Shemales are just men... don't take my word for it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KittyPride

You might just upgrade yourself from fulltime CD to woman lol

---

You have to bring your sniping here too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terminator2011

An honest statement by the best looking tranny on the planet

Get a life "girls" and fact up to the fact of what she says makes a whole lotta sense!

http://ut1.xhamster.com/t/301/5_b_1013301.jpg

---

fuck off retard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dafame

Really don't see anything wrong with what she said. What is there to snap out of? She said she's fine never being a "real" woman. She said that when girls get vaginas they are "fake" vaginas. Don't disagree with anything that she said because she was stating fact.

She said she knows you can be a girl born in a mans body but hormones although they change your outer appearance and make you look more the way that you feel, they don't change the fact that you were "BORN IN A MANS BODY".

Sounds to me that she's just content with being a transsexual and doesn't need to give herself the "illusion" that she's anything other than that.

While you guys are knocking her (totally understand fellas as we've been conditioned to believe that's what we're supposed to do), I think she's one of the unconfused ones.

---

you american homos need some education,fuckin retards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisaparadise

fuck off retard

---

:Bowdown::Bowdown::Bowdown: Perfect.

Once upon a time there were Queens, then came the Princesses; I believe there are still some Goddesses around, so to be 'just men' is indeed a fall from grace...it is the despondent tone in the video that can be dealt with, if one is, as Krishnamurti once said, 'gentle with yourself'.

you shall above all things be glad and young
for if you're young, whatever life you wear
it will become you; and if you are glad
whatever's living will yourself become.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dafame

KittyPride, although the general premise of what I'm saying remains in tact, I have evolved a bit on the subject just from some of the conversations I've had here and with a friend of mine outside of this forum. Self-delusional was a term that I ran with from someone else here and that was a mistake because it's not truly representive of how I feel and is a rather harsh expression of that. I recant that.

I think some of my word were misplaced and it didn't reflect truly what I was trying to say and if you go back and read some of the more recent exchanges with Trish you'll have a better understanding of where I'm coming from.

Thanks for your reply.

---

You do seem to have refined, at least, your standpoint--a good tete-a-tete with Trish will often do that. I believe that you are much more well-meaning than I thought you appeared at first but I think you are still missing a very important point and that is that many TS women don't want to be thought of as 'special', they don't want to be appreciated for being transsexual, they just want to be women and get on with life. That being the case, your attempt to give them special treatment, albeit in a positive way, is often going to be unwelcome. I know it's a paradox, and one that most men here don't even see as it flies over their heads, but you do seem to be deeper and able to give it more profound thought.

The reason I mentioned AIS women, and especially Complete AIS women, is that they are as chromosomally male as a post-operative transsexual woman (excepting those who have other genetic intergender issues like Klinefelter's) yet they are seen as women. Indeed they are often only diagnosed when they want to have a child and can't. That means that really, the only difference between a CAIS woman, who is seen as a woman, and a post-operative transsexual woman, is upbringing--one was raised as a boy (probably) and the other as a girl. I don't think that a few years' conditioning, which many TS women report as feeling uncomfortable with at the time, is justification enough to say TS women are not women. If you think that's defending something that does not need defending, then that's fine, but it's is still my point that all the girls are asking for is NOT to be treated, or seen, differently from any other woman.

I'm not saying that's always going to be easy. But it is an essential step in getting transsexual women to be better accepted and able to live their lives as normal, ordinary girls. If people who like TS women can't do this much for them, then how can the world of sceptics, haters and bible-thumping conservatives ever be persuaded?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisaparadise

you american homos need some education,fuckin retards

---

Precisely my point. I won't dignify the homo statement with a response of by taking a defensive position against it. It is what it is, just a baseless attack.

I will however say that this is to me is an issue with some (not all) transsexuals. I've noticed that there seems to be an elevated state over the "gay" community and a frown upon gay men from "some". I even heard transsexuals say things like "I can't stand gay men" or "I think it's ok for a man to be with a transsexual but two men together is just nasty".

This is not a defense of the "homo" statement but I haven't ever been with a man (meaning someone who is masculine and looks and acts the way I do) and haven't ever found myself attracted to such. That may or may not disqualify me as a "homosexual" by your standard but that's really beside the point.

Point is I don't take issue with gay men or transsexuals or lesbians or anyone else outside of what society deems to be the norm. So why would you?

I get it. You're a heterosexual female and therefore you can make statements like that. My thing is regardless to how you may feel about yourself you shouldn't denigrate people who are different if for no other reason than the struggles that you've had to go through yourself with society not viewing you through the prism of what is the norm.

It's not that I don't find a difference between you and a "homosexual" male because I do. It's the hubris in your statement that points to the "TOTAL SEPARATION" from the gay community that troubles me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MacShreach

You do seem to have refined, at least, your standpoint--a good tete-a-tete with Trish will often do that. I believe that you are much more well-meaning than I thought you appeared at first but I think you are still missing a very important point and that is that many TS women don't want to be thought of as 'special', they don't want to be appreciated for being transsexual, they just want to be women and get on with life. That being the case, your attempt to give them special treatment, albeit in a positive way, is often going to be unwelcome. I know it's a paradox, and one that most men here don't even see as it flies over their heads, but you do seem to be deeper and able to give it more profound thought.

The reason I mentioned AIS women, and especially Complete AIS women, is that they are as chromosomally male as a post-operative transsexual woman (excepting those who have other genetic intergender issues like Klinefelter's) yet they are seen as women. Indeed they are often only diagnosed when they want to have a child and can't. That means that really, the only difference between a CAIS woman, who is seen as a woman, and a post-operative transsexual woman, is upbringing--one was raised as a boy (probably) and the other as a girl. I don't think that a few years' conditioning, which many TS women report as feeling uncomfortable with at the time, is justification enough to say TS women are not women. If you think that's defending something that does not need defending, then that's fine, but it's is still my point that all the girls are asking for is NOT to be treated, or seen, differently from any other woman.

I'm not saying that's always going to be easy. But it is an essential step in getting transsexual women to be better accepted and able to live their lives as normal, ordinary girls. If people who like TS women can't do this much for them, then how can the world of sceptics, haters and bible-thumping conservatives ever be persuaded?

---

I hear your point loud and clear MacShreach but I think you're missing mine. My point is based on the principle of what I believe and I'm not willing to compromise that for the sake of anyone. Because to do so would mean that I'm lying to the person that I'm with.

It's hard for me to understand how anyone that deals with TS can't view them as special or in some ways different than genetic women. I understand that most transsexuals don't wan to be seen as special and want only to be seen as "female" no different than any other naturally born woman. Accept when it comes to the mans acceptence of them and how he relates to this issue when it comes to the people in his life. She can't be "female" no more "special" that any other but if infact she's not the only TS I've dated then I become a (not my choice of word but the best to make the point) "faggot". My point is those particular women are as unacceptable to me as I would be to them. Because I will not be the only person in the relationship that has to accept the issue of transsexuality.

I never made any indication that I'd treat her any different than I would any other woman (or like a man to be more direct).

I understand the paradox, I am just not one to conform to it. If there is a woman out there for me she'll have to be closer to the understanding that I have or it just simply won't happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dafame

I hear your point loud and clear MacShreach but I think you're missing mine. My point is based on the principle of what I believe and I'm not willing to compromise that for the sake of anyone. Because to do so would mean that I'm lying to the person that I'm with.

It's hard for me to understand how anyone that deals with TS can't view them as special or in some ways different than genetic women. I understand that most transsexuals don't wan to be seen as special and want only to be seen as "female" no different than any other naturally born woman. Accept when it comes to the mans acceptence of them and how he relates to this issue when it comes to the people in his life. She can't be "female" no more "special" that any other but if infact she's not the only TS I've dated then I become a (not my choice of word but the best to make the point) "faggot". My point is those particular women are as unacceptable to me as I would be to them. Because I will not be the only person in the relationship that has to accept the issue of transsexuality.

I never made any indication that I'd treat her any different than I would any other woman (or like a man to be more direct).

I understand the paradox, I am just not one to conform to it. If there is a woman out there for me she'll have to be closer to the understanding that I have or it just simply won't happen.

---

I respect where you are, which seems a fair ways from where we began; whether that is because you have reviewed your position, or are expressing it differently, or I am understanding you better...I would have to read the whole thread again, to be honest.

FWIW I don't think you would be a 'faggot' . As I have said, these absolutist positions really have no place. As Trish says, there is a continuum of gender; there is also a continuum of sexuality. I do see where you are coming from and I agree that it is frustrating...the kind of girl you'd be interested in, would not be interested in you because of your previous experience. (Have I got that right?) I don't see any clear way through that minefield. I think some girls are reluctant to invest emotionally in a relationship if there is any chance that it is the 't' that a man is after. :shrug

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MacShreach

I respect where you are, which seems a fair ways from where we began; whether that is because you have reviewed your position, or are expressing it differently, or I am understanding you better...I would have to read the whole thread again, to be honest.

FWIW I don't think you would be a 'faggot' . As I have said, these absolutist positions really have no place. As Trish says, there is a continuum of gender; there is also a continuum of sexuality. I do see where you are coming from and I agree that it is frustrating...the kind of girl you'd be interested in, would not be interested in you because of your previous experience. (Have I got that right?) I don't see any clear way through that minefield. I think some girls are reluctant to invest emotionally in a relationship if there is any chance that it is the 't' that a man is after. :shrug

---

I'm not exactly sure you mean when you say "if there's a chance that it's the "t" that a man is after? I think you mean the fact that she's transsexual and if that's the case then I'll say you're starting to get an understanding of some of my positions.

It's that attitude that I see a limitation in many girls though. To me I see that as "not looking at the reality of the situation" because if being "reluctant to invest emotionally in a relationship if there's a chance that it is the "t" that a man is after" is what it's about then there isn't any man on this forum that's worthy of the love of one of the girls. In other words its impossible to be a man participating in this forum who isn't here interacting with the girls strictly BECAUSE they're transsexuals.

This is flawed logic to me. Someone on a previous post made a reference to interacial dating as a comparison to something I said in some respect.

That logic would be the same as me as a black man saying "I will not date black women. I will only date white women who I believe are not necessarily racist but white women whom would have never considered dating a black man in the past. Infact it was outside the realm of any possibility. If I ever learn that she has, deal breaker".

When a person logic is flawed (or atleast it's a point of view that's impossible for me to comprehend) I don't deal with them. So I say your interpretation is close but instead my position would be more along the lines of "I would not interested in the type of girl that wouldn't be interested in me because of my previous experience".