Delta4Embassy
Gold Member
Much as I like transgendered porn, respect an indivdual's right to do anything to their body including mutilate it and reshape it to their liking, the fact of the matter is transgender reassignment and surgery isn't changing a person's sex beyond the legal aspect. Biologically you're forever whatever you were born as. Perhaps medical science will evolve to where one day those born males who undergo cosmetic surgery to look liek females cna actually have children, but right now that isn't what the surgeries do. They simple change your appearence, but not your biological functioning.
Understanding the difference is important because respecting in law delusions isn't a good idea. What if people suddenly wanted to change their body's appearence but not in reversing their sex? Thinking of the so-called bagelheads in Japan inserting silicon into their foreheads making it look like a bagel's been implanted, what if that trend of body modification continued to the extent of changing our skin color?
Is a white person giving themself black skin suddenly black because they appear black? Can they get positions under affirmitive action because they look and identify as black? If we do that already for transgenders letting them use opposite-sex bathrooms than they were born into, and in every legal sense be treated as whatever sex they merely appear as, that's something to think about in the near-future.
What about the 'at what point is a man a woman and vice-versa' aspect of it. At what point is a man a woman who may opt to retian their male genitalia but get breast implants and wear makeup like a woman? Is that a female too for purposes of the law? What about a convincing crossdresser fully male but in appearence who can change back to male appearence at will?
Respecting in law a person's delusional thought-processes is wrong. Some of you look way hot and I love ya for the fantasies you give rise to
But where the law is concerned you're whatever you were born as. Not what you appear as.
Understanding the difference is important because respecting in law delusions isn't a good idea. What if people suddenly wanted to change their body's appearence but not in reversing their sex? Thinking of the so-called bagelheads in Japan inserting silicon into their foreheads making it look like a bagel's been implanted, what if that trend of body modification continued to the extent of changing our skin color?
Is a white person giving themself black skin suddenly black because they appear black? Can they get positions under affirmitive action because they look and identify as black? If we do that already for transgenders letting them use opposite-sex bathrooms than they were born into, and in every legal sense be treated as whatever sex they merely appear as, that's something to think about in the near-future.
What about the 'at what point is a man a woman and vice-versa' aspect of it. At what point is a man a woman who may opt to retian their male genitalia but get breast implants and wear makeup like a woman? Is that a female too for purposes of the law? What about a convincing crossdresser fully male but in appearence who can change back to male appearence at will?
Respecting in law a person's delusional thought-processes is wrong. Some of you look way hot and I love ya for the fantasies you give rise to
But where the law is concerned you're whatever you were born as. Not what you appear as.
