Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Interesting thread. First off to the monitors: Please ensure the policy is Girls with Muscle is biologically assigned Female at Birth.
Interesting. And how the mods are supposed to ensure that policy? Asking a certificate of biologically-assigned-Female-at-Birth for every subject of a pic, before the pic can be uploaded? Via dna certificate? Tell me, I am curious....
Interesting. And how the mods are supposed to ensure that policy? Asking a certificate of biologically-assigned-Female-at-Birth for every subject of a pic, before the pic can be uploaded? Via dna certificate? Tell me, I am curious....
It's pretty obvious
It's pretty obvious
Really? Because you could tell me that this is Sunny Andrews' newest pic and I wouldn't question it...
https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/2225855/
Neither would anyone else, I'd wager.
Also - again - this photo is on the site and the world didn't end. It can be that easy.
It's pretty obvious
As we said previously, there are at least 5-6 trans women on main site with a lot of comments, many of whom belong to antitrans haters. So, where is your obviousness?
Interesting thread. First off to the monitors: Please ensure the policy is Girls with Muscle is biologically assigned Female at Birth. Now they are just girls who exercise. Girls without any hormones that exercise and diet will be muscular. And that is a far cry from Chicks with Dicks.
Second a women's use of testosterone does masculinize her and is a part of the transition to a man. But not a transition for a Man to a Woman. Biological Man transitioning to a female should absolutely be banned from site. But will naturally be banned to having no muscle. Someone showed a biological woman who looked alike a man, and a biological man that transitioned to a woman. They said most men would consider the biological man most attractive. True. But that pretty man had zero muscle so banned. Second "most mens" tastes is not with this site is after. It's after muscular biological woman. Most men would not be attracted to bio woman that looked like a guy (not by muscle but by haircut and clothes), but they would be horrified if they took the pretty man home under false advertising.
Personally I like working out, I think muscles are attractive, and therefore I think they look good on biological woman. Some women with muscles are sexually attractive some are not. Part off this whole muscular women thing is it's a sport. And no man transitioning to women are getting into any female shows. Second Men transitioning to women are for sure not body building. They are doing everything they can to be your typical girly girl. One quick note someone is saying if you new any gay guys you would no they are not attracted muscular women or trans women. To which I would say I did work with a gay guy, we went out as a group, and he would bang anything that walked. He did not give a fuck it just had to be cheating. He was a GUY.
Last thing I'll say some attractive things about female bodybuilders: 1.) the muscle really doesn't mean shit. It represents discipline, intelligence, competitive, fun, and makes you think: "wow how'd she do that", and in my mind - knows how to fuck!
I think they are sexy because a biological female was able to accomplish this look. Steroids aside, I've done them and I sure as hell didn't look like they do. A women's muscles are pretty, they are not over the top, they do kind of think they are men is a downside are too competitive with their own boyfriend. Positive side effects, they are unbelievable in bed, their sex drive requires 2 to 6 organisms per day.
Couple thoughts:
1) Male to Female trans people have competed in NPC bodybuilding and physique events. I'm not sure if there are any IFBB pros, but there do not seem to be any specific rules against it.
At the end of the day, these events are akin to a beauty pageant. Judging is subjective. A trans competitor might have a muscle size advantage, but most would be at a distinct disadvantage due to their average height and joint thickness.
2) Some gay men are really thirsty, and some individuals may be attracted to trans women, but as a group, I promise you that they do not. I spend a lot of time in gay male spaces. If you don't believe me, go ask around on a gay subreddit.
3) Most men would not be attracted to bio woman that looked like a guy (not by muscle but by haircut)
Interesting point. I would say that 99% of humans would assume that Rheta West is biologically male. And she has short hair (actually no hair now, she's bald under her wigs)
She's still got her fans here. If you think that Rheta looks more classicly feminine than the trans woman posted here (Dion Monteleone) then you're simply lying to yourself.
you know what? ive been on this site for years and if more trans women or women who are non-binary continue to appear on this site more often, im leaving the site. its just not normal. this site would be useless and i might as well just look at A.I. images or comics of girls with muscle.
Okay so hysterics aside... there's not that many trans people and there's way less who are interested in building the amount of muscle to be a model on this site. I don't think we're talking some huge community.
And, if you're open to sharing, I'd love to know a valid reason why this person shouldn't be a model on here:
https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/images/?name=...
They're on the site already. I think that she fits in well. She's not my type, but that's okay.. other guys are probably into her. She's got a decent amount of likes.
How does this impair your enjoyment of the site? Let's say there were 50 Dion Monteleone's.. how would that make the site useless to you?
I can't speak for anyone else but I personally wouldn't like it if we had another 50 Dion Monteleone(s) on the main site even if it wouldn't make the site "useless" to me.
Let me be clear in that I don't mind trans people and I don't think it makes anyone "gay" if they were originally attracted to a trans person before finding out they were trans. I can agree that many trans women may look more feminine than many women on this site. I can agree with a lot of the points made on this forum.
With that being said I personally don't want to go through the hassle of having to double check any new girl added to the site that I may find attractive just to make sure she's not trans. I may like large muscular women, strong jaw lines or big c!I+$ but I'm also only attracted to biological women. You could make as many comparisons as possible between the hormonal similarities between trans women/men and female bodybuilders but that XX chromosome is specifically what makes it breaks it for me.
Even when it comes to visuals like in Deviantart, where anatomy can essentially be thrown out the window I've found myself liking certain drawings of what I thought were just muscular women but when I read the description and saw "femboi" I couldn't favorite it anymore. Does it bother me that there are images like that on DA? No not at all but I do find myself having to check the description or hashtags of certain images just to make sure.
So back to GWM, unless the mods add a "trans" tag on each image of a trans female it would probably make it annoying to have to figure out if a girl I want to subscribe to is trans or not. I don't want to have to keep a mental note of which women are trans. Some commenters are right, there are trans women that are nearly indistinguishable from other women which would make it all the more annoying to figure out if I should favorite an image or subscribe to a new name. Could this entire message be boiled down to "so it would be an inconvenience"? Yes absolutely but while I can't speak for anyone else, I'm sure there are others who may feel the same way.
I think that the system we have now is the best compromise possible. There is an entire section that has been made specifically for trans women. Those who want to look and appreciate those physiques can do it a couple of clicks away.
Honest thanks to Fbblvl for the thoughtful response. I think you made some great points. I’m gonna push back a bit, but know that I really respect what you wrote and your opinion,
I get the idea of projection with erotic imagery. There’s nothing wrong with having preferences. It’s not transphobic to not find trans people attractive. It’s not racist to not find certain races attractive.
But that brings us to the question of: what is the purpose of this site?
In terms of an erotic bodybuilder site, like HerBiceps, I agree that trans models should be excluded or disclosed. The images there are for the male gaze, and the viewers are paying money for that access. It exists expressly as fap material.
But GWM is different. It’s free. As stated, the mission is to showcase and celebrate girls with muscle. We know that this is mostly targeted towards the male gaze. But that isn’t (as far as I know) the explicit purpose. To use a medical term, this site provides fap material as an “off label” use.
Your opposition to Dion Monteleone is rooted in your own personal discomfort. Some others may share that. I suspect that many don’t. I expect that the vast majority won’t care.
So I guess… are the personal preferences of some users more important than the inclusion of a potentially vibrant new community of GWMs?
With that being said I personally don't want to go through the hassle of having to double check any new girl added to the site that I may find attractive just to make sure she's not trans.
I think you just gave your opposition some easy ammo.
If you're interested enough in her, then why would you need to check to see whether she's trans or not? And if you're not interested in her, then it wouldn't matter because you'd just move on with your day. The vast majority of these women will never be posting nude content so it's not like you'll one day accidentally see something you don't want to see.
That said, there aren't any plans to change the way things are right now. The vast majority of users (according to a recent poll) identify themselves as straight men, and generally we've kept things according to the majority's tastes. In a different world where the userbase was overwhelmingly LGBT, then we'd probably just have a site dedicated to muscles of all genders. But, this is GWM, and so it shall remain.
In the meantime, civilized, productive feedback is always welcome. We're always willing to listen to both sides of this.
If you're interested enough in her, then why would you need to check to see whether she's trans or not? And if you're not interested in her, then it wouldn't matter because you'd just move on with your day. The vast majority of these women will never be posting nude content so it's not like you'll one day accidentally see something you don't want to see.
Again I can only speak for myself but if I'm interested and she happens to be trans I would still like to know. My favorites list is entirely comprised of women I'm either attracted to (obviously) or images that I'd look at in my "personal time". I'd be capable of moving forward but again it's just the hassle of having to double check every new woman I may add to my favorites.
I can't speak for anyone else but I personally wouldn't like it if we had another 50 Dion Monteleone(s) on the main site even if it wouldn't make the site "useless" to me.
Let me be clear in that I don't mind trans people and I don't think it makes anyone "gay" if they were originally attracted to a trans person before finding out they were trans. I can agree that many trans women may look more feminine than many women on this site. I can agree with a lot of the points made on this forum.
With that being said I personally don't want to go through the hassle of having to double check any new girl added to the site that I may find attractive just to make sure she's not trans. I may like large muscular women, strong jaw lines or big c!I+$ but I'm also only attracted to biological women. You could make as many comparisons as possible between the hormonal similarities between trans women/men and female bodybuilders but that XX chromosome is specifically what makes it breaks it for me.
Even when it comes to visuals like in Deviantart, where anatomy can essentially be thrown out the window I've found myself liking certain drawings of what I thought were just muscular women but when I read the description and saw "femboi" I couldn't favorite it anymore. Does it bother me that there are images like that on DA? No not at all but I do find myself having to check the description or hashtags of certain images just to make sure.
So back to GWM, unless the mods add a "trans" tag on each image of a trans female it would probably make it annoying to have to figure out if a girl I want to subscribe to is trans or not. I don't want to have to keep a mental note of which women are trans. Some commenters are right, there are trans women that are nearly indistinguishable from other women which would make it all the more annoying to figure out if I should favorite an image or subscribe to a new name. Could this entire message be boiled down to "so it would be an inconvenience"? Yes absolutely but while I can't speak for anyone else, I'm sure there are others who may feel the same way.
I think that the system we have now is the best compromise possible. There is an entire section that has been made specifically for trans women. Those who want to look and appreciate those physiques can do it a couple of clicks away.
THIS is an opinion I can respect tough I could not agree to. I want gmw to be as it is because I arbitrarily can't bare an Xx chromosome even if who's owing that chromosome is actually far more feminine than 50% of the xy chromosome on here. I still doubt this position to be the majority here, but let it be. I really can understand and respect this feeling. But "biology first" and "it's pretty obvious" are really nonsense and belong to people who deny the obvious.
But GWM is different. It’s free. As stated, the mission is to showcase and celebrate girls with muscle.
Technically it doesn't say that anymore. I originally wrote that a long time ago when I felt like I needed to have some lofty-sounding garbage on the About page. A few years ago I realized I didn't need that after all, so I removed it. GWM has no mission. It is what you make of it.
So I guess… are the personal preferences of some users more important than the inclusion of a potentially vibrant new community of GWMs?
Uh... well, yeah. Especially when one group is at least partially the reason the site continues to exist, and the other is not, and even when they are users of the site, the former outnumbers the latter by a ratio of like 100:1.
In any case, Fbblvl made some good arguments coming from a user's point of view, but I think there's a good reason to keep things the way they are from the point of moderation.
If trans women were officially allowed, we (the mod team) would essentially have to become arbiters of which trans women are feminine enough to appear on the site, and who are not. This would put us into a super awkward position every time, especially when the person in question is uploading pictures of themselves, which I suspect would happen more frequently after this rule change. This already happens occasionally when women upload pics of themselves but don't belong on the site (usually due to lack of muscularity), but it would be a lot worse with trans women where their identity is tied up in being feminine which we would be denying by rejecting their pics. It's not a role I'm particularly eager to take on.
And yeah, you could say, "Well, aren't you telling trans women right now that they aren't woman enough with the current policy?" Maybe, it depends how you interpret it, but currently it's not personal. If we had to make decisions per each individual, then it would definitely be personal.
Uh... well, yeah. Especially when one group is at least partially the reason the site continues to exist, and the other is not, and even when they are users of the site, the former outnumbers the latter by a ratio of like 100:1.
Well, you know about your own site, but Are you really sure 99% of users of gwm don't want trans women on the main site and only the 1% wants? The only poll made in the relative section on the matter tells another story.
If trans women were officially allowed, we (the mod team) would essentially have to become arbiters of which trans women are feminine enough to appear on the site, and who are not. This would put us into a super awkward position every time, especially when the person in question is uploading pictures of themselves, which I suspect would happen more frequently after this rule change. This already happens occasionally when women upload pics of themselves but don't belong on the site (usually due to lack of muscularity), but it would be a lot worse with trans women where their identity is tied up in being feminine which we would be denying by rejecting their pics. It's not a role I'm particularly eager to take on.
And yeah, you could say, "Well, aren't you telling trans women right now that they aren't woman enough with the current policy?" Maybe, it depends how you interpret it, but currently it's not personal. If we had to make decisions per each individual, then it would definitely be personal.
This is a good point, I have to admit that as a trans woman.
I think you just gave your opposition some easy ammo.
If you're interested enough in her, then why would you need to check to see whether she's trans or not? And if you're not interested in her, then it wouldn't matter because you'd just move on with your day. The vast majority of these women will never be posting nude content so it's not like you'll one day accidentally see something you don't want to see.
That said, there aren't any plans to change the way things are right now. The vast majority of users (according to a recent poll) identify themselves as straight men, and generally we've kept things according to the majority's tastes. In a different world where the userbase was overwhelmingly LGBT, then we'd probably just have a site dedicated to muscles of all genders. But, this is GWM, and so it shall remain.
In the meantime, civilized, productive feedback is always welcome. We're always willing to listen to both sides of this.
Personally, i'm not trying (anymore) to made gwm change its mind. It is imo a waste of potential and this site could really do history with some courageous decision by accepting officially trans women that are - right now - scored on the main site, but it do not because a loud minority that tries to win a battle that it already lost. But, this is only my opinion, not more: so thanks for your kind feedback. Only a clarification: in my whole life, as a pre-op and then a post-op, I never had a gay partner. I always had declared straight partner. Gays in general do not like AT ALL femininety.
Technically it doesn't say that anymore. I originally wrote that a long time ago when I felt like I needed to have some lofty-sounding garbage on the About page. A few years ago I realized I didn't need that after all, so I removed it. GWM has no mission. It is what you make of it.
Uh... well, yeah. Especially when one group is at least partially the reason the site continues to exist, and the other is not, and even when they are users of the site, the former outnumbers the latter by a ratio of like 100:1.
In any case, Fbblvl made some good arguments coming from a user's point of view, but I think there's a good reason to keep things the way they are from the point of moderation.
If trans women were officially allowed, we (the mod team) would essentially have to become arbiters of which trans women are feminine enough to appear on the site, and who are not. This would put us into a super awkward position every time, especially when the person in question is uploading pictures of themselves, which I suspect would happen more frequently after this rule change. This already happens occasionally when women upload pics of themselves but don't belong on the site (usually due to lack of muscularity), but it would be a lot worse with trans women where their identity is tied up in being feminine which we would be denying by rejecting their pics. It's not a role I'm particularly eager to take on.
And yeah, you could say, "Well, aren't you telling trans women right now that they aren't woman enough with the current policy?" Maybe, it depends how you interpret it, but currently it's not personal. If we had to make decisions per each individual, then it would definitely be personal.
Disclaimer: I'm not necessarily trying to change hearts and minds, but this is a fascinating discussion for me.
The moderation angle is super relevant, and I could imagine how opening the door to trans women could become a quality issue.
How do you define a trans woman vs. a male bodybuilder in a wig who gets off on crossdressing and getting thirsty comments? I've seen this on reddit. You would get that kind of content, and - I'd be pretty sure they'd have a decent fan base, along with a bunch of detractors.
As my username suggests, I love feet, and I'm a huge fan of Wikifeet. It's fairly similar to the setup here, and I'd say that the fan base has similar demographics.
Wikifeet made the decision years ago to allow trans models. Some guys were mad, some of them stay mad, most don't care, and many actively like the trans models. They have pretty feet by necessity, and their feet are objectively indistinguishable from their XX counterparts.
Some guys have an "FBBlvl" sentiment of projection. They must know if a model is trans before they look at their feet. They're a small, vocal miority, and I'd say that the positive comments far outweigh the negative ones.
However.. and this is crucial.. you need an IMDB listing to be a wikifeet model. So the only trans women are known actresses.. mostly adult ones. This prevents the self-upload problem and the crossdresser problem and the unattractive people in general problem.
I imagine that there's a decent number of Dion Monteleone's out there and that the community would overwhelmingly accept them (because they're hot, obvs), but you would need a way to ensure that level of quality. Good point.
Well, you know about your own site, but Are you really sure 99% of users of gwm don't want trans women on the main site and only the 1% wants?
What I meant is a breakdown like:
Furthermore, even though both groups 1 and 3 have an opinion on this, I would guess that the average person in group #1 cares more about this than the average person in group #3.
@Muscles_Toez: That's an interesting system. I'm having trouble thinking of how it could be applied to GWM, especially since in our case it would be limited to trans women only, there not being such a requirement for all women in general.
"I clicked on this link hoping for hot muscular enbies and all I got was walls of text of people debating whether I'm allowed to exist."
Interesting thread. First off to the monitors: Please ensure the policy is Girls with Muscle is biologically assigned Female at Birth. Now they are just girls who exercise. Girls without any hormones that exercise and diet will be muscular. And that is a far cry from Chicks with Dicks.
Second a women's use of testosterone does masculinize her and is a part of the transition to a man. But not a transition for a Man to a Woman. Biological Man transitioning to a female should absolutely be banned from site. But will naturally be banned to having no muscle. Someone showed a biological woman who looked alike a man, and a biological man that transitioned to a woman. They said most men would consider the biological man most attractive. True. But that pretty man had zero muscle so banned. Second "most mens" tastes is not with this site is after. It's after muscular biological woman. Most men would not be attracted to bio woman that looked like a guy (not by muscle but by haircut and clothes), but they would be horrified if they took the pretty man home under false advertising.
Personally I like working out, I think muscles are attractive, and therefore I think they look good on biological woman. Some women with muscles are sexually attractive some are not. Part off this whole muscular women thing is it's a sport. And no man transitioning to women are getting into any female shows. Second Men transitioning to women are for sure not body building. They are doing everything they can to be your typical girly girl. One quick note someone is saying if you new any gay guys you would no they are not attracted muscular women or trans women. To which I would say I did work with a gay guy, we went out as a group, and he would bang anything that walked. He did not give a fuck it just had to be cheating. He was a GUY.
Last thing I'll say some attractive things about female bodybuilders: 1.) the muscle really doesn't mean shit. It represents discipline, intelligence, competitive, fun, and makes you think: "wow how'd she do that", and in my mind - knows how to fuck!
I think they are sexy because a biological female was able to accomplish this look. Steroids aside, I've done them and I sure as hell didn't look like they do. A women's muscles are pretty, they are not over the top, they do kind of think they are men is a downside are too competitive with their own boyfriend. Positive side effects, they are unbelievable in bed, their sex drive requires 2 to 6 organisms per day.