Re: Transgender? Serious?

[DarkEden]

It's very simple. Don't misgender them. Feel queasy? Sure. But yes, misgendering, calling them men etc, is literally transphoboa.

Well that's OK then because I never did that. Maybe you should pay closer attention to my comments before trying to label me.

Also it's a little odd to see you praise Giorgio's work when in the other thread you referred to this site as "a forum dedicated to the degradation of women through extreme pornographic acts." Isn't that a little contradictory?

Oh and you might want to read Giorgio's post a little more carefully before labelling him. He didn't call you a homophobe. He called out people saying derogatory things about an actress he's hired and has clearly made decent money for him already. No one is saying at any point you have to buy porn with transwimen in. No one is saying you have to find them attractive. But the amount of misgenderimg/calling it gay to like it etc in the thread before his intervention was pretty heart breaking.

As Giorgio pointed out - it isn't gay people buying porn with transwomen in. Implying that guys who do buy it are gay IS homophobia.

[TheVulture]

Not at all. Unlike the trans exclusionary/sex worker exclusionary radical feminists, I actually think this site is erotic and empowering.

The point I was making was that the talking points you are repeating are coming from people who literally would make sites like this a crime if they could. THEY see it as denigration. I see it as what it is - consensual kink at the extreme end of the spectrum. When my fiance and I have rough sex, can I separate the act from the rest of the relationship? Yes. Just like here. But drinking piss/being slapped etc is still degrading regardless. My issue is that I'm happy to consent to that. TERFS/SWERFS are not.

And on the misgendering- I didn't say you did. But you jumped in and started arguing with me in the first place purely because I expressed displeasure in people misgendering Natalie. You didn't do it, but jumped to the defence of and justified/vindicated people doing so.

Do feminists really hate porn though? That's a bit sweeping isn't it? I know many women who would class themselves as feminists and have very liberal views regarding pornography.

Phrases like TERFS, cisgender etc. are IMHO not sensible. Most people don't know what they mean. Also suggesting that 99.9999% of the world's population suddenly need a new defining prefix (eg-"cis") isn't going to wash with most people. It's just niche slang for podium debates in liberal echo chambers. "Men" and "women" as universal calling cards are not going away. The transgendered and their supporters will just have to get used to that.

I didn't jump to the defence of people who misgender (although I wouldn't necessarily show hostility towards them either - that would depend on the tone and phrasing) but merely pulled Giorgio up over his misappropriation of what I would class as "trans-scepticism" with homophobia, something you entirely endorsed.

[TheVulture]

To clarify, Giorgio might have been directly responding to some fairly unpleasant earlier comments about Natalie Mars but his own comment ("With all respect I find very homophobic the issue with t-girls") was very broadbrush and this is what prompted me to interject. What is "the issue" with t-girls that Giorgio speaks of? And how can it just be 1 issue when this thread alone clearly encompasses lots of different critiques, many of which were simply about accurate labelling?

You then just praised him for associating all criticism of transgenderism with homophobia and labeled me both a transphobe and a homophobe (implying they are essentially the same thing in this context). That wasn't very clever.

I do agree that people need to take care with language around this issue and some of the earlier comments were derogatory and poor but that doesn't excuse either you or Giorgio from making broad generalisations, not least in your case as I went to great lengths to elaborate my own issues with transgenderism and did so respectfully. Part of the problem with this debate in my experience is that the pro-trans lobby are very quick to go on the offensive and denigrate those with conscientious objection to transgenderism as well as those who are obviously more unpleasant, which ultimately is not going to win them the debate in the long-term. You need to be able to differentiate between the 2 and in the case of the former win hearts and minds.

[DarkEden]

Not at all. Unlike the trans exclusionary/sex worker exclusionary radical feminists, I actually think this site is erotic and empowering.

The point I was making was that the talking points you are repeating are coming from people who literally would make sites like this a crime if they could. THEY see it as denigration. I see it as what it is - consensual kink at the extreme end of the spectrum. When my fiance and I have rough sex, can I separate the act from the rest of the relationship? Yes. Just like here. But drinking piss/being slapped etc is still degrading regardless. My issue is that I'm happy to consent to that. TERFS/SWERFS are not.

And on the misgendering- I didn't say you did. But you jumped in and started arguing with me in the first place purely because I expressed displeasure in people misgendering Natalie. You didn't do it, but jumped to the defence of and justified/vindicated people doing so.

Do feminists really hate porn though? That's a bit sweeping isn't it? I know many women who would class themselves as feminists and have very liberal views regarding pornography.

Phrases like TERFS, cisgender etc. are IMHO not sensible. Most people don't know what they mean. Also suggesting that 99.9999% of the world's population suddenly need a new defining prefix (eg-"cis") isn't going to wash with most people. It's just niche slang for podium debates in liberal echo chambers. "Men" and "women" as universal calling cards are not going away. The transgendered and their supporters will just have to get used to that.

I didn't jump to the defence of people who misgender (although I wouldn't necessarily show hostility towards them either - that would depend on the tone and phrasing) but merely pulled Giorgio up over his misappropriation of what I would class as "trans-scepticism" with homophobia, something you entirely endorsed.

'trans-scepticism" is weasel words, like 'gender critical' or 'race realist'. Sceptical of awarding rights to individuals with gender dysphoria/who are going through gender reassignment? When the scientific community is 99% united that it's the correct treatment for these people? I guess you're a climate change denier also? I, personally, prefer to get my information from the majority of experts who've spent their lives in the field, rather than cherry picking one or two that go against the overwhelming trend.

Also: Please stop (intentionally?) confusing "'feminists' with a very specific group of "radical feminists". There's a significant, significant difference. You keep making sweeping generalisations and completely misrepresenting my points at every opportunity. No feminist that I associate with or know is exclusionary of either trans or sex workers. They only seem to appear online, on forums, and at tiny meetings of older, second wave, 'man-hating' style feminists. Radical Feminists are against pornography by definition. You might want to read some Dworkin or Greer if you're into that second-wave feminism you clearly espouse towards transwoman. You will find that they are very, very, very much against pornography in all of its forms.

You know what "wasn't going to wash" in the 50s? Interracial marriages. You know what "wasn't going to wash" in the 90s/00s here? Equal Marriage for LGB people. And no, you specifically responded to me defending a guy who misgendered people in the other thread. It is literally how we began our conversation. And it's becoming more than "niche slang" - cisgender is a term we teach at school now and attend training on. A friend who works in finance told me they had the same. Referring to gay people as "gay" was something that was resisted for a long time too, as opposed to the many terrible terms a person could use instead.

Regardless of this - at no point have I accused you of misgendering OR homophobia. Just of being very, very keen to defend those who do.

I mean, you show where you get your talking points with 'pro trans lobby'. That makes it sound like an organised group, as opposed to individuals who care about equal rights. You're part of the anti-transgender rights lobby, right? I mean, clearly, if you see everyone who just feels the need to defend oppressed minorities as part of some shadowy 'lobby''. Again, weasel words.

And finally when you say

conscientious objection to transgenderism as well as those who are obviously more unpleasant

- how on earth can you have a 'conscientious objection' an pretend that isn't the same as blatant transphobia/homophobia'? Is it OK to have a conscientious objection to LGB people? Or if a person had a conscientious objection to Jewish people? I genuinely thought you were trying to present this as a kind of debate with the potential to learn, but you seem very, very entrenched in your anti-transgender views, born out by the phrasing you use.

These are people's rights and people's lives. Why don't you butt the fuck out of them. I joined in to say I didn't think it was OK to be insulting or misgendering Natalie. You jumped in to defend the people doing so, and taking personal offence when Giorgio called them homophobic. Giorgio hasn't misappropriated anything - another transphobic dog whistle.

It's fine to hate trans people in your heart. No one can make you think anything you don't want. But don't pretend to yourself that you're being all civil and reasonable when you use phrases like 'lobby', being 'sceptic' regarding minorities, defending misgendering, and trying to pretend that any prejudice against vulnerable people is acceptable while being 'offended' by other prejudices. As a B on the LGBT, I am fine, endorse, and am happy for Giorgio to call out trans/homophobes. Are you LGBT yourself? If not, then why are you misappropriating 'homophobia' for your own purposes? Concern trolling.

Seriously, dude. I speak out of passion and emotion to protect the people I love, and all citizens of the UK and beyond. All you've done is try to justify transphobia in like every post you've made. I think we're done.

[lucasradebe]

The best solution is to have separate section for trans, I also don't want to wait 3 days for regular GIO movies.

[TheVulture]

So don't you think that women concerned at the loss of female only spaces (as they see it) is "conscientious objection" to expanded transgender rights? Surely that kind of measured criticism exists? This is where the difference with race and sexual orientation takes root because when Rosa Parks insisted on moving to the front of the bus literally no imposition was placed on the white passengers beyond having their previous prejudice (either inherent within them or imposed on them by a higher power) pricked. And when gay and lesbian people were allowed to marry (to give just one example in that arena) again precisely nothing was taken away from straight people apart from those with dubious religious doctrinaire views who chuntered at the loss of their divisive version of morality. But when the lines blur around gender orientation there are effects on wider society, most notably with regard to female spaces. You seemed to start from a view of accepting this yet now feel the need (again) to label me as a transphobe simply for stating this. All I'm saying is that transgenderism hasn't yet won over the mass of people for these reasons. If the term "cisgender" is being taught in schools then I would suggest that is a bit of a powder keg. But maybe I'm wrong and it will catch on. I know that I have never heard anyone say it in day-to-day life - it's something I've only ever seen online and generally from liberals or in liberal organs such as The Guardian.

I would also dispute the suggestion that 99% of the medical profession agree on the issue (you were talking about individual cases so I'm not sure if that's quite what you meant but it seems reasonable to assume that you did). I watched a fascinating documentary about a young people's transgender clinic where it seemed that all of the experts were at a loss as to how to deal with the individual cases on view beyond offering them the best expert help available and every available option. That would seem to show both the size of the issue and also the relative infancy of the scientific analysis.

On a political level, the issue has been contentious. Many women have left the Labour party over the issue and I believe a similar rupture has recently occurred with the SNP in Scotland.

We're obviously a long way apart on this issue but no, I'm not LGBT, although I don't see how this should sideline me from the discussion/debate. As someone involved in politics at a local level I can't really avoid it on occasion.

My final point (probably) is to make a prediction, which is that sometime quite soon (perhaps this coming year) the issue might well come to the fore in sport. We saw a very successful women's football World Cup last year (I watched a lot of it and enjoyed it) and it can surely only be a matter of time before trans women start asking to compete in team sports at a high level. Perhaps there might be someone who already excelled at football as a man and then wished to transfer their talents to the women's game following their own transition to a woman. It would I think be fanciful to suggest that the whole of the women's football world would view this as a trailblazing leap forward. Interestingly, the world's best female footballer is Megan Rapinoe who is a very intelligent person (well, she hates Donald Trump, which will do for me), quite outspoken and also I believe something of an LGBT campaigner and role model. Her views on the issue would be very interesting indeed. And again, if you want a reason as to why transgenderism is very different to race and sexual orientation, imagine who could possibly object to black or gay/lesbian footballers on the grounds of unfair competition. This I think is a decent microcosm showing how transgenderism has a trickier path to widespread acceptance. It isn't just a moral or philosophical issue but one with manifest physical and social challenges. I'll just leave that prediction out there anyway.

[fapbastard528]

Please provide a warning and a filter. A Splash screen when coming to the website where you can chose what you what to see. Also, a filter within the store or account settings. Manyvidz does this.

[petes32]

This thread is extremely stupid.

The trailer shows whats to come, don't like the trailer, don't buy it.

You're all up in arms about a t-girl, but have no problem watching two women get off. Two women eating & fucking each other are lesbians, which is gay. So by the way majority or you are typing, if a t-girl is in a scene & a guy jerks off to it, he is gay. So what is he if he jerks off to two girls, a lesbian? Don't be so naive.

Porn is fantasy, whatever gets people off, gets them off. No one is compelling you to buy any of the scenes here. Watch the trailer, if you don't like then don't buy. It's that simple.

T-girls are a niche, I don't have a problem with them being there, but then again my mind is open, unlike the rest of you.

[vvvv84335]

This thread is extremely stupid.

The trailer shows whats to come, don't like the trailer, don't buy it.

You're all up in arms about a t-girl, but have no problem watching two women get off. Two women eating & fucking each other are lesbians, which is gay. So by the way majority or you are typing, if a t-girl is in a scene & a guy jerks off to it, he is gay. So what is he if he jerks off to two girls, a lesbian? Don't be so naive.

Porn is fantasy, whatever gets people off, gets them off. No one is compelling you to buy any of the scenes here. Watch the trailer, if you don't like then don't buy. It's that simple.

T-girls are a niche, I don't have a problem with them being there, but then again my mind is open, unlike the rest of you.

I agree... There's nothing constructive about it at this point. These opinions so far are better to take in PM.

Mods: Can someone please lock this thread?