The term transsexual...why doesn't it apply to me?

[whatsupwithat]

I am not making a blanket statement here so whatever you see yourself as or whatever issues with your sexuality that you might have, please understand this is about me and possibly a few others here. And if this comes across as kind of insipid or stupid, my apologies. I've been struggling with this for along time.

Let's take a look at the sexuality labels and their 'medical' definitions:

Heterosexual: A person sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex. Or a person who has sexual relations with the opposite sex. Colloquially known as "straight."

Homosexual: A person sexually attracted to persons of the same sex. Homosexuals include males (gays) and females (lesbians).

Bisexual: An individual who engages in both heterosexual and homosexual sexual relations. Bisexual can also refer to the corresponding lifestyle.

Transsexual: One who mentally and emotionally identifies as a different sex to the one they have been assigned by society according to their anatomy. Transsexual people will often undergo hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery (as finances and opportunity allow). While the medical establishment claims that transsexual people are suffering from "gender dysphoria", many transsexuals reply that the problem is not with their "gender" but with their "sex" (i.e. their bodies) and that "anatomical dysphoria" is a much more accurate description. Some therapists and sex researchers now use this term and some research suggests that transsexualism is caused by a brain which is differently "sexed" to the person's body.

Other terms: Heteroflexible, trisexual, fauxmosexual, and many more...

There is much debate as to actual definitions, but I'm just using these as a base to work from.


Okay, for years I've thought to myself, why is there no label for me, a person who is soley attracted to transsexuals. If you look at the terms above, you can see that all of them are alike, can be applied to whatever sex, except for the term, transsexual. That is used soley for transsexuals proper.

If I was gay I could be a homosexual. If I was straight, i could be a heterosexual. Bisexual, same thing. And so on. But I can't be a transsexual.

I've heard all the other terms used and tried them on for size like transsensual, transamorous, queer, and all the rest. But none of them are definitive. None of them identify me as what I am. They come across as throwaway terms. There's nothing to root myself in definitively.

So, I'm putting this out there to see what others like me have come up with for themselves. This isn't a rehash of the "am I straight?" threads. I know I'm not straight. And therein lies the problem. Why can't I respond to someone with one definitive word when they ask me what my orientation is? I know what I am. Why is there no term for me? And if all of the -sexual terms are used to identify sexuality, why doesn't transsexual apply to me?

Oh, and tranny chaser is bs term with nothing but negative connotations, so let's just throw that one out with the bathwater right away, hmm. ")

Thoughts?

[Tomfurbs]

Here's a thought.

I personally do not think that anyone is totally straight or gay, and that labels never hold up to scrutiny.

Perhaps you should take comfort in the fact that your sexual orientation is undefinable... maybe it means you are actually just normal :)

Not a totally helpful answer, sorry

[GroobySteven]

Chick with a Dick Lover?

Three Legged Lady Chaser?

I think there are very few people who are solely attracted to transgenders. Most into tgirls like women AND transgenders - a few like men AND transgenders - some like all.
Why do you feel the need to define yourself with one word? How often does it come up in conversation outside sex "What orientation are you?"
Most transgenders I know would reply ... female.

This pre-occupation that many people have with trying to pigeon-hole themselves shows an insecurity with who they are and where they fit in society, family and friends. I mean that with no disrespect intended at you Whatsupwiththat but there is no need to analize it and worry about a word.

You can't call yourself transsexual because you don't identify as being a different sex. You don't have gender dysphoria in any way. You just have a preference for the girls you like to be transgenders the same some guys solely prefer Asian girls, fat girls, black girls etc - and get coined the terms, rice chasers, chubby chasers and having jungle fever - all derogatory terms but you rarely see them needing to clarify who they are to society by needing a term.

seanchai

[hondarobot]

I am not making a blanket statement here so whatever you see yourself as or whatever issues with your sexuality that you might have, please understand this is about me and possibly a few others here. And if this comes across as kind of insipid or stupid, my apologies. I've been struggling with this for along time.

Let's take a look at the sexuality labels and their 'medical' definitions:

Heterosexual: A person sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex. Or a person who has sexual relations with the opposite sex. Colloquially known as "straight."

Homosexual: A person sexually attracted to persons of the same sex. Homosexuals include males (gays) and females (lesbians).

Bisexual: An individual who engages in both heterosexual and homosexual sexual relations. Bisexual can also refer to the corresponding lifestyle.

Transsexual: One who mentally and emotionally identifies as a different sex to the one they have been assigned by society according to their anatomy. Transsexual people will often undergo hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery (as finances and opportunity allow). While the medical establishment claims that transsexual people are suffering from "gender dysphoria", many transsexuals reply that the problem is not with their "gender" but with their "sex" (i.e. their bodies) and that "anatomical dysphoria" is a much more accurate description. Some therapists and sex researchers now use this term and some research suggests that transsexualism is caused by a brain which is differently "sexed" to the person's body.

Other terms: Heteroflexible, trisexual, fauxmosexual, and many more...

There is much debate as to actual definitions, but I'm just using these as a base to work from.


Okay, for years I've thought to myself, why is there no label for me, a person who is soley attracted to transsexuals. If you look at the terms above, you can see that all of them are alike, can be applied to whatever sex, except for the term, transsexual. That is used soley for transsexuals proper.

If I was gay I could be a homosexual. If I was straight, i could be a heterosexual. Bisexual, same thing. And so on. But I can't be a transsexual.

I've heard all the other terms used and tried them on for size like transsensual, transamorous, queer, and all the rest. But none of them are definitive. None of them identify me as what I am. They come across as throwaway terms. There's nothing to root myself in definitively.

So, I'm putting this out there to see what others like me have come up with for themselves. This isn't a rehash of the "am I straight?" threads. I know I'm not straight. And therein lies the problem. Why can't I respond to someone with one definitive word when they ask me what my orientation is? I know what I am. Why is there no term for me? And if all of the -sexual terms are used to identify sexuality, why doesn't transsexual apply to me?

Oh, and tranny chaser is bs term with nothing but negative connotations, so let's just throw that one out with the bathwater right away, hmm. ")

Thoughts?

Interesting. I have no idea what the answer is. A long time ago, on a different forum, the term "Stray" was born, for guys only interested in TS girls. My post on that forum initiated the term, and it honestly was kinda a lie. I'm no more or less attracted to TS girls then I am to GG girls.

I was hopelessly attracted to a specific girl, and I would have said anything to get her attention.

I don't know the answer.

[whatsupwithat]

Chick with a Dick Lover?

Three Legged Lady Chaser?

I think there are very few people who are solely attracted to transgenders. Most into tgirls like women AND transgenders - a few like men AND transgenders - some like all.
Why do you feel the need to define yourself with one word? How often does it come up in conversation outside sex "What orientation are you?"
Most transgenders I know would reply ... female.

This pre-occupation that many people have with trying to pigeon-hole themselves shows an insecurity with who they are and where they fit in society, family and friends. I mean that with no disrespect intended at you Whatsupwiththat but there is no need to analize it and worry about a word.

It's not an insecurity in myself. It's a way to define to others what is a very real thing. In fact, I think what not having a term accomplishes is demeaning to transsexuals themselves. It's way of 'being in the closet' and is an extension of the shame that so many men feel. And that, in turn, leads to confusion, distrust, and an ambiguity that is unhealthy in relationships. And that's one of the biggest issues I have with it.

It's interesting that the transsexuals you know call themselves female to others. But this isn't about that.


You can't call yourself transsexual because you don't identify as being a different sex. You don't have gender dysphoria in any way. You just have a preference for the girls you like to be transgenders the same some guys solely prefer Asian girls, fat girls, black girls etc - and get coined the terms, rice chasers, chubby chasers and having jungle fever - all derogatory terms but you rarely see them needing to clarify who they are to society by needing a term.

seanchai

I know why I can't call myself a transsexual. That's not the point so much as all of the other terms we have for sexuality apply across the board.

What you wrote above puts transsexuals into a fetish category. It's not a fetish to me. It's my sexuality. It's not a preference. pure and simple.

[whatsupwithat]

ps - no offense to you, either, seanchai. :)

pss - not looking to be analyzed so much as to ask why is there no term for men like me? why is it ignored in the pantheon of sexual literature?

[GroobySteven]

I disagree with you. I think it's more demeaning to most transsexuals to know that your purely into transsexuals because let's face it, the only real discernable differences are:
a) either she has a penis or used to have one.
b) when she was born, current norms classed her as male.

In all other aspects other than above, she's a female. So somebody like yourself is purely into her for one of those reasons - and that is demeaning within itself.

As far as people being into an ethnic identity or body type being a fetish, I also disagree. It's a preference, a like, an attraction. It's not a fetish and most people who like transgenders for more than just the sexual kick, it is just the same, it's a preference.

Do you really think your TS girlfriend when your questioned in public what your sexual identity is, you to answer some word that means the same as "Tranny chaser" (no matter how you dress it up, it has the same negative connoctations) or would she rather have you say ... I like girls?

You stated that you need to define to others who you are - that's a form of insecurity right there.

I'm not trying to have a fight with you. Your post makes sense but in fact, it's little more than the "Am I Gay" re-hashed that you tried to stay away from.

seanchai

[whatsupwithat]

One more thing...

I'm at a club the other night shooting this docu-series i'm doing and I was talking to a drag queen who i really didn't know. we were rapping about my liking transsexuals. I was reprimanded up and down about how I didn't need a label. So I had to ask. What do you see yourself as? The answer? "Oh, I know honey. I'm a gay man through and through." ha!

[TJ347]

I have to agree with Seanchai. If you recognize transsexual women as women, with there being no difference between them and a GG in that respect, then how can you say you're attracted solely to transsexual women?

This is, as Seanchai said, disrespectful to the transgendered to some degree, as you clearly make a distinction between transsexual women and genetic females based on what you've said here.

[hondarobot]

I have to agree with Seanchai. If you recognize transsexual women as women, with there being no difference between them and a GG in that respect, then how can you say you're attracted solely to transsexual women?

This is, as Seanchai said, disrespectful to the transgendered to some degree, as you clearly make a distinction between transsexual women and genetic females based on what you've said here.

Tj's vast experience with TS girls is clearly spanking some ass here.

:lol:

[whatsupwithat]

I disagree with you. I think it's more demeaning to most transsexuals to know that your purely into transsexuals because let's face it, the only real discernable differences are:
a) either she has a penis or used to have one.
b) when she was born, current norms classed her as male.

In all other aspects other than above, she's a female. So somebody like yourself is purely into her for one of those reasons - and that is demeaning within itself.

As far as people being into an ethnic identity or body type being a fetish, I also disagree. It's a preference, a like, an attraction. It's not a fetish and most people who like transgenders for more than just the sexual kick, it is just the same, it's a preference.

Do you really think your TS girlfriend when your questioned in public what your sexual identity is, you to answer some word that means the same as "Tranny chaser" (no matter how you dress it up, it has the same negative connoctations) or would she rather have you say ... I like girls?

You stated that you need to define to others who you are - that's a form of insecurity right there.

I'm not trying to have a fight with you. Your post makes sense but in fact, it's little more than the "Am I Gay" re-hashed that you tried to stay away from.

seanchai

Cool. Well, I disagree with you. :)

But you brought up some great points.

Me purely liking transsexuals is demeaning to them? I don't think it is. Into them for purely thos reasons? No. I'm explaining that it's my sexuality. In fact, I think I've come to accept it's a biological/physiological issue. Ever since I was kid I knew what I liked. Yeah, at first it was what you described. But when you're 15, no matter who you are, all sex is like that. As I grew and entered into relationships, that outlook changed.

The girl I'm dating would be proud of me to say I liked transsexuals and that was my sexuality. Many of the girls I know would. I don't see how in the world that would be demeaning unless there was some sort of internalized transphobia going on.

And I stated that defining myself to others is clearing up confusion and stigma around this issue. I can see how you might think this is an issue of insecurity. But I am secure in my sexuality.

[whatsupwithat]

I have to agree with Seanchai. If you recognize transsexual women as women, with there being no difference between them and a GG in that respect, then how can you say you're attracted solely to transsexual women?

This is, as Seanchai said, disrespectful to the transgendered to some degree, as you clearly make a distinction between transsexual women and genetic females based on what you've said here.

If you see in my last reply, I believe it's a bio/physiological issue that has yet to be talked about in any serious way.

Why the hell am I getting stigmatized for wanting clarity on the issue?

[TJ347]

Out of respect for the OP, I won't take the bait of Hondarobot, and derail this thread.

[Jericho]

Thanks...Now i have a headache! ;-)

If you define transwomen as *women*, then, by default, aren't you defining yourself as heterosexual?


why is there no term for men like me? why is it ignored in the pantheon of sexual literature?

Too far ahead of its time.
They're still too busy codifying what transexuality actually is.








Of course, if yer into pre-ops, there's always...lillbitextrasexual [Oh come on, someone had to!] :wink:

[hondarobot]

I disagree with you. I think it's more demeaning to most transsexuals to know that your purely into transsexuals because let's face it, the only real discernable differences are:
a) either she has a penis or used to have one.
b) when she was born, current norms classed her as male.

In all other aspects other than above, she's a female. So somebody like yourself is purely into her for one of those reasons - and that is demeaning within itself.

As far as people being into an ethnic identity or body type being a fetish, I also disagree. It's a preference, a like, an attraction. It's not a fetish and most people who like transgenders for more than just the sexual kick, it is just the same, it's a preference.

Do you really think your TS girlfriend when your questioned in public what your sexual identity is, you to answer some word that means the same as "Tranny chaser" (no matter how you dress it up, it has the same negative connoctations) or would she rather have you say ... I like girls?

You stated that you need to define to others who you are - that's a form of insecurity right there.

I'm not trying to have a fight with you. Your post makes sense but in fact, it's little more than the "Am I Gay" re-hashed that you tried to stay away from.

seanchai

Cool. Well, I disagree with you. :)

But you brought up some great points.

Me purely liking transsexuals is demeaning to them? I don't think it is. Into them for purely thos reasons? No. I'm explaining that it's my sexuality. In fact, I think I've come to accept it's a biological/physiological issue. Ever since I was kid I knew what I liked. Yeah, at first it was what you described. But when you're 15, no matter who you are, all sex is like that. As I grew and entered into relationships, that outlook changed.

The girl I'm dating would be proud of me to say I liked transsexuals and that was my sexuality. Many of the girls I know would. I don't see how in the world that would be demeaning unless there was some sort of internalized transphobia going on.

And I stated that defining myself to others is clearing up confusion and stigma around this issue. Society is the one that needs the definition. I want to provide it to them. I guess, really, that is my biggest issue with this I am proud of who I am and don't hide who I am.

I think E is alright. I'm not completely onboard with everything, because honestly the majority of transgender people are pretty fucked up (you can't lie about that, I see it every day). Most everyone is fucked up.

Viva La Revolution. I'm up for anything that makes the world a better place to live in.

[whatsupwithat]

Thanks...Now i have a headache! ;-)

If you define transwomen as *women*, then, by default, aren't you defining yourself as heterosexual?


why is there no term for men like me? why is it ignored in the pantheon of sexual literature?

Too far ahead of its time.
They're still too busy codifying what transexuality actually is.

Of course, if yer into pre-ops, there's always...lillbitextrasexual [Oh come on, someone had to!] :wink:

I define transwomen as they want to be defined - transwomen, transsexuals, women. Those are deep personal choices that each transwomen needs to make for herself.

And since we're ahead of our time, then there's no time like the present. :)


Look, I knew some people would judge me by my asking this. And others would relate. It's why I clearly made that "disclaimer" at the top of my original post.

[TJ347]

If you see in my last reply, I believe it's a bio/physiological issue that has yet to be talked about in any serious way.

Why the hell am I getting stigmatized for wanting clarity on the issue?

I'm not trying to stigmatize you, but rather trying to get clarity on the way in which you view transsexual women as opposed to genetic females.

I believe you, like myself, view them as women, but don't understand why then one could say that they were attracted solely to transsexual women. Perhaps that is not what you're saying, and I've thus completely misunderstood you. If so, apologies.

[hondarobot]

If you see in my last reply, I believe it's a bio/physiological issue that has yet to be talked about in any serious way.

Why the hell am I getting stigmatized for wanting clarity on the issue?

I'm not trying to stigmatize you, but rather trying to get clarity on the way in which you view transsexual women as opposed to genetic females.

I believe you, like myself, view them as women, but don't understand why then one could say that they were attracted solely to transsexual women. Perhaps that is not what you're saying, and I've thus completely misunderstood you. If so, apologies.

I think the idea is to restrict things to people who actually have physical contact with other people. No offense, but you trolls just cause complications. I'm sure there are many other forums for you to play around on.

Your post did nothing for the thread topic.

[whatsupwithat]

If you see in my last reply, I believe it's a bio/physiological issue that has yet to be talked about in any serious way.

Why the hell am I getting stigmatized for wanting clarity on the issue?

I'm not trying to stigmatize you, but rather trying to get clarity on the way in which you view transsexual women as opposed to genetic females.

I believe you, like myself, view them as women, but don't understand why then one could say that they were attracted solely to transsexual women. Perhaps that is not what you're saying, and I've thus completely misunderstood you. If so, apologies.

Like I said. Along time I stopped asking why I am this way. I chalked it up to being a bio/physiological issue and that I had no answers. I feel at home with the trans community in a trans relationship. I always have.

I know I'm not the only guy like this.

[tsntx]

I don't want to wear dresses or take hormones or go through SRS, but I see myself as part of the community.

I know I'm not the only guy like this.

im very close to a guy in canada and he feels like you, so no youre not the ONLY guy... as for the rest... ill have to think aout it and get back to you later, be it here, PM, or txt -j

[hondarobot]

This is a great thread. I've been interacting with the GLB (I'll leave out the T, but none of it really fits together anyways) community for years. There are many questions people have. I really don't know. I like hot girls, but I understand the context of the whole thing.

(Haha Jen, I saw you logged on the forum again) :P

[TJ347]

I think the idea is to restrict things to people who actually have physical contact with other people. No offense, but you trolls just cause complications. I'm sure there are many other forums for you to play around on.

Your post did nothing for the thread topic.

Please, limit your comments to the OP, as I have no interest in anything you have to say about anything. Thanks in advance.

[hondarobot]

I think the idea is to restrict things to people who actually have physical contact with other people. No offense, but you trolls just cause complications. I'm sure there are many other forums for you to play around on.

Your post did nothing for the thread topic.

Please, limit your comments to the OP, as I have no interest in anything you have to say about anything. Thanks in advance.

Heh. :screwy

[whatsupwithat]

Okay...once more...salient points:


i like transsexuals.

it is my sexuality.

i believe it is a bio/physiological issue.

ibelieve this issue isn't one of insecurity with me although i can see how one might presuppose that.

i live my life out and proud within the community.

currently the only terms used for guys like me are negative.

there no positive or medical term for people like me,

Thank you. :)

[Jericho]

I know I'm not the only guy like this.

Your not, i get it, i really do.
The first time, something clicked. For the first time, being with someone made sense...It *felt* right. Up until then....

[whatsupwithat]

I know I'm not the only guy like this.

Your not, i get it, i really do.
The first time, something clicked. For the first time, being with someone made sense...It *felt* right. Up until then....

right! exactly! yay, i'm not alone! it makes sense. internally. physically. mentally.

yet, and this where i most heartly disagree with seanchai, it's considered demeaning to transsexuals to be soley attracted to them on that level? maybe to some. yeah, i can see that. but is being gay demeaning? being straight? being bi? no.

[whatsupwithat]

all this said, i would love to hear from the transsexuals on this board as well as other guys who feel the same.

[hondarobot]

I honestly don't understand an attraction strictly limited to TS girls. I understand being attracted to a girl, and she happens to be TS, but I don't understand beyond that.

Maybe a girl that can have an objectively proven orgasm. It's hard for a TS to fake it. I'm not being a smart ass. I really don't know. Honestly, a girl with a "she-thing" would probably want to nail me, and I don't think I'd like that.

That's viewing things on a strictly sexual basis, but that would be the only criteria GG's would differ from TS. Really, what else would there be?

[whatsupwithat]

I honestly don't understand an attraction strictly limited to TS girls. I understand being attracted to a girl, and she happens to be TS, but I don't understand beyond that.

Maybe a girl that can have an objectively proven orgasm. It's hard for a TS to fake it. I'm not being a smart ass. I really don't know. Honestly, a girl with a "she-thing" would probably want to nail me, and I don't think I'd like that.

That's viewing things on a strictly sexual basis, but that would be the only criteria GG's would differ from TS. Really, what else would there be?

That's why I believe it's a deeper issue that has yet to be truly studied on any serious level.

[hondarobot]

I honestly don't understand an attraction strictly limited to TS girls. I understand being attracted to a girl, and she happens to be TS, but I don't understand beyond that.

Maybe a girl that can have an objectively proven orgasm. It's hard for a TS to fake it. I'm not being a smart ass. I really don't know. Honestly, a girl with a "she-thing" would probably want to nail me, and I don't think I'd like that.

That's viewing things on a strictly sexual basis, but that would be the only criteria GG's would differ from TS. Really, what else would there be?

That's why I believe it's a deeper issue that has yet to be truly studied on any serious level.

I would agree. I believe 99% of guys on this forum are kink driven, but it does seem that a few of us are kinda normal. It's interesting. If you get into the sexual mechanics, I've had contact with "shecock" once, and she flipped out (I know you're reading this, goofy, ;p).

Vaginas, I'm great with. But the TS thing is a mystery. TS girls have their own rules, and it can drive a guy nuts. Beyond that it gets even more complicated.

I have no answers. I just think she's hot. What can I do?

:wink:

[whatsupwithat]

I find it interesting that so many are on this forum and yet so many have nothing to add to this. I would so love to hear from some of the others on this site including the transwomen.

So, it's just Jericho and I that feel the way we do?

[mbf]

well, actually there is no solution for your dilemma. (if it is one) you like what you like (pardon the tautology).

the reason WHY will never be fully understood.

why do I like this or that? I honestly cant say, I just do....

[whatsupwithat]

well, actually there is no solution for your dilemma. (if it is one) you like what you like (pardon the tautology).

the reason WHY will never be fully understood.

why do I like this or that? I honestly cant say, I just do....

Personally, I think it will be understood sooner rather than later. It's all part of the nature vs nurture argument, but neurological science is making incredible strides.

In the meantime, I think my quantifying myself within society and for society to understand it and move beyond it's negative labeling and preconceptions goes hand in hand with the transsexual community gaining rights, respect, and acceptance.

[hondarobot]

well, actually there is no solution for your dilemma. (if it is one) you like what you like (pardon the tautology).

the reason WHY will never be fully understood.

why do I like this or that? I honestly cant say, I just do....

Personally, I think it will be understood sooner rather than later. It's all part of the nature vs nurture argument, but neurological science is making incredible strides.

In the meantime, I think my quantifying myself within society and for society to understand it and move beyond it's negative labeling and preconceptions goes hand in hand with the transsexual community gaining rights, respect, and acceptance.

I think you should slap Vicki Richter next weekend, and tell her to stop being a goofball, and then I'll explain the mysteries of the universe to everyone.

Don't slap her hard, though. I'd have to head east and fuck ya up if you did that.

:P

[mbf]

well, actually there is no solution for your dilemma. (if it is one) you like what you like (pardon the tautology).

the reason WHY will never be fully understood.

why do I like this or that? I honestly cant say, I just do....

Personally, I think it will be understood sooner rather than later. It's all part of the nature vs nurture argument, but neurological science is making incredible strides.

In the meantime, I think my quantifying myself within society and for society to understand it and move beyond it's negative labeling and preconceptions goes hand in hand with the transsexual community gaining rights, respect, and acceptance.

well, maybe yes. but it will look something like those scientific/medical accounts on "what is love", they come up with stuff like higher blood pressure, racing heartbeat, sweaty palms etc. can describe the effects, but wont be able to tell the actual cause.

anyways, may ur search will be a success :)

[whatsupwithat]

anyways, may ur search will be a success :)

Thank you.

godspeed! :)

[peggygee]

If you define transwomen as *women*, then, by default, aren't you defining yourself as heterosexual?


why is there no term for men like me? why is it ignored in the pantheon of sexual literature?

Too far ahead of its time.
They're still too busy codifying what transexuality actually is.


Of course, if yer into pre-ops, there's always...lillbitextrasexual [Oh come on, someone had to!] :wink:

Eric, Ecstatic, and now Jericho have really driven home to me the lack of
a positive term to describe men who like transwomen. There are no
support groups per se, and basically they meet on forums like this and
ask each other why do they feel the way they do.

Someone said in another thread that for the transwomen there is a fair
modicum of acceptability particularly if she passes. Also society is starting
to see the medical causes for transsexuality, and that is reducing much of
the stigma. Natal females who are in relationships with transwomen are
deemed lesbians, and there's not a great deall of stigma attached to them.
For a genetic male in a realtionship with a transwoman, thetre may be a
stigma, and as stated there is no term to describe them.

A partial explanation for it may be as Jericho has pointed out that the
subject area of transgenderism is still in it's embryonic or infancy stage.
Thus we don't have the working knowledge of all the aspects of it that we
would like.

But for me there is a very strange consideration to this question. For the
most part the vast majority of men that I have been iin relationships
with have been in relationships with genetic females, some have been
in relationships with transwomen as well.

But post operatively I have met a fair number of men that will only date
transwomen, be they pre or post operative. For me this strikes me as very
odd, and harkens back to what Seanchai said upthread about men who
only date women who have a penis or once had a penis.


I disagree with you. I think it's more demeaning to most transsexuals to know that your purely into transsexuals because let's face it, the only real discernable differences are:
a) either she has a penis or used to have one.
b) when she was born, current norms classed her as male.

In all other aspects other than above, she's a female. So somebody like yourself is purely into her for one of those reasons - and that is demeaning within itself.


I must admit that men who only are interested in women who have a
penis history give me pause for cause. I must admit that I question
whether their affinity is to the woman or to her previous or current
genitilia, ie. the penis.

[hwbs]

i date transsexuals...sorry if i don't have a fancy reason or some scientific answer...i was living this life way before i found this site or knew all of these terms or categories..i don't look for a reason why and i feel i have nothing to prove to anyone on here..if u have a problem with that u can feel free to hit up my box..

[whatsupwithat]

i date transsexuals...sorry if i don't have a fancy reason or some scientific answer...i was living this life way before i found this site or knew all of these terms or categories..i don't look for a reason why and i feel i have nothing to prove to anyone on here..if u have a problem with that u can feel free to hit up my box..

You and I have a lot in common, my man. My problem is sometimes I feel like I have something to prove and I get way caught up in it. I need some ice cream.

[whatsupwithat]

But post operatively I have met a fair number of men that will only date
transwomen, be they pre or post operative. For me this strikes me as very
odd, and harkens back to what Seanchai said upthread about men who
only date women who have a penis or once had a penis.

I must admit that men who only are interested in women who have a
penis history give me pause for cause. I must admit that I question
whether their affinity is to the woman or to her previous or current
genitilia, ie. the penis.

fair point.

but why should that matter? men are attracted to men. women to women. men to women and vice versa. society has grown to understand that being gay or straight has a bio/physiological basis...well, except for the religious wingnuts who think they can 'deprogram' homosexuals. i'm saying that my sexuality and attraction is bio/physiological, as well. this is me.

i have tried to 'deprogram' myself. i went the gay route, the straight route...it never, as jericho said, *felt* right.

i never quite understood why i should be looked down upon for my sexuality by the very people who should be lifting it up.

[Coroner]

I think the real idea between E´s topic is his try to awake a consciousness that we are a community. We are a category of our own and I mean only only those who are into GG´s and TS´s or only TS´s if there´s someone like that. Those who like TS´s and men surely don´t have this issue and define themselves as bisexual. Or maybe not? Labels might be wrong but a term is necessery to avoid any confusion. No one wants to be put into a category where he doesn´t belong. Labels are a result of prejudices but scientific terms as well. It´s a fact that men who are attracted to the same sex are gay and no one can´t ignore this. We´re attracted to TS´s who are not men so what I´m I going to say if someone asks me what this is supposed to mean? What does it mean to be attracted to girls with dicks but not men?

[peggygee]

. i'm saying that my sexuality and attraction is bio/physiological, as well. this is me.



For me what attracts me to a person is their personality,
intelligence, integrity, sense of humor, etc.

What is between their legs is irrelevant to me. Thus this
is why I would be open to dating any person that filled
the criteria above.

[whatsupwithat]

. i'm saying that my sexuality and attraction is bio/physiological, as well. this is me.



For me what attracts me to a person is their personality,
intelligence, integrity, sense of humor, etc.

What is between their legs is irrelevant to me. Thus this
is why I would be open to dating any person that filled
the criteria above.

that's great. i'm attracted to those things, too. but although i've had sex with men and women in a quest to find myself, it was never internally fulfilling no matter how much i enjoyed their humor, personality, intelligence, integrity, sense of humor, etc. it never felt right for me, personally.

i don't know how to explain it any better than that. it just feels right for me.

can i ask..is this suspect to you because of the fetishizing of transsexuals that goes on by the majority of men?

[whatsupwithat]

I think the real idea between E´s topic is his try to awake a consciousness that we are a community. We are a category of our own and I mean only only those who are into GG´s and TS´s or only TS´s if there´s someone like that. Those who like TS´s and men surely don´t have this issue and define themselves as bisexual. Or maybe not? Labels might be wrong but a term is necessery to avoid any confusion. No one wants to be put into a category where he doesn´t belong. Labels are a result of prejudices but scientific terms as well. It´s a fact that men who are attracted to the same sex are gay and no one can´t ignore this. We´re attracted to TS´s who are not men so what I´m I going to say if someone asks me what this is supposed to mean?

Dunno. :)

That's the big question.

[Coroner]

I also understand Seanchai when he tries to describe it as a fetish. He shows respect for T-girls by not making differences between GG´s and TS´s. But it´s not a solution.

[whatsupwithat]

I also understand Seanchai when he tries to describe it as a fetish. He shows respect for T-girls by not making differences between GG´s and TS´s. But it´s not a solution.

it's all very varied. i have plenty of friends who identify as transsexuals, period. not as women.

but like you said, it's not a solution.

maybe we should just coin a phrase ourselves and pummel it into the social consciousness.

[Ecstatic]

If I was gay I could be a homosexual. If I was straight, i could be a heterosexual. Bisexual, same thing. And so on. But I can't be a transsexual.

Very interesting thread to come home to from a concert tonight, one which appeals to both my intellect and my sexuality. First of all, let me say (though I suspect that you know this Eric), I am primarily sexually attracted to transwomen, and like yourself long wondered why there is no proper term for this attraction, the alternatives being highly negatively charged (tranny chaser, gay, homosexual, the gamut, some more insulting than others to both the [what's the word] and to the transwomen to whom they are attracted.

I'm not quite in the same camp you are, e, since I am not exclusively attracted to transwomen, and I have had fairly extensive experience with men, women, and transwomen. However, from a purely physical point of view (and yes, there is SO much more involved, but just to consider the physical for the moment), nothing gets my juices flowing like a beautiful pre- or non-op transwoman. That is, as you indicate, the way I'm hardwired. Now I am attracted to female beauty, which is a large factor (again, from that purely physical point of view), and a beautiful woman will always turn my head, but the effect is always much less than with a transwoman. And men do nothing for me, nada.

As to the terms: it's the prefix that determines form. Thus, hetero = other, homo = same, bi = both, and trans = across, over, changing (all of these senses apply). Thus, heterosexual means attracted to the other sex, homosexual means attracted to the same sex, bisexual means attracted to both sexes, but transsexual means crossing over to the other sex or changing to the other sex. Thus we need a different term. Pansexual (pan = all) doesn't fit any better than bisexual unless one is attracted to all variants. Likewise omnisexual. I have yet to find a term that does fit.

But then you give a strong clue when you post:


I define transwomen as they want to be defined - transwomen, transsexuals, women. Those are deep personal choices that each transwomen needs to make for herself.

This being the case, then you are [fillintheblank]sexual only in relation to any given transwoman. If she sees herself as a woman, you are heterosexual. If she sees herself as a man, you're homosexual. If she sees herself as the third sex, you're, umm, kathoeysexual or phettheesamsexual (assuming we can combine form with Thai and English as with Latin and English). In any case, your sexuality in terms of who you're attracted to is definable only in relation to another person.

Of course, this doesn't resolve the negative connotations of said attraction common to our society:


currently the only terms used for guys like me are negative.

there no positive or medical term for people like me

Agreed.


Eric, Ecstatic, and now Jericho have really driven home to me the lack of a positive term to describe men who like transwomen. There are no support groups per se, and basically they meet on forums like this and ask each other why do they feel the way they do.
Well put, Peggy. Not only is there the lack of a positive term, there is a lack of support groups other than forums which typically have other overriding interests.


Natal females who are in relationships with transwomen are
deemed lesbians, and there's not a great deall of stigma attached to them.
For a genetic male in a realtionship with a transwoman, thetre may be a
stigma, and as stated there is no term to describe them.
So very true. And despite my point above about one's sexuality only being definable in relation to another, at least at a certain level, the stigma commonly associated with the attraction indicates that there is, indeed, the need for a more embracing term at least for general discussion. But it also begs the question: are we to see all transwomen as transwomen? Or as what they choose to be seen as (be that women, men, or a third sex)? OK, this is getting circular.....


But post operatively I have met a fair number of men that will only date
transwomen, be they pre or post operative. For me this strikes me as very
odd, and harkens back to what Seanchai said upthread about men who
only date women who have a penis or once had a penis.


I disagree with you. I think it's more demeaning to most transsexuals to know that your purely into transsexuals because let's face it, the only real discernable differences are:
a) either she has a penis or used to have one.
b) when she was born, current norms classed her as male.

In all other aspects other than above, she's a female. So somebody like yourself is purely into her for one of those reasons - and that is demeaning within itself.


I must admit that men who only are interested in women who have a
penis history give me pause for cause.

Indeed. Again, the complexity. This demands an individual answer, I think.


I must admit that I question
whether their affinity is to the woman or to her previous or current
genitilia, ie. the penis.

For me what attracts me to a person is their personality,
intelligence, integrity, sense of humor, etc.

What is between their legs is irrelevant to me. Thus this
is why I would be open to dating any person that filled
the criteria above.
I most definitely concur with your first statement about your preferences: this takes us well beyond the "purely physical" dimension I was referring to above and into the far deeper and more important facets of attraction, such as personality, intelligence, integrity, humor, shared interests, etc. But I don't quite agree with your followup statement (for myself, obviously), as what is between their legs is indeed relevant. It's merely one of several relevant factors, but it's far from irrelevant. To return to Eric's comments, I am primarily (though not exclusively) attracted to transwomen. Thus I would be less likely to seek out other companionship, which is not to say I would not welcome or enjoy such companionship.

[francisfkudrow]

Some time ago, in a similar thread I came up with a 3 dimensional sexual classification theory. Here's how it goes...

--------------------------------------------------------

While I have no degree in psychology or any other discipline that would make me qualified to come up with theories on the subject, it occurred to me that there a 3 dimensions of a person's sexuality...

1) Their identity (whether they identify as male or female)
2) Their genital preference
and
3) The aesthetic preference (that is whether they like the face/body/style of men or women)

If you factor in all the different combinations, including those with no preference in the last two, you have 18 "types"...

Type MMM: Identifies as male, and prefers male genitalia and the male aesthetic (gay males)

Type MMF: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who dates transsexuals, what might be referred to in slang as a "tranny chaser")

Type MMB: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (a man who will date both men and MTF transsexuals)

Type MFM: Identifies as male, prefers female genitalia, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)

Type MFF: Identifies as male, prefers female genitalia and the female aesthetic (straight males)

Type MFB: Identifies as male, prefers female genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (probably somewhat rare)

Type MBM: Identifies as male, has no genital preference, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)

Type MBF: Identifies as male, has no genital preference, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who will date both women and MTF transsexuals)

Type MBB: Identifies as male, and has no genital or aesthetic preference (bisexual males)

Type FMM: Identifies as female, prefers male genitalia and the male aesthetic (straight females and MTF transsexuals who prefer men)

Type FMF: Identifies as female, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (women and MTF transsexuals who date MTF transsexuals)

Type FMB: Identifies as female, prefers male genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (women and MTF transsexuals who date men and MTF transsexuals)

Type FFM: Identifies as female, prefers female genitalia, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)

Type FFF: Identifies as female, and prefers both female genitalia and the female aesthetic (lesbians)

Type FFB: Identifies as female, prefers female genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (probably somewhat rare)

Type FBM: Identifies as female, has no genital preference, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)

Type FBF: Identifies as female, has no genital preference, but prefers the female aesthetic (women and MTF transsexuals who date women and MTF transsexuals)

Type FBB: Identifies as female and has no genital or aesthetic preference (bisexual females)

I'm somewhere between an MMF and an MBF.

[whatsupwithat]

As to the terms: it's the prefix that determines form. Thus, hetero = other, homo = same, bi = both, and trans = across, over, changing (all of these senses apply). Thus, heterosexual means attracted to the other sex, homosexual means attracted to the same sex, bisexual means attracted to both sexes, but transsexual means crossing over to the other sex or changing to the other sex. Thus we need a different term. Pansexual (pan = all) doesn't fit any better than bisexual unless one is attracted to all variants. Likewise omnisexual. I have yet to find a term that does fit.

But then you give a strong clue when you post:


I define transwomen as they want to be defined - transwomen, transsexuals, women. Those are deep personal choices that each transwomen needs to make for herself.

This being the case, then you are [fillintheblank]sexual only in relation to any given transwoman. If she sees herself as a woman, you are heterosexual. If she sees herself as a man, you're homosexual. If she sees herself as the third sex, you're, umm, kathoeysexual or phettheesamsexual (assuming we can combine form with Thai and English as with Latin and English). In any case, your sexuality in terms of who you're attracted to is definable only in relation to another person.

Great thoughts, E.

We could go round and round on this one, huh? *head spins*

I'm exhausted...been discussing this all day. Ugh. I waiting to hear why my sexuality is considered demeaning from peggy. I truly do not believe that for a second. I do believe, as many have stated, that most of the men are in it for the fetish. I am not. I pretty much got over the fetish aspect long ago. it feels right to me. And to some others, like yourself.

Once again, i never quite understood why i should be looked down upon for my sexuality by the very people who should be lifting it up.

[whatsupwithat]

Type MMF: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who dates transsexuals, what might be referred to in slang as a "tranny chaser")

.

You're genius. But there's one problem. Why is there a negative connotation (tranny chaser) attached to only one of those terms? All the rest are free to be themselves without judgement?

[francisfkudrow]

Type MMF: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who dates transsexuals, what might be referred to in slang as a "tranny chaser")

.

You're genius. But there's one problem. Why is there a negative connotation (tranny chaser) attached to only one of those terms? All the rest are free to be themselves without judgement?

Well, I just mention that in the description because that's how many people on this board see Type MMF. Ideally, Type MMF should have no negative connotation. (As I mentioned, I'm a bit of an MMF myself)

[whatsupwithat]

Type MMF: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who dates transsexuals, what might be referred to in slang as a "tranny chaser")

.

You're genius. But there's one problem. Why is there a negative connotation (tranny chaser) attached to only one of those terms? All the rest are free to be themselves without judgement?

Well, I just mention that in the description because that's how many people on this board see Type MMF. Ideally, Type MMF should have no negative connotation. (As I mentioned, I'm a bit of an MMF myself)

I'll take that without the negative connotations. But we still have no positive defining term for MMFs.

MMFsexual? ha! :)

[alpha2117]

By the way I always thought if you are only specifically attracted to transexuals it really falls under fetishistic behaviour. You aren't neccesarily attracted to antthing other than their sexualality which would fit with a fetish Some heteros are only attracted to a person of another race etc etc. I think it is just sexual fetishism. We all have it to some level about certain things or characteristics.

The truth is people get too hung up on labels. There are a lot of different variations on str8, bi, gay etc and a str8 guy who loves flat chested girls and one who loves huge breasts are very different in their sexual desires for instance but people label them the same.

[whatsupwithat]

By the way I always thought if you are only specifically attracted to transexuals it really falls under fetishistic behaviour. You aren't neccesarily attracted to antthing other than their sexualality which would fit with a fetish Some heteros are only attracted to a person of another race etc etc. I think it is just sexual fetishism. We all have it to some level about certain things or characteristics.

Bam! Nailed the problem. Everyone looks at it like a sexual fetish. It's not. We're talking about human beings here. What does that say about transsexuals? They are just fetish objects? Come on. How could you say that? I mean, under your definition, a heterosexual relationship would be a fetish.



The truth is people get too hung up on labels. There are a lot of different variations on str8, bi, gay etc and a str8 guy who loves flat chested girls and one who loves huge breasts are very different in their sexual desires for instance but people label them the same.

Not hung up on labels. There is something definitive here that has not been defined.


/I can't believe I'm still posting...has anyone seen my bed? :)

[TJ347]

There have been several great replies to this topic, and it is definitely something that has made me think a good bit about how one would define what so many people seem to feel defines them with regard to sexuality, which at present has no definition.

As Jericho said, it's made my head hurt, but tomorrow's a new day, and I'll doubtless recover. Regardless, thanks to the OP for this brain twister so late in the evening/early in the morning. Thanks alot. :wink:



Now then...


I honestly don't understand an attraction strictly limited to TS girls.

Which is what I originally said and which you derided as adding nothing to the thread topic, only to subsequently regurgitate it.


I believe 99% of guys on this forum are kink driven, but it does seem that a few of us are kinda normal. I've had contact with "shecock" once, and she flipped out (I know you're reading this, goofy, ;p).

I would hardly define someone who gave oral to someone who was asleep, and without being invited to do so as "normal", but in any event, as you point this out as your sole experience with a transsexual woman, it is abundantly clear you have no real point of reference to even begin to comment in this thread, and thus, ironically, it is you who have added nothing to the thread topic, as per usual I might add.


I have no answers.

This is quite clear, and yet for some reason, it never stops you from saying something anyway. Funny, that.

[mofungo]

I have just read this thread from post 1 to the end, and I'm very tired... ;-) I wish I had discovered it earlier so I could have supported whatsupwiththat.

For years I've pondered my 'placement' in society. Being solely attracted to TGs brings with it a degree of contempt from all 'accepted' sexualities. I find it difficult to believe that so few people share this attraction.

I could go on and on (and on), but instead I'll just say that most people on this forum give opinions based on little or no experience. So, whatsupwiththat, we shouldn't be bothered by their stagnant offerings.

[whatsupwithat]

I have just read this thread from post 1 to the end, and I'm very tired... ;-) I wish I had discovered it earlier so I could have supported whatsupwiththat.

For years I've pondered my 'placement' in society. Being solely attracted to TGs brings with it a degree of contempt from all 'accepted' sexualities. I find it difficult to believe that so few people share this attraction.

I could go on and on (and on), but instead I'll just say that most people on this forum give opinions based on little or no experience. So, whatsupwiththat, we shouldn't be bothered by their stagnant offerings.

Amen. :)

[peggygee]

As to the terms: it's the prefix that determines form. Thus, hetero = other, homo = same, bi = both, and trans = across, over, changing (all of these senses apply). Thus, heterosexual means attracted to the other sex, homosexual means attracted to the same sex, bisexual means attracted to both sexes, but transsexual means crossing over to the other sex or changing to the other sex. Thus we need a different term. Pansexual (pan = all) doesn't fit any better than bisexual unless one is attracted to all variants. Likewise omnisexual. I have yet to find a term that does fit.

But then you give a strong clue when you post:


I define transwomen as they want to be defined - transwomen, transsexuals, women. Those are deep personal choices that each transwomen needs to make for herself.

This being the case, then you are [fillintheblank]sexual only in relation to any given transwoman. If she sees herself as a woman, you are heterosexual. If she sees herself as a man, you're homosexual. If she sees herself as the third sex, you're, umm, kathoeysexual or phettheesamsexual (assuming we can combine form with Thai and English as with Latin and English). In any case, your sexuality in terms of who you're attracted to is definable only in relation to another person.

Great thoughts, E.

We could go round and round on this one, huh? *head spins*

I'm exhausted...been discussing this all day. Ugh. I waiting to hear why my sexuality is considered demeaning from peggy. I truly do not believe that for a second. I do believe, as many have stated, that most of the men are in it for the fetish. I am not. I pretty much got over the fetish aspect long ago. it feels right to me. And to some others, like yourself.

Once again, i never quite understood why i should be looked down upon for my sexuality by the very people who should be lifting it up.

I don't get a sense that you personally fetishize transwomen, I feel that
you have been around them long enough to where that isn't the case.

I feel that you have a great respect for transwomen, and I hold you in
very high esteem for your willingness and ability to do so openly. For
many of the men who are professing love and respect for transwomen,
I am seeing these are but hollow words, for you that is far from the case.

And on this point:





Once again, i never quite understood why i should be looked down upon for my sexuality by the very people who should be lifting it up



And I am speaking only for myself or for other women that share this
viewpoint:

I never felt comfortable with my penis, I rarely used it, it was a source
of intense emotional and physical pain, and eventually I had gender
reassigment siurgery to rectify that situation.

Thus anyone that is or was attracted to me primarilly for that attribute
would not be the optimum mate for me. Fortunately the majority of men
that I had been involved with were not interested in my penis.

They didn't try to suck me off, they didn't want me to fuck them, but they
also didn't freak out, treat me like a dirty little secret, or be reviled by my
genitilia.

All of the men that I have been iin relationships with, I have met their
families, and their friends. There was never any down low activity, no
I don't know you in public activity. We went out to movies, concerts,
dining, shopping, travelling, etc, basically they treated me like any other
woman.

Maybe I got spoiled, maybe my years in hetero-world have caused me to
have unrealistic expectations now that I have returned to trannyville. My
years of living, working, and functioning in the mainstream have
accustomed me to a certain standard of living.

I haven't had to face discrimination whether it be as a person of color or
as a woman for many years. I have been fortunate that my transtatus
hadn't been the hinderance to me that it has been to some.

Coming back to the transcommunity reminds me of the many reasons why
I left it, and while I had hoped or assumed that many things had changed,
I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.

[alpha2117]

By the way I always thought if you are only specifically attracted to transexuals it really falls under fetishistic behaviour. You aren't neccesarily attracted to antthing other than their sexualality which would fit with a fetish Some heteros are only attracted to a person of another race etc etc. I think it is just sexual fetishism. We all have it to some level about certain things or characteristics.

Bam! Nailed the problem. Everyone looks at it like a sexual fetish. It's not. We're talking about human beings here. What does that say about transsexuals? They are just fetish objects? Come on. How could you say that? I mean, under your definition, a heterosexual relationship would be a fetish.



The truth is people get too hung up on labels. There are a lot of different variations on str8, bi, gay etc and a str8 guy who loves flat chested girls and one who loves huge breasts are very different in their sexual desires for instance but people label them the same.

Not hung up on labels. There is something definitive here that has not been defined.


/I can't believe I'm still posting...has anyone seen my bed? :)

I'll go back to your original post for an answer.


Okay, for years I've thought to myself, why is there no label for me, a person who is soley attracted to transsexuals. If you look at the terms above, you can see that all of them are alike, can be applied to whatever sex, except for the term, transsexual. That is used soley for transsexuals proper.

It's not that you dont respect or treat them with respect but you say yourself that you are solely attracted to ts women which means one of two things and given all your other response it seems more that you have a fetishistic attachment to them. Nothing wrong with that either. Plenty of heterosexual people have the same deal, some guys will only date blondes, or girls with flat chests. Essentially if someone has a strict type and thats the only type they are attracted too at all then its really a bit fetishistic, which is really only a overwhelming peference. If it was only a preference then it's just that a preference and you could date gg's if you met one who you liked but by your statements you just wouldn't fancy that. The human mind is complex and like i said if thats the way your brain is wired dont sweat the labels. Most everyone on the planet has an overwhelming preference in some aspect of their life. It's normal. I really dont think you need to worry about a label for yourself

[hondarobot]

[quote="TJ347"]
I would hardly define someone who gave oral to someone who was asleep, and without being invited to do so as "normal",[quote]

You should have seen what she did when I was sticking my tongue up her ass. Lucky for me, she's a very sound sleeper.

:wink:

p.s. this is not an invitation to be forum buddies with you, Tj. You post too much, too often, and I just don't like annonymous forum trolls. I never have.

[whatsupwithat]

[quote]
It's not that you dont respect or treat them with respect but you say yourself that you are solely attracted to ts women which means one of two things and given all your other response it seems more that you have a fetishistic attachment to them. Nothing wrong with that either.

Thanks for the response. I feel I've made it abundantly clear that it isn't fetish for me. I passed beyond that long ago. I've been in the community since I was around 15. My first long term relationship with a ts was in my early 20's. We lived together for 13.5 years. It passes far beyond fetish at that point. I could go on and on about my feelings and my activism and whatnot in the community, but I am very aware that this is not a fetish for me. I am almost of the mind that it's hormonal in some way. My physical makeup is at play here. What I keep trying to impress and keeps being missed is that this is deeply internal.


Plenty of heterosexual people have the same deal, some guys will only date blondes, or girls with flat chests. Essentially if someone has a strict type and thats the only type they are attracted too at all then its really a bit fetishistic, which is really only a overwhelming peference. If it was only a preference then it's just that a preference and you could date gg's if you met one who you liked but by your statements you just wouldn't fancy that. The human mind is complex and like i said if thats the way your brain is wired dont sweat the labels. Most everyone on the planet has an overwhelming preference in some aspect of their life. It's normal. I really dont think you need to worry about a label for yourself

Hheterosexual people. I'm not heterosexual. That's the point I keep trying to make. I'm not gay. I'm not straight. I'm not bi. This is about gender and sexuality, not hair color, breast size, or some other physical attribute.

I appreciate your words, though. And thanks for another take on the subject.

[whatsupwithat]

I don't get a sense that you personally fetishize transwomen, I feel that
you have been around them long enough to where that isn't the case.

I feel that you have a great respect for transwomen, and I hold you in
very high esteem for your willingness and ability to do so openly. For
many of the men who are professing love and respect for transwomen,
I am seeing these are but hollow words, for you that is far from the case.

gracias, peggy. :) mucho gracias.


And on this point:




And I am speaking only for myself or for other women that share this
viewpoint:

I never felt comfortable with my penis, I rarely used it, it was a source
of intense emotional and physical pain, and eventually I had gender
reassigment siurgery to rectify that situation.

One of my dearest friends is going through this now. She started feeling this way when she was 4. She's now 21. The pain and suffering she goes through is, like you said, intense.



Thus anyone that is or was attracted to me primarilly for that attribute
would not be the optimum mate for me. Fortunately the majority of men
that I had been involved with were not interested in my penis.

They didn't try to suck me off, they didn't want me to fuck them, but they
also didn't freak out, treat me like a dirty little secret, or be reviled by my
genitilia.

All of the men that I have been iin relationships with, I have met their
families, and their friends. There was never any down low activity, no
I don't know you in public activity. We went out to movies, concerts,
dining, shopping, travelling, etc, basically they treated me like any other
woman.

I can see why so many transwomen are suspicious of men...considering the track record. Being in a relationship with a transwomen and sharing our bodies with each other, it was only natural that the activities that you described above as well as many more would take place between her and I. Was it all I wanted? Not even close. I preferred, like most, the intimate times, holding each other, kissing, laughing, sharing, learning about each other. Like I stated in my last post, it *feels* so right for me.


Maybe I got spoiled, maybe my years in hetero-world have caused me to
have unrealistic expectations now that I have returned to trannyville. My
years of living, working, and functioning in the mainstream have
accustomed me to a certain standard of living.

I haven't had to face discrimination whether it be as a person of color or
as a woman for many years. I have been fortunate that my transtatus
hadn't been the hinderance to me that it has been to some.

Coming back to the transcommunity reminds me of the many reasons why
I left it, and while I had hoped or assumed that many things had changed,
I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.

I can so understand what you're speaking of. Being in this community, entering into it can be incredibly draining due to the negativity within and without. And, yeah, the more things change, the more they stay the same. But I wonder, did change ever really take place? I think on a small personal level for some of us it has. On larger scale, we have a long way to go.


Thanks, peggy, for responding. Your experience and wisdom is always greatly appreciated and admired by me. :)

[ottorocket]

[quote]
It's not that you dont respect or treat them with respect but you say yourself that you are solely attracted to ts women which means one of two things and given all your other response it seems more that you have a fetishistic attachment to them. Nothing wrong with that either.

Thanks for the response. I feel I've made it abundantly clear that it isn't fetish for me. I passed beyond that long ago. I've been in the community since I was around 15. My first long term relationship with a ts was in my early 20's. We lived together for 13.5 years. It passes far beyond fetish at that point. I could go on and on about my feelings and my activism and whatnot in the community, but I am very aware that this is not a fetish for me. I am almost of the mind that it's hormonal in some way. My physical makeup is at play here. What I keep trying to impress and keeps being missed is that this is deeply internal.


Plenty of heterosexual people have the same deal, some guys will only date blondes, or girls with flat chests. Essentially if someone has a strict type and thats the only type they are attracted too at all then its really a bit fetishistic, which is really only a overwhelming peference. If it was only a preference then it's just that a preference and you could date gg's if you met one who you liked but by your statements you just wouldn't fancy that. The human mind is complex and like i said if thats the way your brain is wired dont sweat the labels. Most everyone on the planet has an overwhelming preference in some aspect of their life. It's normal. I really dont think you need to worry about a label for yourself

Hheterosexual people. I'm not heterosexual. That's the point I keep trying to make. I'm not gay. I'm not straight. I'm not bi. This is about gender and sexuality, not hair color, breast size, or some other physical attribute.

I appreciate your words, though. And thanks for another take on the subject.


Well spoken E...you've said pretty much expressed everything i feel as well

[Ecstatic]

While I have no degree in psychology or any other discipline that would make me qualified to come up with theories on the subject, it occurred to me that there a 3 dimensions of a person's sexuality...

1) Their identity (whether they identify as male or female)
2) Their genital preference
and
3) The aesthetic preference (that is whether they like the face/body/style of men or women)

If you factor in all the different combinations, including those with no preference in the last two, you have 18 "types"...

..................

Type MMF: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who dates transsexuals, what might be referred to in slang as a "tranny chaser")
Brilliant! There's a career for you in taxonomy if you're interested. ;) Yes, I would categorize myself as MMF on this scale: totally identify as male; perfer male genitalia (my only interest in sexual encounters with other men has always been genital: I love cock; however, it's a preference and not exclusive, as I also quite enjoy pussy, but will not actively seek it out); and I strongly prefer the female aesthetic (thus men hold no attraction for me, other than genital; I am and have always been powerfully attracted to feminine aesthetics).

One flaw in this scale, however, and that goes to its assumed perspective: it's a subjective scale, reflecting only the preferences of the subject (the "type") and not those of the type's object: man, woman, or transwoman. That's OK in and of itself (in fact, I think this is a very valuable way of looking at one's own sexuality), but it begs the question I mentioned above regarding how the object, in the case of a transwoman, perceives herself, as a woman, as a transgendered male, or as a third sex. Assuming that a specific transwoman (whether pre-, post-, or non-op) sees herself as a woman, there is the dichotomy to which Peggy refers, in that you are attracted to this woman for the very thing which she may most reject about herself. Yes, she may in fact quite enjoy using her male bits in love play, but still, if she identifies as a woman, this sets up the conflict to which Peggy refers. (If, on the other hand, she identifies as transsexual or third sex, this dichotomy does not exist in this instance.)

[whatsupwithat]

[quote]
It's not that you dont respect or treat them with respect but you say yourself that you are solely attracted to ts women which means one of two things and given all your other response it seems more that you have a fetishistic attachment to them. Nothing wrong with that either.

Thanks for the response. I feel I've made it abundantly clear that it isn't fetish for me. I passed beyond that long ago. I've been in the community since I was around 15. My first long term relationship with a ts was in my early 20's. We lived together for 13.5 years. It passes far beyond fetish at that point. I could go on and on about my feelings and my activism and whatnot in the community, but I am very aware that this is not a fetish for me. I am almost of the mind that it's hormonal in some way. My physical makeup is at play here. What I keep trying to impress and keeps being missed is that this is deeply internal.


Plenty of heterosexual people have the same deal, some guys will only date blondes, or girls with flat chests. Essentially if someone has a strict type and thats the only type they are attracted too at all then its really a bit fetishistic, which is really only a overwhelming peference. If it was only a preference then it's just that a preference and you could date gg's if you met one who you liked but by your statements you just wouldn't fancy that. The human mind is complex and like i said if thats the way your brain is wired dont sweat the labels. Most everyone on the planet has an overwhelming preference in some aspect of their life. It's normal. I really dont think you need to worry about a label for yourself

Hheterosexual people. I'm not heterosexual. That's the point I keep trying to make. I'm not gay. I'm not straight. I'm not bi. This is about gender and sexuality, not hair color, breast size, or some other physical attribute.

I appreciate your words, though. And thanks for another take on the subject.


Well spoken E...you've said pretty much expressed everything i feel as well

Thanks, otto. Much appreciated. i think we should start a website of some kind where guys like us can establish ourselves and build a community, get a voice. Maybe then we'll be taken seriously.

Or maybe we already have one here...

[whatsupwithat]

While I have no degree in psychology or any other discipline that would make me qualified to come up with theories on the subject, it occurred to me that there a 3 dimensions of a person's sexuality...

1) Their identity (whether they identify as male or female)
2) Their genital preference
and
3) The aesthetic preference (that is whether they like the face/body/style of men or women)

If you factor in all the different combinations, including those with no preference in the last two, you have 18 "types"...

..................

Type MMF: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who dates transsexuals, what might be referred to in slang as a "tranny chaser")
Brilliant! There's a career for you in taxonomy if you're interested. ;) Yes, I would categorize myself as MMF on this scale: totally identify as male; perfer male genitalia (my only interest in sexual encounters with other men has always been genital: I love cock; however, it's a preference and not exclusive, as I also quite enjoy pussy, but will not actively seek it out); and I strongly prefer the female aesthetic (thus men hold no attraction for me, other than genital; I am and have always been powerfully attracted to feminine aesthetics).

One flaw in this scale, however, and that goes to its assumed perspective: it's a subjective scale, reflecting only the preferences of the subject (the "type") and not those of the type's object: man, woman, or transwoman. That's OK in and of itself (in fact, I think this is a very valuable way of looking at one's own sexuality), but it begs the question I mentioned above regarding how the object, in the case of a transwoman, perceives herself, as a woman, as a transgendered male, or as a third sex. Assuming that a specific transwoman (whether pre-, post-, or non-op) sees herself as a woman, there is the dichotomy to which Peggy refers, in that you are attracted to this woman for the very thing which she may most reject about herself. Yes, she may in fact quite enjoy using her male bits in love play, but still, if she identifies as a woman, this sets up the conflict to which Peggy refers. (If, on the other hand, she identifies as transsexual or third sex, this dichotomy does not exist in this instance.)

You're loving this, aren't you? :P

[Ecstatic]

:)

Got me.....

[Luna555]

So this all to much to think about and too many aspects to consider. But honestly I can understand someone being solely attracted to transsexuals.

Yes I am a woman, this is how I identify myself. Yes I am a person, a complete human being with feelings, intelligence and everything else that makes a human a human. Even though I will always identify as being a woman and nothign more I cannot deny that I am sooooooooo different than a natal female. And natal females are soooooo different than me. My story will always be different, I cant talk abotu my past and say when I was a little girl or anything like that, even though I belive I have always been a girl that is not how society labled me. There for I have a "dimention" that natal females will never have.

I think, and I am not saying this is what he is saying but what I think he is saying. There needs to be a word for people solely attracted to transsexuals. People must also not forget that there is a differance between fetish and sexual orientation. Soem men might only be into transsexual and see it as a fetish. But there are men who are not into transsexuals as a fetish. I am a person as I stated before, I have a different dimmention to me and I feel like this is why some men might be attracted to transsexuals solely. Not because we have or have had penisus but because of who we are. I will always see the world a bit different and from a different aspect than a GG, why because I wasnt born with a vagina and because I wasnt raised as one. I will always be different and I cant deny that.

Also though please Tranny Chasers dont try to identify as a label you are not. If you are just into transsexual because its a fetish then stay with that. Dont start identifying as being into transsexuals because of what I just stated above. I woudl hate to see a word be created and tehn all of a sudden guys that are into transsexuals only as a fetish or for sex make it out to be looked as a bad word!


francisfkudrow GENIUS!!!! I feel like thats even better than the Kinsey Scale. But if I could suggest something. Instead of putting female genitalia and male genitalia if you could just say vagina and penis or both for inteersexed people. I think taht would be a better idea. My genitalia is not MALE. I have a penis but its not MALE. Just my thoughts. You can ignore if you like, just thought id share that with you. The reson why I say this is because I feel like labeling egnitalia male of female is the cause of allot of issues. That causes doctors to identify a baby as one gender or another when they have no CLUE. I think if they were just to say this baby has a vagina or a penis or both but wouldnt label it as male or female, because honestly how do they know for sure that baby is going to identify as male or female later in their lives. And also if people got to the idea that men can have a penis or a vagina or both and women can have a vagina or a penis or both then it woudl make life easier for alot of people.

SOrry for the mispellings. When ever I start talking and have words in my head that want to get out, I cant help but try to go fast tehre fore causeing so many misspellings.

If you are going to attack me. Whatever. I will not explain myself to someone that is attacking me. If you have any question ask in an intellectual level PLEASE!

[Ecstatic]

Excellent suggestion, Luna. I remember one time Gia Darling described a penis as being very feminine if it's a tgirl's penis. Also, another transwoman I know prefers the term "phallic woman" (she's non-op, identifies wholly as a woman, but enjoys her penis and like you says that she's a woman with a penis).

We are too hung up on genitalia, imho.

[Luna555]

Thank you Ecstatic! And I agree we are really hung up on genitalia.

[dabaldone]

Okay...once more...salient points:


i like transsexuals.

it is my sexuality.

i believe it is a bio/physiological issue.

ibelieve this issue isn't one of insecurity with me although i can see how one might presuppose that.

i live my life out and proud within the community.

currently the only terms used for guys like me are negative.

there no positive or medical term for people like me,

Thank you. :)

I agree with you totally. On this forum, sometimes it's difficult to have a discussion without the name calling. I too am in a relationship with a trans-woman.
For years I battled my attraction and preference. It caused a ton of drama in my personal and professional life. I know I prefer trans-women. Once I stopped allowing societal conditioning to guide my life (we are all taught to view sexuality and gender in absolutes), life became a lot easier. Thanks for the post!!!

[Ecstatic]

Thank you Ecstatic! And I agree we are really hung up on genitalia.
Well, of course, there are times when I rather enjoy being hung up on genitalia.... ;)

[yodajazz]

Here's a thought.

I personally do not think that anyone is totally straight or gay, and that labels never hold up to scrutiny.

Perhaps you should take comfort in the fact that your sexual orientation is undefinable... maybe it means you are actually just normal :) ....



The quote above is close to the global view of what I believe. And I think most of us here understand how complex sexuality is. But that being said we often have to use the recognized society categories when making short statements about our sexuality. The simplest way to put it, you are heterosexual, with an attraction to a specific type of woman. That being said, it is not unusual because everyone is attracted to some type of physiological traits in their sexual partners. I personally believe that these attractions are biological in nature.

In the list of physical, plus emotional traits, that attracts people to others, some people are more exclusive in regards to certain traits than others are. Most people will compromise some traits in their top list but not others. Whatsupwithat, you’re heterosexual with exclusive attraction to a specific type of woman. Many others here are attracted to the same type of women you are, just not as exclusive about the same trait. So once again, I am saying that it is okay to say we are heterosexual when the simplest of explanation is needed.

I am defining Transsexual women as a specific type of woman. Those of us that are attracted to women know that they are a lot more than what is between their legs. Many in the general society may not agree, but we in this forum know that they are wrong. It is not always important to debate this aspect of the issue with everyone, who wants a simple identification of your sexuality. While they are important, the more complex defintions are only appropriate at certain times.

[SmashysmashY]

The last poster has an interesting perspective on this issue. I completely disagree with it but I find it interesting nonetheless. If you like transsexuals you are not a heterosexual that's attracted to a particular kind of woman. A transsexual is not a female plus a y chromosome and a penis and minus a vagina. If you like them you are a homosexual that is attracted to a particular type of man. A man that has enough feminine qualities in a correct enough combination to allow you to feel comfortable engaging in homosexual acts.

"But I'm not attracted to masculinity, I just like cock and asshole"

ok, you win, liking cock doesn't make you gay and sometimes female asshole just wont do.

[whatsupwithat]

Two exactly opposing views back to back. Interesting.

And thus the need for a term is hammered home, whatever psycho and/or bio scientific basis is settled on in the future.

Let's go back to the term transsexual for a moment. And although this may be a bit disingenuous, just throwing this out there, so, please, no one get into a tizzy...

Could not transsexuals and those like myself and others share this term? I would not be A transsexual as I would never call myself one. But couldn't I and others like me BE transsexual, thus lining up with all of the other -sexual terms out there?

For example, see the implied difference in meaning between the two:

"I am A transsexual."

"I am transsexual."

Food for discussion.

In the meantime, are there any scientific researchers on this board that feel like taking on a new project? :)

[whatsupwithat]

So this all to much to think about and too many aspects to consider. But honestly I can understand someone being solely attracted to transsexuals.

Yes I am a woman, this is how I identify myself. Yes I am a person, a complete human being with feelings, intelligence and everything else that makes a human a human. Even though I will always identify as being a woman and nothign more I cannot deny that I am sooooooooo different than a natal female. And natal females are soooooo different than me. My story will always be different, I cant talk abotu my past and say when I was a little girl or anything like that, even though I belive I have always been a girl that is not how society labled me. There for I have a "dimention" that natal females will never have.

I think, and I am not saying this is what he is saying but what I think he is saying. There needs to be a word for people solely attracted to transsexuals. People must also not forget that there is a differance between fetish and sexual orientation. Soem men might only be into transsexual and see it as a fetish. But there are men who are not into transsexuals as a fetish. I am a person as I stated before, I have a different dimmention to me and I feel like this is why some men might be attracted to transsexuals solely. Not because we have or have had penisus but because of who we are. I will always see the world a bit different and from a different aspect than a GG, why because I wasnt born with a vagina and because I wasnt raised as one. I will always be different and I cant deny that.

Also though please Tranny Chasers dont try to identify as a label you are not. If you are just into transsexual because its a fetish then stay with that. Dont start identifying as being into transsexuals because of what I just stated above. I woudl hate to see a word be created and tehn all of a sudden guys that are into transsexuals only as a fetish or for sex make it out to be looked as a bad word!


SOrry for the mispellings. When ever I start talking and have words in my head that want to get out, I cant help but try to go fast tehre fore causeing so many misspellings.

If you are going to attack me. Whatever. I will not explain myself to someone that is attacking me. If you have any question ask in an intellectual level PLEASE!

Hey! Thank you for understanding, for seeing this from an objective point of view. And I totally agree on the fetishistic males co-opting whatever the term may be...that wouldn't be a good thing. But like you said in the message you left me, it's pretty easy to tell who is what when it comes to the men in this community.

Love you, hon! :)

[Coroner]

Here's a thought.

I personally do not think that anyone is totally straight or gay, and that labels never hold up to scrutiny.

Perhaps you should take comfort in the fact that your sexual orientation is undefinable... maybe it means you are actually just normal :) ....



The quote above is close to the global view of what I believe. And I think most of us here understand how complex sexuality is. But that being said we often have to use the recognized society categories when making short statements about our sexuality. The simplest way to put it, you are heterosexual, with an attraction to a specific type of woman. That being said, it is not unusual because everyone is attracted to some type of physiological traits in their sexual partners. I personally believe that these attractions are biological in nature.

In the list of physical, plus emotional traits, that attracts people to others, some people are more exclusive in regards to certain traits than others are. Most people will compromise some traits in their top list but not others. Whatsupwithat, you’re heterosexual with exclusive attraction to a specific type of woman. Many others here are attracted to the same type of women you are, just not as exclusive about the same trait. So once again, I am saying that it is okay to say we are heterosexual when the simplest of explanation is needed.

I am defining Transsexual women as a specific type of woman. Those of us that are attracted to women know that they are a lot more than what is between their legs. Many in the general society may not agree, but we in this forum know that they are wrong. It is not always important to debate this aspect of the issue with everyone, who wants a simple identification of your sexuality. While they are important, the more complex defintions are only appropriate at certain times.

Yoda, a penis is not just a physiological trait like the eyes, nose, mouth or ass. It is the genitalia of a biological man. Transsexual women have this genitalia and although they´re women, this "little" fact doesn´t make one who is attracted to them heterosexual at all. Heterosexuality may be mostly part of our sexual passions since those who are attracted to GG´s and T-girls aren´t attracted to men but thinking that you´re straight isn´t the end solution.

I don´t want to laugh at Smashy´s point of view on this topic but I can´t agree with this ridiculous idea that he identifies transsexual women as "feminine men". I think we need a TS to clear this.

[Coroner]

... and I always forget to type this: what is with those who fall in love with a TS? This isn´t a fetish.

[SmashysmashY]

you can laugh at me if you want. but it won't change the fact that biology is a science, male and female are clearly defined terms that have meaning, and a man cannot be a woman and vice-versa.

heterosexuality and homosexuality are also clearly defined and when you direct sexual desire toward individuals of the same sex you are engaged in homosexuality.

ce n'est pas très poli mais c'est vrai

[Coroner]

This terms may have been defined in times when SRS for example seemed to be impossible. Biology is science and T-girls weren´t born as women, so this part of the theme tells that they aren´t bio-girls but the same science has changed a lot today. I´m sure post-op T-girls will be able to get kids in the next 10 pr 20 years, blind people will get "new eyes" and our fate will depend on technology. This is called singularity and we´re in the middle of it. If you define a TS woman as a man, you mean they´re mentally sick and need to be cured. I don´t think they´re sick.

[Coroner]

This terms may have been defined in times when SRS for example seemed to be impossible. Biology is science and T-girls weren´t born as women, so this part of the theme tells that they aren´t bio-girls but the same science has changed a lot today. I´m sure post-op T-girls will be able to get kids in the next 10 pr 20 years, blind people will get "new eyes" and our fate will depend on technology. This is called singularity and we´re in the middle of it. If you define a TS woman as a man, you mean they´re mentally sick and need to be cured. I don´t think they´re sick.

I won´t laugh at you, I think your thaughts are interesting. I just don´t agree with them.

[Shining Star]

By the strictest medical terms, a transexual is a person whom believes they were born/are the wrong sex. That is to say they identify (on a sliding scale), with being the opposite gender of what they were born.

When the term/diagnosis was "made up" it had to be made clear that such persons abhored their natural physical being and wished to be made into the other. This was the only way doctors could legally and ethically justify removing healthy and working body parts such as penis for no other reason than the patient wished it so.

Over the past 40 or so years since Harry Benjamin did his work on transexuals, entire sub-groups have developed, and the entire term "transexual" has changed, at least perhaps on the street to encompas a wide scope of persons, including transvestites and drag queens. For there are many, many persons of the later two category that will take hormones and or have certian operations done to enhance a feminine appearance, but have absolutely NO intention of having a sex change operation, nor consider themselves "women" even a minority of time.

Now, trannies and the men who love them can call things what they like; but there are still only two types of sex in nature, gay and straight. You can dress up pre-op TS sex in a corset and stockings, and it still would be considered having sex with a male by medical standards.

Under the "old" theory, a true TS didn't like their sexual parts for the most part, and or were at least uncomfortable (again along a sliding scale), with using them for sexual pleasure. However today there is a sub-set of persons who consider themselves true transexuals, but have no intention of having any sort of operation, yet still wish to be come as feminine in looks as possible. Some enjoy and use their sexual organs, others do not (again along a sliding scale).

This is where the gap between some transexuals and the men who love them comes up. Time and again you have seen posted here that there are girls who don't want men who are "gay" or into their "male" parts, or for that matter are too comfortable with them being TS. Instead they prefer "straight" men who are not "into" transexuals, or at least were'nt until they met them, and consider them as "st8" women.

On the male side, you have men who seek transexuals of varying degrees, for various reasons. Many of those reasons mimic some found in the gay male sex world. Their are "tops" only, "bottoms" only. Men who will perform oral on a TS, those that will only receive. Men that consider themselves "straight", yet still engage in passive oral and anal sex with a male pre-op.

As for dating transexuals being a "fetish", guess that depends on how the particular man feels about transexuals in not only in realtion to sex,but romantically as well.

Sadly the Western world does not recongise transexuals as a third sex, and bases sexuality (again on a sliding scale) of a person's sexuality a majority of the time. A st8 man who engages in gay sex because he is in prison or at war, is not considered "gay" because his main choice would be a woman if circumstances were different. However men being a horny lot in general, he takes what is on offer at the moment. A man dating a transexual, depending upon the sexual acts by the strictest of terms is considered engaging in male gay sex, again regardless of what they and the TS tell themselves. This I think is one of the reason's why many girls get kind of ticked off when they meet guys who are interested mainly in touching and using their "male" body parts. Here you have what appears to be a girl, and in some cases a VERY attractive girl, who considers herself (or is trying to), a woman. Now you have man who is outwardly attracted to the same person because they appear to be an attractive woman, but have a penis.

Having lived as a girl for some time now, can honestly say think the "problem" with the TS community, including those who are attracted to/love them is this profound discomfort many on each side have with themselves and what they are seeking. Cannot count anymore how many times I've had to listen a trannie gf wail about not having a man, then BAM! She meets a guy who has it all: looks, job, personality, body, or even if he is just a decent normal guy, it follows almost as night after day that within a few weeks the phone calls start. "Girl, I can't take him anymore, all he wants to do is .... or ....." Or I'll hear she is seeing other men/turning dates behind the guy's back , and so it goes.
From the guys one hears "I just want a girl (transexual) who is happy with what she has and comfortable using it)..

Personally, I think unless one is planning on living in some uptight community or is a public figure that needs to conform to something, just drop the labels and be happy with whomever or whatever gives you joy, long as it is legal.

[SmashysmashY]

I won´t laugh at you, I think your thaughts are interesting. I just don´t agree with them.

that's fine but you should know that when you disagree with facts you are either misinformed or in denial.

[andyuk]

does it matter what label someone gives you?
as long as you know what you are yourself and are happy with that,never mind what anyone else thinks.
i know it can be hard to ignore,but you will always get someone who will try to bring you down,just ignore it and love yourself.

[BeardedOne]

I'm skipping far ahead on this one because I have scragged yet another laptop with an XP update and have therefore missed two daze worth of posts.

However...

Based on the few posts I've caught up on, I relate this story:

I knew a couple (She: Lesbian, he: open-minded) some years ago who were fairly active in the gay rights movement (Which, in and of itself, is too limiting in its title).

After a press conference in Virginia, a reporter approached the woman and asked some questions pertaining to her sexuality. During the nterview, she pointed out that though she was dyke, she was alo married. The reporter assumed "To another woman?" and, pointing across the room, she said "No, to that man, there!".

Intrigued, the reporter approached her spouse and said "So, you are married to that woman? You're heterosexual then?". My friend replied, "No!".

The reporter, quite sure of themselves, then said "Oh, of course! You're bisexual!", to which my friend replied "Nope!".

Confused, the reporter asked "Then...You're homosexual?". To which my friend replied "No, I'm just sexual!" and walked over to join his wife.

Throughout history people have equated gender with sexuality and vice-versa. While it might behoove some to try and educate the masses, there is really only one person that you need to convince of the differences and defintions.

That is yourself.

[Ecstatic]

Here's an interesting article I came across today, from an address given by Christine Burns in 1997 entitled Woman Plus Or how to forget the label and concentrate on the quality of the cloth. She writes:


It started with a discussion that is hardly new, about the semantics of the term "transsexual" … the effects of its’ common usage as a noun rather than an adjective, the confusion and misunderstanding caused by the root word "sexual" which it is based on, and whether or not the prefix "trans" makes the word meaningful, even as an adjective, after the completion of an individual’s physical journey from one anatomical model to the other.

and goes on to say:


For some people, this gets dressed up as an argument about technical semantics … questions of whether the prefix "trans" is appropriate when you’ve stopped, or whether "sexual" means the whole word is etymologically flawed from the outset.

Very interesting; you can read the entire address here (http://www.pfc.org.uk/node/257).

[justatransgirl]

I'm a bit late. Some good comments have been made.

How about this - "If it floats your boat and feels good - DO IT!"

We spend too much time trying to define and label each other and not enough time accepting ourselves and educating others about us.

Shining Star - good comments and so true. It's hard for many t-girls to maintain long term relationships.

Does anyone have any figures on if this changes after SRS? Meaning do post-ops enjoy longer relationships more in line with GG's?

And why is it that so many men who want to have sex with us, but are afraid to be seen in public with us? (And I'm referring to "passable" t-girls, not someone who's going to cause stares.)

Huh?
TS Jamie :-)

[Coroner]

I won´t laugh at you, I think your thaughts are interesting. I just don´t agree with them.

that's fine but you should know that when you disagree with facts you are either misinformed or in denial.

In Austria, a person is classified as transsexual after the psychiatrist confirms it. After that, the medical insurance pays all the surgeries the person undergoes. This means that a transsexual person is recognized as being in the wrong body and gets the support to look outside the way it feels inside. Science has broken the societal rules a long time ago and you can´t compare the position of science from about 50 years ago to it´s present position.

[Ecstatic]

Sex-Lexis gives "transfan" as "A person sympathetic or attracted to transgendered people," but while this is to me preferrable to "tranny chaser" and other derogatory terms, it still falls well short of the mark.

I've been looking for a prefix with the same meaning as trans- but so far without success.

[whatsupwithat]

To all the posters saying, forget the labels, be who you are, etc...I have and am doing that. And while the quip about being "sexual" is all witty and whatnot, it's more of a quip than anything real the person has decided for themselves.

My point in all of this is that there is no positive term that defines men who are attracted to, accept, and support transsexuals. I put myself out on alimb in this thread to get to the bottom of it. And what am I finding? More of the same old, same old. Saying it's a fetish, derision thrown at the men who are attracted by transsexuals, and so on. It's almost like an internalized transphobia. We get that from the rest of the world, why do we have to get it from the very same community we're part of. I'm proud of who I am. I'm not a serial dater. I'm not married. I'm not in the closet. I only enter into monogamous relationships. I don't cheat. i don't chase. I'm involved in the community. I'm trying to make a difference in the community through my work. I'm not fixated on the penis, or sucking, or being a bottom, or being a top. I just don't get what the problem is with me and who I am and others like me.

DISCLAMER: I'm tired, they're starting construction in my bathroom tomorrow, and i'm in a shiatty mood from hearing the same things again and again for 20 odd years now. And people wonder why nothing changes? This thread is a perfect example of why. Holy shiat...when did I get so bitter? :)


Thanks for continuing the search, Ecstatic.

[Ecstatic]

Hey e, hope the bathroom construction goes well. Over the past few years my wife and I have been gradually remodeling, first a wraparound deck, then the kitchen (awesome kitchen), then a finished room in the basement (my photo studio), then a front porch, and most recently the bathroom. A work in progress, like my life.

Anywho, I know where you're coming from. In all likelihood, had I not met my wonderful wife over 30 years ago, I would most likely be in more or less the same position you are (except a bit older, lol). Keep on keeping on....

[whatsupwithat]

And why is it that so many men who want to have sex with us, but are afraid to be seen in public with us? (And I'm referring to "passable" t-girls, not someone who's going to cause stares.)

Huh?
TS Jamie :-)

Not all men are. Just the weak ones.

[dabaldone]

[quote="whatsupwithat"]To all the posters saying, forget the labels, be who you are, etc...I have and am doing that. And while the quip about being "sexual" is all witty and whatnot, it's more of a quip than anything real the person has decided for themselves.

My point in all of this is that there is no positive term that defines men who are attracted to, accept, and support transsexuals. I put myself out on alimb in this thread to get to the bottom of it. And what am I finding? More of the same old, same old. Saying it's a fetish, derision thrown at the men who are attracted by transsexuals, and so on. It's almost like an internalized transphobia. We get that from the rest of the world, why do we have to get it from the very same community we're part of. I'm proud of who I am. I'm not a serial dater. I'm not married. I'm not in the closet. I only enter into monogamous relationships. I don't cheat. i don't chase. I'm involved in the community. I'm trying to make a difference in the community through my work. I'm not fixated on the penis, or sucking, or being a bottom, or being a top. I just don't get what the problem is with me and who I am and others like me.

Like you, I've been at this over 20 years. Thank you for the positive attitude!

[Shining Star]

Sex After Post-Op

Much of the studies done on post-op transexuals do not offer much hope that the operation makes anyone more "happy" or at ease with themselves than before. In fact so much of the opposite was becoming known places like the Harry Benjamin Center, pioneers in TS work, stopped doing the operation.

If the stated medical goal of putting a TS through hormones, and various operations was for them to lead happy lives as "St8" women or men, then by a long shot, according to studies the process is a failure. Why?

A high percentage of post-op MTF's enter into lesbian realtionships. Studies vary as to the exact amount and weahter or not this attraction to women was there all the time, or weather such transgendered women cannot find a male "st8" partner. What is obvious is that the males in the transgender community by and large wish to have a pre-op transgendered person ,if any when it comes to a relationship/sex, and St* men seek GGs.

One group of post op TS's however do end up "happy"; and report the most "well adjusted"; and that is the group many in the TS community label "men in dresses". TS women who change later in life (usually after marrying and having children/reaching middle age), are happiest. Unlike some younger girls, their image is not tied into their looks and the scene/man chasing. They fully realise they may forever be called "a man" when walking down the street, but they do suffer from a profound unhappiness with their current gender, and are willing to accept the trade-offs for some peace of mind.

Oh, there is also the trannie "urban myth" that many post-ops go "crazy" because they no longer can have orgasms. While many post op girls do report having orgasms, including several I know; most of those same girls wouldn't tell me the sky was blue if the sun was out in daylight.

These are probably one of the greatest factors in many girls choosing to remain "non-op". You only have to look at the post op girls who switch from Eros Ts section to the GG section and what they go through to get an idea.

"WhatsUpWithDat"

A cool tall drink of water like yourself shouldn't worry (not that you are), about what people think. A girl (GG or TS) that lands a man such as yourself with a good outlook on life/things should be happy. May have to send my picture over to your MySpace site and apply for a postion should an opening come along! *LOL*

Bottom line is transgendered persons, and those that love them are going to have a bit longer hauling the heavy load. While gay male, in particular white gay male population and lesbians are making huge strides in terms of social acceptance (who ever thought you'd hear "his husband' uttered with such ease as one heard on the subway the other day, but there we are.

However will say I know of one or two transgendered women (pre-op) who are living quite happy lives here in NYC, with long term partners (male). One is a nurse and the other a social worker. Like many gay couples in NYC< they simply go about their business as if everything is normal, because to them it is, and that is what matters.

Think many transgendered girls, especially the young ones, take up residence in Pity Me Pines Apartments, and blame the world for forcing them into "working", and resenting the men they attract because they in fact don't like themselves. But guess what, this is 2007, not 1977 or even 1987; and it does warm my heart to see some young transgirls strolling around NYU's campus behaving exactly like young students should.

A long time ago, I decided I was not going to let what I was stand in my way of making the most of my life. Have I made mistakes? Sure, who hasn't in their lives, but just like those people who are born with a severe handicap or badly disabled later in life, you have two choices; you can get busy living or get busy dying. Someone doesn't like me because I am a TS. Fine, they don't pay my rent, and quite honestly aside from my family and a few close friends, I don't give a rat's butt what people "think" of me anyway. Just keep out of my way and don't even think of starting any trouble, and we'll get along fine. *LOL*

As for the men who date trannies: Well many of you need to pick a team. Can you imagine how it makes anyone feel; gay, straight, trannie, male or female when the only time you will see them is indoors and really only for sex? Worse to be ignored or cut in public by the same man who was on your trade the night before like a monkey on a cupcake. Like many transgendered girls I've had my share of winners. Calls at 1am in the morning from some guy who wants to come over because "I'm in your neighborhood", or finding out a guy you have been seeing is getting married/moving in with his GF: only to call you several weeks later to "come over and play". Heck I've had them call me on their first day back after the honeymoon, or even better while their wife is in labour having THEIR baby.

[whatsupwithat]

I don't think I will ever forget "the same man who was on your trade the night before like a monkey on a cupcake.". That line alone made this entire thread worthwhile! haha!

And what you said about the married guys...spot on. I hear the same stories from so many other girls.

Please keep writing. I'm loving what you have to say. :)

[andyuk]

well at this time i"m married,but not living together.
nothing to do with anyone else,just we took a risk to get married as she is from another country,but never worked out.
we will get divorced as soon as 1 of us meets someone we want to spend the rest of our lifes with.
o go on i"m sure someone will label me now :)

[lust4ts]

I can't explain my interest in transsexuals either. All I know is I am now 27, until the age of 23/24 I had never even really thought about what a transsexual is and if I had I certainly did not assume that I would find them attractive in even a remote way. I was always in relationships be they just sexual or more meaningful with GG's and that was my preference. The fact that I am from England and a place with no transsexual community to speak of probably added to this lack of consideration, I guess what I am saying is it was never something I was confronted with, therefore it was something I never pondered in any great detail. If anything the faint impression and image stored in my mind was properly of a man in drag. So when one day about 4 years ago I was watching a show called Sexcetera (basically a documentary style program about sex around the world) and it had a feature on vanity where she was naked. I was so shocked to see this beautiful women with a penis between her legs, I know she is not the norm of what a transsexual looks like but even the mere fact that this term I only had heard in passing (a transsexual) could look like this simply fascinated me. It was the contrast of her femininity combined with her penis, it was like the way I had been brought up, my sense of sexuality and my understanding of human anatomy were all challenged there and then in that very moment. It was almost as if something that should look so wrong to the way my mind was supposed to work just looked so right.

Then within a day I was on my computer searching firstly for anything to do with Vanity which soon turned into transsexuals in general, and before I knew it I was ordering lots of DVDs in that genre and basically jacking off almost every night to them. In the years that followed I would have girlfriends but found myself wishing they had a cock or loosing interest quickly because they did not.

Then a year ago I joined Hung angels looking for cock pics and armed with a pretty shit attitude to what transsexuals had to offer me and society its self. I will make no bones about the fact I saw them only as objects for my sexual gratification. In the year or so I have been a member I have definitely changed allot. I know longer see them as sexual objects or even obsess about them simply because I realize they are just normal people who have taken a slightly different path in life. All I know is I like the female form, the fact that when I see a cock between that forms legs I find it attractive is really not that bigger deal. Whether I end up growing old with a GG or TS (pre op or post op) really does not bother me in the slightest. Every person is different I have always made a point not judging a people on the race, colour, sexual preference or in this case gender but rather on the individual they are. It seems like all transsexuals (male to female) are put into one group, when in reality the only thing they actually have in common is that they have or have had a penis and started there life as males. Surely there are much more deciding and important factors to judge a person on than this, their beliefs, their values, the love they have to offer or even something as superficial as how physically attractive you find them.

I guess what I am saying is that if you only find transsexuals attractive that is cool, just go with it as long as your interests run much deeper than just the penis which I am sure they do. After all the fact that you have this preference is not your fault, but simply the way you feel. It is alien to me as I find GGs just as attractive, no different to the concept of me liking transsexuals being alien to allot of people I know. What's the difference really you still are attracted by the female form you just prefer them to have a penis. It’s just a preference thing, if you consider all GGs and TS's simply as women then it is not that different to preferring Red Heads or short women, it’s your taste you like your girls to have a cock. Luckily for you there are many hot TS's that do so simply just enjoy the fact there is and have fun.

[whatsupwithat]

well at this time i"m married,but not living together.
nothing to do with anyone else,just we took a risk to get married as she is from another country,but never worked out.
we will get divorced as soon as 1 of us meets someone we want to spend the rest of our lifes with.
o go on i"m sure someone will label me now :)

haha! :)

[Shining Star]

You guys crack me up with this "hot TS" bit. Why does it always have to be a hot TS. Does this mean you give a pass to a girl who is not "hot"?

One wouldn't mind,but for the frequent loud noise from men who aren't GQ or Men's Fittness magazine model material, how most TS girls are only interested in the young, handsome bucks, and won't give an average Joe the time of day.

I've dated "hot" men, and I've dated "normal" run of the mill guys. And quite honestly I prefer average guys (ok, they have to be in shape as I work out lead a healthy lifestyle), than the male model types. Ever see what happens to a goodlooking guy when he goes into a club with his date? Right way you can see girls plotting to take that man from his gf. Ever see a goodlooking guy at a trannie bar? More likely than not his gf won't leave him even to go to the bathroom, because she KNOWS there are girls in that room plotting and scheming! *LOL*

My point is that there are lots f plain ordinary girls out there. Since they don't "work" they don't have the money and maybe not even the desire to go through all that is required to be "hot". I'm not saying they are woofs, just average looking like 98% of the girls walking around. Look beyond the hottness and you'll likely find something beautiful.

SS

[andyuk]

well at this time i"m married,but not living together.
nothing to do with anyone else,just we took a risk to get married as she is from another country,but never worked out.
we will get divorced as soon as 1 of us meets someone we want to spend the rest of our lifes with.
o go on i"m sure someone will label me now :)

haha! :)
you get my point though?
we are all individual,and all have different life experiences.
so i dont see how anyone can put a label on anyone.
sure i have made mistakes in life.
but i dont think anyone was born perfect.
as long as your honest with the person you date or marry or whatever
then i dont see a problem
i have not even been out with anyone for over 2 years,as i"m not into 1 night stands and did not want to meet anyone on the rebound
only this last few months i have started to think about dating again

[lust4ts]

You guys crack me up with this "hot TS" bit. Why does it always have to be a hot TS. Does this mean you give a pass to a girl who is not "hot"?

One wouldn't mind,but for the frequent loud noise from men who aren't GQ or Men's Fittness magazine model material, how most TS girls are only interested in the young, handsome bucks, and won't give an average Joe the time of day.

I've dated "hot" men, and I've dated "normal" run of the mill guys. And quite honestly I prefer average guys (ok, they have to be in shape as I work out lead a healthy lifestyle), than the male model types. Ever see what happens to a goodlooking guy when he goes into a club with his date? Right way you can see girls plotting to take that man from his gf. Ever see a goodlooking guy at a trannie bar? More likely than not his gf won't leave him even to go to the bathroom, because she KNOWS there are girls in that room plotting and scheming! *LOL*

My point is that there are lots f plain ordinary girls out there. Since they don't "work" they don't have the money and maybe not even the desire to go through all that is required to be "hot". I'm not saying they are woofs, just average looking like 98% of the girls walking around. Look beyond the hottness and you'll likely find something beautiful.

SS

Well what can I say, I like hot girls be they ts or not. Sorry if you got the wrong impression obviously just because someone is not hot does not make them less of a person, and I don't remember saying it does.

I go for girls who find hot, personality is great and very important but if I don't find someone physically attractive what is the point. I guess I define hot as what I find attractive. I am not going to feel guilty about saying I prefer pretty girls. Like I said that is just me and I am happy to admit it.

[Felicia Katt]

Everyone is so consumed by labels, by what makes a male a male, and a female, a female, and what it means to be attracted to one or the other or both. But ultimately, all of the things that we think of to divide male from female: hair and skin and body size and shape and breasts, are all secondary sexual characteristics, and as such, they differentiate but they don't define. For human beings, there is only really one primary sexual characteristic, and for better or worse, thats the external genitalia. You can talk about genetics and xx and xy and xyy and all the chromosonal variations, but ultimately, how those genes are expressed physically is what counts. Males have penises, female have vaginas

But Male is not man and female is not woman. Your anatomy is not your gender, which is much more of a psychological construct than a physical absolute. Genitals are not what makes a man a man, or woman, a woman. Having a penis doesn't make you a man, or exclude you from being a woman. Your gender is between your ears, not your legs.

Same with homo vs heterosexuaL. homo=same. hetero=different. In the strict, literal sense of the terms, if you have a penis and your partner has one as well, that is a homosexual act.

But homosexual isn't the same as gay, just like hetero isn't the same as straight. Gay and Straight are social and cultural constructs, not easy absolutes. Being gay or straight is more about who you are attracted to, and why, and how you interact with them, and how you interrelate to the rest of the world. Being "gay" is more of a social poltical identity than a sexual one, just as being straight is. If an open admitted gay guy becomes celibate, he is still gay. If he sleeps with women, I would argue he is still gay as well. A man who is attracted to a transgendered woman can be straight. but he can't technically claim to be wholly heterosexual.

The term transsexual is an unfortunate one, because unlike homo and heterosexual, being transsexual is not about sex, its about gender. If they would have started with the term transgendered at the outset, instead of it evolving slowly and fitfully into more common usage, there might be a lot less confusion and angst among the transgendered community.

Trans=cross though, so its not really accurate to label someone who is attracted to the transgendered a transsexual, because there is no cross sexual component. if you wanted to be painfully accurate, a trans-sexual would be someone who was attracted to someone of the opposite gender but who came accross as being of the same gender. A man and an FTM or a lesbian and MTF would be a trans-sexual relationships. But those are pretty few and far between, and we can never unring the bell as far as the terminology of transsexualism goes, so the term will continue to define gender and to confound how we deal with it.

I'm not sure what latin or scientific term would best define someone who is attracted to the transgendered. Nor am I sure there should be one. A case could be made for the term transphillic, but that may be too much like paraphillic, which is the clinical term for fetish and what is derogatorially referred to as perversions.

I think rather than trying to find a new label, or force a fit with the old ones, that you should love who you love, or lust for those who you lust for, and do so proudly, and openly and shrug off those who would try to define or confine you. Sexuality is nothing if not fluid, and too many people are swimming against its current instead of going with the flow.

FK

[whatsupwithat]

That was beautiful.

Now if only everyone thought of things as you do.

[whatislove]

I'll take that without the negative connotations. But we still have no positive defining term for MMFs.

MMFsexual? ha! :)

I liked transamorous!

[peggygee]

Sex After Post-Op

Much of the studies done on post-op transexuals do not offer much hope that the operation makes anyone more "happy" or at ease with themselves than before. In fact so much of the opposite was becoming known places like the Harry Benjamin Center, pioneers in TS work, stopped doing the operation.

If the stated medical goal of putting a TS through hormones, and various operations was for them to lead happy lives as "St8" women or men, then by a long shot, according to studies the process is a failure. Why?

A high percentage of post-op MTF's enter into lesbian realtionships. Studies vary as to the exact amount and weahter or not this attraction to women was there all the time, or weather such transgendered women cannot find a male "st8" partner. What is obvious is that the males in the transgender community by and large wish to have a pre-op transgendered person ,if any when it comes to a relationship/sex, and St* men seek GGs.

One group of post op TS's however do end up "happy"; and report the most "well adjusted"; and that is the group many in the TS community label "men in dresses". TS women who change later in life (usually after marrying and having children/reaching middle age), are happiest. Unlike some younger girls, their image is not tied into their looks and the scene/man chasing. They fully realise they may forever be called "a man" when walking down the street, but they do suffer from a profound unhappiness with their current gender, and are willing to accept the trade-offs for some peace of mind.

Oh, there is also the trannie "urban myth" that many post-ops go "crazy" because they no longer can have orgasms. While many post op girls do report having orgasms, including several I know; most of those same girls wouldn't tell me the sky was blue if the sun was out in daylight.

These are probably one of the greatest factors in many girls choosing to remain "non-op". You only have to look at the post op girls who switch from Eros Ts section to the GG section and what they go through to get an idea.

"WhatsUpWithDat"

A cool tall drink of water like yourself shouldn't worry (not that you are), about what people think. A girl (GG or TS) that lands a man such as yourself with a good outlook on life/things should be happy. May have to send my picture over to your MySpace site and apply for a postion should an opening come along! *LOL*

Bottom line is transgendered persons, and those that love them are going to have a bit longer hauling the heavy load. While gay male, in particular white gay male population and lesbians are making huge strides in terms of social acceptance (who ever thought you'd hear "his husband' uttered with such ease as one heard on the subway the other day, but there we are.

However will say I know of one or two transgendered women (pre-op) who are living quite happy lives here in NYC, with long term partners (male). One is a nurse and the other a social worker. Like many gay couples in NYC< they simply go about their business as if everything is normal, because to them it is, and that is what matters.

Think many transgendered girls, especially the young ones, take up residence in Pity Me Pines Apartments, and blame the world for forcing them into "working", and resenting the men they attract because they in fact don't like themselves. But guess what, this is 2007, not 1977 or even 1987; and it does warm my heart to see some young transgirls strolling around NYU's campus behaving exactly like young students should.

A long time ago, I decided I was not going to let what I was stand in my way of making the most of my life. Have I made mistakes? Sure, who hasn't in their lives, but just like those people who are born with a severe handicap or badly disabled later in life, you have two choices; you can get busy living or get busy dying. Someone doesn't like me because I am a TS. Fine, they don't pay my rent, and quite honestly aside from my family and a few close friends, I don't give a rat's butt what people "think" of me anyway. Just keep out of my way and don't even think of starting any trouble, and we'll get along fine. *LOL*

As for the men who date trannies: Well many of you need to pick a team. Can you imagine how it makes anyone feel; gay, straight, trannie, male or female when the only time you will see them is indoors and really only for sex? Worse to be ignored or cut in public by the same man who was on your trade the night before like a monkey on a cupcake. Like many transgendered girls I've had my share of winners. Calls at 1am in the morning from some guy who wants to come over because "I'm in your neighborhood", or finding out a guy you have been seeing is getting married/moving in with his GF: only to call you several weeks later to "come over and play". Heck I've had them call me on their first day back after the honeymoon, or even better while their wife is in labour having THEIR baby.

SS, I've just woken up, and I have done a cursory perusal of your post.

Would you be so kind as to provide cites for the studies that you have
alluded to, as I feel there are some erroneous conclusions and
statements.

I'm running late for work, but you may either PM me, or post them on the
forum.

Thanks......

[Shining Star]

Last time I read those books was at college,but will see what I can dig up either on the Internet, or when down by my alma mater see if can find the same books.

[Ecstatic]

Cogent and insightful as ever, Felicia. The crux of the matter is the difference between sex and gender, between physiological differentiation and social/psychological construct. If one bases one's definition of sexuality on a person's primary sexual manifestation (genitalia), then, with the exception of intersexuals, we do fall into the male/female modality. But gender is far more fluid and differently defined for each.


Trans=cross though, so its not really accurate to label someone who is attracted to the transgendered a transsexual, because there is no cross sexual component. if you wanted to be painfully accurate, a trans-sexual would be someone who was attracted to someone of the opposite gender but who came accross as being of the same gender. A man and an FTM or a lesbian and MTF would be a trans-sexual relationships. But those are pretty few and far between, and we can never unring the bell as far as the terminology of transsexualism goes, so the term will continue to define gender and to confound how we deal with it.
Yes, this gets back very succinctly to the points I made above regarding the terminology. I quite agree, it would have been better had we begun with transgender rather than transsexual, but it is what it is.


I'm not sure what latin or scientific term would best define someone who is attracted to the transgendered. Nor am I sure there should be one. A case could be made for the term transphillic, but that may be too much like paraphillic, which is the clinical term for fetish and what is derogatorially referred to as perversions.
I've tried transphillic on for size before, but never really liked the term, partly for the reason you give, and partly because it's too limiting, both as a descriptor of my inclinations and as regards the objects of my inclinations.


I think rather than trying to find a new label, or force a fit with the old ones, that you should love who you love, or lust for those who you lust for, and do so proudly, and openly and shrug off those who would try to define or confine you. Sexuality is nothing if not fluid, and too many people are swimming against its current instead of going with the flow.

FK
:claps :claps :claps

[BeardedOne]

I'm jumping into this convo in the middle (Something I'll stop doing as soon as the laptop is finished with its labotomy), so please bear with me.


I honestly don't understand an attraction strictly limited to TS girls.

I honestly don't understand an attraction strictly limited to GG girls. Or strictly limited to guys. I don't understand limiting ones sexual/sensual preference to any single gender/religion/politics/ethnicity/culture/species. Well...Maybe I'll let 'species' slide.

I define myself as bisexual, but with gender having been proven as more of a sliding scale than a binary fact, that definition is limiting.


So, it's just Jericho and I that feel the way we do?

No, I'm sure there are others, including myself. Yet, as far as I've read so far (Page 4) they may not have a voice for their feelings. I know that I have had moments when I have done edits and rewrites in my head a dozen times and another dozen at the keys and still not post.

I'm wondering if it is checmical or genetic in source, nature/nurture, or how many S & H Green Stamps you traded in at the Sexuality and Gender Definition store. Why are straights (In the greater percentage of the sampling) solely attracted to the opposite gender? Gays/lesbians to the same gender? What clicks for bisexuals? How izzit that Motherfucking Nature gave my intersexed lover tits and a vagina, but no uterus, a clit the size of a burly man's thumb, and the instinct to be a gay boi?


Eric, Ecstatic, and now Jericho have really driven home to me the lack of a positive term to describe men who like transwomen.

Eventually, the APA will tag it somehow, as they ultimately did with people like myself who tend to frequently be involved in relationships with homosexual people of the =opposite= gender: Transhomosexuals. In layman's terms, for me, that would be a "male lesbian" (Which more than a couple of my 3G lovers said to other people to explain why we were together). Yah, yah, I've heard the one about "You are what you eat". :roll:


But post operatively I have met a fair number of men that will only date transwomen, be they pre or post operative. For me this strikes me as very odd, and harkens back to what Seanchai said upthread about men who only date women who have a penis or once had a penis.


I must admit that men who only are interested in women who have a penis history give me pause for cause. I must admit that I question
whether their affinity is to the woman or to her previous or current
genitilia, ie. the penis.

Not knowing the individuals or their backstories, I can only hazard a guess here, and it is based on my own experience with a long train of GG relationships that invariably jumped the tracks and landed in the ditch. Women, as a species, are schizophrenic, game-playing psychos who lie about love and friendship as easily as I might say "I'm from the government and I promise not to put the check in your mouth!". That in mind, it is not unreasonable to assume that a woman who possesses (Or had a recent history of possessing) a dick =might= be sane or at least understanding of how a man operates.

Look up the Man Rules (If they haven't already been posted here on HA, they can't be far afield). We're not mind-readers. When we say "I love you", it is not neccesary to grill us about it. If you ask dumbshit questions like "Does this dress make me look fat?", be prepared for the answer! :x

Maybe, just maybe, T-gurls have a handle on this shit and so are the preferred interest when it comes to dating and relationships for some of us lowly men.

As for me, I =like= the penis. I have one of my very own, and we're quite close. I especially enjoy sharing them. :)


i have tried to 'deprogram' myself. i went the gay route, the straight route...it never, as jericho said, *felt* right.

I had a gay "phase" (Yes, Virginia, they really do occur) when I was in my late teens/early twenties. The pic I posted to the Show Your Ass competition was taken in that time frame (And yes, that really, really, really is my sweet ass...Or at least the sweet ass I possessed back then). Yet, it never satisfied, especially as the gay culture at the time had not even imagined the concept of 'relationship'. :roll: On the flip side of the sexuality coin, my relationships with women were always lacking that little 'extra' that we now refer to as 'T-clit'. :?


Labels might be wrong but a term is necessery to avoid any confusion.

I often refer to my 'ex', but I have never been married. "Ex" is a multi-tiered term that saves a lot of explaining in conversation.


For me what attracts me to a person is their personality,
intelligence, integrity, sense of humor, etc.

Likewise, but there are still random qualifiers that tweak some people's interests and desires. A straight guy might meet a witty, etchical, intelligent queer with a great sense of humor, but he ain't gonna blow him.


Pansexual (pan = all) doesn't fit any better than bisexual unless one is attracted to all variants. Likewise omnisexual.

Until a better tag arrives on the scene, pan/omni seems to work for me. I've been there/done that with all varieties and have yet to drown in guilt over any of my encounters/relationships.


But I don't quite agree with your followup statement (for myself, obviously), as what is between their legs is indeed relevant. It's merely one of several relevant factors, but it's far from irrelevant.

I've never been shady about the fact that I like dick. A gurl with a dick is a major bonus for me. Dick is good. All hail the dick! Yet I don't let that desire or preference rule who/which gender I seek out. There are at least a couple of gurls here on HA that have met me in person and, I think, would tell you that I wasn't =ALL= about the dick.

Ass is good, too. :wink:


I do believe, as many have stated, that most of the men are in it for the fetish.

Truth be told, I think I am here for the fetish aspect as a primary draw. That does not neccesarily doom me to being a "chaser", per se. I like to think that I am a bit more open and deeper than that (But only the gurls can make judgement on that).

The whole nature of the T culture challenges and persecutes us. We are gay because we like dick. We are perverts because we like women with dicks. We are social pariahs because our dream dates charge for us to touch them.

Life, and especially people, sucks. Work around it as best you can.


Why is there a negative connotation (tranny chaser) attached to only one of those terms? All the rest are free to be themselves without judgement?

Because we are FAB (Fucked At Birth). Here's a drink chit, go get a beer.


MMFsexual?

I think I'll have that put on a button. :D


I am almost of the mind that it's hormonal in some way. My physical makeup is at play here. What I keep trying to impress and keeps being missed is that this is deeply internal.

See my comments above re: Chemical


Thanks, otto. Much appreciated. i think we should start a website of some kind where guys like us can establish ourselves and build a community, get a voice. Maybe then we'll be taken seriously.

Or maybe we already have one here...

There are other forums that are not so porn-centric as this one and there are also programs that will allow you to set up your own niche. If you choose the latter, invite me! :D


Many, many wise, but misspelled words by Luna

Izzat you, Luna? =The= Luna? So good to see you here. :D

Re; Your comment of penis/vagina rather than male/female in medical terms. My intersexed friend frequently said "The doctors always get it wrong" as far as gender decisions at birth.


We are too hung up on genitalia, imho.

E...Did you say that for real? :lol:


Well, of course, there are times when I rather enjoy being hung up on genitalia....

Never mind, question answered. :lol:

Christ! I'm only up to Page 8 so far. :shock:

[Mr_Man]

...

[andyuk]

Everyone is so consumed by labels, by what makes a male a male, and a female, a female, and what it means to be attracted to one or the other or both. But ultimately, all of the things that we think of to divide male from female: hair and skin and body size and shape and breasts, are all secondary sexual characteristics, and as such, they differentiate but they don't define. For human beings, there is only really one primary sexual characteristic, and for better or worse, thats the external genitalia. You can talk about genetics and xx and xy and xyy and all the chromosonal variations, but ultimately, how those genes are expressed physically is what counts. Males have penises, female have vaginas

But Male is not man and female is not woman. Your anatomy is not your gender, which is much more of a psychological construct than a physical absolute. Genitals are not what makes a man a man, or woman, a woman. Having a penis doesn't make you a man, or exclude you from being a woman. Your gender is between your ears, not your legs.

Same with homo vs heterosexuaL. homo=same. hetero=different. In the strict, literal sense of the terms, if you have a penis and your partner has one as well, that is a homosexual act.

But homosexual isn't the same as gay, just like hetero isn't the same as straight. Gay and Straight are social and cultural constructs, not easy absolutes. Being gay or straight is more about who you are attracted to, and why, and how you interact with them, and how you interrelate to the rest of the world. Being "gay" is more of a social poltical identity than a sexual one, just as being straight is. If an open admitted gay guy becomes celibate, he is still gay. If he sleeps with women, I would argue he is still gay as well. A man who is attracted to a transgendered woman can be straight. but he can't technically claim to be wholly heterosexual.

The term transsexual is an unfortunate one, because unlike homo and heterosexual, being transsexual is not about sex, its about gender. If they would have started with the term transgendered at the outset, instead of it evolving slowly and fitfully into more common usage, there might be a lot less confusion and angst among the transgendered community.

Trans=cross though, so its not really accurate to label someone who is attracted to the transgendered a transsexual, because there is no cross sexual component. if you wanted to be painfully accurate, a trans-sexual would be someone who was attracted to someone of the opposite gender but who came accross as being of the same gender. A man and an FTM or a lesbian and MTF would be a trans-sexual relationships. But those are pretty few and far between, and we can never unring the bell as far as the terminology of transsexualism goes, so the term will continue to define gender and to confound how we deal with it.

I'm not sure what latin or scientific term would best define someone who is attracted to the transgendered. Nor am I sure there should be one. A case could be made for the term transphillic, but that may be too much like paraphillic, which is the clinical term for fetish and what is derogatorially referred to as perversions.

I think rather than trying to find a new label, or force a fit with the old ones, that you should love who you love, or lust for those who you lust for, and do so proudly, and openly and shrug off those who would try to define or confine you. Sexuality is nothing if not fluid, and too many people are swimming against its current instead of going with the flow.

FK

fantastic post.

[mbf]

my last post in this thread:

A) I can only speak for myself, but I cant see myself beeing attracted to TS only. that whole concept seems rather odd to me, but whatever floats your boat....

B) also in this thread an old HA-favourite turns up: "why am I atrracted to TS?"

for me personally, its more of a "cultural" (or "sociological") thing. I was and I am still fascinated by the massiv change that is to be seen with many TS. the massiv change in physical appearance that is.

another factor always was that TS are often outcasts, and I am usually "in with the out-crowd" - I just mistrust "mainstream"-culture on many levels.

the sexual aspect plays a role too, I am not ashamed to admit I like anal-sex - on the active part. I ve been intimate with two TS-chicks so far, and in both cases the girls penis was a non-issue. oral was me rimming.
so, that obsession with cocks which is on display on his site is a bit odd to me, I cant really relate to it. (and that cock-obsession goes both ways, as in the "cock-bandits" and in the girls who tend to say "men only want me due to the fact I have a cock" - dont get me wrong, do whatever you like, I am not throwing stones at anybody of you, its just not understandable for me)

I am sure there are more guys than me on this board or have a (rather) positive attitude towards TS similar to mine.

[SmashysmashY]

I won´t laugh at you, I think your thaughts are interesting. I just don´t agree with them.

that's fine but you should know that when you disagree with facts you are either misinformed or in denial.

In Austria, a person is classified as transsexual after the psychiatrist confirms it. After that, the medical insurance pays all the surgeries the person undergoes. This means that a transsexual person is recognized as being in the wrong body and gets the support to look outside the way it feels inside. Science has broken the societal rules a long time ago and you can´t compare the position of science from about 50 years ago to it´s present position.

psychiatry is not a science because there is no control group. the person still has a y chromosome no matter how much surgery they get. and just from a common sense standpoint if you have a dick in your mouth or butt you have clearly crossed the line between man and gay-man. sorry.

[Hol]

Hi e,


there actually is a medical/psychiatric name for the propensity to be attracted to transwomen, it is gynandromorphophilia, so you would be a "gynandromorphophile", granted it's a bit of a mouthful and not quite as catchy as "tranny chaser". I think Ray Blanchard came up with it and it is used in some circles. Personally I think you could do with something a little bit pithier and agree that most current names have a pejorative bent to them. I assume this is mainly due to most people (straight, gay and even some ts's) believing that there is something inherently wrong with you finding ts's(mainly/exclusively) sexually attractive. I doubt many people seek professional help to deal with their sexual preference for transsexuals, hence it not being a terribly common term or there being another widely used psych name for it. I know some people will find the "phile/philia" bit not to their liking, but it really just mean liking or attraction

I generally agree with your quest to find a suitable name for your attraction and hope that in some way it may decrease the stigma and misunderstanding surrounding your sexuality and even transwomens sexuality.

ps to others: just a quick note on fetish, usually it means your sexual arousal is dependent on an inanimate non-living object ie women’s panties. That isn't the case with transwomen, unless you view them as objects(i'm sure some people do, but most don’t), it’s more of an "alternative sexuality". But since I think a heck of a lot of "straight" men have fantasies about ts's don’t think it is that unusual or alternative, just very shameful and embarrassing to most men.

There’s some interesting references here: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=329452 about three answers down, make that 4!

[Ecstatic]

"gynandromorphophile" - interesting! /gyn/ (or /gyno/) [Greek gunē, woman] + /andro/ (or /andr/) [Greek, from anēr, andr-, man] + /morpho/ (or /morph/) [Greek, from morphē, shape, used in context of to transform shape] + /phile/ [New Latin -philus, from Greek -philos, beloved, dear, from philos, beloved, loving] = Loving or having a strong affinity or preference for a man transform[ed/ing] into a woman. A mouthful, but it does meet the lexical requirements of the desired term. Nice first post, Hol.

[Hol]

"gynandromorphophile" - interesting! /gyn/ (or /gyno/) [Greek gunē, woman] + /andro/ (or /andr/) [Greek, from anēr, andr-, man] + /morpho/ (or /morph/) [Greek, from morphē, shape, used in context of to transform shape] + /phile/ [New Latin -philus, from Greek -philos, beloved, dear, from philos, beloved, loving] = Loving or having a strong affinity or preference for a man transform[ed/ing] into a woman. A mouthful, but it does meet the lexical requirements of the desired term. Nice first post, Hol.


Thanks Ecstatic,

I've been lurking for a while and think e's search for an identity/label is a good thing and hope he is successful. I think the lack of an identity/label encourages a lot of men to be quite "shady"(i think that's the term?) about their sexual attraction to ts's and that validates their tendency to treat us as dirty secrets and embarrassments. I think if there was a more positive identity for guys who like ts's, ts's wouldn't get treated so poorly by some men. But maybe I'm being naively optimistic? lol!

[francisfkudrow]

Assuming there needs to be a term ending in -sexual (see my previous post suggesting "Type MMF") you could drop the -phile and add -sexual...

Gynandromorphosexual?

[Felicia Katt]

Did no one take my plea to not dwell on the labels seriously? LOL

how about transgensexual. Its less of a mouthful. (whiich in normal usage is a good thing, though I am not so sure here LOL)

meow

FK

[TrueBeauty TS]

Did no one take my plea to not dwell on the labels seriously? LOL

how about transgensexual. Its less of a mouthful. (whiich in normal usage is a good thing, though I am not so sure here LOL)

meow

FK



More than a mouthful is a waste, anyway. :wink:




.

[BeardedOne]

Gynandromorphophile/Gynandromorphosexual/Transgensexual...

Interesting. I will embrace the technical term, Gynandromorphophile, and add it to my earlier label, transhomosexual, and file it with other useful woids that I've tripped over during my lifetime: Bogonophobic = Fear of beards, Parthenophobic = Fear of virgins, and Bovavocaphilia = The inexplicable urge to say "Moo!" when one sees a cow.

[Ecstatic]

How about transgenphile?

[Hol]

Did no one take my plea to not dwell on the labels seriously? LOL

how about transgensexual. Its less of a mouthful. (whiich in normal usage is a good thing, though I am not so sure here LOL)

meow

FK


Absolutely, taking labels too seriously won’t do anyone any favours. I personally favour transfan, doesn’t really suggest anything too negative and captures the essence nicely.

But you've got to admit, if a guy's at a dinner party and the discussion turns to sexuality, if he whips out that beast (gynandrowhatever), people are going to think he terribly sophisticated and avant-garde and not in the least bit a drooling pervert. Could be a winner guys!

[TrueBeauty TS]

But you've got to admit, if a guy's at a dinner party and the discussion turns to sexuality, if he whips out that beast (gynandrowhatever), people are going to think he terribly sophisticated and avant-garde and not in the least bit a drooling pervert. Could be a winner guys!


What kind of dinner parties do YOU go to!!!??? LOL



.

[hwbs]

this stuff is very ridiculous... GOD didn't make me like this ..i chose my path ...the best way to describe my lifestyle is that its my preference..i can't blame it on science...

[Hol]

But you've got to admit, if a guy's at a dinner party and the discussion turns to sexuality, if he whips out that beast (gynandrowhatever), people are going to think he terribly sophisticated and avant-garde and not in the least bit a drooling pervert. Could be a winner guys!


What kind of dinner parties do YOU go to!!!??? LOL


.



lol not ones where it'd be considered "avant-garde" or "sophisticated" to come out with stuff like that!! :)

[Hol]

this stuff is very ridiculous... GOD didn't make me like this ..i chose my path ...the best way to describe my lifestyle is that its my preference..i can't blame it on science...


I agree, I don't think you can blame it on science or god (but maybe a bit on biology), but I think "science" would like to understand why you made that choice, not accept responsibility for it.

[VictoriaJaye]

This thread makes my head hurt. oye

[hondarobot]

The genome mapping project of the pinot noir grape has published their findings. Human beings are less genetically complex than grapes.

I'm not sure what impact this finding will have, or even how it relates specifically to this thread, but it is interesting for some reason.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21017541/

[peggygee]

Sex After Post-Op

Much of the studies done on post-op transexuals do not offer much hope that the operation makes anyone more "happy" or at ease with themselves than before. In fact so much of the opposite was becoming known places like the Harry Benjamin Center, pioneers in TS work, stopped doing the operation.

If the stated medical goal of putting a TS through hormones, and various operations was for them to lead happy lives as "St8" women or men, then by a long shot, according to studies the process is a failure. Why?

A high percentage of post-op MTF's enter into lesbian realtionships. Studies vary as to the exact amount and weahter or not this attraction to women was there all the time, or weather such transgendered women cannot find a male "st8" partner. What is obvious is that the males in the transgender community by and large wish to have a pre-op transgendered person ,if any when it comes to a relationship/sex, and St* men seek GGs.

One group of post op TS's however do end up "happy"; and report the most "well adjusted"; and that is the group many in the TS community label "men in dresses". TS women who change later in life (usually after marrying and having children/reaching middle age), are happiest. Unlike some younger girls, their image is not tied into their looks and the scene/man chasing. They fully realise they may forever be called "a man" when walking down the street, but they do suffer from a profound unhappiness with their current gender, and are willing to accept the trade-offs for some peace of mind.

Oh, there is also the trannie "urban myth" that many post-ops go "crazy" because they no longer can have orgasms. While many post op girls do report having orgasms, including several I know; most of those same girls wouldn't tell me the sky was blue if the sun was out in daylight.

These are probably one of the greatest factors in many girls choosing to remain "non-op". You only have to look at the post op girls who switch from Eros Ts section to the GG section and what they go through to get an idea.

"WhatsUpWithDat"

A cool tall drink of water like yourself shouldn't worry (not that you are), about what people think. A girl (GG or TS) that lands a man such as yourself with a good outlook on life/things should be happy. May have to send my picture over to your MySpace site and apply for a postion should an opening come along! *LOL*

Bottom line is transgendered persons, and those that love them are going to have a bit longer hauling the heavy load. While gay male, in particular white gay male population and lesbians are making huge strides in terms of social acceptance (who ever thought you'd hear "his husband' uttered with such ease as one heard on the subway the other day, but there we are.

However will say I know of one or two transgendered women (pre-op) who are living quite happy lives here in NYC, with long term partners (male). One is a nurse and the other a social worker. Like many gay couples in NYC< they simply go about their business as if everything is normal, because to them it is, and that is what matters.

Think many transgendered girls, especially the young ones, take up residence in Pity Me Pines Apartments, and blame the world for forcing them into "working", and resenting the men they attract because they in fact don't like themselves. But guess what, this is 2007, not 1977 or even 1987; and it does warm my heart to see some young transgirls strolling around NYU's campus behaving exactly like young students should.

A long time ago, I decided I was not going to let what I was stand in my way of making the most of my life. Have I made mistakes? Sure, who hasn't in their lives, but just like those people who are born with a severe handicap or badly disabled later in life, you have two choices; you can get busy living or get busy dying. Someone doesn't like me because I am a TS. Fine, they don't pay my rent, and quite honestly aside from my family and a few close friends, I don't give a rat's butt what people "think" of me anyway. Just keep out of my way and don't even think of starting any trouble, and we'll get along fine. *LOL*

As for the men who date trannies: Well many of you need to pick a team. Can you imagine how it makes anyone feel; gay, straight, trannie, male or female when the only time you will see them is indoors and really only for sex? Worse to be ignored or cut in public by the same man who was on your trade the night before like a monkey on a cupcake. Like many transgendered girls I've had my share of winners. Calls at 1am in the morning from some guy who wants to come over because "I'm in your neighborhood", or finding out a guy you have been seeing is getting married/moving in with his GF: only to call you several weeks later to "come over and play". Heck I've had them call me on their first day back after the honeymoon, or even better while their wife is in labour having THEIR baby.

SS, I've just woken up, and I have done a cursory perusal of your post.

Would you be so kind as to provide cites for the studies that you have
alluded to, as I feel there are some erroneous conclusions and
statements.

I'm running late for work, but you may either PM me, or post them on the
forum.

Thanks......



Last time I read those books was at college,but will see what I can dig up either on the Internet, or when down by my alma mater see if can find the same books.

The following is in response to the post above.

While I have always found your posts insightful and informative, I must
respectfully beg to differ with you on post operative surgical and quality
of life issues, though I am inclined to agree wholeheartedly about
transwomen adopting a victim mentality.

Also I believe it was Johns Hopkins Hospital that you were referring to,
and not the Harry S. Benjamin Foundation that discontinued GRS after
contraversy as to its efficacy.

Oh, and I apologize in advance for length of my response, for ease of
reading I have highlighted the most relevant parts:



In response to quality of life concerns:

1: Arch Sex Behav. 2005 Dec;34(6):679-90.

Sexual and physical health after sex reassignment surgery.

De Cuypere G, T'Sjoen G, Beerten R, Selvaggi G, De Sutter P, Hoebeke P, Monstrey S, Vansteenwegen A, Rubens R.

Department of Sexology and Gender Problems, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium. griet.decuypere@uzgent.be

A long-term follow-up study of 55 transsexual patients (32 male-to-female and 23 female-to-male) post-sex reassignment surgery (SRS) was carried out to evaluate sexual and general health outcome. Relatively few and minor morbidities were observed in our group of patients, and they were mostly reversible with appropriate treatment. A trend toward more general health problems in male-to-females was seen, possibly explained by older age and smoking habits. Although all male-to-females, treated with estrogens continuously, had total testosterone levels within the normal female range because of estrogen effects on sex hormone binding globulin, only 32.1% reached normal free testosterone levels. After SRS, the transsexual person's expectations were met at an emotional and social level, but less so at the physical and sexual level even though a large number of transsexuals (80%) reported improvement of their sexuality. The female-to-males masturbated significantly more frequently than the male-to-females, and a trend to more sexual satisfaction, more sexual excitement, and more easily reaching orgasm was seen in the female-to-male group. The majority of participants reported a change in orgasmic feeling, toward more powerful and shorter for female-to-males and more intense, smoother, and longer in male-to-females. Over two-thirds of male-to-females reported the secretion of a vaginal fluid during sexual excitation, originating from the Cowper's glands, left in place during surgery. In female-to-males with erection prosthesis, sexual expectations were more realized (compared to those without), but pain during intercourse was more often reported.

PMID: 16362252 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]





Factors associated with satisfaction or regret following male-to-female sex reassignment surgery.

1: Arch Sex Behav. 2003 Aug;32(4):299-315.
Lawrence AA.

alawrence@mindspring.com

This study examined factors associated with satisfaction or regret following sex reassignment surgery (SRS) in 232 male-to-female transsexuals operated on between 1994 and 2000 by one surgeon using a consistent technique. Participants, all of whom were at least 1-year postoperative, completed a written questionnaire concerning their experiences and attitudes. Participants reported overwhelmingly that they were happy with their SRS results and that SRS had greatly improved the quality of their lives. None reported outright regret and only a few expressed even occasional regret. Dissatisfaction was most strongly associated with unsatisfactory physical and functional results of surgery. Most indicators of transsexual typology, such as age at surgery, previous marriage or parenthood, and sexual orientation, were not significantly associated with subjective outcomes. Compliance with minimum eligibility requirements for SRS specified by the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association was not associated with more favorable subjective outcomes. The physical results of SRS may be more important than preoperative factors such as transsexual typology or compliance with established treatment regimens in predicting postoperative satisfaction or regret.

PMID: 12856892 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



The reported sex and surgery satisfactions of 28 postoperative male-to-female transsexual patients.

Rehman J, Lazer S, Benet AE, Schaefer LC, Melman A.

1: Arch Sex Behav. 1999 Feb;28(1):71-89.

Department of Urology, Montifiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York 10467, USA.

From 1980 to July 1997 sixty-one male-to-female gender transformation surgeries were performed at our university center by one author (A.M.). Data were collected from patients who had surgery up to 1994 (n = 47) to obtain a minimum follow-up of 3 years; 28 patients were contacted. A mail questionnaire was supplemented by personal interviews with 11 patients and telephone interviews with remaining patients to obtain and clarify additional information. Physical and functional results of surgery were judged to be good, with few patients requiring additional corrective surgery. General satisfaction was expressed over the quality of cosmetic (normal appearing genitalia) and functional (ability to perceive orgasm) results. Follow-up showed satisfied who believed they had normal appearing genitalia and the ability to experience orgasm. Most patients were able to return to their jobs and live a more satisfactory social and personal life. One significant outcome was the importance of proper preparation of patients for surgery and especially the need for additional postoperative psychotherapy. None of the patients regretted having had surgery. However, some were, to a degree, disappointed because of difficulties experienced postoperatively in adjusting satisfactorily as women both in their relationships with men and in living their lives generally as women. Findings of this study make a strong case for making a change in the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care to include a period of postoperative psychotherapy.

PMID: 10097806 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



Follow-up study of transsexuals after sex-reassignment surgery.

Tsoi WF.

Department of Psychological Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore.

INTRODUCTION: This is a follow-up study of 45 male and 36 female sex reassigned transsexuals. METHOD: The subjects were interviewed before and 1 to 8 years following sex reassignment surgery. RESULTS: When first seen the males (mean age 23.8 years) were slightly younger than females (mean age 24.9 years). The males had less education and held lower level jobs. They started their sexual life about 1-2 years earlier, but they cross-dressed 4-7 years later than the females. The follow-up results showed that 35% were married and all of them had no problems adjusting to their new life. The overall results were 56% very good and 44% good. There is no pre-operative variables that can predict good adjustments for female transsexuals. For male transsexuals, earlier age of transsexual manifestation was related to good post-operative adjustments. DISCUSSION: The females were less satisfied with the surgery, but they adjusted well as the males. The results were comparable with those from previous studies.

PMID: 8153713 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



Orgasm in the postoperative transsexual.

1: Arch Sex Behav. 1993 Apr;22(2):145-55.

Lief HI, Hubschman L.
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, (Emeritus) Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia.

The dearth of information regarding organism in postoperative transsexuals prompted the authors to study its prevalence. The sample consisted of 14 male-to-female (M-F) and 9 female-to-male (F-M) postoperative transsexuals. The relationship of orgasm to sexual and general satisfaction was explored via a specially designed questionnaire. Orgastic capacity declined in the M-F group and increased in the (F-M) group. Despite the decrease in orgasm in the M-F group, satisfaction with sex and general satisfaction with the results of surgery were high in both groups. General satisfaction of 86% replicates other studies. Frequency of sex increased by 75% in the M-F group and by 100% in the F-M group. A phalloplasty does not appear to be a critical factor in orgasm or in sexual satisfaction. The general conclusion is reached that it is possible to change one's body image and sexual identity and be sexually satisfied despite inadequate sexual functioning.

PMID: 8476334 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[peggygee]

In response to quality of life concerns:


1: Arch Sex Behav. 1999 Feb;28(1):71-89. Links
The reported sex and surgery satisfactions of 28 postoperative male-to-female transsexual patients.

Rehman J, Lazer S, Benet AE, Schaefer LC, Melman A.
Department of Urology, Montifiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York 10467, USA.

From 1980 to July 1997 sixty-one male-to-female gender transformation surgeries were performed at our university center by one author (A.M.). Data were collected from patients who had surgery up to 1994 (n = 47) to obtain a minimum follow-up of 3 years; 28 patients were contacted. A mail questionnaire was supplemented by personal interviews with 11 patients and telephone interviews with remaining patients to obtain and clarify additional information. Physical and functional results of surgery were judged to be good, with few patients requiring additional corrective surgery. General satisfaction was expressed over the quality of cosmetic (normal appearing genitalia) and functional (ability to perceive orgasm) results. Follow-up showed satisfied who believed they had normal appearing genitalia and the ability to experience orgasm. Most patients were able to return to their jobs and live a more satisfactory social and personal life. One significant outcome was the importance of proper preparation of patients for surgery and especially the need for additional postoperative psychotherapy. None of the patients regretted having had surgery. However, some were, to a degree, disappointed because of difficulties experienced postoperatively in adjusting satisfactorily as women both in their relationships with men and in living their lives generally as women. Findings of this study make a strong case for making a change in the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care to include a period of postoperative psychotherapy.

PMID: 10097806 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

1: Eur Psychiatry. 2002 Oct;17(6):353-62. Links
The transsexual: what about the future?

Michel A, Ansseau M, Legros JJ, Pitchot W, Mormont C.
Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Liege, Boulevard du Rectorat - B33, 4000 Liege, Belgium. aude.michel@tiscali.fr

Since the 1950s, sexual surgical reassignments have been frequently carried out. As this surgical therapeutic procedure is controversial, it seems important to explore the actual consequences of such an intervention and objectively evaluate its relevance. In this context, we have carried out a review of the literature. After looking at the methodological limitations of follow-up studies, the psychological, sexual, social, and professional futures of the individuals subject to a transsexual operation are presented. Finally, prognostic aspects are considered. In the literature, follow-up studies tend to show that surgical transformations have positive consequences for the subjects. In the majority of cases, transsexuals are very satisfied with their intervention and any difficulties experienced are often temporary and disappear within a year after the surgical transformation. Studies show that there is less than 1% of regrets, and a little more than 1% of suicides among operated subjects. The empirical research does not confirm the opinion that suicide is strongly associated with surgical transformation.

PMID: 12457746 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[peggygee]

In response to surgical complication issues:


1: Arch Sex Behav. 2006 Dec;35(6):717-27. Epub 2006 Nov 16. Links
Patient-reported complications and functional outcomes of male-to-female sex reassignment surgery.

Lawrence AA.
alawrence@mindspring.com

This study examined preoperative preparations, complications, and physical and functional outcomes of male-to-female sex reassignment surgery (SRS), based on reports by 232 patients, all of whom underwent penile-inversion vaginoplasty and sensate clitoroplasty, performed by one surgeon using a consistent technique. Nearly all patients discontinued hormone therapy before SRS and most reported that doing so created no difficulties. Preoperative electrolysis to remove genital hair, undergone by most patients, was not associated with less serious vaginal hair problems. No patients reported rectal-vaginal fistula or deep-vein thrombosis and reports of other significant surgical complications were uncommon. One third of patients, however, reported urinary stream problems. No single complication was significantly associated with regretting SRS. Satisfaction with most physical and functional outcomes of SRS was high; participants were least satisfied with vaginal lubrication, vaginal touch sensation, and vaginal erotic sensation. Frequency of achieving orgasm after SRS was not significantly associated with most general measures of satisfaction. Later years of surgery, reflecting greater surgeon experience, were not associated with lower prevalence rates for most complications or with better ratings for most physical and functional outcomes of SRS.
PMID: 17109225 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[peggygee]

In response to the surgical complication issues:


1: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007 Apr;131(2):226-30. Epub 2006 May 5. Links
Do transsexuals have micturition disorders?

Kuhn A, Hiltebrand R, Birkhäuser M.
Frauenklinik, Inselspital Bern, Effingerstr. 102, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland. annette.kuhn@insel.ch

OBJECTIVE: Transsexualism occurs with an estimated prevalence of 2.4:100,000 male-to-female (MTF) and 1:100,000 female-to-male (FTM) transsexuals. As sex reassignment surgery involves surgery of the urethra and transsexuals are substituted life-long with the cross gender hormones there could possibly arise micturition disorders. Aim of the study was to determine if transsexuals have an increased risk of micturition disorders and if so which. STUDY DESIGN: Between January and July 2003 we examined 25 transsexuals whereof 18 were MTF and 7 were FTM transsexuals using King's Health Questionnaire, visual analogue scale for patient's well being, perineal and transabdominal ultrasound, urine dipstick and uroflow measurement. RESULTS: 17 out of 25 patients considered themselves very happy. In MTF transsexuals, a diverted stream, overactive bladder and stress urinary incontinence was a common problem. Prostate volume was small with 20 g and palpation did not confirm and solid or suspicious lesions. None of the patients had significant residual urine but MTF transsexuals had a reduced urinary flow. We could not detect a current urinary tract infections in any of the patients. CONCLUSION: Transsexuals have an increased risk for the development of micturition disorders including stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder compared to age-matched control groups and should be counselled preoperatively. Reasons for the development of incontinence might be surgery including pudendal nerve damage, hormonal reasons and ageing.

PMID: 16678333 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

1: Urologe A. 1996 Jul;35(4):331-7. Links
[Long-term outcome of sex reassignment of male transsexual patients]
[Article in German]


Jarrar K, Wolff E, Weidner W.
Urologische Klinik, Urologische Universitätsklinik, Giessen.
We report on our experience and our results with gender reassignment during the past 20 years. This study investigates the cosmetic and functional adequacy of the neovagina and also the psychological and social status in 37 surgically reassigned male-to-female transsexuals after a mean postsurgical follow-up of 7.5 years. There were 169 subjects who desired operations to adjust sex. In 58 cases the diagnosis "transsexualism" was supported by two psychosomatic and psychiatric expert opinions. We carried out 52 such operations in two stages. The mean age of the patients was 29 (18-40) years. The depth of the neovagina was approximately 12 cm, a cosmetic and physiologic result which adds greatly to the patients' satisfaction. There were no complications such as rectal or urethral fistulas. In one patient, vaginal stenosis developed after reoperation at a different institution. Three patients complained about short vaginas (6-9 cm). Correspondingly, the psychosocial status showed good improvement after surgery.

PMID: 8928364 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[werwt22]

Hmmm. I think it sounds like transexuals are more of a safe route for you. I had a failed gay experience before....I was coaxed into it and I didnt enjoy it, nor did I enjoy the feel of a man's body, the desire to kiss a man, or have sex but TS seemed like a safe route to enjoy a similar experince with the feel and essence of a woman and her body. I fantisized as a child about women with similar privates before I even knew they existed, but I'm still attracted and love GG's. What I'm trying to say is it seems like you have an infatuation with male genitalia by not being attracted to GG. TS are just like GG with one different aspect, and if you only like TS, what does that tell you your focusing on?