Spectator USA

Skip to Content

Internet Life Media

Are you heterosexual? Or simply transphobic?

Sexual attraction, as evidenced by the term itself, has a lot to do with, well, sex

December 19, 2019

5:28 AM

19 December 2019

5:28 AM

Trans activists are discovering that, while their mantras may go far on Twitter, when it comes to biology and sexual attraction, virtue signaling garners less positive results. A 2018 study revealed a lot about how much sway gender identity ideology has in real life. Namely, if you are heterosexual, you want to date the opposite sex, regardless of how they identify. And if you are a lesbian, insisting that ‘transwomen are women’ will not persuade a woman who is only attracted to females. While the study did find that those identifying as ‘queer’, lesbian, or gay were slightly more willing to date a ‘trans person’, a large majority were still disinclined. This information is probably unsurprising most, but was presented as evidence of ‘transphobia’ by liberal and LGTBQ media.

Last week, The Advocate reported that ‘right-wing (and anti-transgender) opinion outlets looked at the results of this study and concluded that of course no one wants to date transgender people, based on the assumption that people can tell if someone is transgender, and that as a result there will be no sexual attraction.’

This is dishonest, of course. The issue is not whether or not a person ‘can tell if someone is transgender.’ Virtually everyone can discern sex. And sexual attraction, as evidenced by the term itself, has a lot to do with, well, sex.

christmas banner

Those who deny the existence of biological sex and insist a person can change sex through self-declaration have made a number of grave mistakes — some of which harm their own community. The promise of ‘passing’ — a term that refers to trans-identified people who are perceived to be the opposite sex, rather than simply a male attempting to dress ‘like a woman’ or vice versa — is in fact quite cruel. Most trans-identified people won’t ‘pass’ in public; but even if they manage to appear as the sex they wish to be on a day to day basis, all sorts of subtle cues betray them when it comes to attracting their desired partner. 

First, there is the question of build, bone structure, facial features, size of limbs, hands, and feet. These things will be visible to most, and there is little we can do, as mammals, to misread a man as a woman and vice versa. There are also other, more subtle messages that signal sex, which cannot be hidden with makeup, facial hair, perfume, or prosthetics. Males and females walk differently, due not to gender training, but to differences in the male and female pelvis. Bones — in particular, the human pelvis — continue to be the most reliable means for determining the sex of skeletal remains. Despite chants that ‘men can get pregnant too!’, the female pelvis is built for birth, whereas the male pelvis is not, so the female pelvis is wider than the male’s, meaning (among other things) that men and women walk differently. Sex hormones play an important role, during puberty, in terms of bone growth — not only are estrogen and testosterone imperative, in terms of kids’ ability to develop healthy, strong, bones, but they ensure the pelvis develops differently (as well as the bones in the face, and the skeleton, more generally). While cosmetic surgery and hormones may be able to alter superficial aspects of an individual’s appearance, they cannot alter a person’s pelvis or, for example, change the size and length of bones, and the way those bones move.

Trans activists often like to pretend as though those who question trans ideology are obsessed with ‘genitals’ or reduce everything to a conversation about them, but this is far from true. While genitals matter a great deal, particularly when it comes to sex, most average people can easily determine a person’s sex without even thinking about what’s in their pants. Observing a person walking down the street will do the trick. 


But there’s more! Men and women smell different, which absolutely factors into sexual attraction. Men and women produce pheromones, which play a role in human attraction. Have trans-identified people who have been promised a life as the opposite sex been told that no matter what they do, they will never smell like that sex? And that this will, among other reasons, deeply limit their ability to find a partner? 

While trans activists and sympathetic media insist that the only thing stopping trans-identified people from being ‘accepted’ as the opposite sex is ‘bigotry’, this is a lie. The sooner they start telling the truth, the better off trans people will be. The problem is not, as The Advocate claims, whether or not transgender people are viewed as objectively attractive. It’s that evolution, biology, and sexual orientation are real. 

People’s genitals are not simply body parts, detached from the body, as a whole. We are not simply attracted to ‘people with vaginas’ or ‘people with penises’, though, naturally, most heterosexual women are going to want to date a man with a functional penis, and most gay men are going to be disinterested in women’s vaginas. 

At The Advocate, Brynn Tannehill offers the following as an example of discrimination: 

‘Imagine a date that’s going well. There’s mutual physical attraction and definite chemistry. Then you find out they’re transgender via conversation (yes, everyone still has their clothes on), and end the date right then and there.’

Tannehill believes this constitutes ‘transphobia’, as ‘this would have been a really good date’ if not for the fact the other person were transgender. But again, this omits the truth, which is that, presumably, the trans person is actually not the biological sex the other person is seeking to date. It has nothing to do with identity. It has to do with lesbians wanting to date females, heterosexual women wanting to date males, and so on and so forth. Tannehill admits that, ‘For cisgender people, the starting point of dating is attraction and chemistry,’ but fails to understand that ‘attraction and chemistry’ is not the same as simply enjoying another person’s company or even finding them objectively attractive.

‘Putting a different standard on transgender people to exclude them from the dating pool is an expression of bias based on false stereotypes, irrational beliefs, and fear,’ he writes. ‘Which is basically the definition of a phobia.’

In fact, it is trans activists, physicians, surgeons, pharmaceutical companies, and the swaths of liberals playing along with this charade who are ‘excluding trans people from the dating pool’. They are doing this by telling trans people it is possible to change sex, and that others will accept them as such, and they should be held accountable for this truly cruel lie.

At the end of the day, humans are still animals. Evolution and biology still factor heavily into countless aspect of our lives, regardless of ‘identity’ and what may be politically correct.

While trans activists are mad at women like me for saying such things, the people they should really be mad at are their comrades in arms: the activists, doctors, psychiatrists, journalists, pharmaceutical companies, politicians, and educators who have sold trans-identified people a painful lie, and ensured many of these people will never be able to access the lives they desire.

We can and should respect people who identify as trans and treat them with dignity, but we can’t force ourselves to want a same-sex relationship if we are heterosexual, just as we can’t force a lesbian to want to partner with a male. While this truth may be frustrating to hear, it will save you a world of pain in the long run.

Meghan Murphy is a writer in Vancouver, B.C. Her website is Feminist Current.


Sign up to receive a daily summary of the best of Spectator USA


Show comments
Close