                    The part that isn’t straightforward is what information is needed in order to make an informed decision and what is reasonable to provide to a sexual partner. It’s not something I’ve thought about before so I don’t have an answer to this, but the fact that I have to put more than a few minutes of thought into it is why I qualify as non-straightforward.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 month ago

                  Angrily revoking consent after the fact is very common and understandable when STDs are involved and undisclosed.

                  There aren’t a lot of other examples I know of, maybe if one party know they were related and didn’t say anything.

                  But do you see the issue now?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 month ago

        Not if you’re actually looking for a happy partnership. It’s one thing if it actually doesn’t come up, but if you’re hiding it from a partner, well, you’re hiding an aspect of your life from your partner.