kristoff: that's nice to hear! I remember you posting a while ago that you had told hardly anyone. I'm very glad things worked out for you.
Raymar: I like "testicle-free individual"

. Though, mine aren't permanently removed yet, just permanently disabled [and hopefully not carcinogenic].
smoothie36, considering: I disagree. I don't mean to sound condescending, but I think you might see things differently [or at least more complexity] if you did in fact not identify with your assigned-at-birth gender. I don't like using binary-identified people as "examples" but perhaps that's most clear: I imagine many trans-women wouldn't use Eunuch, just like cis-women (non-transgender women) wouldn't use the term Eunuch for themselves.
Tugon: I appreciate your story. It's cool that you identify as Eunuch but not male -- my personal interpretation of the word is that Eunuch usually implies male (altered male, but male), and it's great to hear how everyone identifies differently. When I was Eunuch-identified, I had no interest in being female; now, I'd like to have some female body characteristics [more of a want than a need -- I don't strongly identify as having or not having breasts, but they seem nice], and find expressing femininity expressive (there's nothing like dresses, skirts, leggings, etc. in typical western men's wardrobe), fun, potentially flirty, and ultimately a huge source of strength, as [for an assigned-male person] one has to get over a lot of internalized fears to do it.
FLO, unencumbered: yeah, Eunuch has a lot of historical baggage. Another reason I don't use it personally, but respect others who choose to. To me, connotations are just as important as denotations, but I can see how it's useful for alluding to [an aspect of] one's current physical state.
janekane: I agree often terms mean more about what other people think of you, but you can use them to influence how others think of you. On the other hand, it's difficult to say how each individual will perceive the word Eunuch, so you can't say they're necessarily passing on negative judgement, for example. I don't agree that we're all just people -- I think certain differences are important, and worth naming. Having language for myself (gender-nonconforming, genderqueer, effectively castrated, queerly feminine, physical transitioner, lacking social intelligibility, hormone-modified, body-modified, body dysphoric, pansexual-asexual-spectrum or "somewhat asexual", once Eunuch-identified) is powerful, liberating, even if most other people don't understand it.
devi: completely agree with being able to have an "O" (I think there's also an "X" option in the UK/Australia/NZ, with pronoun Mx, pronounced "mix"). But, when you say "
devi (imported) wrote: Sat Jun 29, 2013 8:54 am
third gender construct which would include most
Eunuchs", I think it'd be better to allow people of all body types to be part of any possibly-empty set of gender cohorts, than mandate Eunuchs identify as third gender -- certainly, many respondees of this thread have said they identify as male.
Fixet: I think many asexuals use the term to say "lack of attraction", rather than lack of libido -- some describe masturbation as [paraphrasing] "something that feels nice, but isn't sexual". Sorry you don't like your feelings -- why not?