Jump to content

Use of the term "transromantic"


ithaca

Recommended Posts

I have been informed that the trans* community (or at least several members) feels that the definition posted in the Lexicon for "transromantic" should be amended. So here I am asking the opinion of the asexual community (and both AVENites and non AVENites are welcome obviously :) )

In particular, the main concern is that "transromantic" should be specified to be a label that only trans* peopel can adopt. I have been trying to voice my concerns over it: I especialy think that people (both trans* and cis) can feel romantically attracted by any combination of genders or lack thereof. So if there's trans* people who can be exclusively romantically attracted by other trans* people, the same can apply to cis. Mind, I'm not talking of "actively seeking a trans* partner" for whatever not honest reason, I'm talking of having a romantic orientation, which is not a choice (as I think it's common opinion).

Currently the definition I have posted (based on my knowledge, limited as it can humanly be, obviously) reads as follow:

Transromantic or Skolioromantic: a person who is romantically attracted towards person(s) of variant or ambiguous gender or to transgender or intersex person(s).

I have put "person" as subject as I personally think 'transromantic' is a valid label for anyone who happens to have this orientation. I would like to hear everyone's opinion.

Link to a blog with an opposite opinion: http://metapianycist.tumblr.com/post/29564803423/this-happened-today

and the one linked in the above page:

http://metapianycist.tumblr.com/post/24426907236/aenaithia-metapianycist-aenaithia

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway I don't think the term "transromantic" should apply exclusively to trans* people. It seems to encourage a divide of "us vs. them" (trans vs. cis) when both groups should be working to try to understand each other. Furthermore, if it only applies to trans* people, would a cis person be cis-romantic if they were exclusively attracted to cis people? What about a trans* person that was exclusively attracted to cis people?

*head explodes from labels*

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm Agendered and I'm romantically attracted exclusively to men. Therefore, if it's possible for me as a non binary person to be romantically attracted exclusively to one binary gender, then logically, the opposite is true as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've read/heard, the term transromantic came from a very specific need in the trans community to describe the phenomenon by which the (often difficult) shared experiences of trans people lead to a particular kind of attraction that is dependent on the knowledge that the other person will understand on a personal level things that only trans people experience. Speaking as a cis person, I don't think it's possible for cis people to understand on a personal level the experiences that are unique to trans people. For that reason I think the term ought to describe the attraction a trans person feels toward other trans people.

The term skolioromantic, on the other hand, if it is analagous to the term skoliosexual, refers specifically to attraction to non-binary people. Whereas attraction to trans people is another matter, because a lot of trans people are binary. Judging by the comments on the above-linked Tumblr post, usage of this term to describe cis people is also controversial, though I don't know whether it came from a specifically trans context as did the term transromantic.

I can't say anything about the history of the term skolioromantic, but the history of the term transromantic is very important and should be respected in any definition endorsed by AVEN.

Furthermore, if it only applies to trans* people, would a cis person be cis-romantic if they were exclusively attracted to cis people?

A cis person who claims to be attracted only to cis people is saying, essentially, "I am only attracted to people who identify with their birth-designated gender and sex like I do," which is pretty bigoted and really not the same thing as saying "I am only attracted to people who personally understand the particular experiences I have as a trans person, which include anti-trans oppression."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! I've just made an account to reply to this thread.

I'm Shiyiya. I'm queer, poly, demiromantic, and demisexual.

I'm also cis.

Both of my current romantic relationships are with nonbinary people, and I'm primarily aesthetically attracted to gender nonconformity.

And I have never tried to come up with a label for this, or god forbid appropriate one from the trans* community, because that would be profoundly gross and objectifying. Gross like chasers, which is pure fetishization. (And cis people claiming to be solely attracted to cis people is just... really cissexist. I don't even have words for how cissexist.)

It's not "encouraging a divide", it's recognizing that there inescapably is one in this culture.

From what I've read/heard, the term transromantic came from a very specific need in the trans community to describe the phenomenon by which the (often difficult) shared experiences of trans people lead to a particular kind of attraction that is dependent on the knowledge that the other person will understand on a personal level things that only trans people experience. Speaking as a cis person, I don't think it's possible for cis people to understand on a personal level the experiences that are unique to trans people. For that reason I think the term ought to describe the attraction a trans person feels toward other trans people.

The term skolioromantic, on the other hand, if it is analagous to the term skoliosexual, refers specifically to attraction to non-binary people. Whereas attraction to trans people is another matter, because a lot of trans people are binary. Judging by the comments on the above-linked Tumblr post, usage of this term to describe cis people is also controversial, though I don't know whether it came from a specifically trans context as did the term transromantic.

I can't say anything about the history of the term skolioromantic, but the history of the term transromantic is very important and should be respected in any definition endorsed by AVEN.

Furthermore, if it only applies to trans* people, would a cis person be cis-romantic if they were exclusively attracted to cis people?

A cis person who claims to be attracted only to cis people is saying, essentially, "I am only attracted to people who identify with their birth-designated gender and sex like I do," which is pretty bigoted and really not the same thing as saying "I am only attracted to people who personally understand the particular experiences I have as a trans person, which include anti-trans oppression."

And yeah, what lunasspecto said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Glitter Spock

Furthermore, if it only applies to trans* people, would a cis person be cis-romantic if they were exclusively attracted to cis people?

A cis person who claims to be attracted only to cis people is saying, essentially, "I am only attracted to people who identify with their birth-designated gender and sex like I do," which is pretty bigoted and really not the same thing as saying "I am only attracted to people who personally understand the particular experiences I have as a trans person, which include anti-trans oppression."

Well, there are people, even trans* people, who wouldn't really consider dating a trans* person. I think that's a valid personal preference, but I certainly don't think there should be a label for it; it comes off as hostile.

If by "valid" you mean "okay," I completely disagree with you. Someone stating that they would never desire a relationship with me simply because of my trans status is being both ignorant AND prejudicial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there are people, even trans* people, who wouldn't really consider dating a trans* person. I think that's a valid personal preference, but I certainly don't think there should be a label for it; it comes off as hostile.

I think it's possible to judge cis people for claiming exclusive attraction to cis people without doing the same for trans people. I don't think it's my place as a cis person to tell a trans person that the way they describe or frame their experiences of attraction is cissexist. But a cis person who claims exclusive attraction to cis people is not a target of cissexism, so that's another matter and something I feel quite alright criticising.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've read/heard, the term transromantic came from a very specific need in the trans community to describe the phenomenon by which the (often difficult) shared experiences of trans people lead to a particular kind of attraction that is dependent on the knowledge that the other person will understand on a personal level things that only trans people experience. Speaking as a cis person, I don't think it's possible for cis people to understand on a personal level the experiences that are unique to trans people. For that reason I think the term ought to describe the attraction a trans person feels toward other trans people.

The term skolioromantic, on the other hand, if it is analagous to the term skoliosexual, refers specifically to attraction to non-binary people. Whereas attraction to trans people is another matter, because a lot of trans people are binary. Judging by the comments on the above-linked Tumblr post, usage of this term to describe cis people is also controversial, though I don't know whether it came from a specifically trans context as did the term transromantic.

I can't say anything about the history of the term skolioromantic, but the history of the term transromantic is very important and should be respected in any definition endorsed by AVEN.

This is something I have considered. This said, being trans* isn't (as we all know) the only factor that can lead a person to experience forms of -isms or -phobias, so if it's shared experiences that can lead trans* people to be romantically attracted exclusively to other trans* people, this may be true for all of the other people who have been through similar even though not identical forms of oppression and/or erasure etc.

I also think that it can just happen (common experiences or not) that someone only feels romantic attraction, through out their life, to non binary people only. And this doesn't mean automatically chasing them or objectifying them. I have several friends who are not binary, and while I now identify as aromantic, it happened to me once in my 25 years of life to feel romantic attraction. This may mean I'm some sort of shade of grey maybe. Now if this only person was non-binary, and I happen to fall in my life only for a couple of friends more, both of them who identify outside of the binary system or as trans, this would not be because of their gender identity, personally. I don't see their gender identity as that something that makes me romantically attracted to them. It just happens that I may be romantically attracted to them only, just like heteroromantic people just happen to be romantically attracted towards the opposite gender. It's not a choice, so there's no evil purpose behind.

This is what I do not understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see their gender identity as that something that makes me romantically attracted to them. It just happens that I may be romantically attracted to them only, just like heteroromantic people just happen to be romantically attracted towards the opposite gender. It's not a choice, so there's no evil purpose behind.

This is what I do not understand.

My objection was to the use by cis people of a term created by the trans community to describe a phenomenon that occurs amongst themselves, not to your personal patterns of attraction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is: even though a term is created by someone part of a minority (in this case trans* people), why is it wrong if some people in the 'majority' (cis) identify with the same pattern of attraction? It seems to me that what is being said is that cis people COULD be (and sometimes are) romantically attracted to non-binary people only, but they SHOULDN'T use the label 'transromantic', for some reasons. Is that correct? And if it is, what label should they use? Because the only alternative that have been suggested to me so far has been derogatory towards this part of cis people, and explicitely explained as "not a possible orientation" for them in a non objectifying or non chasing way. While it is obviously possible (as also stated by a member here) for cis people to feel this kind of attraction, there seems to be issues in regards to the term itself.

What is an appropriate term, then, if not this one? Should they not have a label because they are cis? And how isn't that discriminatory in the opposite way than the most common one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would it be ok for a trans* person to express this preference, but not a cis person? What's the justification for the double standard?

I don't actually know whether that's okay, as I think that's a question for trans people to discuss. The difference is that a cis person claiming exclusive attraction to cis people is doing so from a position of relative power, whereas a trans person who claims exclusive attraction to cis people is a target of cissexism. Whether a person who is a target of cissexism is expressing internalized cissexism is a discussion best left to people who know what it's like to be a target of cissexism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Glitter Spock

Why would it be ok for a trans* person to express this preference, but not a cis person? What's the justification for the double standard?

I don't actually know whether that's okay, as I think that's a question for trans people to discuss. The difference is that a cis person claiming exclusive attraction to cis people is doing so from a position of relative power, whereas a trans person who claims exclusive attraction to cis people is a target of cissexism. Whether a person who is a target of cissexism is expressing internalized cissexism is a discussion best left to people who know what it's like to be a target of cissexism.

Additionally, it does not count as a double standard here, because cis people already feel entitled to say (and receive popular social support for saying) such things as "I would never date a trans person."

I have never encountered a trans person who refused to date anyone but cis people, but I'd like it if we'd stop with that hypothetical, because it's not relevant to the topic, which is a discussion of whether "transromantic" is an identity cis people can claim unproblematically. My position (linked in the original post of this thread) has already been stated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nomad in Stasis

The way I see it, every word for attractions is but just a word to define their attraction, anyone can use what definition best fits their sense of attraction. I cannot understand how it can be used by only one minority. If the overall definition of the word is how someone that is not in said minority feels, then they should be able to use the word to describe their attraction(s).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we have the right to redefine a word that already has meaning in another community. If transromantic is used to mean trans people who are only attracted to other trans people, who are we to say "No, that's not what it should mean"? All it does is make people mad at us because it looks like we're messing around with something we don't understand and being insensitive about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still find this to be a double standard.

I know cis people who are attracted only to cis people but not through any conscious choice. I don't see how this is any more problematic than a trans* person who is attracted to another trans* person. I've actually seen trans* people say that they only wanted to date other trans* people or that they only wanted to date cis people.

Furthermore, I am genderfluid bordering on genderless (it's complicated). I do not think it is fair to say that cis people cannot use this word but I can.

Also, many words are reclaimed. Gay is a reclaimed word. Spaz is used in the UK to refer to disabled people (in a very derogatory way) but in the US it just means that somebody is clumsy. Just because one group has one definition doesn't mean another group can't have another.

*is half asleep*

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my Internet friends calls himself "androgynophile".

I think there ought to be a word that describes attraction to people that are percieved as nonbinary.

But if transromantic already means something else, it means someone claimed it before you, so you have to find another... to avoid confusion. ^_^

I think the question is not about what the person you're attracted to really are, but how you percieve them, because it's your impression of the person that causes you to be or not be attracted. A binary person can be attracted to nonbinary people, just like any nonbinary person can. It's in itself no different than being attracted to men or women. But MTF and FTM transsexuals are often binary... while they because of their trans-ness seem nonbinary to those who don't know much about transsexualism. So if someone is attracetd to me because they percieve me as nonbinary, it's not an attraction to TRANS people, but an attraction to nonbinary genders.

If they're still attracted to me despite knowing that I'm not nonbinary, they don't have to be a disrespectful asshole. You can consciously adjust your perception based on what you know, but it isn't always that easy. But if they just don't listen to what I say about myself, and think they have the right to decide who I am, THAT makes them cissexist and disrespectful.

You can also be attracted to trans people for reasons that are not cissexist, exoticizing or misgendering. You can be attracted to them because you think they're brave or because you think they know themselves very well etc. If you would also be attracted to a non-trans person of your preferred gender for those same reasons, and if you don't assume any trans person automatically has those traits just because they're trans, you're not being cissexist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After careful consideration and discussion, the definition has been amended in the A/Romantic Lexicon as follows:

  • Skolioromantic: a person who is romantically attracted non-binary individuals.
  • Transromantic: a person who is romantically attracted towards transgender person(s). Generally used in the trans* community to describe trans* people who are exclusively attracted to other trans* people.

ithaca and Lady Tea Thingy

A/Romantic Identities Moderators

Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe

After careful consideration and discussion, the definition has been amended in the A/Romantic Lexicon as follows:

  • Skolioromantic: a person who is romantically attracted non-binary individuals.
  • Transromantic: a person who is romantically attracted towards transgender person(s). Generally used in the trans* community to describe trans* people who are exclusively attracted to other trans* people.

ithaca and Lady Tea Thingy

A/Romantic Identities Moderators

Dunno what's really the popular term these days, but 15 years ago in M2F circles one heard the term 'transfans' a lot. Or, sometimes, 'tourists'. These were usually str8 men who were looking for a Marco Polo type experience of the Wham-Bam-Thank_Ya_M'am persuasion. In a way, the sub-word 'romance' should probably be changed to 'erotic' in many cases.

But then, pretty much everyone from those times has either went deep stealth, left the community and/or gone back into hiding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Transromantic, does this define people who have affairs on planes between Europe and America? :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno what's really the popular term these days, but 15 years ago in M2F circles one heard the term 'transfans' a lot. Or, sometimes, 'tourists'. These were usually str8 men who were looking for a Marco Polo type experience of the Wham-Bam-Thank_Ya_M'am persuasion. In a way, the sub-word 'romance' should probably be changed to 'erotic' in many cases.

But then, pretty much everyone from those times has either went deep stealth, left the community and/or gone back into hiding.

I see what you mean, but these definitions are not really meant to describe people who "actively look for trans* partners out of curiosity" or what have you. As for heteroromantic, androromantic etc it's just to give a name to another romantic identity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe

Dunno what's really the popular term these days, but 15 years ago in M2F circles one heard the term 'transfans' a lot. Or, sometimes, 'tourists'. These were usually str8 men who were looking for a Marco Polo type experience of the Wham-Bam-Thank_Ya_M'am persuasion. In a way, the sub-word 'romance' should probably be changed to 'erotic' in many cases.

But then, pretty much everyone from those times has either went deep stealth, left the community and/or gone back into hiding.

I see what you mean, but these definitions are not really meant to describe people who "actively look for trans* partners out of curiosity" or what have you. As for heteroromantic, androromantic etc it's just to give a name to another romantic identity.

I suspect some things have changed and perhaps the new definitions are more apt than they could have been 15-20 years ago. They say one should only write about what the know, and I know from direct experience that during THAT time, most of the men who were looking for feminine centered trans people were looking for erotic encounters. It sometimes almost reached the level of stalking at times.

It was also pretty common knowledge (at least in the time and place I'm writing about) that if you were a trans femme and you wanted to keep your dance card full, you DIDN"T have SRS.

Also, during that time and in those places, FTMs pretty much avoided M2Fs. At least socially.

All this said, there was one pretty unique place during that time and place where some good-natured cowboys would show up at a particular bar on REN nights to slow dance with the ladyboys. There really wasn't any romance per se, just each acting like a scratching post for the other. Just good clean fun.

I realize my relating these things won't be looked upon favorably by some. I'm only the messenger adding my two centavos to a pot that spans decades, of what I witnessed during those times. Some of the people from those times have moved on, some are now dead. Some found good lives, some committed suicide. I'd like to think things are better now, but at least in the United States, there's been this huge turn to the MUCH more conservative side of the political spectrum and I'd be surprised if ANY trans issues see the light of day for at least another 10 years during major elections.

I hope I'm wrong, and as always YMMV (Your mileage May Vary).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cis people who are attracted to trans people are pretty much never attracted to me, because I'm a very binarily male person. I've known a number of people who are attracted primarily to transmen, and they are not attracted to me- I don't have a queer personality or sensibilities, and I don't look queer.

Trans people who are attracted especially to trans people, OTOH, are sometimes attracted to me, because I'm an attractive guy and I can talk passionately and knowledgably about trans issues.

I think cis people who are attracted to trans people often are attracted because of their own latent trans issues. But I think that cis people and trans people are different in the ways in which they are attracted to trans people and that that's worth naming.

P.S. I'm trans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Mostly Peaceful Ryan

I read this first in the Lexicon and I have not found one thing on it outside of the AVEN community, not to mention it seems no one identifies as transromantic according to the romantic poll. I am just very curious where this term came from and I have one small problem with it. The sexual equivalent would be transexual which means something completely different. I went into the Wikipedia to find another term and there weren't any that except for very rude slang. I am just wondering if this term is ever used, where it came from and if there is a better term that is less confusing? I really couldn't find this term anywhere else.

P.S. don't go searching for Transromantic in google some not so good sites come up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have merged a similar thread titled "Transromantic?" to this one, in order to keep the ongoing discussion active in one thread.

ithaca

A/Romantic Identities Co-Mod

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...