Look at cisheterosexual. Heterosexual; meaning "Hey this dude's straight", and then the prefix: "No seriously, he's actually straight!"
I thought about this for a moment and I realized something...
and then [cis]: "No seriously, he's actually straight!"
So what you're saying is, being a guy who is attracted to a trans woman makes you somehow not really straight? As if trans women aren't actually women?
What? I didn't make any assumptions about whether someone is attracted to trans*(amidoinitrite?) or not. Just that they're not attracted to those of the same sex. You're grasping at straws here, methinks. Pickin' a fight; stirring the pot; itching for a bitching; not happy 'til you're not happy.
Who are you, my mom? *dun dun tsh*
Personally though(and I hope, with all this open-mindedness towards sexuality here in this thread, this won't come across as offensive), I don't think I could be in a relationship with someone whose gender identity and sexuality both weren't female. I would even say that they would have to match from birth, especially for anything long term.
Then again, I could see dating a lesbian so long as A) she didn't mind my dangly bits and B) she didn't force me to call her "him"... I don't see B happening that often, because then the term would be trans man and not lesbian. I think. Nor A, cuz... Well
duh, and/or
hello.
To me, purposefully ascribing "No, I am REALLY straight" like that, to place such a prefix on the more general term, indicates that the person holds more exclusive views on what is and is not attractive.
I didn't mean to ascribe any exclusivity to the term, just that it's silly(IMO) to add a prefix to something without it adding any additional information to the term. It's completely redundant. Like irregardless. Means the same as regardless, so why add the "ir"?