Columns Jun 8, 2011 at 4:00 am

Trans, Man


@100 Probably a girl who says things like "I love to hang out with my friends, and I love to laugh! LoL! Want to talk about my cat for 3 hours?" Something generic that you hear all the time, and doesn't effectively advertise anything.

I guess the photo equivalent would be girls who take photos at weird angles to conceal their fat.

These things are just annoying though, nothing women do can possibly match the creep factor that men can achieve with little effort.
wow, guys, ease up on 92

maybe they were expressing legitimate curiousity - not judgement.

Personally - for the sake of argument, if I had to choose between getting lots of smoking hot guys as a gay man and staying female and not being able to get any... I'd pick being a man.

And I rather like my gender. But I like getting laid better.
Dan's comments about Rep. Weiner are shockingly ill-informed. Rep. Weiner preyed on young women who approached him online as political admirers, and used this admiration as a sexual weapon. He destroyed a legitimate interest in politics and responded by telling the young women that the only thing they were good for was receiving shots of his hot bod. When confronted, he showed how shameful his behavior was by repeatedly lying about it. Meanwhile, his wife was pregnant.

This man is pond scum, and Dan's impulsive, knee-jerk defense of his actions should be condemned and retracted. Dan should apologize.
@26...As a straight female, I have to disagree about the disembodied cock shot. If the cock in question is big enough, I might decide I'd like to have some fun with it...but nothing further with the guy attached to it. ;)

Why is it that talented, motivated, public servants always seem to trip over their own dicks? While his career may not be over (my rep is Barney Frank), Weiner had better learn contrition.

Sigh (of exasperation).
@103 "a few years ago I started saving those unwanted cock shots guys regaled me with: then the next guy to send me a picture of a penis would get one right back. :)"

LOVE it. I think that's about perfect. I remember once when I guy I messed around with a few times in high school got his hands on my number and out of the blue sent me a crotch shot. I just deleted the message, but I wish I'd had one to send back. That day I came up with a general rule: If I've never seen it, or it's been more than a decade since I've seen it, you don't send me pics unless I ask.
I'm OK with saying that most cocks are ugly as long as no one cries sexism when people say most pussies are ugly...because most of them are, really. About 1 in every 10 vaginas is aesthetically pleasing, something I'd actually enjoy looking at; the rest range from "meh" to "yikes". Not coincidentally, an unsolicited pussy shot from a potential online date would put me off, at best.

Claims that vaginas are more attractive than penises -- or that all vaginas are beautiful (but not all cocks) -- seem motivated mainly by up-with-womyn politics that seek to elevate all things female, and basically make it impossible for men to express negative opinions about women's bodies without being called sexist.

If you doubt this, think about how you'd react differently to a man writing "I was totally turned on, but then I saw her pussy and it was hideous" vs. a woman writing the same thing about a cock. One of them sounds like a sexist douche, but the other one doesn't, right? And that's because we've collectively decided that when a woman asserts that kind of opinion she's just expressing her preferences, but when a man does, he's acting as the enforcer for the Almighty Patriarchy.
i personally am grossed-out by unsolicited cock pictures (nothing like posting an ad on craigslist trying to sell the couch which is too big for your new apartment and getting five responses from guys who don't want the couch but were wondering if U WANNA FUK) but can we please ease up on the "all cocks are ugly and gross" thing? this is just mean. if a bunch of guys posted that they'd never want to see a picture of a vagina because OMG ALL PUSSIES ARE GROSS AND UGLY there'd be a virtual lynch mob forming up right now...
I wonder if Weiner ever had to deal with Santorum on his cock?
I like a good cock shot.....if the cock is pretty it might work.....but I am a size queen so..
NPNG reminds me of when I first discovered Dan this time last year in the Voice. There I read about an FTM looking for guys in the gay bars. I remember thinking at the time, Hey, what about us straight guys who like tomboys or who love girls whose preference is for other girls?

Frankly, although I wouldn't have the foggiest idea how to go about meeting an FTM, the thought has stayed in my head ever since then. Unfortunately, it appears from some of the comments that there is a prejudice against FTMs dating straight guys.
@111: Chalk it up to many years of propaganda -- both feminist and, strangely, anti-feminist -- to the effect that "Woman are beautiful, noble and good, whereas men are troglodytes ruled by their baser instincts."
#64: The reason we give Democrats a bit more of a pass when it comes to private sexual matters is because they *aren't hypocrites*. Democrats (as a rule) don't run on the "family values", what-other-people-do-in-their-bedrooms-concerns-the-government platform. That's why it's so much fun when (seemingly almost every) "family values" Republican congressman geta caught with a dick in his mouth. For the Democrats, they're just guilty of bad judgement, stupidity, and the rest (the stuff with their wives, etc.) is none of our business, really. Republicans who do the same things are guilt of hypocrisy, as well, and that is something that *is* relevant in the public context, particularly when they are being hypocrites about something they are advocating for bringing into the public sphere in the first place.
NPNG's friends are all straight, and yet he's looking at clubs for guys who will take the time to get to know him? Clubs are for superficial hookups. Make some gay male friends already! Join a group, get social, make friends. Some may turn into lovers, some may be delighted to play matchmaker and introduce you to the kind of men you're looking for.
I think you're giving cock-shot senders too much credit for thinking. They're sending pics of their cocks because boob and/or pussy shots would turn them on. They just don't get it that it doesn't turn women on. See, straight guys spend much of their lives getting women to show them our stuff. Women spend much of our lives getting men we are not interested in to keep it in their pants.
I mean, in capitalistic terms, it's a scarcity issue.
100, the first thing I thought of to answer your question about the female equivalent to a cock shot would be a woman displaying her used tampon and saying "Look how much this thing absorbed!"
@121: LOL, that's pretty perfect, since the proportion of guys who are turned on by that is probably comparable to the proportion of women who welcome cock shots.
#114: NPNG reminds me of when I first discovered Dan this time last year in the Voice. There I read about an FTM looking for guys in the gay bars. I remember thinking at the time, Hey, what about us straight guys who like tomboys or who love girls whose preference is for other girls?

I have no idea what lesbians have to do with anything, but let me address the first part of that. It's really very simple: trans guys are guys, and straight guys aren't interested in dating guys. Gay and bi guys are interested in dating guys, so FTMs go where the gay and bi guys are.

Even if a trans guy hasn't done a single thing to alter his body, he is still a man, and would not appreciate you comparing him to a tomboy any more than you would probably want to be mistaken for a burly, hairy woman. But even aside from that, many trans men are on testosterone, so they have facial hair and chest hair and deepened voices and increased muscle bulk (and probably a large and very penis-like clitoris). Some have had "top surgery" so their chests are flat. I'm fairly sure those aren't traits that you, as a straight guy, would be attracted to. But correct me if I'm wrong.
As a gay man who dated a FTM for several years, it's not about the pole, it's about the guy. Really. Hang on No Pole, No Go - you'll find someone.
Guys who do this are partially interested, like Dan said, in girls who do genuinely like unsolicited cock pics. But probably more often, jerks send cock pics to get pics back. Even if they were unsolicited they argue you HAVE to reciprocate or else someone who likes you will think you're NOT NICE. How many times have I read "you owe me a pic ;)"? TOO MANY.
I don't have any experience with unsolicited cock shots (thankfully)... but on reading that letter my first thought was "because men like pussy shots so they assume you'll like cock shots!" seriously, I love my boyfriend and I think he's super sexy but I'm really not turned on by the idea of him sending me naked pics (so he doesn't)... he on the other hand LOVES sexy pics, including but not limited to up-close pussy shots. one of those things I'll never understand, but I do it 'cause I love him :)
Dan, I don't think your answer to TCF was quite right. It has nothing to do with the "type" of woman but who the man is to her. Obviously straight women don't have an "ewww" reaction to every image of a cock or we'd all be lesbians. But for women, context is everything. If a woman is already interested in a man, she might like a cock shot even if she says "ewww" to all random, anonymous cock shots. That makes it all the more important that men WAIT to be asked for a cock shot before sending one. Give one too early and you'll be rejected by someone who otherwise might have been more receptive if only you had a little patience.
@106, the women in question were fully grown adults and had access to the information that he was married. At least one of them approached him by calling him "hot" in the comments of his YouTube video. They knew exactly what they were doing and only went public for money or their 15 minutes of fame. Weiner shouldn't have done what he did, but no physical contact was made so there's still a chance for him to work things out with his wife and learn from his mistakes.

Vitter did far worse by hiring prostitutes (which was both illegal and far more exploitive of women than some online flirting) and he kept his job.
Take 2.

See the Big One crash and burn:


So is ol' Barney stupid or a liar?
@ 123 perversecowgirl (love the name; you're making my heart flutter), I was thinking afterward how "straight" was the wrong word. Let's say hetero. Anyway, who is to chacterize someone? Why dismiss that notion that a hetero guy might be interest in another guy who, sexually, has a cunt?

Having never met anyone who identified themselves as FTM I have no specific experience but it seems as if we should be open minded and eschew stereotypes.
Okay the big word missing here is UNSOLICITED re dick pics. And stop comparing them to pussy shots. Guys are thinking BOOBY shots when they send them. Trust me on this.

And yes, even if chatting a bit with a girl, a dick pic is unsolicited until you've either already stuck it in her or she's asked for it. If she asks for it, she is asking to confirm it meets her specifications (if she has not fucked you already) or to send it to all her friends and laugh at you. There is no other reason on earth a woman wants a dick pic. Even women who like sex, who like penises, etc. No one likes a dick pic just shot at them out of nowhere from a man whom they have not yet ridden like a texas bull for over 8 seconds.
My honest reaction to receiving an unsolicited dick shot: "Gross,
what an idiot". As someone else mentioned, I imagine a sender (some sweaty troglodyte living in the basement of his parents' house) who thinks sex begins and ends with his own dick and has never gone down on a woman in his life.
But, but, but...

Isn't this better? (And it's from Wikipedia so y'know it's educational.)…

Sorry Dan - I have the utmost respect for you, but you are really wrong about the cock shot.

Man take photos of their cocks for the same reason dildo manufacturers make ugly pink veined dildos - because these objects are all about turning on the MAN. Men incredibly PROUD of their little boys, and it turns them on to think women are looking at this 6 inch fetish object. It isn't about the woman at all!

I am a totally GGG girl - but honestly, the only time I really enjoy looking at a photo of a cock is if it is an exceptionally interesting cock - 11 inches and thick as a beer can, or pierced in some unusual way, or maybe has a tattoo of a harley on it.... otherwise (sorry guys) - one dick looks like any other dick.

Finally - and this is important. We girls know how important the little guy is to men. So, we pretend to be impressed, so as not to bruise feelings. We don't say what we are thinking (Ew - Yuck, or worse Oh Brother - Yawn!) - we coo, and tell you how beautiful it is, because we know this is your ... um.... soft spot. This encourages this behavior.

But seriously, guys - unless its huge, or interestingly decorated - your cock is not interesting to us for how it looks. It looks like every other cock we've seen. So, stop showing us the photos and start telling us what you can do with it¬

Regarding Anthony Weiner, I enjoyed reading your response. However, the talk I've heard (or read) so far has ONLY been about the pictures he sent. It doesn't mention that the woman (or women) might have asked to see a picture of his cock. And it's also true that the woman (women) might have asked but he's omitting that to save THEIR reputations. And let's face it, there are women who, knowing the guy they're chatting with is an elected official, would ask the guy to send such a picture because they know it can cause damage to the guy and his party, or help them get rich later on. I regret that life has made me so cynical, but there it is.
"has to be a time that he realizes that what's between his legs does not define who he is."

Shouldn't all transpeople understand this before you start, you know, cutting themselves? I still find it ridiculous and upsetting that something could hate a part of their badly so much that they would cut it off instead of just coming to terms with it and accepting that that's what they are.

This isn't about loving who you want to love, or being who you want to be. It's about a type of body dismorphia that we all have in certain amounts and all have to deal with to be happy.
I'm with Dan, there are women who love dick enough to appreciate a goodlooking dick pic anyday of the week with a few disclaimers, that the penis belongs to someone they are NOT related to/disgusted by/at odds with/unavaiable etc and that they know or is getting to know the owner of the dick in the pic. I never understood why so many people tried to push the idea that women are stuck on inner beauty so much that outer sexual beauty just HORRIFIES OMG us to pieces.
@133 GQbd:

Why dismiss that notion that a hetero guy might be interest in another guy who, sexually, has a cunt?

Not all trans guys have a cunt sexually. They have a cunt biologically, but they didn't ask for it, don't want it, and certainly don't want anything inside it. Some trans dudes are like Buck Angel and willing to use all their holes, others are not...just something to be aware of.

I'm all about shattering gender roles and stereotypes. I think the part of this discussion that bends my brain is a guy calling himself hetero when he's interested in other guys.

On the other hand, if people have the right to label themselves in whatever way they choose, I suppose you could date nothing but guys and still call yourself straight and everyone else would have to respect that.

Bah, I dunno. The semantics of political correctness make my head hurt. Really, my only point is that trans guys are guys, and anyone who pursues one thinking "he's really just a butch-looking woman" is probably going to run into troubles. If you understand this, that's awesome and more power to you! If you ever end up dating a trans dude I hope you come back and tell us all about it. :D
It's hilarious how general these comments are!! Each to their own: some women like genital shots, some don't. Some men like talking, some don't. Some men like genital shots, some don't. Some women like talking, some don't (I refer you to my cousin who really just wants to f*ck if you don't believe me :P ). Really, all this broo-ha-ha over what?!?? Besides, one might say "eww..!!" and think "yum!!!"- who knows?? Vivre et laisser vivre!
Well, perversecowgirl, it is doubtless speculative on my part unless my SO decides to kick me out on my butt sometime before I get too grey and wrinkly.

Still, sex aside, I wondering what it would be like dating an FTM dude. I mean, guys like each other's company so why not a date with a guy. Dinner, conversation, fishing, carpentry projects, whatever. I've never had a girlfriend who wanted to go hunting but maybe it would be fun to have a hunting buddy that felt comfortable cuddling up with me, and vice versa.

As for sex, well, good, caring sex is always full of emotional landmines no matter who you are with. It might be a relief to be able to honestly say "I didn't know" rather than "Shit, will I never learn.". I do not think that I would be squeamish about an anatomical guy it if I was so inclined but I simply do not see myself being intimate with anyone's cock but my own (we have had a very long relationship, you understand; it would be like cheating). Besides, just cause I'm a guy doesn't mean that the getting part is more important than the giving. I could see myself going down on some dude's pussy with the same enthusiasm as I would a chick's.

My query and speculation simply started with the realization that I sort of like the androgyny thing. I often see someone in public and wonder, Is that a chick or a dude? Then, If that's a chick then she's kind of cute. My speculation would never get as far as, What if it is a dude? because, even though I have obviously found that person physically attractive, I have no interest in dick. Until the last year or so it would not have occurred to me that it might be a dude with a pussy. It was when I started reading about FTMs here in Dan's column, I couldn't help but think, why are FTMs who want to go out with guys restricting themselves to gay guys? Am I the only hetero guy who is open to the possibility?

OK, maybe I'm unique or - more likely - delusional, but I do tend to wonder what it would be like and I have a hard time thinking that I'm the only one.
GQbd: I'm totally down with the androgyny, too. Used to be, I'd see someone I couldn't tell was male or female and I'd think "Man, that person is hot!!! But can't hit on them - what if they turn out to have a vagina? I'm not into that!"

Lately, though, my reaction is more like "That person is hot and I'd sex them up no matter what configuration of 'bits' they have." So I guess my orientation is changing as I get older or something.

It's all moot though 'cause I'm in a monogamous relationship. Luckily he's a fairly passable crossdresser so I get the best of both worlds. :D
LOL. You made me think of a Hayes Carll song
@26, ugh! Please shut up! I am a 35 year old female and size queen who is only interested in hung, hairy, uncut guys. Since that first category seems to be rather subjective, cock shots go a long way in establishing sexual compatibility. Before you write me off as a shallow asshole, I'll note that these traits need to coexist with non-physical selling points like intelligence, good politics, similar interests, etc. My sexuality is very phallocentric, however, and penis pics are critical to my online dating experience.

@138 Can anyone imagine a straight guy saying "I'm not interested in boobs, they look all the same"?
Apparently it's not unusual for officially heteresexual women to not be interested in the aesthetics of male bodies.
I find clothed, erect cock on a fit guy to be very arousing...why this straight girl loves software gay porn. :D

But if I comment on, say, Stephen Colbert's website that his slit is "awesome" or "hot," even, that's not a sexual solicitation. Dustin Ackley, on the other hand, is my age and lives in Seattle. ;)
Can anyone imagine a straight guy saying "I'm not interested in boobs, they look all the same"?

There's a lot more variance in boobs than there is in cocks - or at least in the cocks of guys who like to send/post cock pics. I challenge anyone here to go to, browse around a while, then see if they can identify which pics they've already seen and which ones are new.

I've done this. It is difficult.

Also - it's not that we're not interested in any penis because they tend to look the same. We're just not clamouring for yet another picture of one from yet another random guy because they tend to look the same.
I'd much rather be turned on by a bulge than the actual full-on-flesh cock shot. It's more of a tease that way. And I have gotten cock shots before -- they don't really do it for me. Sure, perhaps they might aid me in envisioning them being jammed up inside me, but the actual cock shot itself is... meh. But that's just me. I want to fuck, I don't want to beat around the bush.
I'm a 51 year old mtp (male to parthenogenesis) but I'm only attracted to eukaryotes who are female-identified but into pegging. I've had a really hard time finding a compatible lover in spite of craig's list. Is there a more specific website for me?
@151 perversecowgirl

I think the same case can be made for just about any body part by itself. We humans are best at faces. Breasts, penises, etc. quickly become monotonous when viewed in isolation.

FWIW I intensely like sex with women but I am almost totally indifferent to breasts.
I've received a lot of cock shots from men I didn't know. A LOT of cock shots. It seems to me that the men sending them believed they were providing me with the only information they considered important or that they expected me to feel was important. That told me a lot, and their assumption was wrong, but it wasn't because I do or don't like cocks. I like some cock a lot (the thick, smooth ones that more than fill the guy's hand) and I don't particularly like others (the extremely long ones that look like hoses). And I don't like any that include rulers in the shot. Or beer bottles. Or anything else stuck there to provide "perspective."

I'm actually more into the contents of a man's head than his dick, even for a quickie, but it's always informative to know who thinks the appearance of his penis is the most important information he has to offer me about who he is. Then, I can just delete his message.
@ Hunter: or maybe he's an ass man. And thank god for them. I have nice breasts but I'm stoked when a guy doesn't get caught up on them since I'm totally indifferent to them too.

@140/Kyle: that's really misinformed. Even if you look at the DSM you'll find that being transgendered is not considered body dysmorphia and the "treatment" is allowing the person to transition into the gender they identify with. Even if you want some harder facts, there's preliminary evidence that there are neuoanatomical differences between a biological male who identifies as female, and a biological male that identifies as male.
That's a different context than what I meant but yeah, sure. I like 'em. But just becaue a guy isn't into breasts doesn't mean he has a problem with women. Some women have pretty much nothing in the way of breasts, that doesn't mean they're not women.
Not wanting to sound transphobic, I'm a little concerned that fag hags could try to dishonestly satisfy their "if you're gay, prove it" fetish by becoming FTM LOL.
Anyways, been there, done that, got the T-shirt. I'm vegetarian but an USA-Peruvian bisexual writer and TV presenter called Jaime Bayly once properly said in an interview (like ten years ago for the chilean version of the spanish tv show cqc) that "women are like vegetarian food, they taste good but it feels like you missed a peace of meat" or something like that.
Whoever said to get involved with the genderqueer community, not the trans community - do not listen to them. The "genderqueer community" (which does not exist everywhere, but exists mainly in big cities full over overly academic, middle-to-upper class, white college students, mostly female-assigned and often having attended women's colleges) thinks there is a fundamental difference between transsexual/transgender people and cissexual/cisgender (non-trans) people. It is more important to them what you were born with between your legs than what your gender IS. By which I mean, if they know you are a man, they still have a burning need to know what is in your pants. Which is really sad, cissexist, and a huge problem for stealth trans people. So avoid them at all costs. Try to find a confidential support group or an online message board if you want to meet other men who happen to be trans but are not "transmen" or genderqueer or some other "I'm not really a man because I am trans which makes me SPECIAL!" type of man. Do not, I repeat, do not go out and randomly meet trans people, especially genderqueer trans people, if you value your privacy.
156: Hunter 78,

You've never met a man who mentally bites his knuckles when a long pair of legs and well formed bunda passes by? I have, bless them, as someone who has spent most of her life dancing and therefore would be devastated to loose her legs and well matched backside, I appreciate differences in likes and dislikes. There is nothing wrong with a man with different tastes, and it is a good thing, in my opinion, seeing that not every woman looks exactly the same. You are welcome to disagree, though.

Take care.
#163: Obvious troll is obvious.
weiner should go because he spent too much time preening and sending. i bet he didn't read the necessary papers to make wise political decisions. It is not credible to assume he was doing the voter's business without interferring self-distraction.
I hate to ask this -- and I honestly did try to translate the words and spend some time trying to figure it out -- but can someone restate in plain English whatever it is that #161 said?
@166 GQbd
I'll take a stab at it. I read it as saying that there are various groups out there that have very different views of gender. Some think the most important determinant of gender is what genitals you were born with. Others think gender originates in the brain, i.e. how you feel. Do you feel female or male or something other? KCZ is warning that some groups have militant positions and will not respect other people's views or privacy concerning their genitals (they will out you).
Thanks. That makes sense. I couldn't tell you whether there is a "genderqueer community" here in my mid-size city but even the gay community can be very parochial and controlling in their expectations of other people in the community. I'd laugh except for the hurt that I've seen it cause people who didn't act according to the group's likes.
I thought all of Anthony Weiner's photos were hot, particularly the one in his jockeys. Penises absolutely fascinate me, and I think some are quite beautiful. In fact, my favorite kind of porn is videos of guys getting themselves off. Clearly I'm in the minority, or one of the few girls willing to be honest about it.
@170, Actually I once saw the uncut version of Caligula and it was those kinds of scenes that I liked best. Caligula is a hot movie.

And I agree with you about the boxer shorts photo, although I liked it more when I knew for sure who it belonged to.
@161 way to stereotype about ALL genderqueer folks. We're a more diverse bunch than you're giving us credit for.
@170 - "Clearly I'm in the minority, or one of the few girls willing to be honest about it." Which do you think is more likely? That lots of women on Slog are lying about what they like? Or that tastes differ?
@144 You might still be missing the point (depending on the particular guy you're talking to). Some trans guys don't want you touching their "pussy," they don't want you calling it a pussy or thinking of it as such. They want to have sex with men as men. (Some transguys might be fine with everything you've said. People vary.)

My brother, before he transitioned, was acutely uncomfortable with people noticing [her] hotness as a woman... it felt wrong and uncomfortable and unpleasant to him. Since he started identifying as male he's very comfortable being "objectified" and having his body admired. But if someone is relating to him and attracted to him as a woman, no matter how androgynous, that's a problem for him.

It's a complicated area and requires a lot of sensitivity.
@151 perversecowgirl
The interesting thing about that site is that if you click through the photos in the "top" category, they all look the same, as you said. But if you go through the "all" category the photos vary wildly, including a whole lotta "ew!" if I may add my rating. The "top" ones are boring but unoffensive. There are some beautiful ones in the "all" folder.
@92, you are right on! Being surgically mutilated and doped up on hormones does not make a woman into a man or a man into a woman. If someone thinks they are in the 'wrong' body, they have a MENTAL problem. Treat the mental problem. And as we see, the attempts to alter the body to fit the (confused) mind do not work on the target audience anyway. No one is fooled! It is a cynical ploy by the medical community to 'treat' mental problems by physical mutilation. Deal with the confusion - which is a mental problem, not a physical one. As the Senator from Minnesota once said, it's easier to wear slippers than to carpet the world.
178-- Don't work on the target audience? The target audience is one's self. The rest of the world is welcome to accept or not to accept as they see fit. There will always be tons of variety in what people are attracted to. You're missing the stories of people who transition with surgery and hormones and go from being miserably unhappy all the time to as happy as anyone else-- meaning that life has its ups and downs, but at least they have a shot at being comfortable in their own skin.
Mr. J: Interesting! I honestly can't remember how I navigated around ratemycock those few times I went...maybe I was only looking at the "top" ones.


Cis is a useful synonym for straight; it's shorter.

"Cis" is not a synonym for "straight". The word refers to someone who feels comfortable with the sex they were assigned at birth - so basically, the opposite of "trans".
@140/157: As I understand it, the theory is that there's a part of your brain that has a "map" of your body, and if this map doesn't match up with your actual body, you feel discomfort. This map is influenced by fetal hormones, so occasionally someone will have a male body but a female map, or vice versa, which makes them transsexual.

It's possible that something similar is going on with body dysmorphic disorder: for instance, someone may have a mental map that they don't have a left arm, and thus be so uncomfortable with their left arm that they feel the need to cut it off. I don't think it has anything to do with hate: it's a neurological situation.

@177: Cis has nothing to do with being straight. One can be cis and gay, or trans and straight. Cissexual just means that your body matches your mental idea of your body.

Note that 'cis' is just the Greek opposite of 'trans', as in 'cisalpine Gaul', and so 'cissexual' means not transsexual, and 'cisgender' means not transgender. Transgender is an extremely broad category that includes virtually everyone in some respect, since it just means anyone who doesn't strictly adhere to or subscribe to gender roles. So 'cisgender' should mean someone who generally sticks with gender roles. However, it sometimes gets used to mean cissexual, which is unfortunate for those of us who like to draw Venn diagrams of these things. :)
@180 perversecowgirl
Also the "top" ones have that clonal porn look.
You've got to love that two totally separate conversations are going on, one about people struggling not to define themselves based on their genitals and one about dudes who define themselves by their dicks.
183-- Brilliant. You summed it up perfectly.
I am on a campaign to promote clarity in politics. As a part of this campaign, it is clear that the political parties need to be rebranded. As the right wing has Liberalism a pejorative--despite the fact that Liberlism was an inportant formative idea of the USA and without which the USA may have never been founded as democracy for and by the people--liberals now prefer the term Progressive which is apt. We must now find term for the Right which fits and clearly demarcates the division between the two opposing positions. For the right there seems no better term than Regressives. The terms Progressive and Regressive clearly enunciate the dirrefrence between the two. Therefore, I promote rebranding the Right and the GOP as the Regressive party.

what you're saying is jus straight up, scientifically false. See my post above.
@186: Even with body dysmorphia, I suspect it's easier to treat by changing the body, not the mind, just like with transsexuals. See what I wrote in post 181.

As a gay trans guy, I personally wouldn't want to have sex with someone who would be uncomfortable with another dick in the room. I wouldn't want my partner to get too attached to my genitals, because I'm...rather distant from them, myself.

Basically, I wouldn't want you to be into me for something that I don't see as a part of me. If you wouldn't be into me if I were a cis guy, I'm not interested.

@Dan and Buck:

(1) Not all gay trans men are interested in bottoming. Especially not with *that*. I'm a bottom who's willing to play either way, but I know guys who are strict tops and others who will only bottom the standard way.

(2) Not all gay trans guys feel comfortable in the trans community. You wouldn't know this, Dan, but Buck should: the trans male community is very heavily dominated by 3 overlapping groups - straight guys, formerly (and some currently) lesbian-identified guys, and genderqueers. Those of us who are unambiguously gay binary-male-identified guys who fit in comfortably in the gay community have an incredibly hard time finding support in the trans community. And not all of us really want that support. It sounds like the writer may be one. And in that case, I'd advise him to just get to know more gay men.

I... don't understand. We're agreeing with eachother and also disagreeing with the same person.
@189: Yeah, I wasn't disagreeing with you, but a couple people (140 and 178) were criticizing transfolk by comparing them to people with body dysmorphic disorder. I do think there's a case to be made that the two are similar and that people with BDD should be treated like transfolk as far as body modification, so I wanted to add that on to your comment.
I think you would actually be wrong on that point. It seems to me that you're actually comparing three seperate things which are fairly distinct.

1. Transgender: the most convincing evidence that I've heard of for a neuroanatomical basis for sexual identity is the cBNST (central division of the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis - to be clear this is nowhere near the 'map' you mentioned.) which is larger in those that identify as male and smaller in those that identify as female (regardless of biological gender or sexual orientation). I have never heard of somatotopic map differences in transgender individuals.

2. BDD: again, the running theory doesn't seem to be that there's a somatotopic map defect in BDD patients. It seems that their body dysmorphia is more related to depression/anxiety/self esteem and considering that they respond to therapy and medication, surgery is not advised for them. (This is NOT the case for transpeople where surgery IS advised and they do not respond to medication/therapy). "Surgery and dermatology literature note that the treatment outcome of these patients is frequently poor, with patients often voicing dissatisfaction with an outcome that is objectively acceptable. In some cases, the patient is satisfied with the appearance of the treated body part but then focuses their dissatisfaction on another body area."

3. Finally, what you were talking about... I have learned about something similar to what you're saying but only in the context of parietal lobe damage due to say, trauma (this is where the 'map' you mentioned is). Sometimes these patients want to remove parts of their body because the part of their brain that understands it belongs to them has been damaged. Often what you see is called 'contralateral neglect' which means that the patient completely ignores the opposite side of their body to the damage. This is different from BDD, though.
What I don't understand is No Pole guy's need to meet gay men only. If you were more open to non-monosexual partners, you might actually find someone who's attracted to you as a man *and* not mind the lack of pole.
@191: Thanks for the additional information! I'd appreciate any references or links; I'd like to learn more.

The part about surgery not curing BDD and the discomfort transferring to a different part of the body is especially interesting: if true, it does make BDD sound like a different phenomenon.
No problemo.

So the one thing I can't find (I think because I don't know the clinical term for it) is the part about the parietal lobe damage. Our prof told us about it as kind of an anecdote so it's not even in my notes. The closest I can find is if you google 'hemispatial neglect'. But that's not quite it either.

The quote I found you about BDD is from a paper for doctors,… and it's right out of the abstract.

The cBNST study is here:… although apparently they did a follow up study showing that this difference doesn't really show up until adulthood, so I guess the 'gender identity' search is still on.
Poster #15 here, back to explain/defend myself to #30 and #75...

First, Dan does not explicitly say, "These men are interested in the sort of women that the cock shot works on." That is your understanding of it. But what he *actually* says is, "They're interested in the sort of women that THIS SORT OF OVERTURE works on." This sort (category) of overture is the explicit sort. I *am* the sort of woman who an explicit overture works on; therefore, I *am* in that category and have some authority to speak for the group. (Limited though it may be.) So, as such a woman (the kind that responds to explicit overtures), I can say: this particular explicit overture can be counterproductive, and thus, may not be the wisest opening move. A safer explicit overture (one that may net you more sex partners) involves words, not pics. These men are weeding out otherwise willing and kinky sex partners with no conceivable rationale behind it.

Now, there is another angle. If the goal of the man is merely to engage in mutual explicit sexting, then Dan is correct that the men are behaving logically and weeding out only those they don't want/need. (That is, weeding out those women who don't like to send/receive naked genital pics.) However, if the desired outcome is not sexting but SEX (as it has seemed to be every time I've personally received such a pic), then these men are not behaving logically. Again, there is no conceivable reason to weed out potential sex partners who don't like cock shots, and thus, this weeding is likely unintentional. Therefore, given my assumption that these men are looking for SEX, my post makes perfect sense.

In other words, I see what Dan is saying, but I think he's wrong. (Or, at the very least, wrong in whatever percent of these cock-shot-senders who are sending explicit pics because they're looking for a willing partner for sex.)
I'm a student, and the mom of a 5 y/o so I have limited funds. I still chose to back Buck Angels documentary. It must be made!

Thanks for showing me how to donate to him, and thanks to Buck for being awesome!

Naomi Dahl
I am one of those 1000's of guys that Buck talks about. Contact me if curious on DudesNude or Manhunt.

-- CTBrianD

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

    Add a comment

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.