Forum
>
Trans Women
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
You actually gave a rational reason for the exclusion of trans women a few pages back. I don't agree with it, but it's rational.
In effect, you said that people look at the photos on this site to be aroused. And part of their arousal is projection. So if someone is turned on by a muscular trans woman - without knowing she's trans - they might be distressed by this knowledge, as it is now part of their projection. Even if they're never going to meet or be intimate with this person, they no longer feel like they could, and that's a boner killer (my words here).
I get that. I think this is entirely valid for a p0rn site. I have zero problem with HerBiceps or Awefilms or whoever declining to have trans models. People have the right to be turned on by who they like. It's also okay for a trans site to exclude cis women.
Thing is:
1) This isn't expressly a p0rn site. At least that's not how it's sold. Its supposed to be a huge repository of images. In theory, women should be able to exist here outside of being sexually attractive. They just need to have muscles.
2) As such, you can't have it both ways on the trans ban. If you believe that birth sex is fixed, then trans men are still women, and they belong here. There's plenty of other girls on lots of gear with huge muscles and short hair and no boobs and bulges in their panties. As stated, the only difference between Rheta West and a Trans man is the trans guy's embrace of facial hair.
If you believe that gender can change, then trans men are now verboten (as they're men) and trans women should be allowed. Lots of fit trans girls out there look indistinguishable from the girls already on here. And they work hard for their muscles. You're excluding them and devaluing their accomplishments because it's incompatible with some people's fantasy projection. And that's wrong.
3) Just to clarify - you CAN have it both ways on the trans ban, you'd just be a hypocrite. Which happens every time trans men are mentioned. The same people who want trans women to use the mens room will freak out if a buff and bearded trans man uses the women's room. It messes with the misogynistic narrative, so the solution is to move on with a joke and try to bring the focus back to "men in dresses." You're not alone in this.
I don't even personally find trans people attractive. I'm bisexual and very much into cisgender, clearly binary people. I'm horny and kinky. I like buff women with smooth vaginas and buff guys with big penises. It's just a preference. Doesn't make me a transphobe. I'm not really attracted to black girls or Indian girls or middle eastern girls either. Doesn't make me a racist. We're allowed to have our sexual preferences.
So having trans women on here isn't going to get me aroused. I'll stick with Kristina Mendoza and Chris Bumstead, thank you very much. But I still think that they should be included. I don't mind seeing their photos because I'm a reasonable person who believes that others should be free to be who they want.. and I don't think that female athletes only have value if they're sexually appealing to me.
the simple answer is "no". Most of the site's users wouldn't wanna see that.
Sorry, but the poll up on there tells another story
We forget about natty women who work really hard to get a muscle. They are being further punished with not only sharing the stage with the ones juicing now also the people born with with the male advantage. I say XX chromosome women only, except that rare 6 out of 100k women who are XY born with the female gender. They are ok too. I think a more precise to say if you were born with working or non working Mullerian system you are the only ones allowed here.
I notice you chose to ignore everything I said and play another round of catch instead.
This site is not uncanny valley with muscles, neither is this highly disturbed persons with muscles. Every sane adult knows that you must draw the line somewhere. Just check the upload page to see how it's been drawn currently. It's drawn at very slightly uncanny and less than moderately disturbed.
Another game that gets played a lot in this discussion is let's pretend. Most of the time to pretend that you must have one criterion and one criterion only, and it can either be the gender a person identifies in or the gender a person was born in. The problem is, nobody is interested in playing this game, because it only leads to ugly, useless and undesirable conclusions.
The valid answer is the restaurant analogy I already gave a year ago and again a moment ago. You're entitled to get out, but you're not entitled to get in.
Instead of trying to shame people into playing your games you should maybe offer them reasons that would make them want to play. Or find rules that all players can agree on.
Maybe there are people for whom everything is a game of catch or let's pretend. Everything is power and representation. Nothing is real. This is related to the current AI revolution so that computers are purely things that process things, with no ability to represent anything. Humans straddle the line between things and representations. But this carries with it the danger of falling entirely into the other side.
In other words, you may see it so that no argument is or can be based on reality, but all are simply competing games of catch or let's pretend. You like to gloat how the evil transphobes have isolated and marginalized themselves just by being what they are. I don't think that's enough. I think one should give rational reasons for such claims. Like I did here.