Girly-boy beauty

Pic: Rod Fleming

Sexual transformation from boy to girl has always been hot.  Enter the girly-boy: the transsexual or TS.

The oldest records we have prove the early existence of TS individuals, often priestesses or shamans. Their direct descendants are in the hijra of India, the kathoey of Thailand, the bekis of the Philippines, the travestis of the Americas, Blanchard HSTS and a host of transsexuals, trannies and shemales across the planet.

From the ‘Dancing Boys’ of Afghanistan to the trans girls of Asia, from down-town Sao Paulo to Paris, in every culture, all through history, boys become girls in order to attract men. The beautiful girly-boy has always been with us, and she is not going away.

Throughout Western culture, sexual transformation has been centre-stage, literally, since history began to be written. I remember, as a child no more than ten, falling desperately in love with Peter Pan, in a Christmas pantomime. But Peter was no ordinary boy, for like all his representations in theatre, he was played by a young woman. We are programmed to see sexual ambivalence as an object of desire in itself  from very early ages.

Imperial Roman, after a Greek original

Sexual Ambivalence in Art

Greek sculpture celebrated the beautiful girly-boy. This was a transgender passion, for the object of sexual attraction here was the youthful boy, the young male, who was regarded as so much more perfect than any woman, yet who played the woman in the act of sex. She was the recipient partner.

Consider Sparta, where warriors lived in barracks outside the city. Young boys beginning their life’s journey would be partnered with older men, who were able to grow beards. This believed to improve the efficiency of the Spartan army. Men would fight and die much harder for their lovers than for mere comrades. So they had sex with girly-boys, who would one day become men.

The Spartan system was so effective that men, old enough to take wife, often found it difficult to get aroused with women, which they had to, in order to sire more soldiers.

In Rome, girly-boy prostitutes were commonplace. The tradition of

Narcissus. Roman; after a Greek original.

self-castration first recorded in the temple of Inanna at Uruk in Sumer continued there in the temples of Cybele, the Phrygian Great Mother. Young men called ‘galli’ ritually self-castrated and then ‘adopted women’s clothing and seemed to prefer the receptive role in anal intercourse’.

‘The passion for transition and self-castration became so prevalent at its peak that the Emperor Domitian (81-96 CE) banned the practice’. *

These were the girly-boys.

Homosexuality is not about attraction.

For a man to be in love with a beautiful girly-boy was not considered homosexual, because homosexuality was not defined by attraction. Boys were sexual beings and, as immature males, both subject to and responsive to the lust of older ones. In part, perhaps, this stemmed from the fact that sex with women was practically unavailable to the unmarried man and rare enough for the married one, in an era without contraception. Men either used prostitutes and risked the terrible diseases they might catch, or had sex with boys.

At the same time there is evidence, as we explored in’ Why Men Made God‘, that human sexuality is not as cut and dried as Western culture, with its roots in the ghastly sexual repression and presciptiveness of Christianity, might suggest. Sexuality is naturally fluid.

Situational Homosexuality.

Consider, for  a moment, ‘prison sex’. Homosexual relations between prisoners kept in same-sex institutions are well known. These are sometimes represented as symptoms of male dominance — the big,  tough, mean men force weaker males to have sex with them. But this is not true. In many cases, if not most, the submissive partners become women, sexually at least, voluntarily. They seek out the beasts and offer themselves. Why? Partly for protection, but also for something else.

Quentin Crisp explains the desire that girly-boys have for men like this:

‘(they see themselves as) young, frail, beautiful, and refined. Hence their predilection is for huge, violent, coarse brutes.’**

This behaviour has been described as ‘situational homosexuality’ but that concept depends on the notion that heterosexual relationships between men and women are somehow more ‘normal’ than those between men and girly-boys. It is likely that the latter relationships are just as ‘normal’. ‘Situational homosexuality’ therefore, would just be a normal part of male sexual expression.

Sex is not just about reproduction.

Put that another way: sex is not principally about reproduction, it’s about sex. Men having sex are not trying to make babies, they’re just trying to get off. If the recipient partner happens to lack a womb, who cares? An anus will do nicely in the dark.

Consider the behaviour of soldiers in the days before women were in armies. Where they had no access to real women for example in POW camps, the men dressed up as women and put on shows.

‘Military concert parties ― for the troops by the troops — featuring female impersonators was a British military tradition that went as far back as the eighteenth century, if not earlier.’ ***

and of one performer, a Dutch Eurasian, it was said

‘This fellow had dark  brown eyes with long, curling eyelashes, and a smooth olive complexion. He was five feet, five inches tall and weighed about 150 pounds — the perfect size for a female impersonator — and when he was made up with a wig and what served as cosmetics, he was a dead ringer for the real thing.’***

This performer was known as ‘Sambal Sue’ and it is clear that she was a girly-boy. Small, lightly-built and pretty, she was the classic HSTS as described by Bailey. ****

Western notions of sexuality are baseless.

To understand all this you have to realise that contemporary Western notions of gender and sexual behaviour are somewhat particular, to say the least. In earlier cultures, and across the rest of the world today, society is grouped into ‘men’ and ‘not-men’. The latter group includes women, girls and boys as yet unable to grow a beard. Girly-boys are those who remain in this latter group and indeed emphasis it through the use of hormones and other feminising techniques, as well as behaviours and dress.

In this milieu a sexual relationship in which a man (of age to grow a beard) penetrates a boy (not able to) is seen as heterosexual. It is  ‘man’ penetrating a ‘not-man’ and so is the definition of heterosexual sex. It is permitted even in apparently homophobic cultures. This is why so many patriarchal religions have specific rules against men shaving their beards. To do so is to reject their own masculinity and so become not-men.

Denying the male cultural role.

In other words, it’s fine for a man to have sex with someone who is a ‘not-man’. But it is not allowed for a man to become a not-man. An adult male is supposed to adopt the cultural role appointed for him — of husband and masculine father.

For example, today, in Islamic culture, a boy is sexually equivalent to a woman; they share the lower status of ‘not men’. As a result, boys remain, as they have always been, legitimate sexual targets throughout the Islamic world, while ‘clone’ homosexuals — two beard-growing men — may be punished by ‘being thrown off the highest tower in the town’.

What if you’re a beautiful girly-boy who likes men?

The point, for girly-boys, was never to attract gay men: it was to attract straight men. They are sexually repulsed by gay men because they recognise that these are other ‘not-men’. What they want is am actual man.

The way they went about that was not to develop their faux masculinity, as a New Gay Man would, but their femininity.

Of course the New Gay Men (extra manly manly man with added {super pungent} sock smell) tried to sweep girly-boys under the carpet and told them to grow a moustache and be a man about it. Girly-boys were shunned both by mainstream society and, today, by gay culture; the latter because it is desperate that nobody should ever learn the truth: gay ‘men’ are actually women.

A girly boy doesn’t want to be a man.

Sthai-girly-boyhe doesn’t want to look like a man. She doesn’t want to play the silly charade of the New Gay Man lifestyle. She just wants a nice hunky straight guy to cuddle up with after sex. She doesn’t want to sport a moustaches and be macho, she wants to wear hot pants and be girly.

This dilemma was highlighted and parodied by Freddie Mercury in the delicious video for Queen’s ‘I Want To Break Free‘ where he donned frock and apron while still wearing his famous facial hair.

Girly-boys are beautiful.

These girly-boys know how beautiful they are, and how sexually intriguing they can be. They always knew that given the right mood and circumstances, they could seduce any man, not gays but straight men. They want to be taken like girls and they do not want to be asked to reciprocate.

They have no time for the foetid locker-room atmosphere of the clone gay scene, and the further they are from it the better. The solution is simple: from a dangerously alluring girly boy, become a beautiful, sexy transwoman. While the ancient priestesses of Cybele drank mare’s urine and castrated themselves, today, a girly boy has a whole cosmetics industry that can help transform her in every way.

They get what they want—straight male dick—and their lovers get what they want—girls as sexy as only a girly-boy can be.ladyboys-in-bangkok

Let’s put it this way: we take a girly-boy, attracted to men,  enjoys being penetrated, and who understands that her inner psyche is feminine. We give her hormones that will reverse or arrest the effects of testosterone, then we have what we began with — the ladyboy, shemale, bakla, HSTS, whatever.

The perfect woman?

I wrote in ‘The Warm Pink Jelly Express Train‘ (brilliant read by the way) that a TS is ‘ the perfect woman from a man’s point of view’ and I stand by that. No transsexual on the planet knows what it’s ‘like’ to be a woman. They have no idea. So in ‘becoming women’ they are, in a sense, parodying them. There is no ‘inner woman’; male-to-female transition is provoked by male sexuality. Blanchard proved it.

The delusional nature of the AGP brain we deal with elsewhere but consider now our girly-boy.

She wants to be girly because she likes to be fucked by hot guys — just like a straight girl would, but with the added pep that a turbocharged male libido gives you. She takes the hormones, maybe has a pair of bolt-on boobs installed; et voila.

I once wrote that these girly-boys ‘drove a coach and horses through gay political thinking’ and I stand by that. They destroy ‘queer theory’ just by their simple existence. They render it null; the vapid, meaningless chit-chat that it actually is.

Here were boys who wanted only to be submissive and who did not want to look or behave like men, but like girls; so they became girls.

A girly-boy is not the product of Politically Correct Western philosophy.

They are not ‘genderqueer’ or any of the other fucked-up products of amy-walking-street-pattayaPost-Modernist thinking, or the coffee-room twaddle of superfluous departments of Humanities. Girly-boys are girls and that’s all they  want to be.

They knew perfectly well that they were not women and still do; the object of their transformation was not to be women, but to be more girly in order to attract straight men. (Every girly-boy I know has literally dozens of gay male friends. They won’t sleep with any of them.)

Their understanding of transsexualism is profoundly Dionysian.  It is about the wildness of nature and lust and delight in sexual passion, earthy and untamed. It is about sex, not some weird notion of Platonic attachment, or your mental-patient ‘inner woman’. It is about being fucked.

Dick crazy.

J.Michael Bailey quotes an AGP transgender person as saying that the girly boys (technically HSTS) were ‘boy crazy’. **** Well, Dr Bailey was for once pulling his punches. They’re not boy crazy, they’re dick crazy. As Quentin Crisp said, they spend their lives looking at the front of men’s trousers. David Bonnie put it more directly: ‘they’re like men — they can’t keep it in their pants’.*****

A girly-boy can love you like you have never known before, but her primary attraction to a man is what he has south of his navel.

It is also completely straightforward. It is totally honest. There is no lie, no cover-up. It’s about sex, papa. Girly-boys feel love incredibly passionately and they actually understand it.  They are walking, talking, living works of art, dedicated to love. They understand the foetid swamp of the Earth Mother that Camille Paglia described, the place of creation, of love, of death and of blinding lust, better than anyone else. It is their place; it is the world they inhabit, between penetration and orgasm.

I once said to a girly-boy just like this, on her hands and knees on the bed before me, that what was about to happen might possibly cause her some pain. ‘I don’t care if it hurts,’ she moaned impatiently. ‘I just want to feel it.’

What can a poor boy do?

If you enjoyed this article or found it helpful, please consider leaving a tip. Thank you; just use the yellow button.


* Endres, Nikolai. Galli: Ancient Roman Priests. 2005.

** Crsip, Quentin, The Naked Civil Servant. 1985. Flamingo.


****Bailey, Dr J M. The Man Who Would Be Queen.

*****Bonnie, David. Bangkok Baby.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.