tboy said:I don't think you could classify them in any way shape or form. Just too many variables. The situation reminded me of a movie I saw a long time ago, can't remember the name of it but the main character's father dressed like a woman and was going for the "operation". When asked, "was it because you wanted men"? He said "no, I love women and will still want women after the operation". I think they brought up the fact that while he felt he was meant to be a woman, he was meant to be a LESBIAN woman.
Exactly, way too many variables involved in the 'having a relationship with a transgendered' person scenario. On both sides. So how does the OP get his question answered? It really isn't cut and dried. I have a large group of gay and lesbian friends (mostly lesbian) and I am totally bringing this up at our next get together. I am sure the discussion will be a riot.
tboy said:As for not labling people, it just helps us organize our thoughts. Just because someone may be called gay, bi or lesbian and we call them that, doesn't mean it is derogatory. Just because someone is different, and we acknowledge that difference, doesn't mean it's wrong, or they're wrong.
And yes. The "label" isn't meant to judge, it's meant to clarify. It is easy for people to respond simply "you're gay" to the OP in this instance, but much more difficult to sift through the nuances in this situation. As I said, I really don't think it's cut and dried, or can be simplified to a simple "it's gay" or "it's not gay". It's way more complex than that.
I think the OP poses an interesting scenario, one in which an answer is not easily arrived at. I wish they would come back and clarify some details in this particular situation so that it can be looked at more individually instead of generally. The answer, like your movie plot, is in the details, I think.
**Edit: Auggie, I wasn't singling you out. I am simply trying to validate the OPs question as being a sincere one, which deserves sincere responses that add to the discussion.