Cautionary message about Amazon Eve

[Rachel Bronwyn]

Finding out someone had male genitals at one point doesn't reflect on who they are as a human being whatsoever nor does it change how physically attractive they are. It's a significant event in their life, not in who they are as an individual and is entirely physical. Their mind has never changed. The physical process they underwent, if anything, provided them with a healthier psyche.

If you find a woman attractive until you learn that she is transgendered, and then you're no longer attracted to her, that means you're a homophobe. Know why? Because it means you think either a: she is really a gay man in disguise or b: because it means you're really attracted to a man and therefore you're gay, and you think either of these things is bad or wrong. And no matter which one you pick you're also a prick, because you think 'she's not really a woman, she's just pretending to be one.'

Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding!!!

Unless there is a reason aside from the sex that a Y chromosome denotes or their having had male genitals at one time (and maybe there's a reason that flew over my head), no longer finding someone attractive after finding out they're a biological male is entirely based in homophobia. This is, by no means, a matter of opinion. It's factual and logical. Homophobia has a strict definition which is accurately adhered to in this scenario.

And, to a certain degree, it's fine to be a homophobe. We all need to be honest about our irrational prejudices. We need to make a life-long effort to confront and challenge our discriminatory beliefs and not just accept "Yeah, I'm a little bit homophobic" though.

Originally Posted by CandyKing

As for The Warlock? Finding out that she was a man would spoil my enjoyment, because I just don't swing for the TG thing, the same way I can appreciate a view until I know all of the details, and then find out nothing about it attracts me. I won't ogle her or go out with her, will I hate her or get pissed or discriminate against her? No. Seperate issues, saying people are homophobes for NOT being attracted to someone who is pretty but is a known TG is just a ridiculous opinion.

It's spot on, actually.

Again, you're equating homophobia with violent, hateful behaviour, which simply isn't the case in the scenario of losing attraction to someone after finding out they are biologically male and once had male genitals. Unless there is reasoning for not finding someone attractive based on their being transgendered that isn't founded in private, personal homophobia, that's exactly what it is- private, personal homophobia.

If there is a reason aside from the ones the Warlock mentioned that finding out someone transgendered can completely spoil enjoyment of them and it isn't founded in not wanting to be with someone with the same chromosomes as you, I'm genuinely dying to hear it. "I'm not into TG" isn't a reason. There's motivation behind the sentiment that is either homophobic or isn't.

Originally Posted by Jungles

I'm just too offended by what this Rachel person has to say to even dignify it with a direct response.

This is called trolling.

"I can't formulate a coherent response so I'm just going to bluster and attempt to demonise the person who has challenged me with logic with lies."

I'm all for giving people equal opportunities in life. I don't let someone's sexual preferences affect my everyday treatment of them in business or pleasure, as long as they aren't harming the weak or innocent with their actions.

I'd hope your concern would extend to anyone who doesn't consent. If a weak or innocent person wants to be harmed during sex that's really none of your business either.

But who I like to fuck is entirely my decision, who I don't like to fuck is also entirely my decision, and I don't owe anyone in the entire world an apology over that preference.

When you use discriminatory assumptions to justify your turn offs, you owe an enormous apology to all those you wrongfully assumed negative things about, not because you didn't have sex with them, but because you made horrible, inaccurate assumptions about them. You may never find them attractive, just like I'm not into fuck dolls, and that's OK.

If someone I don't like to fuck tries to trick me into fucking them then I have every right to be upset with them. That is every individual's fundamental right, and it sickens me that someone like Rachel has the nerve to impose their sexual preferences on me or anyone else.

And now you're relying on presenting an argument that was never made to demonise me. Wow. That's embarrassing.

I'll quote myself:

Challenging someone to examine their highly irrational, extreme response to something benign is not the same as forcing someone to not be offended by something or find it attractive. Saying "Your treatment of gay people and response to situations you perceive as gay is irrational" is not the same as saying "You need to learn to find this sexy/not interpret this as gross." When someone's displeasure with a particular stimuli is due to senseless bigotry, challenging them to get the hell over it has to do with that senseless bias, not objective stimuli experienced as attractive or offensive. There's no intention to make the stimuli attractive to them nor is there any intention to make it less repulsive, only to expose the profound irrationality of the basis of their offense. Even once examined, the stimuli my remain unappealing. The faulty logic upon which it stands, which is harmful to others, will dissipate though.

I..... don't see a single example of imposing one's preferences on another. Unless challenging others to not be bigots is a preference. Regarding imposing sexual preferences though, I've been pretty clear this isn't the intention nor is it the most likely outcome. Good effort though.

I certainly wouldn't think of telling Rachel who she should like to fuck, and I'm not offended if it doesn't match my own preferences. It's entirely up to her.

If I had a profoundly discriminatory bias founded in bigotry, I sure as shit would hope you and anyone else would confront me about the irrationality of it and the damage that bias caused. If I screamed about the unattractiveness of black people, a notion based on racist assumptions, I hope others would challenge me. Would I ever find black people attractive? I have no idea, as this isn't and has never been my stance. Would my obsene revulsion based on irrational bias dissipate? If I took what those who had confronted me had to say seriously, probably.

And I'm sure she practices what she preaches and routinely fucks every homeless, sickly, toothless person who wants sex with her because she certainly wouldn't let her own revulsion get in the way of anyone else's desires.

Awww, look at the little troll trying to shove words down my oesopagus. Evidence-free, of course, in genuine troll-style. You can feed it fishsticks for an extra $2.25!

Strangely enough, my guy is missing one of his front teeth. I never want to see him without the fake one. Except maybe on Halloween. We could be rednecks.

You'll need to fabricate something to provide evidence I suggested people fuck everything they're grossed out by though. All I've said is people need to be challenged regarding irrational turn offs, which won't necessarily result in those turn offs becoming turn ons.

Furthermore, your example fails because there are very valid reasons too find sick people, hobos, and toothless folk unappealing.

But that's her preference, and she no right to impose this on anyone else.

Good thing she's never so much as suggested imposing her preferences on others. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt a assume you have poor reading comprehension skills as opposed to thinking you're intentionally trying to put words in my mouth to demonise me.

She does have every right in the world to confront people whose discriminatory sexual biases are rooted in irrational hatred about that irrationality. It likely won't change what they are attracted to. The hateful basis upon which they root their extreme turn-off would be destroyed if the person were willing to examine it closely and weigh the validity of their beliefs though, which would be beneficial to them in that they would no longer experience extreme negative emotion at the sight of such things and would do the people they actively discriminate against due to these irrational beliefs a world of good as well. Everybody wins!

She also has the right to deem others shallow and homophobic when the shoe fits.

I've never dated or been with a trans person, so the notion I'm trying to impose my kink for trangendered people on others falls flat. I don't find anything about being transgendered particularly sexy. I don't find it offensive either. It makes me sad that anyone would have to go through such an ordeal to be comfortable in their body.

I've been with one intersexed person who was positively fascinating though. Used male pronouns but personally identified as male and female regarding different attributes of his personality. I'm super glad I was able to get over the initial what-the-fuck-is-that reaction to his genitals as well, which weren't male or female, but were no less enjoyable and functional than any conventional set I've encountered. It was a profound experience.

[CandyKing]

Originally Posted by Rachel Bronwyn

It's spot on, actually.

Again, you're equating homophobia with violent, hateful behaviour, which simply isn't the case in the scenario of losing attraction to someone after finding out they are biologically male and once had male genitals. Unless there is reasoning for not finding someone attractive based on their being transgendered that isn't founded in private, personal homophobia, that's exactly what it is- private, personal homophobia.

This is a fundamentally flawed assumption, and you are imposing your definition of homophobia on EVERYONE ELSE. Maybe you should try looking it up, someone claiming they are not attracted to someone who is TG'd, formerly a male, is not the same as someone who hates and acts out against them in some fashion, not necessarily violent. I have a TG friend, but so what? She flirts with me, she doesn't look terrible or anything, am I attracted to her? No, do I take it in stride, still hang out with her and have fun? Yes. You really need to stop equating people having an opinion on what they like/dislike with a word which you are imagining is somehow all encompassing of any kind of difference of opinion other than complete acceptance/attraction. The only definition of homophobia which may, JUST MAY cover this kind of junk is "Irrational fear", which isn't even the case, because I have no fear of them, I just won't get into a private relationship with them due to my own preferences, much how like I am not particularly attracted to latino women. Am I racist? No.

I am only addressing the part of the post directed at me, for the most part I agree with your posts preaching acceptance, but I'm getting annoyed at this all encompassing view of homophobia which doesn't match any kind of official definition anywhere.

[Jungles]

The troll is calling me a troll. Never saw that coming.

Originally Posted by Rachel Bronwyn

"I can't formulate a coherent response so I'm just going to bluster and attempt to demonise the person who has challenged me with logic with lies."

Funny. That's my opinion of you right now.

Originally Posted by Rachel Bronwyn

I'd hope your concern would extend to anyone who doesn't consent. If a weak or innocent person wants to be harmed during sex that's really none of your business either.

You realize you're saying rape and child molesting is fine in your eyes by making this statement. Go ahead and tell me you're not. If there's any question about your true motivations, this is very telling.

When you use discriminatory assumptions to justify your turn offs, you owe an enormous apology to all those you wrongfully assumed negative things about, not because you didn't have sex with them, but because you made horrible, inaccurate assumptions about them.

And how is this not taken from a page from Christians who want to deprogram gays and "fix" their "discriminatory assumptions" in their sexual preferences?

You'll need to fabricate something to provide evidence I suggested people fuck everything they're grossed out by though. All I've said is people need to be challenged regarding irrational turn offs, which won't necessarily result in those turn offs becoming turn ons.

So, you don't want people to fuck everything disgusting, just the things you want them not to find disgusting. Why would I ever think you want to impose your sexual preferences on everyone else?

So tell me, what's so important and rational to have sex with that supersedes someone else's preferences? And how does that not get turned and used against you when someone you find "rationally" disgusting wants to fuck you, but they think your disgust is irrational?

[qzar9999]

Originally Posted by CandyKing

This is a fundamentally flawed assumption, and you are imposing your definition of homophobia on EVERYONE ELSE. Maybe you should try looking it up, someone claiming they are not attracted to someone who is TG'd, formerly a male, is not the same as someone who hates and acts out against them in some fashion, not necessarily violent. I have a TG friend, but so what? She flirts with me, she doesn't look terrible or anything, am I attracted to her? No, do I take it in stride, still hang out with her and have fun? Yes. You really need to stop equating people having an opinion on what they like/dislike with a word which you are imagining is somehow all encompassing of any kind of difference of opinion other than complete acceptance/attraction. The only definition of homophobia which may, JUST MAY cover this kind of junk is "Irrational fear", which isn't even the case, because I have no fear of them, I just won't get into a private relationship with them due to my own preferences, much how like I am not particularly attracted to latino women. Am I racist? No.

I am only addressing the part of the post directed at me, for the most part I agree with your posts preaching acceptance, but I'm getting annoyed at this all encompassing view of homophobia which doesn't match any kind of official definition anywhere.

Thank you! Somebody else in this thread who knows what homophobia means!

...Think she's going to listen, though? I doubt it.

[The Warlock]

Originally Posted by qzar9999

Thank you! Somebody else in this thread who knows what homophobia means!

...Think she's going to listen, though? I doubt it.

Homophobia: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals

If you think this doesn't apply to you in any way, when the reason you feel aversion to transgendered women is 'they're really men,' then you are an idiot as well as a bigot.*

You don't have to act out to be homophobic. You don't have to hate to be homophobic. You just have to not accept for no other reason than because you just don't want to. You don't think they deserve your acceptance. That's discrimination, plain and simple, by fucking factual definition.

You can't redefine terms because you don't like that they're applied to you. This is not opinion, you fucking moron, and you continuously claiming it is won't make it true.

You are a bigot. If you were a decent human being, you'd recognize this, accept it, and work to change it. But if you could do that, I imagine you wouldn't be a bigot in the first place.

*The Word 'bigot' is a general term for people with discriminatory beliefs, that includes the subset of 'homophobes,' in case you don't know what that word means.

The Warlock

[qzar9999]

Perhaps you missed something, Warlock. Before you go tossing around words like "idiot," "homophobe," "bigot," or for that matter, "discrimination," I once again invite you to find ANY post I've made in this thread where I have said, "I used to find Eve attractive, but if she's TG I no longer do," or "I dislike TG women because they're really men," or even where I've said "I do not accept trans/gay people the same way as I do straight people."

I have not made any such post. At no time in this thread have I ever, EVER stated that I used to find so-and-so attractive until I found out they were a TG. For that matter, I'm pretty sure I haven't posted anything derogatory about any gay person based solely on the fact that they're gay. Care to try again, or would you like to just continue erroneously insulting me?

Furthermore, you're entirely correct that the definition of homophobia is factual. That was never in doubt. The idea that a dislike of TG females is caused by nothing else but homophobia, however, is not a fact, it's an opinion. And your vehement insistence that it's a fact doesn't make it one.

[CandyKing]

Actually funny enough you do have to act out or hate to be homophobic, not being physically attracted to them does not mean you are homophobic. I also find your use of discrimination absolutely mind blowingly FUCKING STUPID. Discrimination is in fact not bad, would you eat week old maggot infested steaks? Guess what, some people cook their meat like that, it's fucking true, WHAT YOU DISCRIMINATE! HOW CAN YOU FIND THAT BAD OR DISGUSTING! No, you just don't like it, it doesn't make you a bad person, nor do you shit on others for liking it, your personal preferences is just that, PERSONAL preferences, and what you think about others or their lifestyles is actually pretty irrelevant until you start trying to FORCE others to conform to your goddamn beliefs rather than accepting that they are different.

So shut your fucking piehole Warlock about bigotry, because that is exactly what you are.

bigot - a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own

Sorry to get all pissed off, but really guys, you're attacking people for having different opinions, until someone tries to force their opinions on others, they are perfectly entitled for having them, and attacking them for it is patently ridiculous. I'm not here to defend Qzar, but Warlock's rant offended me on so many levels, throwing out strong emotional statements and attacks on someone else. I did the same thing, but I'm keeping it in, because frankly that kind of post deserves it.

Also do not even try attacking me, I already agreed to the whole acceptance stuff Rachel and you seem to preach in a strawman kind of style, and I am not against it, I'm just against the incredibly accusatory phrases you use to state "opinions" as "facts" and attack someone else for their own opinions. Also the incredible misuse of terms such as bigot, as well as homophobe.

Hay look I can be a dick too!

Edit: Also god damn you Qzar. I click that link in your sig EVERY time, leaving me sprawling in a world of tvtropes that I cannot escape over and over again...

[cwmoss]

This needs to posted at the men who love men that wish they were women forum. You could even have post-op and pre-op sections. You could start a I love my gerbil section do what ever you want but just call it what it is "gay" and I'm not.

Call me all the names you want. Say I discriminate, sure I choose not to have sex with men.

If Eve lived his life in a personal way and let everyone in on the joke that would be fine or if Eve said hey I'm a big sexy post-op tranny, come buy my stuff if you like that kink then that's cool too. No one is saying Eve can't buy a car, go to school, get a job, get married or do what ever he wants.

But she comes out all over the net saying he's a beautiful amazon woman or tall woman and is selling video under that premise and it's just lying.

Those that like this kind of stuff and strait sex too have a big advantage over me. Because you don't discern the difference between this and women that were born women you'll have much more opportunities for sex than I will. You should celebrate this. But I would suggest that you celebrate it somewhere else though. Because these boards are generally about Giantess, Amazon Women, Tall Girls and Female Growth. For me it's all about women.

And oversexed, predatory gay men pretending to be something else to have sex with strait men is nothing new. Whether it's dressing like a woman or becoming your best friend to get you drunk and turning you on to the wonderful gay lifestyle. So I find it tasteless and offensive.

And about all the name calling, I browse a lot of boards that are mostly about trans-gender and male-female transformation stuff and I don't start posting stuff on their forums about what a bunch of jerks they are because they're not, they're just different and I respect them because they call it like it is, unlike Eve.

Thank you.

[The Warlock]

I guess I'll just have to accept that you guys are almost as mature and intelligent as 13 year olds. I'm through trying to teach you, you're obviously too afraid to see what's in front of you.

The Warlock

[LOD]

A conversation can go nowhere when both sides consider the definition of a word to be someone's opinion......

[CandyKing]

I'm not, I quoted dictionaries, and looked up several sources just to make sure before I stated it, plus in rl I have just not heard the word bandied out just for non-attraction. The Warlock is just being hilariously offensive at anyone who doesn't 100% agree with his opinion, like they can't wrap their heads around someone NOT being attracted to a TG because they are a TG. like somehow they have some kind of obligation to be physically attracted to them, and are unable to distinguish between being able to acknowledge someone as hot as opposed to wanting to have a relationship, blaming anyone who thinks someone is hot but yet is not attracted is a homophobe. Dickish to the max.

Personal preference dictates alot of things, some things we just are not attracted to, that's why most people don't frequent every board on this forum, I agree with Warlock and Rachel for the most part other than their hilariously inept attempts to shove it in peoples face that "YOUR WRONG AND YOUR BAD".

If you want an idea of how ridiculous this is, replace TG with something else. Not physically attracted to dogs, keychains, etc. Most things you would find ridiculous if you substituted them, and thus it is not a very compelling argument, because there are alot of things you are FINE with substituting in, and they all make "sense". This isn't even anti-TG, this is just anti-emotional hate spewing. Just read Warlocks last response.

[Rachel Bronwyn]

Show your sources, dude. You're talking out your ass. Homophobia is not defined by violence or even active discrimination. You are wrong, profoundly so, about the definition of homophobia and if you interpret an accusation of homophobia as "You're bad" you're also profoundly over-sensitive. Everyone has irrational biases. Thank goodness yours isn't particularly extreme and you don't partipate in fag drags. You are homophobic though just like I discriminate against fat people.

If you don't see the difference between irrational lack of attraction to someone encompassing physical and psychological attractiveness fitting your tastes AFTER you discover they have a Y chromosome, and lack of attraction to a key chain, you have no brain or do have a brain and are being intentionally obtuse. In one scenario, attraction exists prior to an entirely irrelevent factoid being revealed. The overwhelming lack of attraction due to their biology despite strong attraction existing prior is rooted in their being biologically male and not wanting to be with a biological male, despite their being physically and psychologically a female and your finding them attractive. When that single chromosome overrides pre-existing attraction, it's due to latent homophobia.

Key chain attraction initially doesn't exist, so there's no comparison.

Considering the only person here who knows what homophobia is and has provided sources for it is the Warlock, there's really no discussing this with anyone else, who believe their opinions override fact.

Homophobia is: "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals".

This definition fits ALL OF YOU who are claiming otherwise. These are NOT opinions. Homophobia has a strict definition your behaviour adheres to, particularly regarding irrational aversion. You don't get to redefine homophobia just because you don't want to embrace your being privately (or publicly in Mr. Lifestyle Choice's case) homophobic. Homophobia never has nor will it ever require active hatred or violence. These are merely scenarios in which it's readily visible. Sorry. You lose.

Funny that delusional folk like qzar attempt to malign me as the uneducated, misled individual yet they're the one making up definitions as they god. "You should listen to people afraid to admit their faults, not legitimate definitions of terms!" Sorry, the only folks here who have a clue about homophobia and are using it's actual definition as opposed to the definition that suits our fancy are myself and the Warlock. "I have gay friends" does NOT make you not homophobic.

I hate fat people. I irrationally stereotype them as all being disgusting individuals. When I actually encounter and spend time with fat people, I find most of them are pretty lovely. I have fat friends. I still discriminate against fat people due to deep seeded personal biases against them though. Though it's subconcious, I'm less likely to buy a newspaper from a fat person than I am from a healthy one. It's horrible and wrong.

Will I ever be attracted to fat people? Unlikely. I certainly don't want to engage in a relationship with someone who is actively weakening their health and shortening their lifespan. My discrimination against them in non-relationship scenarios though is irrational and horrible and something I need to a) admit to and b) challenge and get the hell over. People who lose all attraction to someone after finding out they have a Y chromosome and claim the reaction isn't rooted in homophobia need to do the same fucking thing. Man up and admitt your own prejudices. You'll never progress if you don't.