Question for GC: Can you explain why a neopenis/phalloplasty is not a penis? If a man is something with a penis, then if a man removes all of his genitals in surgery, why will he still remain a man after surgery?

submitted by GarageCar from (self.GenderCriticalGuys)

I got out of reddit after what I heard happened to the LGBDropTheT and GC subreddits. I know I'm on the fence with the TQ and do not agree with them but don't really have any arguments against them either. I would really like to learn and see your side, why is because if you were wrong then reddit wouldn't ban you like this. They must have seen you as a threat because you're right, that's why I'm here. I have been fed the trans koolaid for years so if my questions are stupid I apologize.

My questions are, can you explain why a neopenis/phalloplasty is not a penis? Phalloplasty, which is the construction of a penis, was originally created for men that weren't even "trans", why weren't their neopenises as real as any other man's penis?

In Phalloplasty, a semi-functional penis is created using the arm skin, etc. This tissue is used to make both the urethra and the shaft of the penis - their urinary tract works the same, they can produce precum, and they use the same erectile devices (the same a penile implant) as non-trans men that get erectile dysfunction and can not get hard on their own do. Take a look at this entire medical company: https://www.coloplastmenshealth.com/erectile-dysfunction/penile-implants/titan-inflatable-penile-implant/

Production of precum is anecdotal but possible due to the skene’s glands/prostate in their bodies. And nerve-wise, the nerves from the graft are hooked up with the genital nerves, thus allowing the neopenis connected to the trans man for tactile, erotic, temperate, and other sensations, so that the trans man can feel things like how a non-trans man feels things through his penis.

You can go on google and search up “RFF phalloplasty sensation” and you will be taken to a variety of medical sources which discuss how nerve hookups in phalloplasty work that allow trans men to feel things when they touch their neopenis.

Here’s an FAQ from a well known hospital and surgeon who performs it, who answers questions about sensation: https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/center-transgender-health/services-appointments/faq/phalloplasty

The exact quote being: “We do offer nerve hook up. Nerve hook up involves taking the existing nerves from the donor site, such as the arm, and connecting them to nerves located in the pelvis. This allows you to have sensation.”

More medical studies regarding sensation in their dicks: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5505829/

And there are many more articles. With phalloplasty from the leg, referred to as ALT, less nerves can be harvested so there’s often less sensation in neopenis. but most trans men opt for RFF, which is known as the “gold star” of phalloplasty that lets them have more sensations in the neopenis. It seems the neopenis is at least semi-functional since trans men can feel things with them, can pee with them, can release pre cum or cum with them, etc. The neopenis is like the penis of a non-trans man that has erectile dysfunction and needs another device attached to it for it to get hard.

If the penis of a man that has erectile dysfunction and can not get hard on its own so it needs a device called a penile implant to make it go hard and can not release sperm is still a penis, then why is the neopenis which can not get hard on its own and needs a device called a penile implant to get hard and can not release sperm be a penis? Can you explain why?

And if a man is something with a penis, then imagine that a man removes all of his genitals in surgery, why will he still remain a man after surgery?

There is this exception of men that get surgery and remove all genitals which excludes both penis and neo-penis, both non-trans men and trans men, why then is the inclusion of a neopenis or a transman in the definition of a penis or a man not possible?

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]MyLongestJourney 40 insightful - 4 fun40 insightful - 3 fun41 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

A man is an adult human male.Even if he loses his genitals,his maleness is encoded in his DNA.If I clone a man,I can produce other men.If I clone a "transman" I can only produce women.

A penis is a complex organ and not a flap of arm or thigh flesh rolled up and stitched in place.

I can not believe I have to explain those things in present day with all the information available in the net.

PS.Apologies for butting in,me being a woman and all.I am a Biologist and I just can not stand the TRA sophistry regarding biological sex.

[–]davids877 15 insightful - 9 fun15 insightful - 8 fun16 insightful - 9 fun -  (0 children)

Noooooo.... the truth.... it burns.....

[–][deleted] 34 insightful - 5 fun34 insightful - 4 fun35 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

And if a man is something with a penis, then imagine that a man removes all of his genitals in surgery, why will he still remain a man after surgery?

I mean, this is trivially easy to dismiss. A man is not just 'something with a penis'.

[–]notdelusional 29 insightful - 3 fun29 insightful - 2 fun30 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This is a joke, right? Females don’t have a prostate. Precum is produced by the Cowper’s gland, also a thing females do not have. And nerve hookups for “sensation”? These srs clinics are great at marketing non-specific outcomes. Jesus Christ.

[–]motionlessoracle 24 insightful - 2 fun24 insightful - 1 fun25 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

And if a man is something with a penis, then imagine that a man removes all of his genitals in surgery, why will he still remain a man after surgery?

A man isn't merely "something with a penis". I realize that QT tends to phrase GC arguments as simplistic, in order to convince you that they are the only purveyors of nuance, but there are many signs of maleness that are not a penis and/or testicles. Delete the penis/testicles and there are still bushy eyebrows, sloped forehead, adam's apple, facial hair, broad shoulders, large hands/feet, tall stature, etc. Surgically alter all of those, and there is still, at the end of it, a set of XY chromosomes easily checked by a blood test. Those will never change absent intense genetic modification. And even if those were to change, many males have obvious behaviors and mannerisms that originate in the way they were raised and the years spent being perceived as male and stewing in the chemicals a male body creates.

A male can appear feminine, and this may help him cope with life, but he cannot become female. We can revisit this when it's possible to change chromosomes, as it will become a more nuanced question, but right now it's far too easy to tell. It's so easy to tell that 23andMe now gives you results based on your self-reported sex so that dysphoric trans women don't have to be confronted with an XY.

https://customercare.23andme.com/hc/en-us/articles/115015843628-I-m-Transgender-Will-This-Impact-My-DNA-Test-Kit-Experience-

[–]MezozoicGay 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

We can revisit this when it's possible to change chromosomes

So TRA should aim on cyberpunk future where sex can be changed on go with simple replacement of body, or will mean nothing as you can just change your whole body with mechanical parts. And for this they need to push science forward, and not backwards!

[–]FlippyKing 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So, if x is y depends on on how you define y, not x. That is not the same thing as saying x is the same as y, if "same" is taken to mean for some specific set of purposes-- but that would be speaking conversationally or at least imprecisely.

To ask this question, if a surgical imitation of a penis is a penis, is to ignore the obvious differences we all know to be true. The first difference is that one is created just as part of how a human is born and the other is not. Surgeons do not make penises. Is a cow made by a carpenter a cow? No. Carpenters do not make cows. Differences with regard to how it functions and if certain uses of it can or can't risk getting a woman pregnant are in fact differences. No amount of "but what ifs" about some stupid future of trans-humanism where a corporation can let a very rich, and very obviously spoiled, and even more obviously neglected, female child produce sperm changes the differences now or ever. The question, and any question like this, is either gaslighting, or asked by someone who is either choosing to be stupid, or too young to get it.

[–]lairacunda 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I bet you can understand why a cheap Calvin Klein knock-off is not the real thing. This shouldn't be that difficult for you.

[–]mbr 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A man is a human being with an expressed SRY gene, usually to be found on the Y chromosome. That covers literally all men, regardless of internal or external characteristics. With exceedingly few exceptions, men are born with a penis, which is part of a set of internal and external organs (primary and secondary sexual characteristics) which are part of sexual differentiation present in all mammals. The purpose of these characteristics is to allow for the procreation of the species. It is true that some men are born unable to actually procreate: that is called a defect.

The penis is used for a few different things. Urination is one of them. Ejaculation is another. These depend heavily on being connected to that set of external and internal organs, such as testes, prostate, cowpers gland, and so on and so forth. It's a complex system.

A phalloplasty is a surgical process through which an external appendage is created that is intended to appear like a penis. Given that it is not connected to the set of internal and external organs described previously, it is not capable of many of the normal functions of a penis. The absence of testes, cowper's gland, prostate, etc. means that is will never expel ejaculate, for example. It really only externally mimics a penis. It is not capable of normal erection, for example. One can, in some cases, be artificially created, but the absence of corpora cavernosa means that one cannot ever naturally occur.

What a phalloplasty creates is more appropriately termed a pseudopenis. It mimics the appearance of a penis, without being able to perform the functions thereof.

All of this, of course, in addition to the fact that no amount of phalloplasties -- or even the transplant of an actual penis, which I suspect will happen at some point -- can make up for the only thing that truly makes a man: that SRY gene.