Forum
>
Trans Women
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Hi Monica! Nice to meet you!
Oh and just so Iâm clearâŚ
1) You posting pics here isnât competing with any other models or diminishing them. So the âtrans athleteâ thing just doesnât apply. This site has muscular women of all stripes and sports and levels of accomplishment.
2) I donât think there should be a trans tag. Or an Asian tag or a black tag or a lesbian tag or any tags. Youâre a woman, this is a site for muscular women.
These kind of tags are okay on a porn site. But this doesnât present itself as one. People may very well fap to these pics (I certainly do), but they shouldnât judge them only through the lens of what they find attractive. If they donât like the model⌠just move on. Itâs that easy.
It could be so in a perfect world. But, as you say, only 80-100 years ago there were the majority of people that would not have allowed black or asian women on gwm because they would have sworn they were not "women" (or human beings like white people, for what they concerned). Now, there are some dinosaurs that think so, but they are far minority. It will be the time when trans women would be considered women. Expecting that, if the "trans" tag will help, i would be ok with it.
Moreover, there's no nudity or explicitly sexual things. So if TransMuscleChic can't post a photo flexing in a sports bra, then there's only one reason why... the mods do not consider her to be a "woman." There are members here who are TERRIFIED of liking her photo and then discovering that she's trans. Due to their own insecurities and fragility. And that is completely f**ked up.
I'll tell a secret that's not a secret: there are RIGHT NOW some transwomen featured on the main site. Some women that are male-born, had their hrt, their gender operation, have muscles, and have a bunch of comments beneath their pics. I am sure about that. And a lot of transphobes yet commenting on how they are powerful and feminine. I'm not sure about non operated trans, but I guess in the hundreds of thousands of pics there are too.
I'll tell a secret that's not a secret: there are RIGHT NOW some transwomen featured on the main site. Some women that are male-born, had their hrt, their gender operation, have muscles, and have a bunch of comments beneath their pics. I am sure about that. And a lot of transphobes yet commenting on how they are powerful and feminine. I'm not sure about non operated trans, but I guess in the hundreds of thousands of pics there are too.
Yup, you're entirely correct... there are definitely some trans women in the galleries. And they do get a good amount of positive feedback. No one is harmed by this.
It's great evidence to the pure and simple discrimination that exists here. If the small community of insecure morons don't know she's trans: they're enjoying and praising her photo. If they know she's trans... they're freaking out and reporting and complaining.
They'll never meet this person. Probably never talk to her. Her presence doesn't negatively impact any other women on the site. And it's easy to simply move on to the next picture. But their bigotry is so strong that they can't deal with it. Their only course is to make every effort to erase their existence in the galleries and ban them to this segregated part of the forum.
I have an honest question for the people who are nervous about trans models. And even though I've been combative in the past, I promise that I'm not going to try to attack or refute your points. I'm having an impossible time seeing things from your side, and I really just want to learn.
What is the absolute worst case scenario for you? What are you afraid of?
I imagine that the best known trans bodybuilder is Janae Marie Kroc
She was a male bodybuilder before and admittedly has some pretty masculine traits. Not the least of which is being totally bald underneath the wig.
But she's had multiple documentaries made about her, she owns a gym, and she's very much a legitimate part of the bodybuilding world.
If her photos were allowed on here, what is the absolute worst thing that could happen? In my mind, her presence would cost you nothing. It would not diminish the other women on here in any way. We don't necessarily rank models in order of femininity, but I could name quite a few cisgender women who are less classically "feminine" than Janae Kroc.
What is so scary about her presence that she needs to be banned, or segregated, or given a "trans tag?"
I have an honest question for the people who are nervous about trans models. And even though I've been combative in the past, I promise that I'm not going to try to attack or refute your points. I'm having an impossible time seeing things from your side, and I really just want to learn.
What is the absolute worst case scenario for you? What are you afraid of?
I imagine that the best known trans bodybuilder is Janae Marie Kroc
She was a male bodybuilder before and admittedly has some pretty masculine traits. Not the least of which is being totally bald underneath the wig.
But she's had multiple documentaries made about her, she owns a gym, and she's very much a legitimate part of the bodybuilding world.
If her photos were allowed on here, what is the absolute worst thing that could happen? In my mind, her presence would cost you nothing. It would not diminish the other women on here in any way. We don't necessarily rank models in order of femininity, but I could name quite a few cisgender women who are less classically "feminine" than Janae Kroc.
What is so scary about her presence that she needs to be banned, or segregated, or given a "trans tag?"
Because these guys want to make sure that only pictures they can jerk off to are on the site lol.
Because these guys want to make sure that only pictures they can jerk off to are on the site lol.
I guess that's the part that I don't understand. I love jerking off, and I pretty much exclusively do it alone. No one really knows what I'm using to get off. This site is technically SFW and isn't showing any genitals or sex acts.
On the scale of feminine presentation.. I don't see a huge difference in the photos of Janae Kroc and ... say... Anastasia Korableva.
I'm not trying to be mean with that, and I find them both equally attractive. But the big girls are on a ton of PEDs and they all have pretty strong virilization effects. To the average person on the street, I'm quite sure that Anastasia looks transgender in their eyes.
So if a guy looks that that picture, I imagine that he gets off due to her massive arms, pecs, and biceps. Anastasia has absolutely mind blowing mass in her upper body and it's really sexy. So does Janae. I can't directly link her photos here, but google her... the upper body shape and mass is REALLY similar.
Genuinely curious to hear. At the end of the day, what's the difference? What's the harm in looking at Janae's pics (and maybe enjoying them) versus looking at Anastasia's pics?
Genuinely curious to hear. At the end of the day, what's the difference? What's the harm in looking at Janae's pics (and maybe enjoying them) versus looking at Anastasia's pics?
Itâs a psychological thing, I think. To a lot of people, transgender women simply arenât ârealâ women, unfortunately.
Itâs a psychological thing, I think. To a lot of people, transgender women simply arenât ârealâ women, unfortunately.
It is. And it is all about a subjective perception of what is "feminine" and "masculine". Not a single objective matter on there, as transphobes like to think. Or, they will allow on the main site ftm trans bodybuilder, that have beards, adam apples and all secondary male characters, BUT they still have a natural vagina. That, in own transphobes idea, is THE ONLY feature that makes a woman a real woman. So?
It is all a matter of subjective perception. A perception, I can add after weeks of this poll online, that appears minoritary EVEN on gwm. So, I think that the site should re-think its entire policy on trans women on the main site. Or, at least, begin to.
Itâs a psychological thing, I think. To a lot of people, transgender women simply arenât ârealâ women, unfortunately.
Yes, I'd sadly agree with that. But do they need to attracted to "real women" only when they're focused on things like biceps and quads and such?
Like I get not watching to watch trans porn or date a trans woman. That's all totally fine, everyone is entitled to their preferences. But why the need to suppress all of their content on here? There's plenty of "Girls with Muscle" who I don't like and don't find attractive in the least. But I'm not reporting their photos because they still belong here. And I just move on.
I have mixed feeling. Trans that look like woman ok, but then what about the abundance of cross dressing men who like to put on womens underwear and a wig and start taking flexing pics? Technically they are considered trans. So where does the line get drawn?
Sorry. They are not. Men that crossdress are technically into fetish of what is normally considered female clothes, regardless of their gender perception and sexual inclination. Often they are cis etherosexual men. Transexuals have gender disphoria, in specific case male-born who identifies into women gender and live with some degree of suffering that perception. Sorry no will to do lessons, but I know the case personally.
I have mixed feeling. Trans that look like woman ok, but then what about the abundance of cross dressing men who like to put on womens underwear and a wig and start taking flexing pics? Technically they are considered trans. So where does the line get drawn?
Cross dressers aren't trans majority of them identify as men or nonbinary.
Cross dressers aren't trans majority of them identify as men or nonbinary.
Well you could have fulled me, because I know someone who identifies as Trans and wears fake breast and a wig, but also somedays dresses like his normal male self and shaved bald head. Not to mention he even identifies as a trans person on his dating site. Sooo that kinda blows your logic.
As I said, where do we draw the line?
Well you could have fulled me, because I know someone who identifies as Trans and wears fake breast and a wig, but also somedays dresses like his normal male self and shaved bald head. Not to mention he even identifies as a trans person on his dating site. Sooo that kinda blows your logic.
As I said, where do we draw the line?
This is anecdotal evidence but even then cis women wear wigs, pads and shave their heads all the time too so idk how you could consider this cross dressing..
I brought this up before, but you can easily reveal the hypocrisy of this trans women ban by bringing up TRANS MEN. Women who became men. Everybody forgets about them because the same people who are prejudiced against trans women also consider everyday cis women to be less important. There's a lot of freaking out when a man becomes a woman (he's losing his status!! he's tempting me!!) but pretty much no one cares when a woman becomes a man.
Anyway, if GWM is going to roll with the logic that gender is based on either (1) what sex you were born or (2) what genitalia you have, then this person technically qualifies as a GWM model:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/transge...
He was born a woman. He has a vagina. He's probably on less HRT than most FBB's.
Anyone want to try posting his photos and tagging his name? Wonder how that's going to work out.
I canât imagine why any trans woman would want to be on this site.
Jesus the amount of fragile male energy and overcompensation here is thick enough to cut with a knife.
You can picture the Drake meme for GWMâŚ
Reluctant Drake: fit and beautiful trans woman who has a penis that you never even see because all of her pics are clothed.
Smiling Drake: cis woman with bald head, skin like leather, more girth âdown thereâ then most males, and more testosterone and GH than Rich Piana at his peak.
The awesome thing about being bisexual (like me) is simply not GAF and enjoying wonderful muscles on the full spectrum of humans who have them. Itâs just photos, Iâm (sadly) not sleeping with any of these exceptional people. Just drop the pretense and let yourself enjoy life for chissakes.
Why insult people and paint them with the same brush? And why insinuate that there is something wrong with people if they don't like the same things you do? Honestly this political BS should not be on a nice forum such as this. You guys are pulling a whole lot of baggage on to this site and I do not think it is courteous to ask ANYONE why he or she does not like it nor to give us YOUR reasons why they don't.
Why insult people and paint them with the same brush? And why insinuate that there is something wrong with people if they don't like the same things you do? Honestly this political BS should not be on a nice forum such as this. You guys are pulling a whole lot of baggage on to this site and I do not think it is courteous to ask ANYONE why he or she does not like it nor to give us YOUR reasons why they don't.
1) I'm insulting people who are bigoted and actively want to keep trans women off of a site for women.
2) It's 100% not a problem if you don't find trans women attractive. But if they have muscles, they belong on this site. You're free to not look at their photos.
For me, I don't find really huge, roided up girls attractive. But they are girls with muscle and they belong here. I see their photos, and move past to the ones that I do like. It's not that hard to do. I'm not complaining and leaving nasty comments and reporting things. It's a free site with millions of photos, and I move onto the photos that I want to see.
3) The only reason to exclude trans women is to reject the fact that they are women. And that's simply not correct. It's not "political," it's just bigoted.
Not finding trans women attractive does not make you a transphobe necessarily. That's okay. If you're not attracted to black women, I don't think you're necessarily a racist. But trying to exclude them because their mere presence offends you or confuses you... that's ignorant.
Let's face it: a lot of trans women with muscles look hot and look just like the cis girls on this site who take gear and it's a terrifying for some fragile guys to possibly consider finding them attractive. Even though they'll never meet them, the fact that they looked at and enjoyed a photo is enough to rock them to the core.
Sad.
Let's face it: a lot of trans women with muscles look hot and look just like the cis girls on this site who take gear and it's a terrifying for some fragile guys to possibly consider finding them attractive. Even though they'll never meet them, the fact that they looked at and enjoyed a photo is enough to rock them to the core.
Sad.
AND, on this poll basis (but we do not have the evidence to say the contrary), they are MINORITY. Even on this site. So?
AND, on this poll basis (but we do not have the evidence to say the contrary), they are MINORITY. Even on this site. So?
Selection bias. Those who are interested in the issue are more prone to vote on it. Those who are not will more likely just keep their distance. I always think that issues should be discussed on their merits.
It clearly seems to me that the side that is advocating change has very little merit. This is why their arguments are based on painting or framing their opponents in a certain way and insinuating evil motives, evil sentiments, stupidity, bad character and so on.
Also denying that the issue has meaning to one side while saying it's incredibly meaningful to the other. "You are not me, therefore you should have no say in any issue pertaining to me." That just makes zero sense.
For starters, any discussion of facts or merits does not argue from anyone's ignorance, bigotry, malice or fragility. Those are accusations, and accusations are not facts and neither do they prove the merit of the accuser.
The pro-trans argument can sometimes be summarized, leaving nothing out, to "either you agree with me or you are worthless human garbage."
It is all a matter of subjective perception. A perception, I can add after weeks of this poll online, that appears minoritary EVEN on gwm. So, I think that the site should re-think its entire policy on trans women on the main site. Or, at least, begin to.
I think I got a new, never seen before perspective to this. Or maybe I have mentioned this already in the psychological reasons discussion. Namely that this site is based on illusions.
This makes the pro-trans argument into "since everything is based on illusion and nothing is real, it does not matter which illusion you consume, since any illusion is as good as any other illusion". Which is obviously false.
Also could not resist pointing out the doublethink that "nothing is real, everything is an illusion, but these men they have really turned into women".
There's a lot of freaking out when a man becomes a woman (he's losing his status!! he's tempting me!!) but pretty much no one cares when a woman becomes a man.
In logic often employed in support of certain political views there is a particular feature that if one, a few or some do it, it can be argued as if they all did it. So if a small minority likes the facial hair, acne, beer bellies, angular jaws or the thought of male body odor then an even smaller minority likes the idea of that person really making a bid to go over to the other side.
But you are talking as if a small minority cheering on this one extreme would make everyone, literally everyone responsible for supporting an even more remote and different kind of extreme.
In comparison, in feminism no woman ever wants to have what the average guy has. They always, each single one of them, want to have what the most successful and most powerful men have. They did not get to have the rich and powerful man, so the second best option is to be like him. Some causes and issues would not exist without this mixing up of the average and the extreme. Something to always look out for.
For many people here it actually is important that the bulky figure they see has once been a little girl. Like their cute cousin or the girl who lived next door or their first crush in school. That is really an integral part of the illusion and the fantasy that the girl they were so fond of or secretly attracted to could turn into a muscle monster. "Hello, Kevin. Look at my biceps. Think of the things I could do to you now."
Some are in effect saying that this is all just trashy porn anyway, so why don't we get to be in it?
Now people may accidentally lie to themselves and accidentally make the mistake, in their point of view at least, of praising a bodybuilder they think is female but has in fact once been a little boy. The pro-trans argument in this case is that since people are sometimes fooled against their will and intentions, they should be fooled more. Since people sometimes involuntarily lie to themselves, they must now lie to themselves on purpose. Or rather that you are entitled to them lying to themselves. No, you're not.
It may be dumb or immoral or a sign of insanity for people to willfully distort their reality. But they may still want to hold on to their agency in doing it. "You're lying to yourself anyway" just isn't an argument or an excuse for anyone else to take over.
In logic often employed in support of certain political views there is a particular feature that if one, a few or some do it, it can be argued as if they all did it. So if a small minority likes the facial hair, acne, beer bellies, angular jaws or the thought of male body odor then an even smaller minority likes the idea of that person really making a bid to go over to the other side.
But you are talking as if a small minority cheering on this one extreme would make everyone, literally everyone responsible for supporting an even more remote and different kind of extreme.
In comparison, in feminism no woman ever wants to have what the average guy has. They always, each single one of them, want to have what the most successful and most powerful men have. They did not get to have the rich and powerful man, so the second best option is to be like him. Some causes and issues would not exist without this mixing up of the average and the extreme. Something to always look out for.
For many people here it actually is important that the bulky figure they see has once been a little girl. Like their cute cousin or the girl who lived next door or their first crush in school. That is really an integral part of the illusion and the fantasy that the girl they were so fond of or secretly attracted to could turn into a muscle monster. "Hello, Kevin. Look at my biceps. Think of the things I could do to you now."
Some are in effect saying that this is all just trashy porn anyway, so why don't we get to be in it?
Now people may accidentally lie to themselves and accidentally make the mistake, in their point of view at least, of praising a bodybuilder they think is female but has in fact once been a little boy. The pro-trans argument in this case is that since people are sometimes fooled against their will and intentions, they should be fooled more. Since people sometimes involuntarily lie to themselves, they must now lie to themselves on purpose. Or rather that you are entitled to them lying to themselves. No, you're not.
It may be dumb or immoral or a sign of insanity for people to willfully distort their reality. But they may still want to hold on to their agency in doing it. "You're lying to yourself anyway" just isn't an argument or an excuse for anyone else to take over.
Just wow. To all of that.
Okay, since you're thinking very deeply on this, how about we do a quick, concrete example. Gabbi Tuft is a former male WWE wrestler and transitioned. She's officially a woman in the eyes of the US government and the medical community. Here's a picture of her:
Now in this example, what harm is done by allowing her on the main page? Does it diminish the other women here? Does it harm the viewers who pay absolutely nothing to use this site, and can quickly move on to the next photo?
And when you say that "people are fooled against their will and intentions"... exactly how does this picture of Gabbi harm them? Looks like Gabbi is married (to a woman who's way hotter than 99% of people here, including me, will ever sleep with) and she's not doing sex work or sessions. This isn't Tinder or Grindr. It's literally a photo. What is the harm done to someone looking at it?
Selection bias. Those who are interested in the issue are more prone to vote on it. Those who are not will more likely just keep their distance. I always think that issues should be discussed on their merits.
I know selection bias. It is a critical point of all polls. So, why put on a poll section? Or maybe, the point is only about trans polls? If this poll output saw the "against trans on main site" POV win, I certainly read something like: "see? People don't want this shit". Now that the other POV seems forward, the thing is: "see? Only trans lovers voted. People don't want this shit" . Oh my. Very consequential.
Hi Monica! Nice to meet you!
Oh and just so Iâm clearâŚ
1) You posting pics here isnât competing with any other models or diminishing them. So the âtrans athleteâ thing just doesnât apply. This site has muscular women of all stripes and sports and levels of accomplishment.
2) I donât think there should be a trans tag. Or an Asian tag or a black tag or a lesbian tag or any tags. Youâre a woman, this is a site for muscular women.
These kind of tags are okay on a porn site. But this doesnât present itself as one. People may very well fap to these pics (I certainly do), but they shouldnât judge them only through the lens of what they find attractive. If they donât like the model⌠just move on. Itâs that easy.