Open main menu

Talk:Attraction to transgender people

WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated Start-class)
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Sexology and sexuality (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


Page moveEdit

(Personal attack removed)

I've moved this page to tranny chaser, which is what they're actually known as. Searching for "tranny chaser" on Google comes up with 26,100 relevant hits. Searching for "transsensual" turns up 646 hits, many of which are not relevant. The former may be somewhat derogatory, but it's the common term; the latter is a neologism that makes no sense whatsoever. Ambi 08:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC) -- Hi! I'm the one who wanted to add the term transsensual or transensual to the article. I don't really use the term myself, but I've seen it used many times as a sort of more neutral or politically correct way to say somebody who is attracted to trans people. I've also seen it used a for people who are attracted to FTM people. I believe the word should at least be added to the article.--Sonjaaa 23:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a tool for spreading neologisms. Ambi 14:59, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Couldn't we just discribe it in a literal and logical sense as being a 'heterosexual penis fetish'? It seems pretty neutral and factual way to discribe a 'tranny chaser'. It also doesn't reek of homophobia, paranoia or excessive liberalism. -Ashley —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 04:29, 30 December 2005

The problem with terms is that they might be connotative or denotative, or that a denotative term might turn into a connotative one, or vice versa, through usage. Words evolve and change, just like people. In this specific case, tranny chaser designs, in our community, a man who is attracted to a pre-op transsexual woman BECAUSE of her male genitalia. PERIOD. A man who is attracted to male genitalia is homosexual, even though they try to deny it. There is nothing wrong with being homosexual, but that's not what TG women like myself want. I'm satisfied with the lexical juxtaposition "tranny chaser" because we needed something to describe, in an immediate and vivid way, a certain type of men we should be leery of. There are a lot of things to say about this issue, but the most relevant point is that these tranny chasers are in denial and need to see a penis attached to a woman (and that's how tranny chaser perceive us) to deceive themselves into thinking that they are straight. Let's set the record straight. A heterosexual man is someone who might be attracted to us, but who completely ignores our male genitalia and considers them as a de-sexualized part of our body (like the elbow or the wrist) in need of future corrective surgery. A real man doesn't care if our penis is big or small, functional or non functional, because he's not attracted to it. For a tranny chaser, by contrast, the penis is the "conditio sine qua non". This is what "straight" means. "Transsensual" is a kind of euphemism, I don't like this term at all, it's full of hypocrisy. This is such a contradictory situation. First and foremost, people with gender dysphoria like myself are very uncomfortable with their penis and become much more uncomfortable when it becomes the lover's object of attraction. How could tranny chasers possibly say that they are heterosexuals when all they want is to do a "fellatio in ore" and be sodomized? Transsexual women don't transition to screw men's asses, really! The other contradiction is that tranny chasers look for shemales (a very offensive, disgusting term) a mythical figure, a stunning feminine girl with a huge functional penis. And this is a contradiction, indeed, or a mythical figure, first of all because hormone theraphy renders the penis non-functional, and then because what's the use of going through the hell of transition (with surgical procedures, risks etc) if a tranny chaser seeks you for your male part? Another distinguishing trait of tranny chasers is that they suffer from BDD (body dysmorphic disorder). They have a distorted, unrealistic and non-realistic picture of their physical appearence. They are very demanding and exacting when it comes to the beauty of the transsexual woman and want a transsexual woman be more beautiful and more feminine than a genetic female, but they are most often average to ugly aging men, are going bald, are overweight and consider themselves very attractive or handsome. A lot of tranny chasers just don't click with genetic females (obviously, because they have a homosexual orientation) and consider transsexual women as easy, substandard women and want to treat us accordingly. In other words, most tranny chasers are losers refused by genetic women and want us as a substitute. The lead a double life, are married or in a long term relationship with a genetic woman, but look for trannies with huge penis to fulfil their insane obsessions.

Discription of a tranny chaser? Do you even know what you just said? Let's quote this... "Another distinguishing trait of tranny chasers is that they suffer from BDD (body dysmorphic disorder)." Okay, let's read about Body dysmorphic disorder. Essentually, they're convinced their ugly. Then you said "but they are most often avarage to ugly aging men, are going bald, are overweight and consider themselves very attractive or handsome." So, they are people who are convinced they are ugly as a result of a mental disorder. However, they are also ugly people who are convinced they are attractive? That's entirely contradictory. "They are very demanding and exacting when it comes to the beauty of the transsexual woman and want a transsexual woman be more beautiful and more feminine than a genetic female," So do most married men who wish their wives looked more like the girls on the covers of Maxim. This is the problem with you transsexuals and your gender politics, you forget to use common sense before saying anything. -Ashley

Excuse me, you missed my point. BDD is a distortion of your body image, for the worse or for the better. In the case of tranny chasers, they don't think they are ugly when they are handsome, on the contrary, they think they are handsom when they are very ugly, i.e. they have a distorted perception of their physical appearence! That's what BDD is all about! We always read stories about people who suffer from BDD and consider themselves to be more unattractive than what they really are, but we never hear of opposite stories, that is, people who are delusional and consider themselves stunning when they look horrible. This is the typical case of tranny chasers. They look at TS women as substandard women and want to treat us like garbage and think that we will accept anything and we have different standards of beauty. They think that just because we are not genetic women, we will consider them attractive. And it's ridiculous to make the comparison with married men who wish their wives looked more like the girls of the covers of Maxim. Your point doesn't make any sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 23:19, 30 December 2005

No. No it's not. There is nothing about people with BDD having a positive body image when they themselves are 'ugly'. You do not see mention of people with such a positive image because that is not BDD. I have the DSM-IV-TR sitting here on my desk. You read the wiki entry which actually lists the three diagnosis criterion for 300.7 Body Dysmorphic Disorder. You have no place on the wikipedia if you are just going to make stuff up that is obviously false and claim them as fact. -Ashley —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 23:57, 30 December 2005

Then, let's go back to the etymology of the word "dysmorphophobia". Dys is the prefix which indicates an undesirable state (as in , dysphoria which is the opposite of euphoria), morpho means "shape" (as in "morphology", "morpheme") "phobia" means fear (as in claustrophobia). Dysmorphophobia is a word from greek derivation. Of course, and as I have already put it, words evolve and sometimes terms containing phobia do not really mean "fear" but something else. In fact, homophobia, at the present day, doesn't literally mean that someone is frightened by homosexuals but something else. Here in Europe there are psychotherapists who adopt the term dysmorphophobia to describe people who have a distorted image of themselves, and this might be for the worse or for the better, i.e. not only to describe patients who perceive themselves as unattractive (or tend to magnify a physical flaw, such as people who suffer from anorexia nervosa) but also the opposite. BDD or dysmorphophoby is the umbrella term (hyperonim) which includes other hyponims (such as bigorexia). I'm not making stuff up! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 11:10, 31 December 2005

(Personal attack removed)

There are so many assumptions and much ill-considered prejudice in this discussion. A few points: 1. The term transfan, while not as offensive as tranny chaser, is I believe condescending. The terms transoriented man or trans-attracted man are more adequate. Chasers and fans have been described as akin to a player, as used in the heterosexual sense. There is an inferred assumption here that transoriented men are all players, which ignores the fact that many, albeit a comparatively small percentage of us, for various reasons, have happy loving relationships with transwomen. 2. To claim that all transoriented men seek to receive, or even give anal sex is also ignorant of the diversity that exists among us. 3. It is not true that all transoriented men are closet gays, some do in fact consider themselves gay to a degree, though the majority who have though about it believe gays are significantly and categorically different. Part of this is that these men usually feel their partner to be female and use feminine pronouns. They also are usually turned off by most aspects of masculinity that are commonly found attractive to gay males.

There is a website which is making an effort to better understand transoriented men. Seeing the near hatred and comparison to pedophiles and scum that is part of the discussion here, it's little wonder transoriented men have been tentative to declare and talk about their orientation publicly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:15, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Pre- or preEdit

I really don't want to start anything over something this silly, so I'm more than willing to let it go as is. However, I'd like to mention that as best as I've been taught as far as English goes, while "pre-" is technically correct, whether to use the suspensive hyphen here or not is more of a stylistic point. It's a device that's often encouraged to be used very spraringly, and most typically to avoid confusion. [Example: "The right- or left-handed scissors" would be necessary as it would clarify that we're contrasting two different pair and not a single one that works both ways] It would be very difficult to state that any confusion would be created by its abscence in this situation, as one cannot be both pre-operative and non-operative. So I guess with that said, I'll leave it to any future editors to decide if Mr. Hyphen should stay around or not. You know my vote. But as it stands now, Tamara versus myself in Hyphen War '06 won't get us anywhere. :-p -- Zoe 11:03, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Tranny chaser, there is no such thing as 'transsensual'Edit

Really, that should be 'nuff said. Transsensual is a horrible misuse of psudolatin. By breaking it down, it seems it would apply more to someone into S&M, B&D, or something.

A Tranny chaser is a man who frequents trans-friendly clubs and internet chats, looking to hook up with transwomen for quick sexual fixes. They are abnormally obsessed with the penis, and with how femenine any given transwoman looks. Straight men may talk about how good looking this or that woman is, but seldom if ever will you hear to straight men discussing which woman is more womanly, nor whether or not it's a shame that their penis doesn't work. These discussions have been had by chasers. Trannychasers display behavior in line with that of Closeted homosexual males, such as a complete denial of their homosexual tendenceis, and an overcompensation of finding 'femininity' attractive, to such ends that most chasers have unusually and unrealisticly high demands of beauty and femininity.

A tranny chasers Modis Operendi is more akin to that of a pedophile than a homosexual male, although the psychological drive is probably more similar to a homosexual male. Most Transwomen, particularly when still in transition, are very much like pubescent women. Thanks to hormone therepy they are often overly-emotional, frustrated, often insecure, and extremely curious about their newfound gender and in exploring their sexual identity with their new gender.

Chasers take advantage of these insecurities and curiosity in much the same way that pedophiles do with young children. In clubs and chats, chaser mentality and behavior towards transwomen is startlingly similar to that of a pedophile trying to groom a child. If you're insulted by this comparasin, do some research on pedophilia and see for yourself. Remember, I'm not saying that chasers are child molestors, just that their behavior towards transwomen is extremely similar to that of a child molestor to a child.

As an aside, neither pedophiles nor tranny chasers like very much being called gay.

A tranny chaser is a man who always insists they are hetero-sexual, with an extremely keen interest in the secondary feminine sexual characteristics, such as hair, smooth skin, and feminine faces, while being attracted sexually to the primary masculine feature of transwomen, that being the penis, and in particular whether or not the penis functions. And, whether or not the transwoman wants to or is willing to use it.

Most if not all of these chasers are always hunting to be with a T-girl who they feel is ideal. Whether it is online or in real life. Chasers are not interested in forming relationships with Transsexuals for the most part, although I've personally encountered three (out of literally thousands) who wanted to have long term relationships, only one of them wanted specifically someone who was either post op, or wanted to be post op in the near future, or only biological women. All of the others wanted only sexual release, and 75% of them were either married or had serious long term relationships with genetic women. Neither the Spouses or girlfriends knew of their lovers interest in transwomen. About 50% of the chasers had actually been with transsexual hookers and escorts, and it seemed about 80% were willing to pay for sex as well, but hadn't for various reasons, usually pride. Every single one of them expected to have sex with a transwomen if they went out to a tranny club, and 90% of those online expected to have sex with a transwoman if they were to meet one for the first time. None of them had such expectations in regards to genetic women, and many even said they had no real interest in genetic woman, and absolutely no interest in a post-operative transsexual. Akinokaze 00:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)The Autumn Wind

What in god's name have you been doing in life that has lead you to encounter 'literally thousands' of men who are sexually interested in you? DJ Izumi 00:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia policyEdit

I'd like to remind all contributors that Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks and that Wikipedia is not a battleground. Thanks :) - FrancisTyers 22:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi all! I know this is an emotional topic for all of you, but please try and be at least a little civil. Debates go so much nicer then :) - FrancisTyers 00:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

2007-02-9 Automated pywikipediabot messageEdit

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 12:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

TGs and Tranny Chasers as Queers; can I suggest another line of thinking on this; that chasers are representatyive of firstly, str8 society's feeling of entitlement to use queers for gratification/sexual release, and secondly to heterosexualize latent homosexuality/bisexuality to protect the patriarchal system, in other words to proivide an outlet for it within a heterosexual context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R jay72 (talkcontribs) 16:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Book reference all mixed upEdit

The reference to "True Selves" seems a bit conflated. "True Selves" was written by Mildred L. Brown and Chloe Ann Rounsley. Helen Boyd (a pseudonym) wrote "My Husband Betty" and "She's Not the Man I Married".

I don't remember "True Selves" having anything about tranny chasers in it. It seems more like something Helen Boyd would have addressed, but I don't remember that either.

While "True Selves" is a good book I don't know whether I'd objectively describe it as "pathbreaking"

Temblast (talk) 13:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

What about people who like post-ops?Edit

I really hate the attitude of western transsexuals. They classify everyone who like transsexuals as trannychasers who are after "chicks with dicks". But what about the rest of us who are attracted to post-op transsexuals? This article doesn't mention a bit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

If you are attracted to post-op ts women, then you simply like women. The ones who are penis obsessed, but prefer that it comes attached to transitioning women (so they don't have to admit homosexual desires) are the ones who earn the pejorative term 'tranny chaser.'

Sexual and affectional orientationEdit

This article covers both sexual orientation and affectional orientation. We do not need articles for both. Comments welcome. Jokestress (talk) 18:50, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

As it states on our page about sexual orientation, The American Psychological Association states that "[s]exual orientation is an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectional attraction toward others." Alternately, "Sexual orientation is a specific manifestation of sexuality as expressed through sexual, affectional, and relational predispositions toward other persons." Docter's 2001 article discusses "affectional, social, or sexual encounters between a transgendered person and a male." Please state the concern with phrasing this as the APA does. Attraction to transgender people, just like any other kind of attraction, is not necessarily sexual. Jokestress (talk) 19:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I can discuss only the sources provided. APA provides a broad definition, but provides no information about gynandromorphophilia. Docter provides information about gynandromorphophilia, but no definition for sexual orientation. Gupta is not an RS at all. All that's left is SYNTH and OR.
To a repeated question, I can give only a repeated answer: There are researchers who gather data using the focused definition, and there are rights advocates who use a broad definition. It is, to repeat, both SYNTH and OR to use the broad definitions provided by rights groups to misrepresent what was meant by the scientists to apply only to their narrow/specific definitions.
There are separate articles for homosexual (the technical term, which contains the research info on the topic) and for gay (the everyday term, which contains all the info about that term and its use). That there are many more hits for the common term than the technical term does not supercede WP:MoS.
— James Cantor (talk) 20:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
The APA no longer says "toward others," if it ever did, seeing as that can be taken to mean any type of attraction. It says "an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic, and/or sexual attractions to men, women, or both sexes. Sexual orientation also refers to a person’s sense of identity based on those attractions, related behaviors, and membership in a community of others who share those attractions." And of course it says more as well, but certainly makes it clear that sexual orientation is usually categorized as heterosexuality, homosexuality or bisexuality. Thus, I will change that part of the article accordingly. (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I have just added another definition that very clearly discusses attraction to trans people in its section on sexual orientation. Per the book by National Academies Press, "This working definition encompasses attraction, behavior, and identity. As explained in Chapter 3, most researchers studying sexual orientation have defined it operationally in terms of one or more of these three components. Defined in terms of attraction (or desire), sexual orientation is an enduring pattern of experiencing sexual or romantic feelings for men, women, transgender persons, or some combination of these groups." [1] That's the part cited in the article. It then goes on to give similar definitions for behavior and identity. We should go by the definitions used by most researchers (emphasis mine), not an activist minority in the mental health field. Jokestress (talk) 21:02, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
The definition of sexual orientation used by most researchers is "heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality," as the APA states. Meaning sexual/romantic attraction to males/men, females/women or both sexes/genders, or, specifically-speaking, the sexual/romantic attraction to the opposite sex, same sex or both sexes. I consider transgender people a part of that equation because they usually appear to be either male or female and usually identify as either a man or a woman. But a specific attraction to transgender people is not usually defined as a sexual orientation. (talk) 21:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Agreed. A number of researchers have noted the problems with simplistic homo/hetero terminology in relation to attraction to trans people and attraction overall, which is why there are a number of proposed improvements in use, like androphilia and gynephilia. The idea that attraction to trans people is a paraphilia is also shifting, which is why there's a strong reaction among activists who want to preserve the narrow older ideology. Jokestress (talk) 21:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
There has now been a string of RS’s added to the lead, with claims that they support something they do not.
1. A “working definition” is not generally the highly-sourced/cited one that would appear in an encyclopedia.
2. Most authors studying SEXUAL ORIENTATION use sexual-attraction/romantic-attraction/identity, but most authors (all?) studying GYNANDROMORPHILIA only use the SEXUAL aspects to form the category studied.
3. Missing from Jokestress’ excerpt is the report’s caution: "[S]exual attractions and behaviors are generally understood as ranging along a continuum from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual....’’’Which of these categories is used in a particular study or health intervention will depend on the research or treatment goals.’’’ Individuals may also have a specific attraction toward transgender persons" (p. 28). This is what I have said already: The particular studies on the mainpage categorized by the sexual, not romantic, aspects.
Now that many sources posted on the main page have failed verification, I suggest obtaining a consensus here before posting any additional ones.
— James Cantor (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Your objection is to the inclusion of the word romantic as it appears in the source? The source says attraction is "sexual or romantic feelings" and is a reliable source. This is an article about attraction. You requested a source that mentions trans people specifically. This meets all the requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia.
  • Is the citation you removed a reliable source? Yes.
  • Does the source state "Defined in terms of attraction (or desire), sexual orientation is an enduring pattern of experiencing sexual or romantic feelings for men, women, transgender persons, or some combination of these groups." Yes.
  • Does the source specifically mention that attraction to trans people can be romantic? Yes.
It's one thing to request sources, but this is now veering into disruption. Please explain yourself or add back the reliable source you removed. Jokestress (talk) 22:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

LOL You kinda forgot another aspect of a lead: It has to be about the topic of the page. Every RS on the page (and every RS in print) is about the SEXUAL aspects.

  • No RS uses "romantic" (or "emotional," or "affectional," or any of the other bowlderized terms you tried) as a defining characteristic). Rather, the RS's provide (at best) a passing mention if it when describing (at best) a whole range of sexual interests, and "Significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article."
  • The definition you are inserting this time is that book's definition of SEXUAL orientation, which can include nonsexual aspects. The mainpage title, however, is not "SEXUAL attraction to trans", it's just "attraction", making it (falsely) sound like merely having a romantic attraction (and not a sexual one) would count. NONE of the RS's say that, however. Like I said, this is all SYNTH aimed at minimizing the sexual component of a sexual phenomenon. The page, clearly, puts its attention on what is and is not a politically correct term rather than on the actual topic. It's rather clear WP:PROMOTION, using WP to advocate for the language of the day, all in violation of WP:MOS.
  • Moreover, you're skipping some point. For example, the book being an RS does not let you use what it calls a "working definition" as something stronger than the actual RS does.

— James Cantor (talk) 22:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

If the name of the page were changed to Sexual attraction to transgender people, then I would have little objection to vaguer/broader lead sentences. But the watering down of both pagename and lead misrepresents the topic and is unsupported by the RS's. — James Cantor (talk) 23:04, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
You know, talking about RS and then not providing any for convenience is annoying. I also want to point out that edit warring or near-edit warring is not acceptable! Seriously you guys. --Τασουλα (talk) 01:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

C Hunger games catching fire (talk) 07:25, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Undue weightEdit

This article gives undue weight to the notion that attraction to trans people is a paraphilia/fetish. Money's and Blanchard's ideas have been largely discredited, and their methods questioned, and yet their ideas make up the majority of this page. Their POVs should be discussed, certainly, but should not inform the tone of the entire article. It is entirely possible to be attracted to a trans person without fetishizing them, yet this article seems to suggest otherwise.

This article also discusses attraction to trans women and MtF crossdressers almost exclusively, with only brief mentions of people attracted to trans men or non-binary folks. It also only discusses cisgender people who are attracted to trans people, ignoring cases of trans people who are attracted to other trans people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandbergja (talkcontribs) 15:44, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Money's and Blanchard's ideas have been largely discredited

— Citation fucking needed... (talk) 08:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for joining the conversation, and for a reminder to back up my assertions. Money's research methods included coercing parents into having their infant undergo sex reassignment surgery and forcing twin siblings to engage in sexual acts with one another (Colapinto, J (2001). As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl. Harper Perennial. ISBN 0-06-092959-6.). The World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the leading world authority on transgender healthcare has rejected Blanchard's typology of trans women, noting that there wasn't any acceptable evidence to support it (see DOI 10.1080/15532739.2010.550766 and DOI 10.1080/15532739.2011.606195). Both of them have a pretty awful reputation within trans and intersex communities as well. I don't want to clog the talk page with a bunch of citations, but you can visit the wikipedia articles about either Money or Blanchard to find references to critiques by leading trans and intersex thinkers. Let me know if you have any questions, and if you have any constructive ideas about how to address the undue weight issue that still exists on this article. Sandbergja (talk) 04:07, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Exceptionally poor, arguably prejudiced and definitely inaccurate articleEdit

Incredibly poorly framed, narrow in focus, and biased in core content coverage, this article needs serious work. The title itself betrays an incredible lack of understanding about the subject matter. Believe it or not, but trans people are not some alien other who only attract people who align with a particular niche orientation. Transgender people are a vast and diverse demographic, who can be and usually are just as attractive to the population in general as cisgender people are. It is impossible to even tell if somebody is trans by looking at them on the street unless they inform you as such! Yet, this article persists in fetishizing and othering trans people in much the same manner as do the chasers that it describes, and who most likely were responsible for much of the text. Moreover, why does an article entitled "attraction to transgender people" concern itself almost entirely with people who "chase" trans women, almost entirely neglecting trans men (and non-binary trans people), and discussing cross dressers who are themselves not even trans? This is a poor article in need of significant work and a definite rename. I might suggest "fetishization of trans people" as a good working title to start with. (talk) 01:51, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

May I propose a term?Edit


Coniungere (latin "to combine, to connect"), Sexualis (latin "sexual") A person whose sexual and/or romantic attraction is exclusively directed towards another person combining feminine as well as masculine traits. This includes androgynous and non-operative transgender individuals.

I identify as such without having a fetish (which I think is a very degrading and inaccurate explanation for this type of attraction). Conisexuals can be defined by not being Hetero, nor Homosexual but instead being attracted to non-binary, transgender and androgynous people only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CE:1BE6:A872:9534:D013:113A:26A7 (talk) 03:58, 31 May 2017 (UTC)


Why does Transvestophilia (i.e. sexual interest in crossdressers) redirect here? Cross-dressing is not the same thing as transgender.Sega31098 (talk) 08:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Actually, transgender is an umbrella term which includes transsexuals and cross-dressers. AliceJMarkham (talk) 01:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
A better explanation might be, that men with this type of attraction see what is on the outside, whereas gender identity distinctions are on the inside, and not visible. Thus, whether someone is a trans women, a cross-dresser, or female impersonator, isn't part of the equation for men who are attracted to feminine appearing persons assigned male at birth. Thus, it makes sense for Transvestophilia to redirect here. Mathglot (talk) 01:16, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Sexual attraction to third-gender peopleEdit

There's some research about the sexual orientation of men who have sex with third genders in Asian and Pacific communities. I was thinking about including some such content in here. Do you think this belongs in this entry? What say you, User:Flyer22 Reborn? Rafe87 (talk) 00:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Return to "Attraction to transgender people" page.