Good poll. There are some nice looking ladyboys in Thailand who many men find attractive. Many straight men will sleep with them, irrespective of whether they have had gender reassignment surgery or not. These same straight men would never take a man to bed. Treechada “Poyd” Petcharat is a good example of a nice "man" who is now a woman... https://www.facebook.com/treechada.petcharat/photos
there are biological and physical attributes that distinguish a male from a female. at this point in medical science, we do no have the ability to 100% change a male to be a pure female, or a female to be a pure male. now, some folks say we should call someone a "male", even before they have undergone any sex reassignment therapy or surgery, simply because they want to be called "male" or "female". i think this is absurd.
if a man starts to 100% look like a woman, has complete reassignment surgery, has hormonal therapy, I guess maybe....I could sorta accept calling him a "woman". but it would be odd.
One could, however, a woman has ovaries and produces eggs. Can the man who changed himself to a "woman" now do that? No. Because he's still a man.
well, uber-Progressives believe that since "she" wants have herself called a "woman", she has such a right and it would be rude and offensive to call her anything but a woman. now, will it become workplace harrassment, punishable by prison, to refer to a transgender by their original and biological gender pronoun?
It'll never be punishable by prison? Do you mean, subject to a law suit? No one will go to prison for referring to anyone as any sex. If anything, it'll get you fired or a good talking-to by your HR team.
Yes, I know that. However, I firmly believe that one's DNA will show what one's true sex is and that no amount of surgery or hormones can change that.
Well it depends on what you define as "sex". If it's defined as a person's sexual organs, part way. There's the outside appearance changed but not the internal organs.
I believe that sex is an inherent and unchangeable characteristic given by God to each and every person at the moment of their conception.
If that's how you decide to define sex, you're not wrong. It is inherent, but outward appearances is different.
There is male, there is female, and then there are all the grey areas in-between which transgendered people occupy. Sex-reassignment surgery attempts to align a person's physical body with their psychological self, but the most you can say is that it moves the patient from one grey area to another.
Phenotype is different from genotype. So what someone physically looks like on the outside is not indicative of their genes. Someone with brown hair could have been born with the gene for blond hair for example.
It is sex reassignment surgery, not gender reassignment surgery. It is artificial by definition. Nor does it change a person's physiology in terms of the person's sex, other than apparent faux genitals. If a Jew has his/her hooked nose changed in a nose job, is that person no longer a Jew?
I think that surgery to change one's sexual organs is usually supported by hormone therapy. I'm not sure that plastic surgery alone constitutes a change in one's sex.
There is also matters like bone structure and internal organs. In my opinion, transsexuals (not the same as the means so much it means almost nothing "transgender") should be considered a 3rd gender.
We aren't obliged to play along in his delusion. If it becomes workplace harassment, businesses will stop hiring trannys.