There's no such thing as Transexuals

…because you can’t change your sex.

From now on, I’m going to call them fauxsexuals, fauxmales and fauxfemales, a French prefix meaning fake, and I encourage everyone to do the same.

You could also call them simsexuals, simmales and simfemales, for simulated, or synthsexuals, synthmales and synthfemales, for synthetic, but I’m going to go with faux for now.

Pseudosexuals, pseudomales and pseudofemales are already taken for some hermaphrodites, so I’m not gong to use them.

Demi, quasi and semi mean partly, or almost, but not quite, so I’m not going to use them either, because fauxsexuals are nowhere near to being the opposite sex.

Like when a dude gets his dick cut off and throws in a set of fake tits, then has his balls turned inside out into some kind of baseball glove of a fake vagina, then gets his hair done all pretty and shaves his legs and armpits and puts on makeup then goes out looking for another dude to bang…like who’s this other dude who’s down with that?

Like I don’t care what the deal is, even if you cut off your dick and shape the rest of your junk into a vagina and shave your legs and armpits and get good hair and makeup and everything, I just don’t think I could ever get past the fact that you used to have a dick. I don’t know any normal person who could…hell, I don’t know any abnormal person who could.

Not trying to judge or say I know what’s right or wrong here, but for real I don’t understand how anyone could want to bang a fake vagina made of of scrotum skin.

I’m seeing a lot of transphobia here lately.

I imagine this is the same attitudes evil white supremacist slave owners had towards the blacks in the 19th century, or evil right-wing conservatives had towards all forms of liberalism and feminism in the 20th century.

We’ve made so much progress. Why stop now? If 2 men can fuck each other in the ass and call it “love”, why not have trannies too?


They have done MRI studies of transexuals, Before hormone treatments. Their Brains resemble the Brains of the sex they Think they are and not the sex that goes with their genitals. Their Brains do not look like the Brains of the sex they were born with. I find even the slightest thoughts about the operations really unpleasant. I don’t know if I could fully take a transperson as the sex they have changed into. But these people are not just making this up. And now they even have research based on MRIs to back this up. They tend to feel better about their lives, often much better after they make the change. I see people of all kinds living lives I do not want, many of the rich ones spending incredible amounts of Money doing shit I Think is worthless or painful or worse fucking up the lives of other people or all the above and more. A transperson has found a solution to something that bothered them incredibly. Go the fuck on with your own lives.

Worry about the rich guy whose hobby fucks over a whole mountainside or a Town, or influences a government to go to war for his hobbies.

I am tired of the Left jamming trans shit down my throat - and they truly have gone crazy with no one having genders don’t use boys and girls in school and the rest, yes, nuts, and I am tired of the right focusing so much vitriol NOT on people who really fuck things up for others, but on people who do nto have it easy.

It’s not that big and issue, really, except for those people considering the change and their families.

The Left and Right should cut out the middleman and not focus their hate/pedastaling on transexuals but on each other.


Myself I really don’t care what fauxsexuals, or people in general do with their bodies.
My gripe is I don’t want my tax dollars paying for their surgery, I don’t want them teaching this crap to young children, and I don’t want them imposing their concepts/language on society.

And I don’t think faxuwomen should be using the women’s washroom either.

I think fauxwomen/transsexuals should have all the benefits of being female, but not in the physically competitive arena of sports and such… due to an advantageous once-male physique.

I agree that faxuwomen i.e. men shouldn’t be participating in women’s sports, because of the physical advantages men have.

The problem with allowing faxuwomen to use the women’s restroom, is one: they’re not women, two: they still have a strong, masculine physique, three: many of them still have an aggressive, masculine libido, and four: many of them are heterosexuals i.e. attracted to women, so many faxuwomen are going to spy and prey on women.

Additionally, many faxuwomen mayn’t even be sincere about believing they are, or wanting to become women, they may feign to, just so they have access to things like the women’s restroom, so they can spy and prey on women, sexually harass and assault them.
From my research, there are little-no checks and balances in place to prevent this from occurring.
If a man just says he feels like a woman, and declares himself to be as such, that’s all it takes for him to legally change his status.


Fauxsexuals are not and cannot become members of the opposite sex.
At best, they are or can become androgynous.
either way, they are pretending to be something, they are not.

  1. The essential, most contrastive or starkest, Macroscopic difference between men and women is what sex organs they’re born with.
    It’s what defines them, distinguishes them, sets them apart.
    There are many other differences between them, but again, none so primary as their sex organs, all other differences are secondary.
    And so called ‘sex reassignment surgery’ doesn’t give fauxsexuals the genitals of the opposite sex, at best, they restructure their genitals so they kind of, sort of appear and function like genitals of the opposite sex in some ways, but not really, and at worst, they just flat out disfigure, mutilate and butcher their genitals.

  2. The essential, most contrastive or starkest, Microscopic difference between men and women is what chromosomes they’re born with, and fauxwomen aren’t born with, don’t naturally develop and can’t be artificially given XX chromosomes, likewise fauxmen aren’t born with, don’t naturally develop and can’t be artificially given XY chromosomes.

  3. While some fauxsexuals may be born with or naturally develop a few physical secondary sex characteristics of the opposite sex, such as a man having broad hips, narrow shoulders and a shallow voice, or a woman having narrow hips, broad shoulders and a deep voice, obviously all fauxsexuals share the vast majority of their physical secondary sex characteristics with the same sex (and I suspect the same is true of their brains, but we shall see later).
    And no amount of testosterone and estrogen blockers and injections can significantly alter that, especially if they begin taking them as adults, but even if they begin taking them as children, already major divergences between boys and girls have taken place, hell before they exit the womb, already major divergences between boys and girls have taken place.
    And there’s so much more that goes into shaping men and women’s physical secondary sex characteristics than just testosterone and estrogen, there are other hormones, XY and XX chromosomes, and innumerable organic processes already underway from the time of conception onward that’re virtually impossible to reverse.

  4. Fauxsexuals brains at best tend to be sexually ambiguous, and arguably no fauxsexual is going to have a brain (nearly) identical to that of the opposite sex.

So the science on fauxsexual neurology is still early, and the data so far indicates their brains tend to be androgynous, rather than perfectly unaligned, or aligned with their physical sex.
But if you listened to the rhetoric coming from the progressive media, you’d think we know for a fact all fauxsexuals brains are 100% aligned with the opposite sex.

And I also wonder who funded these studies, and whether that skewed them and their results?
If a group of conservatives funded them, they’d be immediately called into question by the media, but if a group of progressives fund them?
Nope, no bias there.
Of course progressives are incapable of having an agenda, they are one of the two dominant political groups who always, always follows wherever the science leads, and conservatives never, ever do.
The former ideology is wholly motivated by science, whereas the latter is wholly motivated by religion, superstition and/or icky emotions, like hate and fear.

Because language, politics, psychology, sociology, or peoples opinions of themselves can be straightforward, like that, perfectly objective, like physics (well, even physics isn’t perfectly objective, but you get it), without any bias ever coming into play.

  1. Physiology continually shapes and determines neurology, and neurology continually shapes and determines, at least in part, psychology, including what masculine and feminine psychological traits you end up having, so you can’t have a wholly feminine brain in a wholly masculine body, and you can’t get a wholly feminine psychology out of a partly masculine brain.
    For instance if you managed to successfully transplant a woman’s brain into a man’s body, it would no longer behave exactly like a woman’s brain, because body and brain are constantly molding, and remolding each other.

*Laughs, an aside, as organ transplantation advances, perhaps fauxsexual men and women will swap brains/bodies one day in the future.

  1. While studies might, or mightn’t suggest most fauxsexuals brains share some of their characteristics with the opposite sex, there’s obviously variability between them progressives, psychologists, governments and fauxsexuals themselves aren’t taking into account.
    Some fauxsexuals brains and/or psychologies might/may resemble the brains of the opposite sex a little, some quite a bit, and some not at all, but are governments taking any of this variability into account?
    Not at all.
    As far as I know, and correct me if I’m wrong, It’s enough for you to simply say you feel like the opposite sex, in order to legally change your sex status.

I’m not taking that seriously.
At the very least, there should be checks and balances (neuropsychological screening) in place to determine the legitimacy of a claim like that, where you can now use a different bathroom, play different sports and so on.
So what it comes down to at the end of the day is feelings, I feel like an x is all you need.

This isn’t science working together with government and progressives on this, not even close, this is progressives hijacking government under the pretext of science.

Look government may be taking you seriously, but I’m not, just because you say internally you feel like an x, doesn’t mean you are or even close, anymore than me saying I’m blonde with an extroverted, sanguine personality, or a 6 year old African American, or a unicorn makes me any of these things.
You are entitled to perceive yourself however you like, but you are not entitled to my perception of you.
Just because you say you have a male or female brain/psychology, doesn’t mean you do, people can be mistaken about themselves, people can lie about themselves, and sometimes people know us or aspects of us better than we do ourselves.

  1. All these facts, the fact that fauxsexuals don’t have the opposite sex’s genitals, the fact that they don’t have the opposite sex’s chromosomes, that by and large they don’t have their other physical attributes, and that by and large they don’t have their brains/minds, aren’t trivial, they are critical, not only for determining what bathrooms and sports you should be barred from, but from how you physically and psychologically interact with other people. You are not going to interact with the world the same way as the opposite sex does, not even close, and so you shouldn’t expect it, including the people within it, to perceive and interact with you the way you, irrespective of the facts, imagine or wish they should.

  2. Slippery slope: what next? Are adults going to start claiming they’re children or vice versa (well they already are), are whites going to start claiming they’re blacks and vice versa, people other species?
    And suppose we find a little scientific evidence to support some of these claims, that they kind of, sort of resemble the opposite or other in some way?
    A little more than most people…on some level, then what?
    everyone can claim to be anything they want?
    Adults can go back to elementary school and play with children, children join the workforce and engage in other adult activities?
    We can keep some people as pets and lock others up in zoos?
    A white person can claim to be African or Native American and receive affirmative action or join the reservation?

Do I already happen to have more genes, and/or anatomical, morphological features (or at least ones people and/or scientists are paying attention to) in common with African Americans than typical for whites?
What combination of testosterone, estrogen or other hormones will make me more African?
When can I sign up for my Afro-facial reconstructive surgery?
How many soul, jazz and funk records do I have to listen to?

In conclusion, fauxsexuals aren’t the opposite sex, not even close, certainly not when it comes to primary sex characteristics (genitals and chromosomes), definitely not when it comes to physical secondary sexual characteristics (rest of the body and the brain), and more arguably not even when it comes to psychology, nor can they ever be, therefore, they shouldn’t be referred to as such, we should refer to them as faux or pseudosexuals, as feigning to be something other than they are, and can fully comprehend.

I tell them their y chromosome is the problem. Fix that and we’ll see.

Seems fair. But you’re telling them this? Like you’re finding yourself in the situation?

The ol’ nature versus nurture.

Psychological femininity, like almost anything, is in all likelihood in part determined by neurology.
Scientific research on fauxsexuals brains is in its infancy, but what it’s suggesting so far is: fauxsexuals have brains somewhere in between masculine and feminine.
Now why would we expect faxuwomen, who’s brains are averagely somewhere in between masculine and feminine, to averagely be as psychologically feminine as real women, who’s brains are (nearly) wholly feminine?
It’s absurd.
Not only that, but body influences brain/mind, both directly, physiologically, and indirectly, in our perceptions of ourselves, and faxuwomen have (nearly) wholly masculine bodies.
So not only are they not physiologically or even neurologically women, in the main, but in all probability, they’re not even psychologically women, in the main.

They’re not women and this isn’t science.
If it was, there would at the very least be psychoneurological screening to prevent just anyone from legally changing their sexual status, as some fauxsexuals are more delusional (even less like the sex they think they are) or bigger liars than others, or perhaps neuropsychologists would determine our sex for us in adolescence by neuropsychologically examining us, irrespective of the sex we thought we were or wanted to be, because such is the nature of facts, they’re independent of our wishes.

This is progressives and the LGBT community cherry-picking science, and possibly (un)intentionally manipulating science by throwing money at it, into making it seem like there’s more legitimacy to their claims than there is, but so far, not much legitimacy has claimed to have been found by the scientific community anyway.
The progressives, which LGBT activists are a branch of, have an agenda, they’ll do whatever they can to advance what they believe to be the interests of so called ‘transsexuals’, irrespective or at the expense of the facts and wellbeing of society, just like feminists are demonstrably not really interested in equality, but in advancing women’s interests, often at the expense of men and society as a whole.


There’s an assumption in the progressive community, which LGBT activists are a part of, that fauxsexuals, like lesbians and so on, are born, not made, or socially and/or self-constructed, but in actuality, it’s likely a combination of the two, which’s why I don’t think children should be exposed to this, because it could condition their still forming brain/minds into developing so called gender ‘dysphoria’, which’s a mental illness, when they otherwise wouldn’t’ve.
People with gender dysphoria often develop depression, anxiety disorders and commit suicide as a result of it.
People with gender dysphoria may feel compelled to undergo expensive and irreversible surgical procedures, sterilizing, mutilating, disfiguring and disabling them for life, take drugs and steroids with numerous side, and negative effects.

This is not something you mess a child’s mind around with, in fact, if anything, it should be considered a form of child abuse, to implant these ideas into their minds.

And we shouldn’t take claims children make about themselves regarding sex, gender and so on seriously, their brains are still forming, and so is their notion of sex and gender.
Children are highly suggestible, if you suggest they are or may be something, they may unthinkingly adopt that something, until it’s deeply ingrained, they have very limited capacity for self-assessment.
And once they go through puberty, they may feel completely different about themselves, there’s no way a child’s gender dysphoria could be set in stone, so the idea of giving kids traumatic, experimental, irreversible drugs and surgery seems ludicrous to me.

I couldn’t take a fauxsexual as the sex they believe they are, as they’re fundamentally the sex they believe they’re not, for the reasons given in this thread.
However, I could take, some of them as neuropsychological androgynes, depending largely on my own independent evaluation of their psychology.

While there is evidence to suggest their population group as a whole isn’t entirely fabricating this, how do you know every individual who claims to be a fauxsexual isn’t?
People make things up, they’re mistaken about themselves, they lie about themselves.
Why would this population group be any different?

The research, as demonstrated earlier, suggests they’re neuropsychologically androgynous, not fully males or females living inside the opposite body.

Many also end up committing suicide or trying to ‘change back’ into the sex they were.
Why is embracing their delusion the only solution?
It’s not good to believe you’re something you’re not.
If you’re a man, you will never think, feel or look exactly like a woman does, and vice versa.
Being delusional impairs ones navigation through the world.
Why not instead try getting them to see that while some of them may be neuropsychological androgynes, they’re not and can never be the other sex, not physically, not even neuropsychologically.
Why not try getting them to embrace their androgyny, instead of futilely setting them on a life long quest to become something they’re not, and will never be?

I support peoples right to think and do with their lives as they please.

Fauxsexuals represent a tiny fraction of the population, I think less than 1%, but the way the media talks about them, you’d think it would be closer to 10%.

LOL yeah :confused: I’ve had dudes proposition me in the past and had to figure a way to let them down easy because, like you, there ain’t NO way I could. I don’t even like manly women with genuine XX chromosomes. So I make it seem as if the problem is me and my hangup (which may be true) and probably they can find someone else who doesn’t have my problem. It really is a sad situation. One guy said he was pre-op and wondered if I would be more attracted after the operation, so I said “not unless you’re swapping chromosomes”. As far as I know, that’s impossible and lets me off the hook.

Genetic similarity is a valid reason for rejection:


Here is the first part of the video:


Same here. As a general rule I like women who are feminine, and small, and who have small hands and feet, and who I can pick up. If I can’t pick them up then that’s pretty much a deal breaker. I also don’t think I could grow old with a woman who refused to get fake tits at some point. She can have regular tits as long as she’s young and the gravity hasn’t set in, but once they start looking like old lady tits she’s gonna have to get them fixed or I won’t be able to like her as much.

This is the slave-instinct at work. Many, or even most humans, are so compelled to seek-out a master, an Alpha, and praise as a god, that they will do whatever it takes to appeal and please Him. For many homosexuals and transexuals, this means wanting to suck dick and be the receiving bottom-end. Again, they will do anything to submit to a higher power, a higher male.

It’s about seeking leadership, in all the wrong ways. People here should at least recognize this is Slave-Dialectic. When the masses have nobody to obsess and fawn over, then they’ll seek out anybody and anything to achieve that end.

Fauxsexuals, like homosexuals, are in all likelihood a product of both genetics, and environment, some individuals might be more a product of the former, others may be more a product of the latter.
So what kinds of environments are more likely to produce fauxsexuals?
Don’t expect scientists to delve too deeply into that one anytime soon, it’s too unpleasant.

Does being a passive, submissive male, or an aggressive, domineering female incline some individuals to become fauxsexuals?
And how does one become a passive-submissive male, or aggressive-domineering female?
Again it’s a, combination of genes/environment.

Why can’t (how we perceive) our masculinity/femininity, affect both the sex we identify as, and the sex we’re attracted to?
The reason why it can’t, is not because, science, but because if (self-perception of) our masculinity/femininity can affect sexual identification and attraction, than altering (self-perception of) our masculinity/femininity, can also alter sexual identification and attraction, and of course progressives don’t want to go there, because that would mean some of them, at least in part, are responsible for their sexuality.

It’s an interesting hypothesis, but again, don’t expect scientists to test it, because science is political, and politics in the 21st century, is very much about being, ‘progressive’.
Science doesn’t exist all by itself in a void, it is nourished, and poisoned alike by the funding it receives from politics, and big business.

I know you identified yourself as “Gloominary” when you signed up here, but I’m going to call you Poopyface. You are entitled to think of yourself as “Gloominary”, but, by your reasoning, you aren’t entitled to have me perceive you as anything other than Poopyface if that’s how I perceive you, and, apparently, you aren’t entitled to complain that I have chosen to call you Poopyface, despite that any reasonable observer would guess that you would prefer not to be called Poopyface.

This is an admittedly and intentionally juvenile spin on what it seems like you’re doing. There is no law, nor should there be, that says that when you tell me your name is John, I am prohibited from responding, “No, I think I’ll call you Mike instead, Mike’s a much better name for you than John.” There should be no such law. But we need no such law, people grant to others the dignity of the name they offer. If someone says they are John, then we take them at their word and call them John. I’ve met many people who go by a name that isn’t their given name and isn’t their legal name, and yet it is still obvious to me, and seems obvious to everyone I’ve seen them interact with, that the name they indicate as the name they’d prefer to be called is the name that it is polite to call them.

The parallel with sex is not exact, but it is importantly similar. Men and women occupy different social roles, not just different sexual roles, and we can think of these differences separately. We know that a transwoman will not menstruate or get pregnant, but insofar as these sorts of considerations are irrelevant, where sex serves only the social purpose of signaling how we treat someone and how we expect them to behave in non-sexual and non-reproductive settings, to self-identify and present as a certain sex should be accorded the same courtesy as we accord the decision to introduce oneself by a particular name or to, through style of dress or grooming, to identify oneself as a member of some subculture.

This includes the use of gendered bathrooms (though they be a relic of a much more prudish past). To the extent there is a harm presented, police the harm, not the poor proxy for an expectation of harm. If someone is actually attacking or harassing people in a bathroom, the sex of the people involved is roughly irrelevant. There is no epidemic of abuse of these policies, and the places where self-selection is most respected, and where transsexuals are most prevalent, there is no attendant increase in the sorts of negative behaviors that critics claim as motivation. This charge is bullshit, and clearly ad hoc.

So recognize people as a matter of basic manners. You aren’t making a biological claim when you treat someone as the gender with which they identify, and you most likely won’t have an opportunity to test whether they have the genitals or genetic basis to backup their claimed identity. But in the same way you won’t ask someone for their license or birth certificate, and would likely respect their proffered named even if you did find that it didn’t match their birth or legal name, you should respect peoples other choices of self-identity.

I know I have seen you on here shilling for Fleshlight, so I feel like the fakeness of the vagina can’t have much to do with it.

Carleas, if I may, perhaps it is not so much the fakeness as the fact that it is made of scrotum.

To me personally, that’s a very compelling case.