Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
This has been fascinating.
I've been banging on for trans inclusion for a minute, but I think that the poll is telling. If this is explicitly an erotic site, then it's fair to have a division of cis-gender and transgender people.
I think a lot of ignorant and bigoted s**t has been said here, but not wanting to fap to a the pic of a trans person is not ignorant or bigoted. It's a sexual preference, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm proudly fatphobic.. I absolutely hate fat people.. and it would be a massive turnoff for me if a bunch of really fat-yet-slightly-muscular girls got posted here. I get it.
Although, I guess it is funny that there's like a dozen under the radar trans women on here and dudes be fapping to them (I assume) and it didn't light their crotch on fire or make them the grand marshall of a pride parade. I'll continue to be entertained by that.
Maybe this thread needs to be shut down.
Oh before that happens... honest request... are there certain women with beards that you're really into? After we spoke, I googled it, but was having a difficult time finding actual models. Lots of obvious beard makeup though.
So, where and why do you feel you’re in a position to judge and lecture others on acceptance and inclusion, then?
Oh cool, glad you asked. There's a few differences:
1) I treat fat people with respect just like anyone else. These are my feelings, and I don't let them influence my behavior. If you're fat and we met in real life, I'd be just as friendly and pleasant as I would to anyone else.
2) I want NO part of them in any kind of sexual way. It's probably my biggest turnoff, and I think it's disgusting. But that's me! So I can sympathize why someone would find the idea of a trans woman with male parts or formerly male parts to be sexually repellant. That's totally cool. I like penises (on guys tho), but can't stand fat bellies or cellulite. These are simply preferences.
3) What isn't cool is the gross demonization of trans people on this thread and in society as a whole. Saying that they're demonic or mentally ill or "less than" is like saying that fat people are lazy, are slobs, and are overly and unfairly taxing our obscenely expensive medical system. Both of these things are morally wrong on their face.
4) There are a few girls on here who are objectively pretty fat, and it's a major yuck for me. I recogonize that it can be a yum for others. So I move on and find photos that I like (the recommendations are helpful) and I keep to myself. Rather than bitch and moan and report everything.
This has been fascinating.
For some. But not for you. You're not trolling, or laughing at anyone. You're just coping.
If this is explicitly an erotic site, then it's fair to have a division of cis-gender and transgender people.
An erotic site with pics of women. But keep trying.
I think a lot of ignorant and bigoted s**t has been said here, but not wanting to fap to a the pic of a trans person is not ignorant or bigoted. It's a sexual preference, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm proudly fatphobic.. I absolutely hate fat people.. and it would be a massive turnoff for me if a bunch of really fat-yet-slightly-muscular girls got posted here. I get it.
Passive-aggressive now? Keep trying.
Although, I guess it is funny that there's like a dozen under the radar trans women on here and dudes be fapping to them (I assume) and it didn't light their crotch on fire or make them the grand marshall of a pride parade. I'll continue to be entertained by that.
Yay. Victory!
Oh cool, glad you asked. There's a few differences:
1) I treat fat people with respect just like anyone else. These are my feelings, and I don't let them influence my behavior. If you're fat and we met in real life, I'd be just as friendly and pleasant as I would to anyone else.
2) I want NO part of them in any kind of sexual way. It's probably my biggest turnoff, and I think it's disgusting. But that's me! So I can sympathize why someone would find the idea of a trans woman with male parts or formerly male parts to be sexually repellant. That's totally cool. I like penises (on guys tho), but can't stand fat bellies or cellulite. These are simply preferences.
3) What isn't cool is the gross demonization of trans people on this thread and in society as a whole. Saying that they're demonic or mentally ill or "less than" is like saying that fat people are lazy, are slobs, and are overly and unfairly taxing our obscenely expensive medical system. Both of these things are morally wrong on their face.
4) There are a few girls on here who are objectively pretty fat, and it's a major yuck for me. I recogonize that it can be a yum for others. So I move on and find photos that I like (the recommendations are helpful) and I keep to myself. Rather than bitch and moan and report everything.
I have a negative view of people who allow themselves to get obese. It speaks of mental and character weakness.
Old age, injury, special needs or financial duress (poverty) sure. But, a young otherwise-should-be-healthy person who is knowingly allowing themselves to be or become obese? No respect for them re that act. I will still be polite and caring when interacting with them, but will always feel distaste for theur lack of strength and self motivation to get into shape.
I feel more strongly about that than Trans inclusion. I'm sure I'd find some trans-women very attractive, but I don't find guys attractive.
The poll say no them, majority rule a la Democracy.
Lol, it's a privately owned site not a democracy.
Even so, I don't know if there were sufficient number of members who voted to say that they represented the majority view of everyone here. The poll is useless and will only attract those interested in this topic. Also, the vote does not even say anything about those who visit the site and are not members.
All the female muscle women on this site are on the way to being men or are quasi-men, so it makes no difference to me if we have men on the way to being women or quasi-women on this site.
No one is forcing anyone to look at what they don't like. So, there's really no argument. Just look at what you like and move on.
(BTW, no one who has blathered about biological science obviously isn't steeped enough in biology to know what they're really talking about. For example, those who think they've nailed the argument by reference to XX and XY, are they aware that there are XX who are phenotypically XY and that there are XY who are phenotypically XX? These people are assigned the sex of their phenotype at birth and grow up that way, often oblivious to their chromosomes unless they have a genetic test for whatever reason.)
Lol, it's a privately owned site not a democracy.
Even so, I don't know if there were sufficient number of members who voted to say that they represented the majority view of everyone here. The poll is useless and will only attract those interested in this topic. Also, the vote does not even say anything about those who visit the site and are not members.
All the female muscle women on this site are on the way to being men or are quasi-men, so it makes no difference to me if we have men on the way to being women or quasi-women on this site.
No one is forcing anyone to look at what they don't like. So, there's really no argument. Just look at what you like and move on.
(BTW, no one who has blathered about biological science obviously isn't steeped enough in biology to know what they're really talking about. For example, those who think they've nailed the argument by reference to XX and XY, are they aware that there are XX who are phenotypically XY and that there are XY who are phenotypically XX? These people are assigned the sex of their phenotype at birth and grow up that way, often oblivious to their chromosomes unless they have a genetic test for whatever reason.)
Stock Ford Mustangs are not made for the tallest humans alive today. They can be modified to accommodate very tall people. And that's OK.
GWM site was modified to accommodate trans women and their fans. That's also OK.
Some people feel the GWM modifications did not go far enough. They're entitled to that opinion. Chainer has consistently chosen to be inclusive without disrupting the usual fare, and the trans models and trans fans have their own safe space on GWM that (I suppose) exists without disturbance from the "-phobes" who are not here for that type of content.
Disclosure: I don't visit FMG forums either.
4) There are a few girls on here who are objectively pretty fat, and it's a major yuck for me. I recogonize that it can be a yum for others. So I move on and find photos that I like (the recommendations are helpful) and I keep to myself. Rather than bitch and moan and report everything.
Fucking this.
I hate fake tits. Hate them. If I see them I become physically ill. They are everywhere on this site, literally fucking everywhere.
I'm the victim here. GWM Why are you forcing fake boobs on me?
For some. But not for you. You're not trolling, or laughing at anyone. You're just coping.
Coping? I'm into a lot of humans, but trans people don't usually do it for me. I have no personal interest in their inclusion, I just think it's silly that they're excluded. I enjoy debating the topic when it comes up because it's engaging to discuss it.
An erotic site with pics of women. But keep trying.
Thing is, it's not OFFICIALLY an erotic site, as there is no over 18 checkbox. It's not sold as such in a direct way.
So if its an erotic site just like HerBiceps... yes I think it's fine to exclude trans people. HerBiceps and co. exist to provide specific erotic content to viewers, and it's standard to divide trans people into their own category. All good. The models on HerBiceps are there for their erotic value.
If it isn't an erotic site and it's merely a crowd-sourced gallery of "girls with muscle" then I think trans women should be included. The primary purpose is to showcase the athletic achievements of the models, and the unintended purpose would be to turn guys on.
To give another example.. think about gymnastics. Lots of guys find gymnasts to be sexy, and for good reason.
Now you have a a site called "Gymnast Girls" that just shows photos of pro and amateur gymnasts. People upload the pics, and the requirement is that the models are competitive gymnasts. Well, it would be fine to show trans girls here (they do compete in gymnastics) and even underage girls here. It's not explicitly erotic. Users shouldn't have an expectation of seeing photos which are safe to fap to - in their own mind.
But another site called "HerGymnastThighs" costs $9.99 a month and focuses on the sex appeal of gymnasts. Curated pics and video galleries and the whole deal. This site should never show an underage model. And it's also totally fine to exclude transwomen. Hell, the site could be called "EbonyGymnasts" and exclude everyone who isn't black. No problem to have an erotic site that's targeted.
If GWM is indeed more like the second site, then I'd agree that dividing trans models into their own category is appropriate. I was under the impression that it was more like the first though.
let's be real, the reason you guys are so opposed to trans people being included, is not because you're not attracted to them, it's because you ARE, and that makes you feel insecure. if you actually think you can clock them so easily, then you can easily just ignore them. but you're afraid you're gonna be tricked into being attracted to a "man"
How would that change the decision to exclude them from the site or give them their own seperate section?
Is that supposed to be some sort of "gotcha"? Who gives a fuck what the reason is for any one of us, I'm sure the reasons vary. But thats irrelevant. The fact is the overwhelming majority of us don't want it. End of story.
Thing is, it's not OFFICIALLY an erotic site, as there is no over 18 checkbox. It's not sold as such in a direct way.
Buddy, c'mon. I truly appreciate your dedication to the cause and would hope my defense attorney was half your measure should I find myself in court.
If it isn't an erotic site and it's merely a crowd-sourced gallery of "girls with muscle" then I think trans women should be included. The primary purpose is to showcase the athletic achievements of the models, and the unintended purpose would be to turn guys on.
If GWM is indeed more like the second site, then I'd agree that dividing trans models into their own category is appropriate. I was under the impression that it was more like the first though.
Let's approach this in good faith. We all know why we're here. Are you earnestly arguing that you're only here to support strong, muscular women and see them succeed in life? Or is that just a hypothetical scenario you're using to illustrate your point?
It seems like you're saying there's nothing hot about any of the below pictures and you're genuinely shocked anyone would find these images sexually appealing as this is just a crowd sourced image depository highlighting athletic achievements. Am I reading that right?
All the female muscle women on this site are on the way to being men or are quasi-men, so it makes no difference to me if we have men on the way to being women or quasi-women on this site.
wait, what?
Although, I guess it is funny that there's like a dozen under the radar trans women on here and dudes be fapping to them (I assume) and it didn't light their crotch on fire or make them the grand marshall of a pride parade. I'll continue to be entertained by that.
this seems really important to know dudes are unknowingly jacking it to other dudes pretending to be girls. why is this important to you?
yeah i think it's time to shut down this ridiculous thread
As a transgender girl I would be very glad if we were included, if not at least we have posts like this one I made: https://www.girlswithmuscle.com/forum/thread/...
I'm glad to see the majority aren't brainwashed but I'm surprised to see so many perpetuating the lie that transwomen are women.
> > 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.
I see, so you're one of the troon types who just goes to places to "own transphobes". That's literally the only reason you're here.. to troll. It's a wonder why mods keep BS like this going. Go touch grass dude.
(BTW, no one who has blathered about biological science obviously isn't steeped enough in biology to know what they're really talking about. For example, those who think they've nailed the argument by reference to XX and XY, are they aware that there are XX who are phenotypically XY and that there are XY who are phenotypically XX? These people are assigned the sex of their phenotype at birth and grow up that way, often oblivious to their chromosomes unless they have a genetic test for whatever reason.)
What exactly do you mean "phenotypically"? Does it relate to women with truckasaurus hands and men with slender figures? Because those traits don't make a woman/man less of a woman/man, just different from others of their same sex.
Note that they won't just be satisfied making their own site. They have to invade your site, your hobbies, your interests. Every single time.
Bro, you have been through some s**t.
It’s like you had an epic day where every Tinder match was a trans catfish and then you got fired for using the wrong pronouns and then a nonbinary person with blue hair slipped some raw estrogen into your Jamba Juice.
Seriously, have most of you guys even met a trans person? Even once? I live in LA, I got to some seriously queer bars, and even I don’t see them that much. There’s like one at my gym.
No, that falls under "Images lacking femininity" under "strongly discouraged" in the upload rules. In fact we do delete images of cis women under this rule with some frequency.