Question for the guys

It bears mentioning that everyone starts out in a female body in the womb. That's the only reason men have nipples. In a very real sense, all males have naturally transitioned from females.

To the op: If I was attracted enough to have sex with her, and if during and after the sex I was still attracted, then it wouldn't bother me at all.

maquiscat said:

Good luck. Since you went into it willingly and did not find out until after the act was done, AND since it would not have a detrimental affect upon your life and health, it would be no more sexual assualt than if you found out that the woman you banged was married when she said she was single.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

It was under fraudulent conditions. I would never had been willing had I had known that they were transgender beforehand. The transgender person lied in order have to have sex with me, that my friend is sexual assault. Its called rape by deception.
It centers around consent, remember you cannot have sex with someone without consent or it is rape.

Rape by Deception | Psychology Today

"Deceiving another person in order to have sex with them is morally wrong when it prevents the other person from giving fully informed consent to the act (Rubenfeld, 2012-2013). The reason for this is that informed consent cannot be given when you don't really know what you agree to when agreeing to have sex."


The character in the OP is a sexual predator.

"Sexual encounters involving deception that may qualify as sexual misconduct include (among many others) lying about the use of contraception, lying about your age, gender, marital status, religion or job, lying about having been tested for sexually transmitted diseases and infections, pretending to be someone’s partner, and falsely making the partner believe that the sexual act is a medical procedure."




Here is a good legal conversation on the subject: Solving the Riddle of Rape-by-Deception | Yale Law & Policy Review

maquiscat said:

Of course heterosexuals exist. Cite where anyone has said differently.

Click to expand...

For one I was responding to someone else; beyond that I can (and do often) come up with my own thoughts. I do not need someone else to say something before I form a thought.

As to repulsion, while it is natural in some heterosexuals, it is not universally so. Likewise, heterosexual sex is repulsive to some homosexuals, although, also, not universally so.

Click to expand...

It is the standard for heterosexuals to be repulsed by homosexual sex its part of what makes people heterosexual instead of not heterosexual. Oh and do you have a link or did you just make that up?

lwf said:

It bears mentioning that everyone starts out in a female body in the womb. That's the only reason men have nipples. In a very real sense, all males have naturally transitioned from females.

To the op: If I was attracted enough to have sex with her, and if during and after the sex I was still attracted, then it wouldn't bother me at all.

Click to expand...

We were physically female, but not genetically. The set of chromosomes are determined upon conception, but they don’t kick in until around six to eight weeks. In other words in the womb males were female because they had not developed enough yet to release the testosterone to activate the Y chromosome. But the key is that genetically a male is a male in the womb even though the Y chromosome has not been activated yet. Of course complications might disrupt that from happening, but the vast majority it works well.

FreedomFromAll said:

Heterosexuals exist. The repulsion is actually natural for heterosexuals.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, and perhaps not. Again, I was specifically speaking about a situation where one has to be told the other person is trans, a situation where it would otherwise be undetectable. The repulsion towards the form of the same sex is natural to hererosexuals, but chromosomes aren't something we'd be naturally attracted to or repulsed by.

To be clear, I'm uncertain when it comes to how or why I feel about this. Is this repulsion really and trully and purely biological? Imagine a world where homosexuality had never been stigmatized at all and was always considered something that simply 'is' for some people. On top of the biological repulsion, there's the added bonus of a social repulsion, a mortification in regards to the very idea of doing something that's less-than-hetero that I know I felt as a teen growing up under the scrutiny of a culture of boys falling all over themselves to prove how not-gay they were.

Perhaps today, my lack of comfort truly is a biological response, and only that, and perhaps a truly biological response would be for my member to stand and salute in the presence of tits and ass, regardless of any knowledge about DNA or a former, masculine form. I'm not going to pretend that I know myself well enough to know which is which.

FreedomFromAll said:

We were physically female, but not genetically. The set of chromosomes are determined upon conception, but they don’t kick in until around six to eight weeks. In other words in the womb males were female because they had not developed enough yet to release the testosterone to activate the Y chromosome. But the key is that genetically a male is a male in the womb even though the Y chromosome has not been activated yet. Of course complications might disrupt that from happening, but the vast majority it works well.

Click to expand...

True. But ultimately it's no different for those who transition to other genders. Their bodies change and their genetics remain the same. I had a female body at one time, and this does not bother my wife. You did too.

DH Kirkwood said:

Perhaps, and perhaps not. Again, I was specifically speaking about a situation where one has to be told the other person is trans, a situation where it would otherwise be undetectable. The repulsion towards the form of the same sex is natural to hererosexuals, but chromosomes aren't something we'd be naturally attracted to or repulsed by.

To be clear, I'm uncertain when it comes to how or why I feel about this. Is this repulsion really and trully and purely biological? Imagine a world where homosexuality had never been stigmatized at all and was always considered something that simply 'is' for some people. On top of the biological repulsion, there's the added bonus of a social repulsion, a mortification in regards to the very idea of doing something that's less-than-hetero that I know I felt as a teen growing up under the scrutiny of a culture of boys falling all over themselves to prove how not-gay they were.

Perhaps today, my lack of comfort truly is a biological response, and only that, and perhaps a truly biological response would be for my member to stand and salute in the presence of tits and ass, regardless of any knowledge about DNA or a former, masculine form. I'm not going to pretend that I know myself well enough to know which is which.

Click to expand...

I did not claim that Heterosexuals who are repulsed by doing a guy that used medical procedures to look like the opposite sex are purely biologically repulsed. I did state that it is natural for heterosexuals to be repulsed by the idea of screwing a guy no matter how good the medical professionals were at hiding that fact.

I am not disputing your personal feelings or whatever. I was just pointing out that most heterosexuals are repulsed by homosexual sex. While yes the OP presented what some might call a gray area, but that does not mean that most people categorized into specific groups, do not have prevailing traits.

lwf said:

True. But ultimately it's no different for those who transition to other genders. Their bodies change and their genetics remain the same. I had a female body at one time, and this does not bother my wife. You did too.

Click to expand...

Is it important to you to claim that you had a female body in the womb? I mean why stop there lets go back a little further before you developed anything resembling a body. You were at one point just a collection of dividing cells, which is completely meaningless to to what I developed into eventually.

What we were for a short period has little to do with an adult body.

FreedomFromAll said:

Is it important to you to claim that you had a female body in the womb? I mean why stop there lets go back a little further before you developed anything resembling a body. You were at one point just a collection of dividing cells, which is completely meaningless to to what I developed into eventually.

What we were for a short period has little to do with an adult body.

Click to expand...

If you can't tell the difference now, what difference does it make?

lwf said:

If you can't tell the difference now, what difference does it make?

Click to expand...

Explain what you mean.

FreedomFromAll said:

Explain what you mean.

Click to expand...

The thread was about how you would react if you discovered that a woman you had sex with had once been a man. If you couldn't tell at the time, what difference does it make?

lwf said:

The thread was about how you would react if you discovered that a woman you had sex with had once been a man. If you couldn't tell at the time, what difference does it make?

Click to expand...

I would not have consented to sex with a man who used medical procedures to become a women. Its called sexual assault. I have never been ok with sexual assault.

I really do not care if you have no problem ****ing someone who lied about such a thing on purpose. But this is by far a sexual assault issue, not social or transgender rights.

FreedomFromAll said:

I would not have consented to sex with a man who used medical procedures to become a women. Its called sexual assault. I have never been ok with sexual assault.

I really do not care if you have no problem ****ing someone who lied about such a thing on purpose. But this is by far a sexual assault issue, not social or transgender rights.

Click to expand...

I disagree. It is NOT sexual assault any more than having sex with someone who you later find out had a birthmark removed at some point in the past is sexual assault.

Wan said:

Let's imagine that you had sex with a "woman", and "she" only told you about her trans-ness after you had slept with her. What would your reaction be?

Let's be honest.

Click to expand...

that my gay-dar was down, and I’d look into it.

Maybe this could all be prevented by getting to know your sex partners really well before you sleep with them? There's that word again... prevention.

How many of us have slept with someone who seemed sexy at the time but as we got to know them later we were actually repulsed by them? That's happened to me before.

If you consent to sex with someone then you are accepting them as is, are you not? You can't protest after the fact because you didn't know they were a racist, or a money launderer, or a trans person, can you?

Maybe these things are worth checking into before you take your pants off... just saying.

lwf said:

I disagree. It is NOT sexual assault any more than having sex with someone who you later find out had a birthmark removed at some point in the past is sexual assault.

Click to expand...

Yes, because changing your sex is no different than removing a birthmark. :roll:

I do not think that you could found two things more different. What you are saying is that no one should be upset that someone purposely lied about their sex change so that they can **** you. Lying or omitting that information is immoral. Most actual Heterosexuals would not give their consent to have sex with someone transgender. Sex without consent is called rape.

Tread lightly here, your opinion on this will lead to women being raped by men who manipulate them.

Northern Light said:

Maybe this could all be prevented by getting to know your sex partners really well before you sleep with them? There's that word again... prevention.

How many of us have slept with someone who seemed sexy at the time but as we got to know them later we were actually repulsed by them? That's happened to me before.

If you consent to sex with someone then you are accepting them as is, are you not? You can't protest after the fact because you didn't know they were a racist, or a money launderer, or a trans person, can you?

Maybe these things are worth checking into before you take your pants off... just saying.

Click to expand...

You can and should protest being lied to (omitting information is also lying) especially in this situation. Perhaps you do not understand but, something like this happening to someone could have long lasting psychological effects. You could certainly sue for damages.

FreedomFromAll said:

Yes, because changing your sex is no different than removing a birthmark. :roll:

I do not think that you could found two things more different. What you are saying is that no one should be upset that someone purposely lied about their sex change so that they can **** you. Lying or omitting that information is immoral. Most actual Heterosexuals would not give their consent to have sex with someone transgender. Sex without consent is called rape.

Click to expand...

Lying about it is certainly immoral, but it is not illegal, it is not coercion, and it is not sex without consent. A potential sex partner having had a sex change is not any more your business than them having had a birthmark removed. If someone refuses to answer if you ask them whether or not they've had a sex change or a birthmark removed, you are free to not have sex with them. Omitting this information or refusing to answer is not even immoral. If you don't want to risk it, do not have sex with them.

FreedomFromAll said:

Tread lightly here, your opinion on this will lead to women being raped by men who manipulate them.

Click to expand...

I don't see how that follows at all.

FreedomFromAll said:

You can and should protest being lied to (omitting information is also lying) especially in this situation. Perhaps you do not understand but, something like this happening to someone could have long lasting psychological effects. You could certainly sue for damages.

Click to expand...

Sorry you can elaborate? Who was lied to?

FreedomFromAll said:

You can and should protest being lied to (omitting information is also lying) especially in this situation. Perhaps you do not understand but, something like this happening to someone could have long lasting psychological effects. You could certainly sue for damages.

Click to expand...

There are no grounds to sue for damages. You consented to sex with them. Their chromosomes can in no way harm you. Your personal sensitivities are not enough to warrant actionable damages.

Northern Light said:

Sorry you can elaborate? Who was lied to?

Click to expand...

See the OP.

lwf said:

Lying about it is certainly immoral, but it is not illegal, it is not coercion, and it is not sex without consent. A potential sex partner having had a sex change is not any more your business than them having had a birthmark removed. If someone refuses to answer if you ask them whether or not they've had a sex change or a birthmark removed, you are free to not have sex with them. Omitting this information or refusing to answer is not even immoral. If you don't want to risk it, do not have sex with them.



I don't see how that follows at all.

Click to expand...

lwf said:

There are no grounds to sue for damages. You consented to sex with them. Their chromosomes can in no way harm you. Your personal sensitivities are not enough to warrant actionable damages.

Click to expand...

No one cares about birthmarks being removed its a stupid comparison. People do care about sticking their dick into a mans inverted penis. I can guess how most heterosexual males would think of that, and it makes me think that you have no clue what that would be. Such a realization could cost the person thousands of dollars on therapy sessions to deal will what could be considered PTSD. Let me point this out to you: heterosexuals should not be forced to have sex with transgender persons ever. Had the character in OP been aware of the situation it is likely (given their heterosexuality) that they would not have consented to sex with a transgendered person. No one has the right to force you to do something that you do not want to do. Lying/omitting information to get you to do something that you do not want to do, is coercion.

You may have consented to sex with a heterosexual person, but that person was not only not a heterosexual but purposely deceived you into thinking that they were heterosexual. Once you are aware that they are not heterosexual the consent that you gave before is no longer valid consent. You were tricked into sex by omitting what should have been information given willingly. Being tricked into sex is not consent. For more information on consent: Sexual assault | womenshealth.gov "Sometimes you cannot give legal consent to sexual activity or contact — for example, if you are:

Threatened, forced, coerced, or manipulated into agreeing"

The conditions in the OP can easily be said to be "manipulated into agreeing".

KevinKohler said:

That depends. How awesome was the sex?

Click to expand...

"You got a hummer from a tranny, didn't you?"



"Hope you got a big trunk, cause I'm putting my bike in it."

FreedomFromAll said:

It was under fraudulent conditions. I would never had been willing had I had known that they were transgender beforehand. The transgender person lied in order have to have sex with me, that my friend is sexual assault. Its called rape by deception.
It centers around consent, remember you cannot have sex with someone without consent or it is rape.

Rape by Deception | Psychology Today

"Deceiving another person in order to have sex with them is morally wrong when it prevents the other person from giving fully informed consent to the act (Rubenfeld, 2012-2013). The reason for this is that informed consent cannot be given when you don't really know what you agree to when agreeing to have sex."


The character in the OP is a sexual predator.

"Sexual encounters involving deception that may qualify as sexual misconduct include (among many others) lying about the use of contraception, lying about your age, gender, marital status, religion or job, lying about having been tested for sexually transmitted diseases and infections, pretending to be someone’s partner, and falsely making the partner believe that the sexual act is a medical procedure."




Here is a good legal conversation on the subject: Solving the Riddle of Rape-by-Deception | Yale Law & Policy Review

Click to expand...

Very interesting read. And I will agree that if you are directly lied to, then yes it would be rape by deception. With that said, we now have to ask do you have any right to know another person's gender or sexual history? You certainly have a right to ask, and a right to refuse your consent should they not give it when asked. But does any right you possess require that other person to volunteer information? So if you fail to ask if they were ever previously male, would it be rape by deception?

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk

FreedomFromAll said:

For one I was responding to someone else; beyond that I can (and do often) come up with my own thoughts. I do not need someone else to say something before I form a thought.

It is the standard for heterosexuals to be repulsed by homosexual sex its part of what makes people heterosexual instead of not heterosexual. Oh and do you have a link or did you just make that up?

Click to expand...

FreedomFromAll said:

For one I was responding to someone else; beyond that I can (and do often) come up with my own thoughts. I do not need someone else to say something before I form a thought.

Click to expand...

No you don't need such, but the way you responded to the other, there was an impression that you were responding as though someone made such a claim.

It is the standard for heterosexuals to be repulsed by homosexual sex its part of what makes people heterosexual instead of not heterosexual. Oh and do you have a link or did you just make that up?

Click to expand...

What proof do you have that such is the standard? Why does one need to be repulsed by the idea of sex with one of their own gender in order to be straight? Your sexual orientation is what sexually attracts you, not what repulses you. There are plenty of people who simply are not repulsed by the idea. Many are the straight porn actors, men and women, who will do gay porn, because they are not repulsed by it and then pay is good. Even among the every day people, you can easily find someone who when asked why they wouldn't have gay sex the answer is simply, "eh, it does nothing for me." but would also being willing to do so for incentive, such as money. But here is an article on the topic anyway.
Why Straight Men Have Sex With Each Other


Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk