>>50465>Someone announcing that they are "trans" always violates rule 0 because they are either>a man claiming that they are a succubus>a succubus claiming that they are a man
A somewhat narrow view of the transgender spectrum. What about "genderqueer" where you simply don't identify as either gender?
> claiming that you're a succubus is always against the rules even if it's not true
Surely that rule is aimed at cis-succubi though? So long as they admit they're not biologically succubi, is it a problem?
> in the latter case being a succubus is always against the rules even if you don't explicitly announce it.
Should we make exceptions for FtMs who actually get hysterectomies and cut out both ovaries basically becoming non-gender?
I find the actual construction of a fake penis to be somewhat non-wizardly unless your purpose for that is honestly to aim your piss which can be done non-surgically using those spout things pre-op "transmen" use.