Talk:Transgender pornography

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Untitled section 1

FicticiousAnimation (talk) 01:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC) Look i'm kind of new to Wikipedia but this page is wrong. Transsexual is somebody who has undergone a complete sex-change. If it's only a partial sex-change (as in a girl with a dick or a man with boobs/vagina) that is transgender. There is no such thing as transgender porn, if you search for it nothing will show up. Shemales are not real, because the dick cannot get hard after being placed on a woman. It hasn't been figured out yet. Shemale porn is usually realistic strap-ons, clever video editing, an actual man dressed as a woman, or is animated/hentai. Transexual pornography does exist, but it is usually passed off as regular porn since it is nearly impossible to tell a trans from a cis, simply because once you undergo a sex change you have undergone a sex change. Literally, your sex is changed. You are, for example, no longer a man, you are a legitimate woman. This article is completely wrong. It should be renamed to "shemale porn" and the facts should follow that format, never bringing sex or gender into question. Also remember that sex =/= gender. It's obvious that whoever wrote this page thinks shemales are real, which they're not. (Sorry I don't really know how to use Wikipedia I would love some help learning everything. I'm trying my best to get the formatting right and stuff.) FicticiousAnimation (talk) 01:35, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

So much of this is wrong I don't even know where to begin :/ 86.153.60.194 (talk) 17:40, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Fetishisation

This article needs more exploration of how the vast majority of pornography featuring transgender women is made for the gaze of, marketed to and consumed by people who fetishise transgender women (often referred to as "tranny chasers", or "chasers" for short), and how this fetishisation is considered oppressive by the vast majority of transgender women including many sex workers (all across the sex industry) whose profession forces them to play into it. It could also expand on how part of the reason why "shemales", "trannies", "t-girls", "chicks with dicks" etc are considered slurs is that they're associated with the aforementioned fetishisation. 86.153.60.194 (talk) 17:40, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Merger Proposal

I think Shemale porn should be merged into this article as its more appriorpate than being redirected to Shemale.Dwanyewest (talk) 02:08, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Dwanyewest, the Shemale porn article doesn't exist. I take it that you mean the Shemale porn redirect? I think that, given what the Shemale article covers, and that the term shemale is so offensive to transgender people, it is likely best to keep the redirect pointing to the Shemale article. You could ask for input from WP:LGBT. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Normally I would expect shemale porn to redirect to transsexual pornography. I don't see how the fact that the word "shemale" is offensive changes that (in fact, we have a template specifically for this case). Redirects are meant to help readers find the article they want, and if they are searching "shemale porn" I would expect that what they are looking for is an article about transwomen in pornography. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 09:09, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Your points are valid, Caeciliusinhorto, and I agree that the Transsexual pornography article is likely the better target. The Shemale article is also about pornography, though. That's why I stated "given what the Shemale article covers." My comment was not solely about offensiveness. I do keep offensiveness in mind when editing controversial topics, though, per WP:Offensive material. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:16, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the Transsexual pornography article again, I now fully agree that "shemale porn" should redirect there. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:20, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

• Note: I have removed the merge template as it is not applicable here. As for the redirect, if you need more input, I suggest sending it to RFD and notifying the applicable WikiProjects. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:37, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Issue has been definitively resolved. FeatherPluma (talk) 21:55, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Shemale porn redirect discusion

There is a redirect discussion for Shemale porn. Please see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 October 23#Shemale porn. You can add your opinion over there. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Issue has been definitively resolved. FeatherPluma (talk) 21:55, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Should it be redirected?

I think Transgender pornography should be redirected to this article to this article as it is the same as Transsexual pornography. Dwanyewest (talk) 00:09, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Critical Views on the Self-Identification of the Fanbase

The male Fans of Transgender Pornography are probably all bisexual or polysexual respectively pansexual.--217.92.58.201 (talk) 07:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Adding a pornographic image

I added a sexually explicit image to the page of a trans male performer and cis male performer having sex and smiling, which was removed. (I would've added something featuring a trans woman, too, but didn't see anything suitable on Commons.) It seems like there's a general trend against using pornographic images on Wikipedia, so I wasn't really expecting my addition to stick, and won't push very hard for its inclusion. But just wanted to throw out a defense of the image anyway:

1. WP:NOTCENSORED. Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive‍—‌even exceedingly so. Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia.

2. Out of respect for readers' sensitivities, I put the image near the bottom of the page, rather than making it the lead image.

3. One argument that's been raised in other discussions is that we don't need sexual photographs in articles because we can just use drawings (drawings are apparently more tasteful). Well, in this case there are no suitable drawings that would work.

4. I think trans porn in particular is a pornographic subject where an image actually would help the readers' understanding. To a certain sort of person, if you say the phrase "cis man and trans man having sex", they might not even be able to picture what that looks like.

5. Personally, I find the image of two people happily having a sexual experience and smiling into the camera far, far, far, far, far, far less shocking and offensive than, say, all the images of lynching victims in the lynching article.

6. It's a nice, high quality image! Professionally-shot, well lit. It's not some blurry, awkward closeup taken with a cell phone camera or something. WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 05:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Post-op Transgender Pornographic Film Actors?

There is also a minority of post-op Transgender Pornographic Film Actresses who mostly begun pre-op but Im not sure about the existence of post-op male Transgender Pornographic FIlm Actors.--178.7.228.95 (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2019 (UTC)