Castration: DISCUSSION

After both Jodie's and Racquel's interventions, it seems like there is almost nothing more to say on the subject, at least on the serious mode. Ladies, you both posted some of the most informative texts that I've ever read on this. Thanks a lot.
As far as I'm concerned, I really love that tiny bit more of femininity that the absence or reduction of the testicules brings to the look. And as someone said in a post, it does make the penis look cuter... Moreover, it is one more testimony to the incredible dedication of transsexual women to achieve their goal, a dedication which personally I never cease to admire. It's not just the beautifull look of a ts that seems so appealing to me, but also this irreducible desire for feminity. Takes a lot of intelligence, ressources and personallity, not to say anything of the efforts in themselves. I admit that's one thing that really gets my drive going. Hope i don't seem to weird for that...

[SbDm59]

As for me - I wish to be castrated with removal of testicles and scrotum. I wish my place between my clitty cock and asspussy looks flat, smooth and looks like it never exists there anything except tight smooth and flat skin...

[loverboy23]

Originally Posted by VanityLove2030

If the doctor removes the testis correctly the sack should shrink. The shaft if taking hormones would also shrink in size but as much one may think.

My penis is much smaller then before I was 7 now its 5 1/2 without testis, but then again I have been on Spiro since 2000.

This my take on this topic..

Thanks

Did your sack shrink? When did you have the operation? I dont know why, but you describing your once 7 to now 5 1/2 without testicles just turned me on.

[rb654321]

I think it would be such a turn-on to fondle, caress and suck on an empty sac on a beautiful shemale.

[markie v]

I would like to see one in person!

[rb654321]

Have any of the wonderful ladies who have had their balls removed had them made into earrings?

If not, what did you do with them after they were removed?

[markie v]

Just sick.

Originally Posted by rb654321

Have any of the wonderful ladies who have had their balls removed had them made into earrings?

If not, what did you do with them after they were removed?

[Ana Mancini]

Originally Posted by dirkhard

Can they still cum?

Yes we do still cum. But with the testicles removed, NO liquid comes out.

Mine have been gone for many years and it has helped me in multiple ways. But it is NOT for everyone.

[Alana TG]

I don't know when it'll happen, but I am excitedly looking forward to having my unwanted "family jewels" removed, someday.

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

As far as I'm concerned, I really love that tiny bit more of femininity that the absence or reduction of the testicles brings to the look. And as someone said in a post, it does make the penis look cuter... Moreover, it is one more testimony to the incredible dedication of transsexual women to achieve their goal, a dedication which personally I never cease to admire. It's not just the beautiful look of a ts that seems so appealing to me, but also this irreducible desire for femininity. Takes a lot of intelligence, resources and personality, not to say anything of the efforts in themselves. I admit that's one thing that really gets my drive going. Hope i don't seem to weird for that...

Oh my......on the contrary. To me Dan, what you said above makes you more attractive........not less (or weird, as you put it).

[SilverSabre]

Suddenly I noticed that some girls have really pale skin. Like Mandy, Sarina, Ana, Hime and some more I can't remember
Can those two things- skin pigmentation and hormone level be somehow related?

Originally Posted by Alana TG

Oh my......on the contrary. To me Dan, what you said above makes you more attractive........not less (or weird, as you put it).

Thank you kindly, lady Alana. You don't see it, but I'm blushing...

Originally Posted by SilverSabre

Suddenly I noticed that some girls have really pale skin. Like Mandy, Sarina, Ana, Hime and some more I can't remember
Can those two things- skin pigmentation and hormone level be somehow related?

Women in general tend to have paler skin than men. I suppose it has to do with this greater quality of skin, which comes from the effect of hormones, a more delicate and sensible skin constitution. Women in ancient Greece tried their best never to stay too long under the sun, as this quality was viewed as an important part of women’s aesthetic. They wanted, as any woman does with the use of make-up today, to accentuate this difference, to help biology a little. Yet, in general, the ratio in skin tone is not radical nor extreme; it's just a bit of a milder shade or tint.
I guess a paler skin therefore might possibly have something to do with the greater effect of hormones in these ladies, but all in all I suppose that they had a tendency to have a paler skin before their orchidectomy, as something natural belonging to their idiosyncratic biology.

[ila]

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

Women in general tend to have paler skin than men.

I disagree. Some women have paler skin than some men. Similarly there are a great number of men that have paler skin than women. All one can safely say is that some people have paler skin than others. Anything else is just an unscientific generalization.

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

I suppose it has to do with this greater quality of skin, which comes from the effect of hormones, a more delicate and sensible skin constitution.

I disagree with this statement too. I quite sure that one gender's skin does not have any greater quality than the other gender's skin.

Ila, we all want to be politically correct. We all want a society which gives men and women equal rights and equal chances. We all want institutions to treat both men and women alike. But there are definite, strong, very obvious physical differences between human sexes. First, sexual dimorphism is greater in humans than in just about any species of mammals. It doesn’t take much observation to realize it. Not very easy to distinguish between a female and a male cat or dog, for instance. There’s a bit more difference between apes, but far from the differences in humans. This is an evident testimony to one of the means of our survival as a specie: we collaborated by insisting on our sexual differences and aptitudes to adapt. Now, most of any good book on evolution (as long as they haven’t suffered too much influence of some trend in popular culture) will state those facts. And so will most good books on biology. After I read your answer, I googled it to get some infos to present here. Immediately, many came up. I invite you to consult simply Wikipedia on this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans

Let me quote to you what is said for the gender differences in skin:
“Skin
Male skin is thicker (more collagen) and oilier (more sebum) than female skin.[19] They also have redder skin.
The skin of females is warmer on average than that of males. Females tend to have more pain receptors per cm of skin than males.”

The biological creatures that we are also tend (I say “tend”, ila) to view beauty in terms not only of the acknowledgement and accentuation of such differences, but also in terms of capacity to procreate and transmit good genes. Therefore such differences in women’s skin will appear as being more beautiful then that of men (in all respect for divergent sexual desires and orientations, of course), not unlike for instance, the often more pronounced lower back curve in women (a characteristic which allow more room for the uterus and better position for carrying on the one hand, and the fact that it is a sexual position which favors sexual intercourse and is created by neurotransmitters traveling directly in the spine during phases of sexual stimulation, on the other hand) will be perceived often as an element of feminine beauty, amongst many other such physical differences.

Ila, you’re a nice person with good, solid convictions, and a great sense of doing the right thing. And I respect you a lot. I don’t want to be contradictory here. But you have to acknowledge biology. And I mean of course, real biology (beware of what you find out there…).

[ila]

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

Ila, we all want to be politically correct. We all want a society which gives men and women equal rights and equal chances...

You have missed the points that I was addressing. I was not and am not trying to be politically correct. If anything I am far from ever being politically correct.

The two statements that I was specifically addressing are:

Women generally have paler skin. That is not true. It's individuals and not genders that have pale skin. For example my skin is as white as a Scandanavian's in winter. However after I've been in the sun for a week or so my skin turns a deep tan.

Women have a greater quality of skin. Nothing in the quoted article has anything to do with quality. It does however state the differences between genders. Quality is subjective, depending on who is doing the measuring.

Start reading the post quietly once again and you might, I say YOU MIGHT understand what I?m saying? If not I can always try to give you a biology course. OK?
I always marvel at how people who don?t understand the first thing about any science are the first to use the term against others.
Of course, there?s differences in individuals, ila! But that goes without saying, does it not?
?Skin
Male skin is thicker (more collagen) and oilier (more sebum) than female skin.[19] They also have redder skin.
The skin of females is warmer on average than that of males. Females tend to have more pain receptors per cm of skin than males.?
These are facts from biology, a science. You mean to say you don?t understand the meaning of men+thicker skin; women+more pain receptors (more sensibility)? You don?t get men+redder skin neither? Really???????

And I should think that you don’t understand the followings about how we tend to feel beauty and desire along such biological differences? It’s academic, ila!!

[ila]

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

Start reading the post quietly once again and you might, I say YOU MIGHT understand what I?m saying? If not I can always try to give you a biology course. OK?
I always marvel at how people who don?t understand the first thing about any science are the first to use the term against others.
Of course, there?s differences in individuals, ila! But that goes without saying, does it not?
?Skin
Male skin is thicker (more collagen) and oilier (more sebum) than female skin.[19] They also have redder skin.
The skin of females is warmer on average than that of males. Females tend to have more pain receptors per cm of skin than males.?
These are facts from biology, a science. You mean to say you don?t understand the meaning of men+thicker skin; women+more pain receptors (more sensibility)? You don?t get men+redder skin neither? Really???????

You should try reading the points that I addressed. Thickness and the number of pain receptors is not a measure of quality. They are simply measurements of thickness and the number of pain receptors.

And it's still individuals and not gender who various shades of skin (and of course race). One only has to look around to confirm this.

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

And I should think that you don?t understand the followings about how we tend to feel beauty and desire along such biological differences? It?s academic, ila!!

I never once brought up feelings for beauty and desire. That has nothing to do with the paleness of one's skin or the quality.

[Alana TG]

Boys, boys....please play nice. Do I need to separate you two ?

I’m speechless, here. There’s indeed nothing else to add, everything is under your very eyes.
Yet I guess I’ll try to explain a bit more. Ila, you told me first that I was making an “unscientific generalization”. Well, science (biology) does make such a generalization. Of course people have particular physical differences and characteristics, but there is also obviously general differences between sexes (or else, by the way, why would anyone feel she/he is in the wrong body?) If that was your point (that everyone is different), it has nothing to do with what I was saying and therefore it was indeed irrelevant in the first place. In any case, stating that people are different is so obvious, ila, that in itself, it’s an irrelevant intervention. Isn’t it?
Now, the point about desire and beauty is that we, as animals, have biological tendencies to find beautiful and desirable (“quality”, judgement on quality) what favours reproduction, and therefore we see more enhanced sexual (general) characteristics as something more attractive, something that seems to indicate good genes, good carrier of babies, good provider, etc. etc. Do you understand? As I said, this is academic, this has been well established by biology and evolutive sciences forever, ila.
Besides, if you don’t think yourself that is of a greater "quality" a skin which will biologically tend to be paler, finer (thinner) and more sensible than a skin thicker, redder and less sensible, well, yes, there’s no reason for me to discuss endlessly and ridiculously with you…

I’m sorry if I’m getting mad at you here. But ila please, read all the post quietly and try to understand what I wrote, would you? (By the way (and to end this all), we’re not discussing your point! You intervened on mine! We should therefore be discussing mine in all logic, shouldn’t we? It’s one more reason why I’m asking you to read back the posts!)

Originally Posted by Alana TG

Boys, boys....please play nice. Do I need to separate you two ?

Sorry for such an ungracious display, lady Alana...

[ila]

Originally Posted by danthepoetman

I?m speechless, here. There?s indeed nothing else to add, everything is under your very eyes.
Yet I guess I?ll try to explain a bit more. Ila, you told me first that I was making an ?unscientific generalization?. Well, science (biology) does make such a generalization. Of course people have particular physical differences and characteristics, but there is also obviously general differences between sexes (or else, by the way, why would anyone feel she/he is in the wrong body?) If that was your point (that everyone is different), it has nothing to do with what I was saying and therefore it was indeed irrelevant in the first place. In any case, stating that people are different is so obvious, ila, that in itself, it?s an irrelevant intervention. Isn?t it?
Now, the point about desire and beauty is that we, as animals, have biological tendencies to find beautiful and desirable (?quality?, judgement on quality) what favours reproduction, and therefore we see more enhanced sexual (general) characteristics as something more attractive, something that seems to indicate good genes, good carrier of babies, good provider, etc. etc. Do you understand? As I said, this is academic, this has been well established by biology and evolutive sciences forever, ila.
Besides, if you don?t think yourself that is of a greater "quality" a skin which will biologically tend to be paler, finer (thinner) and more sensible than a skin thicker, redder and less sensible, well, yes, there?s no reason for me to discuss endlessly and ridiculously with you?

I?m sorry if I?m getting mad at you here. But ila please, read all the post quietly and try to understand what I wrote, would you? (By the way (and to end this all), we?re not discussing your point! You intervened on mine! We should therefore be discussing mine in all logic, shouldn?t we? It?s one more reason why I?m asking you to read back the posts!)

There's no sense in continuing on, because you haven't properly read what I've posted. I'm also not impressed with the condescending tone of your replies.

[smc]

Originally Posted by Alana TG

Boys, boys....please play nice. Do I need to separate you two ?

There does seem to be some talking-past-each-other going on ... believe me, I recognize it when I see it, since I'm guilty of it sometimes.

Originally Posted by ila

There's no sense in continuing on, because you haven't properly read what I've posted. I'm also not impressed with the condescending tone of your replies.

It?s true. My tone was condescending, and I apologize for that. I was mad and I still am frustrated at the way you intervened, ila, and at the way you choose to envision this. But I admit I lost my temper a bit?

[rb654321]

What is done with the balls when they're removed?

Trophies or??

[Agurlishboy01]

Originally Posted by rb654321

What is done with the balls when they're removed?

Trophies or??

Sometimes, yes

[camper]

Originally Posted by rb654321

What is done with the balls when they're removed?

Trophies or??

They would make nice bookends preserved in clear plastic blocks about 4 inches wide and 6 inches high.

[rb654321]

Originally Posted by Agurlishboy01

Sometimes, yes

I'd love to have her nuts on my desk....

[andyoranges]

......turns me on........I'm new to all this, and for me it will be easier to deal with a gorgeous woman with a cock & no balls (just like dealing with the Domme who ass-fucks me with her strapon).........somehow, sucking down a load of blanks seems easier than sucking down a load of sperm.

I don't understand why somebody who goes to all the effort to be so feminine would want to fight the effects of testosterone at the same time......?

[AnneFlore]

Some prefer shemales with, others prefer without balls. This is a personal choice and taste. I will not dare define which is better.
From my own transgender experience, I regret I was born too early in a country where having balls removed was absolutely out of question. I would have it done, and maybe the full operation.
About the pictures displayed, I suspect that, unknown from the poster, some TG are actually GG with a Photoshop cock. It is easy to do it on pictures, but not on video clips.
Anyway, TG for ever.

[AnneFlore]

Many consider transgender people through hard movies and pictures. This is only the emersing part of the iceberg. Many TG across the world live as women, part or full time. They do not mean hard sex and care little of being watched. Having the testes removed is a matter of comfort in the panty, and a step to SRS. Sure, it helps lowering the testosterone level in blood, but not in full, since the adrenal glands still produce some. In addition, reduction of body hair, and specially the beard is a myth.

[AnneFlore]

Originally Posted by sosed

Does castration do a process of feminazing the body any quicker comparing to just HRT? Does it have influence in everyday temperament, will to work, etc?

I am afraid many posters simply do not take time to read and understand previous posts before posting themselves questions that have been answered so many times (sigh!...)

[tonywaits]

If more people spent as much time studying up on transgendered girls as they do masturbating about them, they may understand them as ladies and not just a piece of ass.

[spike_40]

Originally Posted by tonywaits

If more people spent as much time studying up on transgendered girls as they do masturbating about them, they may understand them as ladies and not just a piece of ass.

GREAT WELL SAID

[Charlie413]

Originally Posted by Tailia

When a girl is totally submissive I believe it is occasionally necessary for the sack to be emptied. For cosmetic purposes prosthetic balls can replace those removed. However, I do adore the thought of shemale balls clinking into the pan.

Kinky but then aren't we all?

Oh yes, that empty sack looks so very exciting to me. Please, no prosthetic balls. Let that sack hang down nice and empty. I love that look!

Charlie

[franalexes]

Originally Posted by tonywaits

If more people spent as much time studying up on transgendered girls as they do masturbating about them, they may understand them as ladies and not just a piece of ass.

And we gurls are so easy to understand.

(watching out for the lightening to strike)

[tonywaits]

Originally Posted by franalexes

And we gurls are so easy to understand.

(watching out for the lightening to strike)

UMMM right

[charlue007]

No curious, your explanations of the true shemales are very much appreciated! I am so curious as to these lovely creatures!

[redheadtsclaire]

I agree, I think a tiny little she cock with no accompanying balls is beautiful, so much so I am going to get it done myself.

[jonnie]

Totally love the look of a tiny cock and an empty sac. If she could have the sac removed and have small breasts then that would be heaven.
Hope someone out there will post some pictures !

[angel195730]

Originally Posted by redheadtsclaire

I agree, I think a tiny little she cock with no accompanying balls is beautiful, so much so I am going to get it done myself.

How about some before and after pics.....

[jonnie]

Angel: I agree. Would be great to get before & after pics. Nothing nicer than small breasts, tiny cock and very smooth beneath.

[allen stretch]

,'my preference is for a small limp useless penis with large empty sack, which I hope is the catorgory I will fall into when I finally get casrated

[Robyn Jones]

Hi,
I am a pre op transsexual and I am hoping to go through the castration process. I am on hormones and it would be easier to accomplish my feminization process. I am small anyway so clothes would fit better.

Robyn

[redheadtsclaire]

I have been thinking about this and after reading this and some other credible information, well I want to have this done. Can anyone recommend a good surgeon?

[jonnie]

Empty sac is so cool. I only have one ball and would love to get rid of the other. Big question...do I need HRT? Really would rather not have to take hormones.

[brian621]

Originally Posted by redheadtsclaire

I have been thinking about this and after reading this and some other credible information, well I want to have this done. Can anyone recommend a good surgeon?

Good ideal snip them off. Nothing more sexy than a naked tgirl with a little soft one.

[prepuce]

Can ovaries be transplanted into empty sacks?

[tux]

Originally Posted by prepuce

Can ovaries be transplanted into empty sacks?

The short answer is: NO.

If you could transplant reproductive organs, then males that have lost the balls in an accident, and wanted them back. Had have that done ages ago.

My question: What the hell on earth would the idea of such an operation be?

[franalexes]

Some one is probably thinking that ovaries in a sack would suffice as hormone replacement.
Putting girlie pictures in the upstairs bedroom does not make it a penthouse.

[ila]

Originally Posted by prepuce

Can ovaries be transplanted into empty sacks?

Originally Posted by tux

The short answer is: NO.

If you could transplant reproductive organs, then males that have lost the balls in an accident, and wanted them back. Had have that done ages ago.

My question: What the hell on earth would the idea of such an operation be?

Originally Posted by franalexes

Some one is probably thinking that ovaries in a sack would suffice as hormone replacement.
Putting girlie pictures in the upstairs bedroom does not make it a penthouse.

I, too, have been wondering why anyone would want to transplant ovaries into an empty scrotum. I had hoped that prepuce would tell us the reason for his question. I am not being sarcastic or condescending. I really would like to know the reason for the question.