Create Vagina without losing Penis?

[Francis (imported)]

I have heard that some male to female transsexuals have had a vagina created using skin grafts, so that the end result is that they have a penis and a vagina. Has anyone ever heard of this?

Not sure how the geometry would work out but there is a technique where the vagina is made out of a section of the bowel/colon that could allow the rest of the aparatus remain intact. The big issue is that in most SRS part of the penis is modified and retained as part of the new vagina to provide the necessary enjoyable sensations. You might not get a lot of satisfaction out of the bowel exercise except for auto-coitus maybe???:dong::dong::dong:

[Jessie James (imported)]

Thank you Priscilla. It's so nice to hear you say that. I am castrated and feminized. I too love having my cock and breasts. Once you get the breasts, everybody tries to put the pressure on you to get a vagina, like it's not ok to be a shemale. I home grew my breasts after castration with premarin and really love my body now just as it is.

Jessie

[Lesley (imported)]

In many Non-European civilisations they think in terms of a third sex, what we now call She-Males.

In Thailand they have more than just two words to describe sexual orientation, in India the Hjara's are considered a third sex, in the Pacific Islands there is the word Faliao to describe the feminised male.

There are other societies in the third world that have similar concepts to describe what lies between male and female.

I find She-Males incredibly attractive and often reminisce that I could have become one forty years earlier in my life, if I had not been so inhibited & shy about my sexuality.

[punkypink (imported)]

Thing is, even tho im non-op by choice, I feel like I have every right to belong to the female species instead of being discriminated against as a "3rd sex". I'd say I am solidly on the "female" side. I certainly don't see myself as lying between male and female, whatever's down there! I know its not always a negative conotation to be the 3rd sex, but I know for sure I am a girl, I just don't see a need to change bits that people can't see anyway since I pass completely right now without even being on hormones. The term shemale really brings out mixed feelings in me. On one hand, yea it does sort of describe me. I'm not ashamed of being one, but at the same time it's just so... it makes me feel like I'm being excluded from being recognised as who I am not even because of how I look like externally, but because theres this extra bit of flesh down there.

I guess I can say that when someone calls me a shemale I feel disrespected and discriminated against. I think that yes, there is nothing wrong being a girl with a penis (I really don't like the term shemale), but if we are to get rid of negative attitudes towards girls who are different down there, then the whole "shemale" thing has to be stopped, and girls with dicks have to be recognised as much a girl as a post-op MtF TS or a cisgendered girl. Afterall, I feel that more important things like my studies and career come 1st. Between being a girl with a penis and a comfortable... nay, make that luxurious, life, and being a girl with a vagina and so poor i need to sell my vagina to random ugly desperate and probably STD-ridden guys for a quick buck, i know which i'd prefer to be

However, if someone could offer me a free op to have a vagina now, why not? As freebies come, that's up there with someone offering me a brand new Merc SL65 AMG Black.

[punkypink (imported)]

Punky- I love you. Let's rule the universe together!

Lets.

You'll be the Queen of the Day, I'll be the Empress of Night.

[jackcollins (imported)]

How can it be possible man i do not think that at a time both can present.

[punkypink (imported)]

How can it be possible man i do not think that at a time both can present.

Actually yes it can be. Don't forget that making a vagina via surgery is really just about making a hole, having enough loose skin to shape the outside and enough skin to line the inside. There is a procedure where they use a small section of the colon instead of the inversion method. So why not? The position where the penis joins the body and the position of the entrance of a vagina are seperate locations so theres nothing that makes it a physical impossibility.

[Priscilla (imported)]

Yes, I totally understand being accepted into the women's tribe. Especially after my FFS this year, even though I am tall I pass very well and that is a good feeling. At the same time I sort of like to stay on the edge, because I also like appearing "different from others". All my life I have felt "different", and through the years I have learned to leave the shame that sometime accompanies that, and to be proud of who I am. So while I do not go around advertising the fact that I have a body that mixed gendered, I do not hide that fact either. In fact, I look at it as if I am very blessed.

[punkypink (imported)]

It's certainly nothing to be ashamed of! It's as "shameful" as women who have breasts smaller than they'd like, noses bigger than they'd like etc. Physical imperfections thats all. I do not feel any different. To me, it's all just the diversity that exists within one gender.

[DocT (imported)]

Priscilla, I think I have the answer. About twenty years ago I picked up a magazine in The Pleasure Chest in LA and read about something called, "The Ultrasexual". It was a surgery where they cut the tissue that held the penis to the pubic bone, then they created a pocket behind the pubic bone so that you could invert the penis into your body. It could be held in place with an erection and something like a vagina was created by the inside out foreskin, inside of you. Supposedly you could have sex and the stimulation against the underside of your penis by someone elses penis would allow you to orgasm. Then your could pull your penis out and still be able to use it to penetrate if you wanted. It must not have really worked or it would have become more popular, don't you think? But it stuck in my mind and I always wondered about it. It could have been just a fictional story, but it seemed plausible to me at the time.

Would this sort of fulfill what you were looking for?

DocT

[punkypink (imported)]

Priscilla, I think I have the answer. About twenty years ago I picked up a magazine in The Pleasure Chest in LA and read about something called, "The Ultrasexual". It was a surgery where they cut the tissue that held the penis to the pubic bone, then they created a pocket behind the pubic bone so that you could invert the penis into your body. It could be held in place with an erection and something like a vagina was created by the inside out foreskin, inside of you. Supposedly you could have sex and the stimulation against the underside of your penis by someone elses penis would allow you to orgasm. Then your could pull your penis out and still be able to use it to penetrate if you wanted. It must not have really worked or it would have become more popular, don't you think? But it stuck in my mind and I always wondered about it. It could have been just a fictional story, but it seemed plausible to me at the time.

Would this sort of fulfill what you were looking for?

DocT

Wow that seems pretty cool if it actually existed. Sure would help with dating cock-fearing lesbians who seem to think that genitals define gender =P

[Priscilla (imported)]

DOC- That is quite a story and I never heard of that being possible but it is a good story.

To have sex like a woman and like a man at the same time is what I am after. I can come close the way my body is, but not quite.

I have decided that what I am after is probably not possible, or if it is possible I would not want to go through the medical slicing and dicing to get it done.

So I will be content the way my body is. I love it this way anyway.

[punkypink (imported)]

oh priscilla i tell ya the pocket idea is purrfect for me!

[tonywaits (imported)]

That would be nice having a woman with a penis and a vagina, especially if the penis could still get hard.

And as far as HumptyDumpty needing to eat, to each their own. I think she is hot just like she is.

I often use the term Shemale, but I don't mean it in a derogatory way. I use it to describe a girl who retains her penis for sex. Most girls that I have met that refer to themselves as TS don't use their penis' and want to get rid of them.

[punkypink (imported)]

well, im not most girls, i feel that to use shemale to place an emphasis on the genitals one has is unnecessary and creates un-needed segregation and discrimination even if not used in a degrading manner, and i dont feel people should be defined by their genitals, or that TSes should be defined by whether they hate the genitals they were born with. I would feel very sorry for any mtf TS who says "I'm TS because i hate my cock" instead of "I'm TS because im a girl inside".

Afterall someone who is TS is simply a girl in a man's body, to what extent they hate that body and want to change it is another matter entirely, not unlike cisgendered girls wanting plastic surgery for all manner of perceived or real physical imperfections. in my case im just a TS who does not hate my genitals to the extent that i want to get rid of them. My motivations for wanting to get rid of them is because it will be a novel experience, whether I am rid of them or not is no obstacle towards me being a female both in mind or socially. So why define my by that? A term to describe me that is based on what genitals I have, is just not respectful, no matter how it is used, and trivialises my identity from being who i am inside to what i have between my legs. Hardly progressive in this modern day and age is it?

I'm not aiming this at Tony Waits alone. This is meant for anyone who thinks its ok to call a pre-op or non-op trans a shemale, and that includes the TSes themselves who think its ok to be called that.

[calmeilles (imported)]

Is it not curious that in Asia the ladyboys (in their various guises) are often seen as something other than male or female while here in the West only one or other of the duality is considered acceptable: just about any term i can think of for something other than male or female is pejorative, or is often heard used perjoratively.

[Priscilla (imported)]

I understand the problems with the word "shemale", as this is the term used on numerous porn websites to describe a MtF transsexual who has her penis and is in the porn trade. The very unfortunate issue here is that because of job discrimination, tacitly or openly, many young TSs cannot find good jobs and have to resort to the sex trade.

This is a shame and a sin.

I have a body like these sisters of mine, but I have been fortunate enough to have a good job and very supportive employers.

That being said, I use the word "shemale" sometimes to describe my body, and also to make the point that I am not "better" than any of my sisters in the sex trade, in fact I stand in solidarity with them and will continue to fight for the rights of all TSs, wherever they are.

Hugs to you ALL

[punkypink (imported)]

hmm interesting i guess...

I prefer to show solidarity with them, not by calling myself a shemale, but by not seeing them as one too. To me they're all girls. If its my own body I have to describe, I see no need to mince words and unashamedly describe it as male. I'm comfortable with the fact that I'm a girl in a male body that I no longer see any need to "dress" up the fact that my body is a male one. Words like shemale describe nothing, and only brings with it negative conotations.

As for the asian trend of addressing us as an "other gender", one has to 1st consider the conformist mindset of asians. This is something I know intimately since I grew up in asia. Since we do not conform, but there is little chance of us waving the white flag, and living a lie in the role expected of one with our birth gender just so their ignorant sensibilities aren't offended, the next best thing they can do is to exclude us from the "normal" genders and deny us the basic recognition we are entitled to, and seek, as our right. No matter how tolerant they are, such mindsets ultimately are a passive form of discrimination and contribute to other more overt forms of discrimination. Thailand for example, is famous for its transsexuals, and yet refuse to recognise them legally as women even after they've gone the whole hog. Contrast that to UK which is more than happy to recognise us as women legally, and FtMs as men, as long as we fulfill 3 criterias: certified with GID, full time for a minimum of 2 years, and a guarentee that you intend to permantly live in the role that matches yr gender identity. And the best thing of course is, UK allows for provision for people who do not identify as male or female alongside non discriminatory gender recognition of transsexuals. Asia's way is but a sort of deceptive bigotry made to look nice and "diversified".

Calmeilles, the term ladyboy isn't one that celebrates genders that exist outside a duality like you might think it to be. In asia, the term ladyboy or most other similiar descriptives is very often really not much more than a descriptive word like "dog" and does not contain with it any sort of respect. In fact because most people there see ladyboys as ladyboys and not women, in asia we're seen as some sort of sub-human class of things, who exist solely to fulfill their sexual fetishes and needs, and seldom as people who're on par with them and equally deserving of respect. Give me the western duality anyday, at least I get more respect. Degradory or not, terms like these should just be done away with. At least the degradory ones are an obvious threat towards non-discrimination, its the ones that sound nice that help to promote discrimination and allow it to sneak in under the radar.

Only the indian hijra seems to be one that has any mediocum of respect contained within it, and that is due to the unique role that hijras play within indian society. Even then, hirajs are actually not strictly limited to transsexuals, and is a massive diversified group. Most adjectives I know that come to mean transsexuals like "shemale", "ladyboy" or "bapok", do not contain any trace of respect in their intended meanings and conotations.

[calmeilles (imported)]

I didn't use the word "celebrate" or anything like it. I do know that it's not all roses: I have a Filipino (or should that be Filipina?) friend who complains bitterly that he can't get a "normal" job although what he does do, hostess manager of a Tokyo club, makes him wealthy by the standards of his peers.

The strong duality of male and female leaves us no place for the intermediate, indeterminate, eunuch or just plain contrary.

[punkypink (imported)]

I didn't use the word "celebrate" or anything like it. I do know that it's not all roses: I have a Filipino (or should that be Filipina?) friend who complains bitterly that he can't get a "normal" job although what he does do, hostess manager of a Tokyo club, makes him wealthy by the standards of his peers.

The strong duality of male and female leaves us no place for the intermediate, indeterminate, eunuch or just plain contrary.

A strong duality does leave

place for the intermediate, indeterminate, eunuch

and plain contary.

Having a strong exclusion category does anything for people who're outside the boundaries of what is considered normal might also leave place for people who dont belong to either major sides, but it does nothing to get them treated fairly. Fact is its fairer to have a strong duality, and then allow people to decide that they are neither or something else, than have a 3rd existing social category between the 2 that allows discrimination by giving "normal" people a place to dump the rest of us who aren't "normal" into.

You might not realise, but a strong duality is not the same as an exclusive duality. In an exclusive duality, there is no room for existance outside of that duality. In a strong duality, there is plenty of little niche spaces for people outside of the duality to fill themselves wherever they feel comfortable putting themselves. Imagine an exclusive duality as 2 halves of a circle, while a strong duality are 2 large ovals within a circle. In the latter there is plenty of space that is not defined, that allows scope for personal identification, while at the same time, ensuring that because a 3rd distinct category does not exist, the opportunities for discrimination is much smaller.

So I have to say that I strongly disagree with what you said. Maybe it was an exclusive duality you had in mind, but from comparing Asia and the West, I have to say that it is a strong duality that exists in the West, and not an exclusive one. Asia's system of having a 3rd distinct category does not elevate it above the West in terms of allowing for individuals who do not wish to belong to either, because it then forces the definition of the 3rd category on those individuals who might not agree with that definition either. For eg, in Thailand, the term ladyboy is widely applied to mean crossdressers, transsexuals and transvestites. I'm sure not every crossdresser, transsexual and transvestite feel like they should be identified under the "ladyboy" umbrella. I am sure that eunuchs would also get pushed under the ladyboy definition in thailand because its their "dustbin" for anyone who doesnt fit within the duality of male and female, and I can also say that a lot of eunuchs wouldnt be happy about being put into a 3rd category that they dont feel like they belong to.

In short, I will make a stand that a strong duality is actually the best system, because 1stly, as a species we HAVE a strong duality. The system of strong duality allows for people who have small variations from either dualities belong, while giving the freedom for people who choose to exist outside of those 2 dualities to do so. I've done a little diagram to illustrate the point. Hope it helps.

http://www.freeimagehosting.net/image.p ... 165723.jpg

[calmeilles (imported)]

I take you point.

Maybe my problem here is that I don't see anybody inhabiting that grey zone in the diagram, here at home I mean, there obviously are some on the EA.

[gildedgurl (imported)]

Certain terms or labels are repulsive to me when they are said to me. I have the same response to shemale and ladyboy as I do to Suzi (I'm Chinese).

Suzi is an HK hooker in "The World of Suzi Wong," a white boy's novel (1957) and movie (1960, I was 21 yrs old).

For me, all 3 terms are STRONGLY associated w/ porn and sex-industry and disgust me. Too many strangers yelling Suzi to get my attention has made me a bit sensitive to shemale and ladyboy labels.

A hidden history of Asians: most Asian women of my generation know what I'm talking about.

Just my .02 yen

- G Gutl

[kristoff]

Getting quite off topic from the fantasy orientation of the thread. Keep the politics - and it is politics, even if sexual politics - on the political board.

[Elizabeth (imported)]

Hi everyone,

While it's a great fantasy, I think it highly unlikely that anyone has undergone such a procedure. Mainly because the requirements of the SOC (Standards of Care), which require one to have letters from two psychologists, one at the masters level and the other at the doctorate level, to have sex change surgery or orchiectomy(castration).

I don't see any doctor saying that someone needs to have both a penis and a vagina. So I am not saying it's impossible, but being a moderator on a forum with many transgendered people, I have never heard of such a thing. I know there are "cutters" in Thailand that do Sex change surgery on the cheap with no letters, but as one might expect the results are not that great and many suffer from severe complications and infections. It's doubtful they could perform such a complicated procedure.

Elizabeth

[punkypink (imported)]

hmm what if a patient is certified as being able to benefit from an improved quality of life and enjoy improved psychological well-being from having both?