Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Christ almighty, so many transphobic people on here claiming to have science on their side and other nonsense. First of all, I recommend you read up on what modern biology has to say about sex, gender etc. Or at the very least, look up "Sex and Sensibility" on Youtube - it's a great video about this topic.
Clearing up some basic misconceptions:
- Gender != sex. And neither is binary.
- Trans woman is a woman.
- Trying to compare gender to race/age/whatever is ridiculous.
This poll is (or at least should be) whether you want to see trans women on this site, not whether trans women are or aren't women. Stop using that as an argument. Personally, I have no issues of trans women being here but I can understand that most people want to see only cisgendered women. And I think solution is very simple - add a global toggle to the site if you want to filter out transwomen. I have seen such a switch on porn sites already - works great.
Misconceptions? The majority of the worlds English speaking population now and throughout history regards the term gender as a synonym for sex. Whereby gendered terms are sex specific. This common understanding forms the basis for many social and cultural norms as well as policy and legislation. This movement to redefine gender as a faith based belief in some alleged identity is relatively new. The gender ideologues behind this religious-like movement should've come up with their own distinct nomenclature to name their constructs of identity. But we all know that doing so wouldn't help them in their agenda to muddy the waters and attempt to redefine the various cultural and social norms as well as policies and legislation created under the shared understanding that sex and gender synonymous around their faith based belief.
No. I want to see what an adult female can do on gear with training. I don't come here to see what males can achieve.
đź’Ż
I don't think this needs to be as politicized or controversial as it is becoming. At the end of the day, GWM isn't going to globally define "what is a woman". Science, ideology, etc. are all irrelevant as far as this thread and GWM as a whold SHOULD be concerned. The only question we should ask is how to optimize the site for the betterment of current and future users. Definitions are hard, but as a community, I think we can at least democratically be able to determine if somone would be qualified as trans or not. I think that the poll should be re-worded to something like this:
Should trans-women, identified as such by a majority of users, be allowed on the main site?
yes or no
it's really that simple.
> > A woman is a woman. Gear doesn’t change that. Just like even masculine looking “trans” are still women and get pregnant and often de-trans. > > They shouldn’t be on the site!
Exactly, I don't get why people are using that as an argument. It should be the people who actually believe you can change your gender who have a problem with the women on this site because by their logic they should be considered men since they take male hormones.
Neither are natural women.
I don't understand how and why there are people who want trans women included on the site.
Then the arguments for it have been even more ridiculous. Everything from comparing transsexuals to the historical experiences of black people (??), arguing that the women on here "already use steroids, soo...", arguments that trans people are ALREADY on this site (which would defeat this argument and does not in fact prove any point)
I don't agree because these people like to live in fantasy land.
The reality is that trans women are MEN who decided that they are better identified as women.
If your argument is their appearance, it can be argued that you agree that halloween costumes are real.
It's not about how you feel. It's not about inclusion. It's none of it.
This website is for women. Even women who abuse male hormones to the point that they develop masculine features. That's the name of the website. Girls with Muscles. Not "Girls" as defined by a legal definition.
For all its worth, why not go and start a Trans with Muscles website? That way you can decide who and what goes on your website. All inclusive right?
Neither are natural women.
One is a woman on gear, one is a man LARPing as a woman. Never said women on gear are natural.
Even if they pass, they are a man. They have no womb. They’re a man and always will be.
You people live in fantasy land.
> Most of the women on here have altered their biology to the point they look more masculine than a trans. So we're already using the term girls loosely anyway.
A woman is a woman. Gear doesn’t change that. Just like even masculine looking “trans” are still women and get pregnant and often de-trans.
They shouldn’t be on the site!
The gear alters their body in a way that is not possible for XX. So while their chromosomes have not changed, other biological markers of a female have.
Just allow trans and don't tell anybody.
Imagine the outrage when the transphobes and homophobes realize what they've been jerking it to.
The gear alters their body in a way that is not possible for XX. So while their chromosomes have not changed, other biological markers of a female have.
Hormonal infusions will change a woman or man's body but not their sex. Put a stop to the infusions/gear and their bodies will revert back to their more natural states or suffer from side effects of the treatments/lifestyle.
Ever since female bodybuilding burst on the scene, it's dealt with femininity and muscularity, whether in harmony or in conflict with each other. But it was and is the realm of women according to most visitors here.
Hormonal infusions will change a woman or man's body but not their sex. Put a stop to the infusions/gear and their bodies will revert back to their more natural states or suffer from side effects of the treatments/lifestyle.
Ever since female bodybuilding burst on the scene, it's dealt with femininity and muscularity, whether in harmony or in conflict with each other. But it was and is the realm of women according to most visitors here.
Why is it ok for a woman to grow a miniature penis through gear, but a man reducing his hormones is seen as sick?
The poll is pretty definitive, 4 to 1 against trans inclusion here. I don't mind there being a separate section for trans but if it became part of the main site I'd just stop using it. I imagine most of us would stop using this site. It's nothing to do with the politics etc... it's just how it is. If some want to try and force acceptance of trans it will just turn folks away from it. Again this is not political this is just the way it is. If some want a trans inclusive site then get off your lazy butt's and go make one, rather than trying to make the rest of us accept it.
Uh, yeah... It's physically impossible to tell if the "woman" with enormous hands and 5 o'clock shadow is a man.......... 🙄
Except perception errors happen -- and that's when transphobes become the most furious.
The best argument against is that transwomen are more likely to be boner killers. This is also true for some of the extremely muscular women who, as far as my tastes are concerned, took things way, way too far. From an administrative standpoint, that's a lot more difficult to adjudicate than someone who is trans. Thus, it's a practical argument, not necessarily a purely rational one. Trans revulsion is sort of like sibling revulsion. "Your sister is hot!"
Why is it ok for a woman to grow a miniature penis through gear, but a man reducing his hormones is seen as sick?
You're in the wrong debate hall. The "sickness" of men reducing their hormones for whatever reason is not on debate here. In fact, male pro bodybuilders face shrinkage from the substances they put in their bodies. These are side effects that males and females face when delving into the pro bodybuilding world. Not everyone who visits GwM approves of these changes in women, but such is their call and you'd be hard-pressed to find some argument that these heavily virilized women have literally become men... unless it's by those pushing for trans females to be added to the main gallery.
This debate itself is kinda pointless indeed, I doubt anyone will read this and get convinced of anything and chances are we get more people banned
The poll is there, the results are there, I suggest you guys to move on
Purple summed it up perfectly. We had a fair election, the results are in, and they overwhelmingly favor one position. Same as the last time this was voted on. No need to storm the servers.
It's time to put away the swords and begin healing. Let's focus on the important things, like who has the hottest abs, who has the hottest calves, and who we think can lift a passenger van overhead.
You're in the wrong debate hall. The "sickness" of men reducing their hormones for whatever reason is not on debate here. In fact, male pro bodybuilders face shrinkage from the substances they put in their bodies. These are side effects that males and females face when delving into the pro bodybuilding world. Not everyone who visits GwM approves of these changes in women, but such is their call and you'd be hard-pressed to find some argument that these heavily virilized women have literally become men... unless it's by those pushing for trans females to be added to the main gallery.
It's on debate to highlight a potential double standard.
There are a lot of manly looking women who are allowed here, regardless of the number of people who might find them attractive. So my point is, if a woman has ripped pecs, a small penis, and massive jawline, yet is still welcomed here, then we're already using the term "girls" loosely.
No. I want to see what an adult female can do on gear with training. I don't come here to see what males can achieve.