It’s so ironic that Vladi - our unofficial Queen of muscle girls - is regularly bombarded with transphobic hate and ridicule ever time she’s featured on a mainstream page.
I spent a few minutes decoding this utterance. I failed to see any irony, even though I tried to apply all three dictionary definitions to this situation. I've heard that sarcasm is a cheap substitute for intelligence. That is, some people adopt a sarcastic tone, then say something as bland as "I guess it's Tuesday", but listeners get the idea anyway that they're chronically unimpressed by everything. They must therefore be used to things being far smarter and more impressive. I think the same applies to perceiving irony when there in fact is none. The intent is purely to confuse the opponent.
Some people might think the term transphobia has lost all meaning and simply turned into mud and poo that's flung at one's political opponents. But if it still means something, then it's by definition an irrational fear that somebody is transgender when in fact he isn't. I submit that the great majority of people who ridicule Vladislava Galagan don't believe she is transgender. They simply don't like her appearance.
But really, why does it matter at all what they say or think? Why do you think it's relevant? In one place one group of people is repulsed by some woman being extremely muscular. In some other place another group of people is repulsed by the idea of a biological male trying to pass himself off as a woman. Pretending that there is a connection is ridiculous. If you're afraid of random people's opinions on the Internet then how can you use the Internet at all?
What you're basically trying to force everyone to believe is that "every manly-looking woman is interchangeable with every other manly-looking woman, not to mention manly-looking man who identifies as a woman, and to think otherwise is hypocrisy, bigotry, idiocy, nazism, fascism, chauvinism, rape and murder! If you like one of these, you must like all of them!"
Step by step it goes like first there are people ridiculing Vladislava for "looking manly". That's purely their opinion. Nobody here is on the hook for anything those people say. And even if anyone was, it would not help the argument. In the second step those comments are falsely put into a category called "transphobia", which means the dislike of or opposition to the idea of people switching genders. In the third step, people who don't want to have biological men on the main site are added to this category.
In the fourth step these people who pan Vladislava are declared evil (which the assumed average person on this site is expected to agree with), then the category called "transphobic" they're falsely included in is declared evil (and here any sane person would disagree because of the false inclusion) and then is drawn the final conclusion that "you don't want to be like these people who ridicule Vladislava, your favorite and your queen, ergo you don't want to be transphobic, ergo you must support adding biological males to the main site".
You're too used to winning arguments by bashing people with the "transphobia" hammer. But all it boils down to in this case is a false equivalence. You like strawberries? I have here some liver casserole, but some people call it strawberries, don't know why, but this is why I think you should like it and I see a great irony and hypocrisy if you don't.
The third definition of irony is "incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs", so it's like people who like something that some other people bash falsely as being trans are expected to like everything else that someone might consider truthfully as being trans.
So there is an expectation based on a contrived false equivalence and the "irony" is that this expectation proved false.
Also, the whole "I see irony" means "I caught you in hypocrisy" (and bigotry and whatever), but if you shed any light on it, there's nothing.
The whole argument is actually that "in some way all these women on this site are already trans, so adding real trans, trans trans, unironically trans or intentionally trans people to the mix would change nothing". Well, I just disagree.
So sad. A female-born woman bombed with transphobic hate. How ironic. Sorry for her...
Ironic indeed. A huge portion of the population thinks that female bodybuilders look transgender or want to be men. They think that guys who like them are gay. They're laughing their ass off at all of us, and making fun of all of us.
Instead of fighting back against those sentiments by being more accepting and inclusive, some dudes on here simply want to push out the goalposts. "Normies think that Vladi looks like a man, but I think she's hot so she's a woman. But I'm not attracted to Paige Dumars, so she's officially too masculine"
I also have yet to get any kind of clarity on trans men. If men can't become women, then women can't become men. So if someone is born a woman, they are a woman forever.. no matter what they do, correct?
Can my homie down here be posted on the site? This person, Ayran Pasha, was born a woman, takes a massive amount of male hormones, and lifts weights...
Functionally, what is the difference between Ayran and someone like Rheta West? They have the same genitals. Ayran has short hair, Rheta has no hair and is wearing a wig. Neither of them have any breasts that I can see. Their supplement and PED use most likely looks very similar. They're both on a ton of testosterone and GH.
Ayran has facial hair. You can bet your ass that Rheta would as well if she'd didn't zap it with laser or electrolysis. That's the case for most of the bigger girls. Heavy testosterone simply be like that... whether it comes from testacles or a vial.
COULD IT BE THE PRONOUNS THAT THEY USE? If it's okay to post Rheta, is it okay to post Ayran too? According to "biological sex," Ayran is female right? They'd be using the ladies' bathroom in an increasing number of states.
It’s so ironic that Vladi - our unofficial Queen of muscle girls - is regularly bombarded with transphobic hate and ridicule ever time she’s featured on a mainstream page.
They’d certainly consider you gay or trans-attracted for liking her.
Idk, I sleep with guys and girls so doesn’t bother me at all, but must be funny to consider that from your perspective.
I could draw a Venn diagram and you guys would have a nice bit of overlap with the commenters here.
t
So sad. A female-born woman bombed with transphobic hate. How ironic. Sorry for her...
It’s so ironic that Vladi - our unofficial Queen of muscle girls - is regularly bombarded with transphobic hate and ridicule ever time she’s featured on a mainstream page.
They’d certainly consider you gay or trans-attracted for liking her.
Idk, I sleep with guys and girls so doesn’t bother me at all, but must be funny to consider that from your perspective.
I could draw a Venn diagram and you guys would have a nice bit of overlap with the commenters here.
Absolutely not. Female bodybuilders are regularly maligned with comments that they are looking too masculine, so to add transgender into this forum, would in my opinion create much controversy and disagreement. I'm sure someone will start up a unique forum to cater for their social media interests.
Seems to me that many average people have an icky feeling about biological men who want to be women. One thing we could do is explore and explain the reasons for this ick and then attempt to address them, rationally and at face value, one by one, and see where we get. But I doubt this is going to happen, is allowed to happen or is even necessary to make happen, as long as the big answer is already no.
Then there is the ubiquitous misuse of the word hate, whose real meaning can range from avoidant dislike, which is practically always the case, to willingness to commit mass murder. The key being that people who have an avoidant dislike get accused of willingness to commit mass murder. But this is an example of the general tendency of trans rights activists to be on the attack and employ copious false accusations.
THE point.
Most of the things said there are best ignored. Most of the things said amount to wishful gaslighting. But for the benefit of alarmed and confused onlookers I think a few things need to be said.
Beauty can be defined in two ways that I know of. First one is to consider it synonymous with desirable. This does not say a lot. But the Aristotelian concept contains three parts that are called clarity, integrity and consonance. I think men to women trans fail in all three. No matter if they can fool some people totally and many people initially, there is a gut feeling of confusion and ugliness and lack of purpose about the whole issue. I have no idea why trans activists talk here about fear, except as part of some kind of power fantasy.
I think what people really fear is a certain kind of toxicity. People fear the verbal aggression, false accusations and gaslighting will not end until the trans activists get their way. Though this is what they're probably counting on. That people would want to buy their silence by giving in.
Then again the concept of "hate speech". If voicing a personal dislike is considered "hate speech" then hate speech is a human right and any attempt to silence it is a human rights violation. I have no clue why trans activists are so much in love with these "sliding scale" concepts, whose only utility is in making false accusations. It takes all meaning away from language and makes rational discussion impossible.
Ignorance is not a substance or type of energy. It is a state of not knowing something that is presumably true. Disagreeing with someone is not the same thing as being ignorant, though practically always when someone is accused of ignorance he is in reality being accused of disagreeing with the accuser.
To paraphrase: These trans activists aren't juicing the ad numbers. They make the place look worse and feel worse. They're a buzzkill for anyone trying to get turned on by photos. I actually can't imagine any rationale as to why they're given so much deference.
I actually haven't seen anyone been given any kind of deference. It's a simple choice between two alternatives. Nobody really knows the reasons. Maybe it's ad revenue. Maybe it's some big principle or someone's peace of mind. Maybe something else. But usually when minorities get their way in things like this, it's due to unmerited deference. And cowardice. It's absolutely a sign of courage to not give in in the face of aggressive activism and false accusations.
The opposite of ignorance is to pretend to know something one possibly can not know in reality. It is actually possible that 100 % of what you quoted is not only false but the direct opposite of reality. Real knowledge is a balance between not knowing and knowing falsely.
Probably the only way to find out would be to set up a sister site and call it transwithmuscle or something. There would only be two problems. The more obvious one is I believe the site would not get much traffic. This for the simple reason that people want to see muscular biological women. Pay no attention to what they say but where they click. There is no getting around this. It is their sexuality. Trans activists basically consider themselves entitled to meddle with not only their own but especially other people's sexuality. The other one being that this meddling is the whole point of the bid and the exercise, so this is why a parallel site would not give them what they want. It would not fool anyone into taking biological men for women.
It's no more complicated than that I know what I want to be turned on by. If someone wants to fool me into being turned on by a biological male, then I naturally think that's disgusting. If he were to momentarily succeed but eventually fail then he may think he has proven something. But this is like arguing that since rape victims sometimes get turned on by the physical activity, no matter how much and consistently they object to it otherwise, then they must secretly like it. No doubt people also object to this meddling mentality or rape mentality.
Some women may think that I am not a handsome and desirable guy. But do I wish there was a law that entitled me to pass off as handsome and desirable to whichever woman I want, under the pain of wholesale destruction of her career, finances and other relationships? Or is she somehow entitled to not consider me handsome and desirable? Might I even call that hate? Or would you be so cruel as to tell me to simply learn to live with it?
I think that this is accurate for why some guys are so resistant to trans models.
I'm confident that a strong trans women would have at least as many fans as she does haters, and most users would simply not care. It's just a vocal, hysterical minority that can't simply live and let live. Imagine being mad about a trans model when there's freaking 1.5 MILLION OTHER PHOTOS TO LOOK AT. Who the hell has time for that? Trans models scare them because many of them are strong and beautiful. And they look exactly like many of the cis girls on here. Some look even more feminine than cis FBBs. We all know that it's true. That's why it's threatening to some.
The mods made this decision because they can't or won't enforce a ban on hate speech. They said that the moderation is too difficult. Seems easy to me. Make an announcement that bigoted comments about trans people (or any other people) won't be tolerated and earns you a permanent ban. Then just ban the problematic commenters.
I've seen a bizarre degree of tolerance for ignorance and misogyny and bigotry here. I can't imagine why. These ignorant users aren't juicing the ad numbers. They make the place look worse and feel worse. They're a buzzkill for anyone trying to get turned on by photos. I actually can't imagine any rationale as to why they're given so much deference.
If I was single, and I was not, I would probably talk to her (she was with an older woman that I would assume was her mother).
She's such a teaser.
And a woman.
She doesn't have my equipment down there.
I don't mean this in an internet troll kinda way, but please go outside and touch some grass, breath some fresh air, instead of thinking about what random women on the internet have down there
There might be but for me it’s a no. Even some of the most juiced up girls still look like women to me. There are girls like Paige Dumars or Anastasia Korableva that push it and for me once they start acting as masculine as men it’s a turn off.
Roid girls still have more narrow bone structure, wider hips, (hopefully for me) no facial hair and move more feminine. Of the trans women I have seen, none of them really look like biological women to me.
Log in |
Register
^ There’s just no way that I’m reading all that. But I really enjoy speculating what you look like.
I usually envision Pollux Troy in “Face Off.” Am I close at all?
I spent a few minutes decoding this utterance. I failed to see any irony, even though I tried to apply all three dictionary definitions to this situation. I've heard that sarcasm is a cheap substitute for intelligence. That is, some people adopt a sarcastic tone, then say something as bland as "I guess it's Tuesday", but listeners get the idea anyway that they're chronically unimpressed by everything. They must therefore be used to things being far smarter and more impressive. I think the same applies to perceiving irony when there in fact is none. The intent is purely to confuse the opponent.
Some people might think the term transphobia has lost all meaning and simply turned into mud and poo that's flung at one's political opponents. But if it still means something, then it's by definition an irrational fear that somebody is transgender when in fact he isn't. I submit that the great majority of people who ridicule Vladislava Galagan don't believe she is transgender. They simply don't like her appearance.
But really, why does it matter at all what they say or think? Why do you think it's relevant? In one place one group of people is repulsed by some woman being extremely muscular. In some other place another group of people is repulsed by the idea of a biological male trying to pass himself off as a woman. Pretending that there is a connection is ridiculous. If you're afraid of random people's opinions on the Internet then how can you use the Internet at all?
What you're basically trying to force everyone to believe is that "every manly-looking woman is interchangeable with every other manly-looking woman, not to mention manly-looking man who identifies as a woman, and to think otherwise is hypocrisy, bigotry, idiocy, nazism, fascism, chauvinism, rape and murder! If you like one of these, you must like all of them!"
Step by step it goes like first there are people ridiculing Vladislava for "looking manly". That's purely their opinion. Nobody here is on the hook for anything those people say. And even if anyone was, it would not help the argument. In the second step those comments are falsely put into a category called "transphobia", which means the dislike of or opposition to the idea of people switching genders. In the third step, people who don't want to have biological men on the main site are added to this category.
In the fourth step these people who pan Vladislava are declared evil (which the assumed average person on this site is expected to agree with), then the category called "transphobic" they're falsely included in is declared evil (and here any sane person would disagree because of the false inclusion) and then is drawn the final conclusion that "you don't want to be like these people who ridicule Vladislava, your favorite and your queen, ergo you don't want to be transphobic, ergo you must support adding biological males to the main site".
You're too used to winning arguments by bashing people with the "transphobia" hammer. But all it boils down to in this case is a false equivalence. You like strawberries? I have here some liver casserole, but some people call it strawberries, don't know why, but this is why I think you should like it and I see a great irony and hypocrisy if you don't.
The third definition of irony is "incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs", so it's like people who like something that some other people bash falsely as being trans are expected to like everything else that someone might consider truthfully as being trans.
So there is an expectation based on a contrived false equivalence and the "irony" is that this expectation proved false.
Also, the whole "I see irony" means "I caught you in hypocrisy" (and bigotry and whatever), but if you shed any light on it, there's nothing.
The whole argument is actually that "in some way all these women on this site are already trans, so adding real trans, trans trans, unironically trans or intentionally trans people to the mix would change nothing". Well, I just disagree.
Ironic indeed. A huge portion of the population thinks that female bodybuilders look transgender or want to be men. They think that guys who like them are gay. They're laughing their ass off at all of us, and making fun of all of us.
Instead of fighting back against those sentiments by being more accepting and inclusive, some dudes on here simply want to push out the goalposts. "Normies think that Vladi looks like a man, but I think she's hot so she's a woman. But I'm not attracted to Paige Dumars, so she's officially too masculine"
I also have yet to get any kind of clarity on trans men. If men can't become women, then women can't become men. So if someone is born a woman, they are a woman forever.. no matter what they do, correct?
Can my homie down here be posted on the site? This person, Ayran Pasha, was born a woman, takes a massive amount of male hormones, and lifts weights...
Functionally, what is the difference between Ayran and someone like Rheta West? They have the same genitals. Ayran has short hair, Rheta has no hair and is wearing a wig. Neither of them have any breasts that I can see. Their supplement and PED use most likely looks very similar. They're both on a ton of testosterone and GH.
Ayran has facial hair. You can bet your ass that Rheta would as well if she'd didn't zap it with laser or electrolysis. That's the case for most of the bigger girls. Heavy testosterone simply be like that... whether it comes from testacles or a vial.
COULD IT BE THE PRONOUNS THAT THEY USE? If it's okay to post Rheta, is it okay to post Ayran too? According to "biological sex," Ayran is female right? They'd be using the ladies' bathroom in an increasing number of states.
So sad. A female-born woman bombed with transphobic hate. How ironic. Sorry for her...
It’s so ironic that Vladi - our unofficial Queen of muscle girls - is regularly bombarded with transphobic hate and ridicule ever time she’s featured on a mainstream page.
They’d certainly consider you gay or trans-attracted for liking her.
Idk, I sleep with guys and girls so doesn’t bother me at all, but must be funny to consider that from your perspective.
I could draw a Venn diagram and you guys would have a nice bit of overlap with the commenters here.
Absolutely not. Female bodybuilders are regularly maligned with comments that they are looking too masculine, so to add transgender into this forum, would in my opinion create much controversy and disagreement. I'm sure someone will start up a unique forum to cater for their social media interests.
Seems to me that many average people have an icky feeling about biological men who want to be women. One thing we could do is explore and explain the reasons for this ick and then attempt to address them, rationally and at face value, one by one, and see where we get. But I doubt this is going to happen, is allowed to happen or is even necessary to make happen, as long as the big answer is already no.
Then there is the ubiquitous misuse of the word hate, whose real meaning can range from avoidant dislike, which is practically always the case, to willingness to commit mass murder. The key being that people who have an avoidant dislike get accused of willingness to commit mass murder. But this is an example of the general tendency of trans rights activists to be on the attack and employ copious false accusations.
Most of the things said there are best ignored. Most of the things said amount to wishful gaslighting. But for the benefit of alarmed and confused onlookers I think a few things need to be said.
Beauty can be defined in two ways that I know of. First one is to consider it synonymous with desirable. This does not say a lot. But the Aristotelian concept contains three parts that are called clarity, integrity and consonance. I think men to women trans fail in all three. No matter if they can fool some people totally and many people initially, there is a gut feeling of confusion and ugliness and lack of purpose about the whole issue. I have no idea why trans activists talk here about fear, except as part of some kind of power fantasy.
I think what people really fear is a certain kind of toxicity. People fear the verbal aggression, false accusations and gaslighting will not end until the trans activists get their way. Though this is what they're probably counting on. That people would want to buy their silence by giving in.
Then again the concept of "hate speech". If voicing a personal dislike is considered "hate speech" then hate speech is a human right and any attempt to silence it is a human rights violation. I have no clue why trans activists are so much in love with these "sliding scale" concepts, whose only utility is in making false accusations. It takes all meaning away from language and makes rational discussion impossible.
Ignorance is not a substance or type of energy. It is a state of not knowing something that is presumably true. Disagreeing with someone is not the same thing as being ignorant, though practically always when someone is accused of ignorance he is in reality being accused of disagreeing with the accuser.
To paraphrase: These trans activists aren't juicing the ad numbers. They make the place look worse and feel worse. They're a buzzkill for anyone trying to get turned on by photos. I actually can't imagine any rationale as to why they're given so much deference.
I actually haven't seen anyone been given any kind of deference. It's a simple choice between two alternatives. Nobody really knows the reasons. Maybe it's ad revenue. Maybe it's some big principle or someone's peace of mind. Maybe something else. But usually when minorities get their way in things like this, it's due to unmerited deference. And cowardice. It's absolutely a sign of courage to not give in in the face of aggressive activism and false accusations.
The opposite of ignorance is to pretend to know something one possibly can not know in reality. It is actually possible that 100 % of what you quoted is not only false but the direct opposite of reality. Real knowledge is a balance between not knowing and knowing falsely.
Probably the only way to find out would be to set up a sister site and call it transwithmuscle or something. There would only be two problems. The more obvious one is I believe the site would not get much traffic. This for the simple reason that people want to see muscular biological women. Pay no attention to what they say but where they click. There is no getting around this. It is their sexuality. Trans activists basically consider themselves entitled to meddle with not only their own but especially other people's sexuality. The other one being that this meddling is the whole point of the bid and the exercise, so this is why a parallel site would not give them what they want. It would not fool anyone into taking biological men for women.
It's no more complicated than that I know what I want to be turned on by. If someone wants to fool me into being turned on by a biological male, then I naturally think that's disgusting. If he were to momentarily succeed but eventually fail then he may think he has proven something. But this is like arguing that since rape victims sometimes get turned on by the physical activity, no matter how much and consistently they object to it otherwise, then they must secretly like it. No doubt people also object to this meddling mentality or rape mentality.
Some women may think that I am not a handsome and desirable guy. But do I wish there was a law that entitled me to pass off as handsome and desirable to whichever woman I want, under the pain of wholesale destruction of her career, finances and other relationships? Or is she somehow entitled to not consider me handsome and desirable? Might I even call that hate? Or would you be so cruel as to tell me to simply learn to live with it?
So if some of you are into muscular trans,what are the nicknames ?
Recently i stumbled upon:
jean_sneider
https://www.reddit.com/user/AKeenBeanQueen/
THE point.
Dude enjoy your transgender bodybuilders to your hearts desire but comparing and using race/ethnicity to justify a sexual fetish is some sick shit.
Since you touched the subject in this very womanly way, I'll bring the REPEAL THE 19th AMENDMENT subject and see what you, FREYA, have to say.
;-)
It's a good discussion.
I don't mean this in an internet troll kinda way, but please go outside and touch some grass, breath some fresh air, instead of thinking about what random women on the internet have down there
Same energy as "Lmao you blacks want to vote? You should be grateful we don't enslave you anymore!"
(obv different situation as this is just an obscure website, but the underlying logic is the same)
great looking legs
There might be but for me it’s a no. Even some of the most juiced up girls still look like women to me. There are girls like Paige Dumars or Anastasia Korableva that push it and for me once they start acting as masculine as men it’s a turn off. Roid girls still have more narrow bone structure, wider hips, (hopefully for me) no facial hair and move more feminine. Of the trans women I have seen, none of them really look like biological women to me.
So kind of you ❤️
You're welcome
Hottt 🔥🔥🔥🔥🥵
I love her:):):)
LOVE THE PICS!!!!!!!
Thank You very much:)