I like what you say Juan and think it is true. I'm less concerned with trying to place TSAmber or Kim Carta in a "category." I certainly do not want to offend either. I find both women very attractive. peace.Quote:
Originally Posted by Juan
Printable View
I like what you say Juan and think it is true. I'm less concerned with trying to place TSAmber or Kim Carta in a "category." I certainly do not want to offend either. I find both women very attractive. peace.Quote:
Originally Posted by Juan
Wow now did you check that online dictionary before you responded. Like I mentioned earlierQuote:
Originally Posted by Ms Remy M
we can say whatever we want but it is what it is . My online reference would be onelook.com terms that have been in existence for quite sometime "prefix" and all. I try to be careful of what I write whenever I write, the truth of it is I didn't need any real intelligence on all the terms I talked about trans, sexual, gender. Thats a grade school diploma. But i'm learning that even something as foolish as what I've utter here can misconstrued as knowledge:)
I think categories do serve some function.Quote:
Originally Posted by Larryp
I dont want someone thinking that me and a cross dresser/drag queen are the same (not that im saying kim is). im a woman 24/7.I dont get the luxury of being a man and benefiting from male privilege when its convenient.
also I think people treat you how they perceive you.if someone perceives that you are really male they will ultimately treat you as that.
for example theres a feminine gay male at my school who dresses in female clothes to varying degrees depending on the day.however the other students call him "he" and enteract with him in a very flamboyant manner.
now me on the other hand, while im sure some students have to suspect im ts (only one has asked me so far, I said no lol) im never referred to as anything other than "she" and treated like a normal girl.
I find it interesting to see the dichotomy between modes of thinking between (some) males and (some) transsexual females on full display here.
On the one hand, people like chubbychaser seem to fetishize transwomen and are shocked and appalled by anything that ruins the fantasy. For someone only seeking sexual gratification this makes sense. If one identifies himself as straight but is still attracted to transsexuals, then holding on to the idea of them living as women full time can be a way of rationalizing this. The other person's mental state never really enters the equation here because they were only superficially interested in the first place. For someone with this viewpoint, paying for sex makes the most sense. Part a sex worker's job is fulfilling the other person's fantasy. If he has the money and a willing partner, then in the end both people will have gotten what they wanted.
On the other hand you have people like Remy who actively push for rights and acceptance of the transgender lifestyle. For her, what's appalling is generalization and misconstruction of the group she belongs to. For someone with this mentality, a statement like "trannies are basically men who look good as women" probably has about the same impact as "Barack Obama is basically just a nigger in a suit" would have on a black civil rights activist. I honestly have to question whether of forum on a pornographic website is the best place to seek support and understanding for her cause, but she does at least articulate her point of view well and attempt to educate.
No wonder you two clashed though :p
Why would you feel so?Quote:
Originally Posted by joxynn
There are some guys as myself that are just physically attracted to features in which is commonly found with a good portion girls, hence the reason I would date a transsexual if I found one that I considered attractive. It is the primary reason why, many who fall in such a category, do not fancy guy features and, will not date what is commonly known as a gay male.
I have encountered many masculine in looks and personality guys who would class themselves heterosexuals say things to me that would only conclude they are flirting with me when no one is around. This is due to assuming that I fancy gay men, which is not the case.
There are also some guys that fancy cross-dressers due to liking the masculine attributes still lurking within the shadows of a guy. This may be based on facial features and/or personality. There is a higher ratio of such guys who fall in this category dating what society considers a gay male than a guy who does not fancy cross-dressers.
Moving away from physical attributes, mental attraction is not uncommon from a male-to-male perspective, as two guys tend to get along better amongst one another, than two girls paired together. It is rare to hear a guy say “I don’t get a long with guys” however, not uncommon to hear a girl state “I don’t get a long with girls.”
I always try my best to not pass judgment on the individual when society tries to class the individual into a group.Quote:
Originally Posted by Larryp
I looked at your "onelook.com" site and typing in transsexual brings up on the sidebar more than what you provided. You also stated that transsexual and transgender are the same. Wrong, if you look at my reply toward chubbychaser you will see the appropriate meaning of each term. Which is not what you said, which is why I said your words were foolish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Handandsom
While I see where you are coming from, and truly I understand I am biased. I also know that on other porn forums there is much room for discourse of all varieties aside from strictly porn. I actually acknowledge the main purpose of this forum, which is why I don't comment at all on the threads relegated to "who has the biggest balls" "hottest trans" etc. I still feel it is good to educate people when they are clearly wrong on a particular subject. For instance, someone claimed trans women only work in the sex industry, there was a question about whether assholes have a clitoris lol, most trans women transition for the hustle, things like that are based on that particular person limited view of the world, and I am going to set them straight on what is really out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by joxynn
This is exactly the case perfectly communicated. Ditto!Quote:
Originally Posted by joxynn
Hi Amber, I believe I understand what you are saying. You are a woman 24/7 and do not want to be placed in a CD/TV "category" because someone perceives that all trans-sexual women, cross dressers, and transvestites are "kind of similar" and can therefore be lumped together--is that correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by tsamberskyi
I was simply trying to say, that I am less concerned with the labels or categories being used---I find both TS women and some CD/TVs attractive. I think Kim Carta is super hot--and without meaning any disrespect to her, I'm not that interested in knowing what "category" she is in. Does that make sense?
For me personally, I would much prefer having a serious long term relationship with a trans-sexual woman, vice with a CD / TV who is only a woman part time or when dressed up. I enjoy the mental and emotional parts of a relationship with a woman as well as the physical part. Having said that--I really haven't had any type of relationship with a CD or TV. No real reason it has not happened, but it just hasn't. Now if someone as sexy as Kim Carta invited me home with her, now that's a different story!! I would have to give that a chance.....Peace.
Type in transgender and see what you get lol. I could map it out for everyone but I have nothing to prove I provided the source now all can do the research . At times though its important to recognize when we are making things up as we go and when we are stating truths. Or for that much when we are stating things that are more appropriate as opposed to more factually based.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ms Remy M
I dont think if someone explains something differently from what you would, classifies it as foolish, hence I would agree with your latter comment of you having a biased account of the topic. Its all good though, I'm just a squirrel in this world trying to get a................"u betta believe it"?:cool:
That site is lacking in any real information, providing only "relating to transsexuals" for the definition of transgender. When in fact, any person who does not prescribe to their cisgender societal norms of presentation can qualify as transgender and are still not transsexual (e.g. cross dressers, intersex, tv, genderqueer, etc.) Simply put, transgender is an umbrella term which does include transsexuals but is not limited to that one specific group as you would like people to believe. Further, not every person that 'transitions' from one gender to another is a transsexual either, your definition speaks nothing of the mental state of a person. I've been approached by a guy that wanted to grow breast, and just that alone didn't want to actually be a woman or anything, other than in bed. I told the guy that he shouldn't try transitioning if he truly didn't feel that he wanted to be a woman because he wasn't really transsexual, but by your definition you would consider him such just because he started transitioning so he could have people suck on his tits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Handandsom
Your simple definition is like saying a star is something that shines in the sky. Yes, you could say that but that's far from complete. I tried looking up 'latina' on your certified source of all facts onelook.com and found that it defines the term as a female surname. lol Now if you spend more than 1 second on the internet looking up the term latina you could also find that it is a term used chiefly in the United States to refer to people of Latin American extraction or descent, though the term has also been incorrectly used as a synonym for Hispanic. Hispanic is a narrower term which only refers to persons of Spanish-speaking origin or ancestry, while "Latino" is more frequently used to refer more generally to anyone of Latin American origin or ancestry, including Brazilians. The term latino is used to refer to males only or a combination of males and females in a group, whereas the term Latina is used to refer to females only.
The U.S. Government has defined Hispanic or Latino persons as being "persons who trace their origin or descent to Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Central and South America, and other Spanish cultures." The United States Census uses the ethnonym Hispanic or Latino to refer to "a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race." The Census Bureau also explains that "[o]rigin can be viewed as the heritage, nationality group, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person’s ancestors before their arrival in the United States. People who identify their origin as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race." The AP Stylebook's recommended usage of Latino includes not only persons of Spanish-speaking ancestry, but also more generally includes persons "from -- or whose ancestors were from -- . . . Latin America, including Brazilians."
You see how doing actual research instead of looking for the most basic and non-informative definition varies?
Correction it's not my definition. It’s one from a site on the internet something that you have said was a source(internet) that we all can use to not be ignorant; if I'm not capturing one of your previous notions from a different comment in its entirety please forgive me). But you hit on some important things in you last comment one of which you indicate the site lacks "real" information, then you kinda of relate basic to non-informative which is not so. It's real information, yes the definitions of those terms in that site were very basic but that is the base, the most important / foundation of those terms you start there and inquire more. But by inquiring more you should never loose site of the base. Hence your example of the star is an inaccurate comparison because you didn’t define star you described it as shiny. So a little closer to what I’m talking about would be "a star is of a gaseous nature" while simple is the basis of what it is. As I mention before we can all write, type and say what we want but it is what it is. The funny thing is we agree through our research that TG does relate to TS but you go further to believe those that don't prescribe to societal gender norms also qualifies as TG. And here is the kicker and where I jump ship; you can say that if you want but I classify it as something like slang (we all know how you're using the word to mean what you said but it doesn't really mean that). Gender is based on one's reproductive role there are only two mainstreams and they are governed by the penis*and the vagina**(sure we can discuss the few anomalies, totally different topic). Whats crazy to me is that we are born one way but think we are something else and as long as we feel we are not hurting anyone it’s all good (which we have to be real careful in putting that out there) And so you speak of the mental state of the definition (that really doesn't make sense but I understand what you are trying to say) the definition is simply that, the mental state of the person we are attributing these definitions by way of that persons gender is different and its funny cause immediately i related "mental state" to some type of conflict mentally when I read that, which now makes perfect sense as Ms. Ambersky commented that her source was the DSM of Mental disorders. I suppose now when we talk of TS and TG and everything included under that umbrella we should make reference to it being of a mental disorder of some sort. And that would explain the complexity of trying to understand someone defining who they are(sexually, gender) based off of how they feel on a day to day basis. It changes daily* (lil exaggeration)! And this is why some of us will go back to the basics and go from there as I have put forth thus far. I won't conclude that all TS and TG are mental, I think that would be unfair and not conclusively true. But we have to acknowledge the identity crisis within the lifestyle which contributes to these kinds or conversations all the while being responsible for what we are putting out there. After all i think its safe to package it as a lifestyle. How about this one when I pay to play what am I "the client" (a term you seem to enjoy) but if I said "hold on", that definition speaks nothing to my mental state because truth is for that 1hr or so that was wifey and I was her husband. Am I really her husband or anywhere under that umbrella. LOL
BTW Latina is a surname it is a female of the Latin descent so while it may not be conclusively defined in the site, it was a start, the basis of the definition. In regards to your question the only thing that varies between what you are doing and I have done is your inclusion of "mind state" which doesn't change definitions here nor there so I've disregarded the notion. Because again it goes back to "we can say what we want" because we are free to choose but "it is what it is".*
Oh and just cause dude wanted tits wouldnt make him TS by my definition it may make him TG according to yours. I had breast from age 10 to about 10 and a half was I a TS for that short period No, I wasnt TG either but I did go through puberty. My estrogen levels peaked I suppose it happens in some males others it doesnt. But specifically I wasnt TS or TG because my reproductive role (gender) wasn't of question change or other creative word you would like to use.
You totally miss the point of my initial post in that I said it was foolish not to do research. Looking up the most basic and simple definition of a word hardly qualifies as research on a subject matter. They teach that to students in both high school and college. Would your entire thesis of transgender be limited to "of relating to transsexual" with no further research to quantify what you are saying?
Again, your lack of familiarity with the whole spectrum of transgender shows, as intersex people are neither male nor female genetically. Doctors simply "flip a coin" at birth and try label a baby whichever will be the easiest for them to correct through surgery. It is only recently "within" the last decade or so that parents have truly started to allow their children to grow naturally without surgery and then decide for themselves when they are ready what 'gender' they want to be.
My point earlier was that TG is an umbrella term which includes a variety of peoples CD, TV, TS, IS, GQ, etc. That does not mean that every TG person is TS as you would have people to believe. If you did actual 'research' you would know these things already has the internet provides a wealth of information. To settle for the most basic and non-informative source shows that what you feel qualifies as being a knowledgeable individual varies greatly from most college and non college educated people, and with the ability to smarten up on subject matters available for free through the internet you do not only yourself a disservice but also everyone else that you would converse with on the subject matter. I would no more talk about mechanics of how a car operates until I did more research on understand something more than a mixture of gas, air, and fire make the engine run. Why, because I would want to know what I'm really talking about and be able to hold an intelligent discourse on the matter.
I still think Kim Carta is a sexy black trans-sexual woman who I would love to share a bed with......Peace.
Exactly, ditto except I'd like to pin her to the bed "head down booty up.............":)Quote:
Originally Posted by Larryp