Would you date a transexual?

[OnnaBushido]

QFT. If you don't have a self lubricating vagina thats a red flag right there.

Or she's just not turned on. lol.

I've dated a trans man (identified as a dude, asigned female at birth). It sucked. Mostly because he acted and looked like a man and I'm not into men sexually. But hey, at least I gave it a shot.
I've also dated a trans woman. It was nice. She was nice. My only complaint is that the sex was practically non existent.

I think trans women are women and trans men are men. My libido says so. Plus ship of Theseus. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck then it's a duck. I think the logical fallacy here is that people assume identity is persistent because let's face it, human identities are persistent. Our stream of consciousness feels like one continuous stream. But I guess where we go wrong is that we assume that they were born a boy/girl, just like us but they weren't. They were born either neurologically female in a male body or vice versa. Which means their perception of reality follows that neurological wiring, not their exterior. So they never really used to be a boy (for mtf) /girl (for ftm). But we assume it to be so because their sex characteristics when they were young tell us so and we (correctly) assume that birth gender identity is concrete and set for life. This likely wouldn't be a problem if we just took a child's word for it when they told us their gender and let them be who they want to be instead of railroading them according to the presence or absence of a 1inch penis at birth.

I'm a cis girl but I experienced gender policing too. I was a tomboy growing up, I loved to play in the dirt, I loved violent video games. But whenever my parents caught me playing counter strike or swords with male friends, they would punish me. I would get the wooden spoon until I acted like a proper lady. It sucked. The thing is, that was just activities. I can't imagine what it would be like for a a trans person who is forced against their will to not only do activities they don't like but to pretend to be a gender which they are not and forced to go through a puberty which turns them into their (internal) opposite sex. I think we should cut them some slack. Not necessarily date them, I mean if they look like a trainwreck then ofc not.... but if they look, act, talk like the real deal then maybe give them the benefit of the doubt?

[Exarch]

would i date a transexual?

since i am not gay and do not find men attractive the answer is no

[Denny Crane!]

would i date a transexual?

since i am not gay and do not find men attractive the answer is no

Yeah as someone who has spent a loooong ass time in Thailand I can absolutely guarantee you every single man would fail that test of can they spot ladyboys vs men.

[Winston Smith]

would i date a transexual?

since i am not gay and do not find men attractive the answer is no

Well, if the person in question is M to F, they ain't male anymore.

[sumskilz]

Well, if the person in question is M to F, they ain't male anymore.

What do they do about all the Y chromosomes and prenatal androgenization?

[OnnaBushido]

What do they do about all the Y chromosomes and prenatal androgenization?

Hmmm I wonder how trans men develop male sex characteristics when they don't have a Y chromosome...

[RubiconDecision]

Wow, most responses since the 14th are hardly worth reading. At least OnnaBushido's posts added some perspective.

[sumskilz]

Hmmm I wonder how trans men develop male sex characteristics when they don't have a Y chromosome...

They are limited to secondary sexual characteristics, many of which are further limited by the age at which hormonal intervention begins.

[OnnaBushido]

Wow, most responses since the 14th are hardly worth reading. At least OnnaBushido's posts added some perspective.

Awww thanks. I'm glad you think it was insightful.

They are limited to secondary sexual characteristics, many of which are further limited by the age at which hormonal intervention begins.

Rhetorical question. I actually already know the answer, having done advanced cell and molecular biology myself. It's true that unless the testosterone is administered prenatally, they will not grow a full penis (although a micropenis is still possible). But every other male feature is there: the rough skin, the overpowering smell, the cro magnon brow ridge, narrow hips, broad shoulders, deep husky voice. So where does it all come from when there's no Y chromosome? The easy answer is from the x and the 22 pairs of autosomes that every human being has. Essentially there is a template for both a male you and a female you inside you. In layman's terms testosterone turns the male genes on and the female genes off and vice versa for estrogen. And that's why hormone therapy works so well for transexuals; it's not so much that the hormones are doing anything it's their cells that are doing all the hard work changing their body. Why do some trans ppl "pass" so well? Because their body is changing on a cellular level, their sex is changing on a cellular level.

The significance of the Y chromosome is that it contains the SRY gene, which when the foetus is developing it causes the development of testes. Once the testes is formed then the testes produces testosterone which then tells all the cells in the body to "be male", essentially.

The complaint that some trans people have sex characteristics of their natal sex is a fair one. The problem with puberty is that some of the changes are irreversible. If a trans person avoids their unwanted puberty and goes through their desired puberty there will without a doubt be no evidence of their birth sex apart from their junk, which tbh is probably going to smell and behave more like a vagina (if its an mtf) or penis (if it's an ftm). I've actually witnessed that myself with those two trans ppl I dated. If they go through their unwanted puberty though then there's going to be some irreversible changes. Which is where surgery comes in. Surgery removes those permanent changes and then allows the body to fix itself in the desired configuration.

And that's about my limits of my knowledge of trans stuff. If anyone wants to know the name of the process of how environmental factors affect gene expression it's called "Epigenetics". It's also one of the reasons why I don't buy into genetic bioessentialism. I mean if the environment affects gene expression then how can one say that a person is genetically determined? It's not just trans stuff either, it also works with nutrition: absence or presence of nutrients in people's diets will affect what genes are expressed as well. And then there's the >90% junk DNA in our chromosomes that don't code for anything useful. The Central Dogma of biology is very real and it was a monumental discovery when it was made but it is a broken pedestal and doesn't deserve our worship. Rather, treat it as an essential biological process that works within a system of other complicated processes.

[sumskilz]

Rhetorical question. I actually already know the answer, having done advanced cell and molecular biology myself. It's true that unless the testosterone is administered prenatally, they will not grow a full penis (although a micropenis is still possible). But every other male feature is there: the rough skin, the overpowering smell, the cro magnon brow ridge, narrow hips, broad shoulders, deep husky voice. So where does it all come from when there's no Y chromosome? The easy answer is from the x and the 22 pairs of autosomes that every human being has. Essentially there is a template for both a male you and a female you inside you. In layman's terms testosterone turns the male genes on and the female genes off and vice versa for estrogen. And that's why hormone therapy works so well for transexuals; it's not so much that the hormones are doing anything it's their cells that are doing all the hard work changing their body. Why do some trans ppl "pass" so well? Because their body is changing on a cellular level, their sex is changing on a cellular level.

The significance of the Y chromosome is that it contains the SRY gene, which when the foetus is developing it causes the development of testes. Once the testes is formed then the testes produces testosterone which then tells all the cells in the body to "be male", essentially.

The complaint that some trans people have sex characteristics of their natal sex is a fair one. The problem with puberty is that some of the changes are irreversible. If a trans person avoids their unwanted puberty and goes through their desired puberty there will without a doubt be no evidence of their birth sex apart from their junk, which tbh is probably going to smell and behave more like a vagina (if its an mtf) or penis (if it's an ftm). I've actually witnessed that myself with those two trans ppl I dated. If they go through their unwanted puberty though then there's going to be some irreversible changes. Which is where surgery comes in. Surgery removes those permanent changes and then allows the body to fix itself in the desired configuration.

I assumed it was a rhetorical question and I'm aware of the mechanisms. Are you detailing them just for the sake of interest? As I said, you can artificially change secondary sexual characteristics with success limited by the age of intervention, but considering that to be an actual change of sex is a matter of perspective. I objected to an earlier post which stated it as if it were objective fact. Biologically they end up somewhere in between.

And that's about my limits of my knowledge of trans stuff. If anyone wants to know the name of the process of how environmental factors affect gene expression it's called "Epigenetics". It's also one of the reasons why I don't buy into genetic bioessentialism. I mean if the environment affects gene expression then how can one say that a person is genetically determined? It's not just trans stuff either, it also works with nutrition: absence or presence of nutrients in people's diets will affect what genes are expressed as well. And then there's the >90% junk DNA in our chromosomes that don't code for anything useful. The Central Dogma of biology is very real and it was a monumental discovery when it was made but it is a broken pedestal and doesn't deserve our worship. Rather, treat it as an essential biological process that works within a system of other complicated processes.

This is sort of a strawman. Epigenetics simply explains the mechanisms behind what was already being accounted for in heritability estimates. It's interesting, but it doesn't make certain ideological positions any less science denialism, and isn't really relevant to this thread.

EDIT: While I'm hesitant to get into this since we're not in the science section, I still think it's important to point out that you're mischaracterizing things a bit:

All of the myriad differences between human males and females—from anatomy to disease susceptibility—arise from differences in the genes of the X and Y chromosomes that appeared as these chromosomes diverged in gene content from their autosomal ancestors. Of the 17 surviving ancestral genes on the human Y chromosome, four (SRY, RBMY, TSPY, and HSFY) have clearly diverged in function from their X homologues (SOX3, RBMX, TSPX and HSFX) to play male-specific roles in reproductive development or gametogenesis. Because all genes on the Y chromosome were exposed to selection only in males, even widely expressed ancestral genes may exhibit subtle functional differences from their X-linked homologues. Particularly worthy of consideration are eight global regulators of gene activity that exist as X-encoded and Y-encoded (male-specific) protein isoforms in diverse human tissues: UTX/UTY, EIF1AX/EIF1AY, ZFX/ZFY, RPS4X/RPS4Y1, KDM5C/KDM5D, DDX3X/DDX3Y, USP9X/USP9Y and TBL1X/TBL1Y. These exemplify a fundamental sexual dimorphism, at a biochemical level, throughout the human body, that derives directly from genetic differences between the X and Y chromosomes.

Mammalian Y chromosomes retain widely expressed dosage-sensitive regulators

[OnnaBushido]

I simplified things because I know we are not in the science section.

But sure, take RMBY, it regulates spermatogenesis and in an estrogen rich / testosterone deprived environment, spermatogenesis ceases. My point still stands. Genetic Determinism is a belief, not objective truth.

It reminds me of what I read in Questioning the Millenium By Stephen Jay Gould. We live in an unscientific age. What makes the scientific method work is inductive reasoning coupled with falsifiability, but in the world we live in is full of dogmatic worship. Of the Central Dogma, of Natural Selection, of the Big Bang... the list goes on. We build them up until they become ineffable truths, all the while forgetting the nuances behind them and forgetting that what makes the scientific method work is not our belief in it but our skepticism. We mustn't use science as a tool to oppress the weak. It's been done before with race; there have been peer reviewed journal articles explaining the evolutionary superiority of whites of blacks. Same for gender. Same for jewish lineage, the list goes on. And what allows the authors to get away with it is that confirmation bias confirms their prejudices, and the readers and peers are paralyzed by their own prejudiced paradigms.

So do you really believe that genes dictate who you are as a person?

[Maiar93]

I don't think anyone here thinks genes are the sole dictator of your personality. It's obvious that there are multiple factors in development of personality. I think the disagreement lies in the factors' respective ratios.

[War lord]

I wish it didn't bother me, but ultimately a male to female transexual isn't the same thing as a biological women, in terms of personality, leaving physicality aside.

[Himster]

but ultimately a male to female transexual isn't the same thing as a biological women, in terms of personality,.

Say whuuuut?
Some transgender women are more feminine than most women. Individuals are individuals and should be judged accordingly: sweeping over generalizations is the domain of bigots (see what I did there? generalizing bigots: but those ass holes).

[sumskilz]

I simplified things because I know we are not in the science section.

But sure, take RMBY, it regulates spermatogenesis and in an estrogen rich / testosterone deprived environment, spermatogenesis ceases. My point still stands. Genetic Determinism is a belief, not objective truth.

It's not just a matter of simplification. You claimed "there is a template for both a male you and a female you inside you". That is false in that it is at least not a complete template. For example, the Y-chromosome has 200 genes that have been under male specific selection since long before our species. How can hormone treatment modulate the expression of genes that a female to male transexual does not have? Do you believe all the widely expressed genes unique to the Y-chromosome stop functioning in a testosterone deprived environment? I doubt it.

It reminds me of what I read in Questioning the Millenium By Stephen Jay Gould. We live in an unscientific age. What makes the scientific method work is inductive reasoning coupled with falsifiability, but in the world we live in is full of dogmatic worship. Of the Central Dogma, of Natural Selection, of the Big Bang... the list goes on. We build them up until they become ineffable truths, all the while forgetting the nuances behind them and forgetting that what makes the scientific method work is not our belief in it but our skepticism.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, Stephen Jay Gould was clearly a scientist heavily swayed by his ideology. Just one example.

You actually seem to be bending the science to fit your perspective. That is my issue with your most recent two posts.

We mustn't use science as a tool to oppress the weak.

The implication here is that we must accept that sex is independent of genes or we are oppressing transexuals. That is absurd of course.

So do you really believe that genes dictate who you are as a person?

I believe heritability estimates are relatively accurate especially those supported by gene associations where the mechanism is at least partially understood. Genetics account for about 50% of the variability of most human personality traits, 60 to 80% of the variability in IQ under normal circumstances, and so forth. When severely tampering with the body's endocrine system obviously greater changes can take place than would occur without intervention.

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

I wish it didn't bother me, but ultimately a male to female transexual isn't the same thing as a biological women, in terms of personality, leaving physicality aside.

I'll meet you half way and lets just take this on a case by case basis.







Mega who has'nt kicked it with War Lord in two or three lifetimes, really wonders if warlord has forgotten a few things about Mega, and will plow straight ahead in pressing his point..........
Hi War Lord, way to long since we last spoke......

[Maiar93]

Oh, it's War Lord. Blast from the past! The troublemaker senator from YATS!

It seems to me that this press for 'transgender rights' (e.g the "don't oppress them" narrative, without any derision) is very much limited by biology and evolution.

[Exarch]

Yeah as someone who has spent a loooong ass time in Thailand I can absolutely guarantee you every single man would fail that test of can they spot ladyboys vs men.

granted, the kinds of tourists who get ed by ladyboys already had homosexual tendencies anyhow, not that it's a bad thng, it is what it is-also factor in the booze, the drugs etc etc and it's not uncommon to see many western men with their heads in their hands at the bar on a sunday morning

Well, if the person in question is M to F, they ain't male anymore.

well unless they dramatically underwent futurisitic gene therapy and turned their XY chromosomes to XX chromosomes, they are still male, in the sense that eunuchs and castrati were considered 'male' or the 'third sex'

[Phier]

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, Stephen Jay Gould was clearly a scientist heavily swayed by his ideology. Just one example.

Reading a few of Gould's books in the past, made me question his cranial capacity slightly. Great link as usual.

[Valkor Deathborne]

Say whuuuut?
Some transgender women are more feminine than most women. Individuals are individuals and should be judged accordingly: sweeping over generalizations is the domain of bigots (see what I did there? generalizing bigots: but those ass holes).

You are trying to convince someone that they have to be sexually attracted to something they are not and if they are not they are a bigot. HAHA. This isn't an argument over rights its a sexual attraction poll. Sweeping over mandated sexual responses is the domain of rapists.