It's not gay, it's a woman's penis!

The terms 'male' and 'female' for the overwhelming majority of people do and have always been defined in terms of biology not self ID

It makes no sence to the overwhelming majority of people therefore to talk of a female penis as such primary sexual charteristics are what are used in most cases to initially observe (not 'assign') sex in all but a tiny minority who are born sexually abnormal.

A certain demand made by one segment of the trans community can therefore never be realised and there will always be the victim card of 'transphobia to play for some as you just aren't going to get that many heterosexual men who will want partners with penises or heterosexual women who will want partners with the other type of commonly occurring genetalia.

When I say I would want a woman as a sexual partner it means adult human of the female biological sex much the same as it would for the majority of biological males.
 
[..] So does anyone on here think that a straight guy who had sex with a trans woman is just regular straight sex as per any other woman?

That depends on what has changed, i.e. what the "trans" part is. If they've changed sex, then they're female and so it would be straight sex. If they've "changed" gender, then they're male and so it would be gay sex. A man dressed as a woman is a man. If they want to use a feminine name, fine. If they want me to use a feminine pronoun to refer to them, well, that would be fine if sex and gender were normally treated as being the completely different things that they are. But they're not, so it isn't. I'll use ungendered personal pronouns. If they don't like being referred to as a person, maybe they should campaign to stop sex and gender being treated as being the same thing.

Calling it "transphobic" is like me calling a man homophobic because he doesn't find penises sexy. It's that degree of nastiness and wrongness.

As for the "hate crimes" stats, they're just politics. They're nothing to do with counting hate crimes. They're about the throughtcrime of disagreeing with a person with enough power.
 
That depends on what has changed, i.e. what the "trans" part is. If they've changed sex, then they're female and so it would be straight sex. If they've "changed" gender, then they're male and so it would be gay sex.

At what point do you consider someone to have changed sex - is this a hypothetical based on medical technology improving in future to incorporate advanced gene editing etc.. and much more advanced surgery?

Or can it be more of a tokenistic change - for example someone having their penis surgically removed and an open wound left in it's place as a pretend vagina etc..?

Or likewise a fake penis made of some of their skin from elsewhere on their body etc. added onto them in order to become a man.
 
At what point do you consider someone to have changed sex - is this a hypothetical based on medical technology improving in future to incorporate advanced gene editing etc.. and much more advanced surgery?

Or can it be more of a tokenistic change - for example someone having their penis surgically removed and an open wound left in it's place as a pretend vagina etc..?

Or likewise a fake penis made of some of their skin from elsewhere on their body etc. added onto them in order to become a man.

Add in the results of appropriate hormone treatment and the latter examples would be enough for me to say they'd changed sex. Genes are irrelevant - they're the plans for things, not the things themselves. As the saying goes, genotype is not phenotype. More advanced surgery would be nice for the people who have it done, but what we've got now fits my "close enough" approach. It's pretty much impossible to really nail down an accurate and all-inclusive definition of sex, so it's always a matter of "close enough". The question is how close is close enough?
 
So does anyone on here think that a straight guy who had sex with a trans woman is just regular straight sex as per any other woman?

No, absolutely not. If you are born a male, you will always be a male - and there is nothing anyone can ever say that will change my mind.
 
The question is how close is close enough?

Yup it is a bit of an open question tbh.. and perhaps somewhat subjective -IMO currently I'd say it is sort of queer in any combination of "sex" change at the moment. Some people might just go for the hormone treatment and perhaps breasts, some might remove testes etc.. but those won't fit your requirements of a sex change unless they went the extra step - I'd not personally view someone whose gone a step further and had their penis removed and an open wound/constructed "vagina" left in its place to have really changed sex, especially as the sexual organ is more of a poor imitation - so I'd see it as being a bit queer too tbh...
 
Honestly I don't think you should bother with threads like this. :P
Ignorance is bliss.
It just winds me up IRL having to deal with people like this occasionally I can't deal with it here too so often. I'm going to bleach my eyes so I forget, that's how it works right?
I wish it was the Victorian era again....
 
No, absolutely not. If you are born a male, you will always be a male - and there is nothing anyone can ever say that will change my mind.
I agree. It is honestly defending mental illness that sex changes are even a thing.
You can cut off your dick, get a boob job , etc etc. But you are just a dick less man to put it eloquently.
I honestly couldn't care less if you dress up as a lady, have femine mannerisms whatever they are these days, and just cliché pretend to be one I"love shoes and shopping trips" kind of idiot.
It's sad, it really is for a person that thinks that will help them. Mental illness is terrible and it explains why there's a huge percentage of suicides after operations. God I hope we have WW3 soon.
 
Reminders me of this....


tTc9cKQ.gif
 
Back
Top Bottom