• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Transgendered. Insane or Misunderstood?

I personally feel transgender individuals are...


  • Total voters
    58
The judgmental attitude people have about this matter sickens me. I hope those of you who have exhibited such narrow views feel uplifted by your efforts.

Well at a certain point the ridiculousness of it all gets to be too much. I'll say watching the first pregnant man interviewed repeatedly about a year or so ago didn't help. On the one hand she's a woman but we're asked to indulge the fantasy that she's a man and then we're further asked to play the "she's the first pregnant man," game.

It's hard to take it seriously after awhile.

A man can't become a woman. A woman can't become a man. I see no reason to indulge a whole host of nonsense.
 
I've yet to see a convincing one. Perhaps I didn't know? How do they get around the sound of their voice? Which is usually the second biggest give away? How convincing are their genitals? :shock:

Google is your friend.
The female to male genitals are not particularly attractive or convincing; they're also nonfunctional (ie, they're just for show). This is one reason that so many fem-to-males just go with the hormone therapy to enlarge their clits, have a total hysterectomy, and sometimes have their labia sewn together and two implants sewn into it, to create an artificial scrotum.
The whole thing's just for show, though.

The male-to-fem ones are actually functional. They relocate the urethra to the appropriate place, create a clit out of some of the nerves that were once part of the penis, and carve out a fully-functional vagina, which is sometimes just a little bit shallower than an ordinary vagina, and of course ends in a blind sleeve, rather than a cervix (much like the vagina of a woman who has had a hysterectomy). It is said that men who have sex with them (with male-to-fem transexuals) can't tell the difference. Reports vary on whether they can have orgasms as women do; I tend to suspect not, but you never know. Many women who have had hysterectomies claim to still have orgasms even though they lack a uterus and cervix.
The pics I've seen, these surgically-created vaginas are aesthetically perfect; maybe more perfect than natural vaginas, which usually have some degree of asymmetry.
I've never examined a post-op tranny's vagina IRL, but pictures abound on the internet, on medical sites and other reputable sources.
 
Last edited:
Well at a certain point the ridiculousness of it all gets to be too much. I'll say watching the first pregnant man interviewed repeatedly about a year or so ago didn't help. On the one hand she's a woman but we're asked to indulge the fantasy that she's a man and then we're further asked to play the "she's the first pregnant man," game.

It's hard to take it seriously after awhile.

A man can't become a woman. A woman can't become a man. I see no reason to indulge a whole host of nonsense.

I see no reason to indulge your nonsense.

Is a person who was born with a penis and who also was born with ovaries a man or a woman? If that person has the ovaries removed, is that person 'pretending' to be a man?

If a person has a penis and at the same time has a brain with characteristics typical of a female, is that person a male or a female? If they live as a male (their external physical gender) are they pretending, or are they pretending if they live as female? Which is more profound a determinant of gender identity, do you suppose, the genitals or the brain?
 
Last edited:
Google is your friend.
The female to male genitals are not particularly attractive or convincing; they're also nonfunctional (ie, they're just for show). This is one reason that so many fem-to-males just go with the hormone therapy to enlarge their clits, have a total hysterectomy, and sometimes have their labia sewn together and two implants sewn into it, to create an artificial scrotum.
The whole thing's just for show, though.

The male-to-fem ones are actually functional. They relocate the urethra to the appropriate place, create a clit out of some of the nerves that were once part of the penis, and carve out a fully-functional vagina, which is sometimes just a little bit shallower than an ordinary vagina, and of course ends in a blind sleeve, rather than a cervix (much like the vagina of a woman who has had a hysterectomy). It is said that men who have sex with them (male-to-fem transexuals) can't tell the difference.
The pics I've seen, these surgically-created vaginas are aesthetically perfect; maybe more perfect than natural vaginas, which usually have some degree of asymmetry.
I've never examined a post-op tranny's vagina IRL, but pictures abound on the internet, on medical sites and other reputable sources.

Do the male to females keep their prostate?

I just think at a certain point you can't have it both ways. You can't on the one hand say this is a legitimate ailment or deformation or whatever that causes mental anguish and on the second hand say these folks are normal healthy mentally sound individuals.

If drs. could turn a man into a woman or vice versa then you could argue they were ailing and now they're cured.

But since drs. can only indulge the fantasy and attempt a replica of the preferred gender then you have to basically admit if they were mental pre op they're mental post op.

I don't see how you get around that.
 
Until you can switch DNA around, a guy is a guy and a girl is a girl. You can rip out, put in(on) all the new body parts you want and stuff all the hormones you want down someones throat. When the DNA test comes back from the lab, you still are what you were. You may not feel that way inside, but the science doesn't lie.
 
I see no reason to indulge your nonsense.

Is a person who has a penis and who also has ovaries a man or a woman? If that person has the ovaries removed, is that person 'pretending' to be a man?

If a person has a penis and at the same time has a brain with characteristics typical of a female, is that person a male or a female? If they live as a male (their external physical gender) are they pretending, or are they pretending if they live as female? Which is more profound a determinant of gender identity, do you suppose, the genitals or the brain?

I think the evidence for gender disorder being an organic component of brain make up is a bit looser scientifically than you're attempting to put forth.

That aside, if it is an issue of real organic deformity where the brain and body are in contrast surgery DOES NOT correct the abnormality.

It's self mutilation in an attempt to create a replica of self that resembles the preferred gender. The dr. can't actually change your sex. You are STILL biologically whatever you were when you were born. Your brain/body gender dysphoria remains in existence post op. No matter how good the illusion is it is an illusion thus the first pregnant man. :roll:
 
Until you can switch DNA around, a guy is a guy and a girl is a girl. You can rip out, put in(on) all the new body parts you want and stuff all the hormones you want down someones throat. When the DNA test comes back from the lab, you still are what you were. You may not feel that way inside, but the science doesn't lie.

What about people who are genetically female but have penises? Are they male or female? What about the opposite, are they male or female?

Officer's sexuality no longer confusing | ajc.com
 
Until you can switch DNA around, a guy is a guy and a girl is a girl. You can rip out, put in(on) all the new body parts you want and stuff all the hormones you want down someones throat. When the DNA test comes back from the lab, you still are what you were. You may not feel that way inside, but the science doesn't lie.

Exactly if the rift between body/brain is strong enough to cause severe mental anguish prior to surgery the same mental issues will be present post op. They may be lessoned or heightened to various degrees but the dysphoria doesn't go away. The disconnect between brain/body/presentation will still inevitably be all screwed up, forever.
 
I think the evidence for gender disorder being an organic component of brain make up is a bit looser scientifically than you're attempting to put forth.

That aside, if it is an issue of real organic deformity where the brain and body are in contrast surgery DOES NOT correct the abnormality.

It's self mutilation in an attempt to create a replica of self that resembles the preferred gender. The dr. can't actually change your sex. You are STILL biologically whatever you were when you were born. Your brain/body gender dysphoria remains in existence post op. No matter how good the illusion is it is an illusion thus the first pregnant man. :roll:

The ONLY way what you're saying is true is IF you are right that intersexuality does not play a part here. If the brain is female and the genitalia is male, I'm gonna side with those who say the individual is female. And the evidence is with me, not with you. It's not conclusive, but all the evidence points the direction I am saying.

What have you offered other than repeating what you apparently believe to be self-evident?
 
Yeah right and yet wonder of all wonders a teacher can leave school in the summer as a man and return in the fall as a woman. How does that happen???

You'd have to give me considerably more sources to detail that allegation, since there have been more than once case of transexual teachers (one in California and one in New Jersey that I know of), and not once did those articles go into any detail about the psychological and medical prepping prior to implementing hormone therapies. Hormone therapies, as you know, are implemented for some months prior to surgery, and in the two cases I referenced we know only that the hormone therapies were started over the summer months, not that surgery had also been performed.

BTW, the healing time for a surgery of that magnitude is about two months. My guess is that they started the hormone therapies one summer, and planned the surgeries for the next summer. But hey, if you have more in-depth information, please feel free to offer me a source.

Just curious. Why do you care to the point of anger? And why did you carefully clip the last paragraph of my post in your quote without answering the question I posed in it?
 
Last edited:
Do the male to females keep their prostate?

I just think at a certain point you can't have it both ways. You can't on the one hand say this is a legitimate ailment or deformation or whatever that causes mental anguish and on the second hand say these folks are normal healthy mentally sound individuals.

If drs. could turn a man into a woman or vice versa then you could argue they were ailing and now they're cured.

But since drs. can only indulge the fantasy and attempt a replica of the preferred gender then you have to basically admit if they were mental pre op they're mental post op.

I don't see how you get around that.

A question, please. You've repeatedly stated that "a man can't be a woman and a woman can't be a man", then you've backed that up by the "mulitalation" of the bodies. Are you presuming that a man can't be a woman because a transgendered female does not have ovaries and a uterus? If so, do you believe a woman who has had a hysterectomy is no longer a real female? You mentioned the prostrat. My husband no longer has one... cancer, you see. Does that mean he isn't a male any more?

I tend to think people are more than the sum of their parts. I wonder if you do.
 
You'd have to give me considerably more sources to detail that allegation, since there have been more than once case of transexual teachers (one in California and one in New Jersey that I know of), and not once did those articles go into any detail about the psychological and medical prepping prior to implementing hormone therapies. Hormone therapies, as you know, are implemented for some months prior to surgery, and in the two cases I referenced we know only that the hormone therapies were started over the summer months, not that surgery had also been performed.

BTW, the healing time for a surgery of that magnitude is about two months. My guess is that they started the hormone therapies one summer, and planned the surgeries for the next summer. But hey, if you have more in-depth information, please feel free to offer me a source.

Just curious. Why do you care to the point of anger?

I'm not angry. I just think it all gets to be too much. What if our woman turned man turned pregnant person were a school teacher?

A woman who leaves school and becomes a man over the course of one summer. Then a few years later the man comes to school with a belly having gotten knocked up over the summer?

Then the media proudly announces "Our very first pregnant man!"

It just gets to be too much. And as I've said previously the new thing is to institute these "sex changes" even earlier, for better results.

I balk at the insanity of it all. I'm not angry but I'm not going to sit by pretend like 10 likes to that "gender" is a made up societal concept. That it's perfectly mentally sound to be a woman who becomes a man who then gets pregnant.

It is impossible to ignore the obvious mental component to all this. It's absurd to pretend there aren't mental issues involved and it's ridiculous to pretend surgery offers a cure when the man or woman comes out of surgery the exact same sex they were when they went in.
 
A question, please. You've repeatedly stated that "a man can't be a woman and a woman can't be a man", then you've backed that up by the "mulitalation" of the bodies. Are you presuming that a man can't be a woman because a transgendered female does not have ovaries and a uterus? If so, do you believe a woman who has had a hysterectomy is no longer a real female? You mentioned the prostrat. My husband no longer has one... cancer, you see. Does that mean he isn't a male any more?

I tend to think people are more than the sum of their parts. I wonder if you do.

I know you're attempting to debate me and yet you're proving my case. A woman can have her boobs removed due to cancer and she's still a woman. A man can have his prostate removed and viola he's still a man. Whatever your chromosomes say you are, you are and no surgical manipulation can change that so why not love your body, be glad it's healthy, and then express yourself through clothing choice?
 
Do the male to females keep their prostate?

No, the prostate is generally retained, except in rare cases where it is accidentally damaged during the process of creating a vaginal cavity within the perineum.
Prostatectomy is an extremely serious surgical procedure, which often results in severe, life-long side effects such as urinary incontinence.
But in post-op male-to-fem trannies, the prostate shrinks to almost nothing, due to the combined effects of androgen deprivation and estrogen supplementation.
Post-op trannies generally do require hormone therapy for life, but so do a lot of women, at least after menopause (and during their fertile years, many are on hormone therapy for contraceptive purposes as well).
So-called "neo-vaginas" (tranny vaginas) do not have any natural lubrication, and so require some form of lubricant to have sex. On the other hand, neither do born women, at any other time than during their reproductive years. After menopause, they too require lube to have sex.

It's very interesting to me. Yes, I'm sure a post-op tranny's body and hormones differ from those of a born woman, but women's bodies also differ so much from one phase of life to another that who really gives a crap?
Nature never intended post-menopausal females to have sex. They're obviously not meant to, biologically or hormonally speaking. Yet most of them do, and they use whatever artificial aids are necessary to make this possible, and nobody frowns upon it.
That right there proves that this objection to transexuals as "unnatural" is a fallacy.
Do you hang around at Walgreen's persecuting 55-year-old grandmothers who are attempting to purchase Replens or K-Y in an effort to make marital relations a continuing possibility?
 
Last edited:
I'm not angry. I just think it all gets to be too much. What if our woman turned man turned pregnant person were a school teacher?

A woman who leaves school and becomes a man over the course of one summer. Then a few years later the man comes to school with a belly having gotten knocked up over the summer?

Then the media proudly announces "Our very first pregnant man!"

"What if's" really don't cut it when dealing with very real people who have very real lives. Looking at the rare exception and basically chortling "aha!" still doesn't answer the question I asked in my first post, the question you avoided: Why do you care what individuals and their physicians do if they all decide it's more likely than not to improve the patient's quality of life? Why is it your business at all?

Besides, since the "man" got pregnant, it's obvious that the transgender in question never had the surgery. ;)

It just gets to be too much. And as I've said previously the new thing is to institute these "sex changes" even earlier, for better results.

I balk at the insanity of it all. I'm not angry but I'm not going to sit by pretend like 10 likes to that "gender" is a made up societal concept. That it's perfectly mentally sound to be a woman who becomes a man who then gets pregnant.

It is impossible to ignore the obvious mental component to all this. It's absurd to pretend there aren't mental issues involved and it's ridiculous to pretend surgery offers a cure when the man or woman comes out of surgery the exact same sex they were when they went in.

Surgery doesn't offer a cure. Surgery cannot yet implant reproductive organs on transgenders of either sex. Nobody has said that it could. What people have said is that for some individuals with the brain of one gender and the genatalia of another gender, hormone therapy and surgery will make them happier and give them a better quality of life.

I repeat, why would you deny them that... and why do you care?
 
Last edited:
Lightdemon said:
Translation: Pray the gay away.

Oh look, I can play this game too!
Yeah except you epically fail at it.

As evidenced by the fact that you're still here.

(joking, joking. :mrgreen: It was too sweet to pass up.)
 
Well now that's a shining come back.

What's next...Are not!!! Are too!!! Are not!!! Are too!!! Are NOT!!!! Are TOO!!!:roll:

Your comeback here is entirely irrelevant. I followed up my statement, which you quoted, with evidence supporting the notion that her nonsense should be ignored. You, on the other hand, have offered no evidence at all, little in the way of logic, and have quite simply proven to everyone that what people have said here in this thread about you is, in fact, true.
 
I know you're attempting to debate me and yet you're proving my case. A woman can have her boobs removed due to cancer and she's still a woman. A man can have his prostate removed and viola he's still a man. Whatever your chromosomes say you are, you are and no surgical manipulation can change that so why not love your body, be glad it's healthy, and then express yourself through clothing choice?

You are more than welcome to do so. However, why do you insist that others must also do so? What if a person born male wants to express himself by wearing women's clothing, and wants a body that makes those clothes look good? Why should he be denied hormone therapy? Obviously, I make the same argument for a person born female who wants to express herself by appearing male.

It doesn't seem to be just the surgery that repulses you; it's the mere fact that some individuals are not happy or comfortable with the gender they were born with. Why? They can't help how they were born; but they can do many things to make themselves happier and more comfortable with their bodies. Why do you wish to deny them that?
 
Your comeback here is entirely irrelevant. I followed up my statement, which you quoted, with evidence supporting the notion that her nonsense should be ignored. You, on the other hand, have offered no evidence at all, little in the way of logic, and have quite simply proven to everyone that what people have said here in this thread about you is, in fact, true.

Yeah that "WAAAAAAA, jallman's a big ole meanie". Whatever Dezaad...when your or other's opinions of ME become the topic of debate, why don't you send around a memo that I can promptly toss in the circular file.

As far as I know, the topic of debate here is TRANSGENDERED. INSANE OR MISUNDERSTOOD.

Maybe you'd like to stick to that topic? kthanx
 
It is impossible to ignore the obvious mental component to all this. It's absurd to pretend there aren't mental issues involved and it's ridiculous to pretend surgery offers a cure when the man or woman comes out of surgery the exact same sex they were when they went in.

The mental component of it is exacerbated by the type of attitude that people exhibit against transsexuals. Why do you think that people with GID is likely to have depression? Why do you think it's likely for them to have mood disorders?

I can tell you that it isn't because people are too damn nice to them. People treat them like lepers. Don't let them be teachers, what will happen to the precious little ones!? Their virgin minds raped!!
 
As evidenced by the fact that you're still here.

(joking, joking. :mrgreen: It was too sweet to pass up.)

Well, I can't stay mad at Jallman. He's the most irresistible 2 year old I've ever seen. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom