Transman kicked out of gay sauna

We usually add names when we are addressing people directly Arghh and quote without names if we are just responding generally to a particularly point (or agreeing with it).

On this board we tend to bold and not @ people, just because the resulting email notifications can get tedious - if we want to draw a particular person’s attention to a thread they aren’t on, we might @ them (and apologise 😂)

These are all unwritten conventions, so new posters have no real way of knowing until they have kicked around for a while. Please don’t take it personally!

AGHHHH, you've misunderstood a reasonably common posting style on this forum, which has then been explained to you. Continuing to over-react and refusing to accept the explanation is going to waste your time and everyone else's.

Um, yeah.

Quoting me and then saying: You know humans have all types of neurodiversity, we deal with it, however forcing us all to act as a placebo in this particular neuro challenge is not on.

Why wouldn't I think that was aimed at me?...

quoting someone and then saying you're not talking to them. It is a natural assumption that you were

AGHHH It is the style of discussion on the site. Perhaps you weren't aware of this?

@Electron1 you don't need to avoid posts from gay men. Your note to self should be: make it clear who you're talking to instead of quoting someone and then saying you're not talking to them. It is a natural assumption that you were...

That video R0wan posted is very reminiscent of a number of religious youth festival ones I've seen. Motivational speaker, lots of scenes of happy colourful people, Genderist religious phrases eg. The chanting etc.

Following questions raised on this thread I ended up more aware than I might have wished of the 'puppy play scene' in the UK.

'Mr Pup 2018' being a transman who may well be amongst those challenging gay men's spaces such as saunas and bath houses.

Some may recall the Channel 4 documentary about this kink scene 'Secret Life of the Human Pups'. I'm not sure if this was part of the same series which also looked at males wearing full latex doll suits.

@AGHHHH

I wasn't talking to you , we frequently quote or bold a post we are continuing to make points about as a conversational method, I was addressing the board in general as is the custom here, and the trans people that are imposing their worldview on others.

Thanks for the hissy fit email. Note to self; avoid any posts from gay men on a feminist chat board in future.

Highheels - reinforces what I have thought for a long time. Many gay men are not our allies. They are as entitled as straight men and only care about them and their dicks whilst at the same time expecting women to do their dirty work for them.

do they believe that we all wish we could be like them, or that we're basically a lower kind of lifeform because we rather enjoy being embodied beings?

worth watching:

That program was really quite something, and a useful corrective for anyone who'd assumed that the politics of transsexualism was fine until fairly recently.

There's an early expression of this 'higher being' belief described by Della Aleksander who Stephen Whittle has identified as being an early significant influence:

On previous thread, OP Sunkisses wrote:
"I did a search of Mumsnet and couldn't see any other posts about this extraordinary 1973 discussion show which was produced by transsexuals 45 years ago where they were given free-reign, free from editorial control. Four transsexuals are joined by a psychologist and an MP.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06c83f4/player

Where to start? Maybe with the show's producer and host, Della Aleksander, who is the most bizarre of all the participants. Della starts by claiming that a "chastened and wiser" Adolf Hitler and Queen Victoria have said, through a medium, that "there was a special role for me, in the reconstruction following a world wide collapse in 1978-79". Della also claims to have been sent from another world where the sexes don't exist and that transsexuals are the only model of a "higher race"! Della also claims to have founded the neo-Nazi sounding European National Movement in South Africa whilst serving in the Army there (I couldn't find any info on them, but they sound well dodgy to me).

Della also seems utterly confused, mis-using the terms 'bisexual' and 'intersex', and appearing to think these words mean transsexual, and that the appearance of nipples on a man means 'we are all transsexuals'. Della is, thankfully, corrected by the psychologist at 33.53 mins in who states that it is important to use the correct terminology, but Della wafts such trivialities away by saying "I don't want to get bogged down in medical questions". The MP, Leo Abse, argues against the 'trans umbrella' (before this term was invented by Stonewall etc) at 36 mins in.

There is clear evidence of autogynephilia (AGP - the sexual fetish of a man loving himself as a woman) at 33.23 when Della says the "sex act" is a "transsexual one", as "one attempts to become and absorb the beloved".

At 26 mins in one of the speakers, Rachel Bowen (the working class northern transsexual with dark hair), says that having a female birth certificate is a "status symbol". Another of the transsexuals, Laura Pralet, at 27 mins preposterously claims that "we are not a minority", and "I have never been a homosexual", even though Laura lives with and has married a man. Laura also says their husband is never happier when they are "in the kitchen", and at 31 mins in says they wanted to become a woman as "women have the best deal anyway".

It's absolutely fascinating and well worth a watch."

I would second that its worth watching

I keep thinking of that thing from Futurama where they had the heads of former US presidents in jars. Apparently that's something to aspire to? Can't say I fancy it myself.

AAK, I think it's fairly clear that there is a sense of value judgement on those who don't agree with Genderist tenets. That's why dissenters get clobbered with the very worst insults - bigot, nazi etc. It's why there is the repeated refrain about dissent being 'on the wrong side of history'.

It's why people who have a very sense of their own sexual orientation are called 'genital fetishists'. It's meant to shame you into compliance or silence. This religion doesn't replicate through persuasion, it's a compelled faith - mostly through social threats.

do they believe that we all wish we could be like them, or that we're basically a lower kind of lifeform because we rather enjoy being embodied beings?

I think for some there is indeed a belief that elevates trans people to a higher kind of lifeform.
Just as kink is elevated above 'vanilla'

I don't want to transcend it, though. Not sure that they understand that - do they believe that we all wish we could be like them, or that we're basically a lower kind of lifeform because we rather enjoy being embodied beings?

I think the weirdness around genitals is part of the religious aspect of Genderism. Adherents tend to see themselves as higher up the virtue scale, and as their religion has dualistic basis of spirit Vs matter, they feel extra virtue by claiming 'not to care' about genitals. Only the base, low virtue people care about physical things like that. Genderists see themselves as transcending this.

Yeah, that too, Fermats. Photography is an artform, you can do amazing things with it. Attraction involves all 5 senses.

but really, if you're not massively interested in your sexual partner's genitals, I can't really see sex being very successful

TRAs really struggle to accept this, don't they? Genitals matter because we use them to shag with. When people act like they're irrelevant it's like asking what your mouth has to do with eating, what your feet have to do with running, etc.

@TrashyTerf Yeah. Even on dating apps with carefully angled photos I will always check their profile if I think they are and I'm always right. Female faces and bodies generally look different.

The only one who has ever been mostly convincing to me, is that Luke A from BB years ago.

A lot of trans people look like they pass in airbrushed photographs... very very few pass in real life.

@foxyliz26 A staged black and white photoshoot. Lol none of them actually look like that.

I would say no to this person because I have no interest in having sexual relations with a trans person. Surgery or not.

And believe it or not but gay men, like everyone else, have preferences and we don't say no because we're "all about size" what a stupid thing to say.

Thing is if you are androphilic you are always going to prefer a real man and they aren't exactly a rare commodity.

Like AAK I don't go for gym bunnies. But even if I did, it's impossible to tell from a photo how I'd react in RL. For starters, smell is immensely important to me -some otherwise personable and attractive men just smell wrong. Then there's not just the appearance of the neo-phallus (the photos I've seen don't look promising) but it's feel. I can't see, for instance, how any plastic surgery could reproduce that lovely, almost velvety feel and softness of the foreskin. Then there's the solidity of the male perineum.

I find it hard to believe a skilled plastic surgeon could reproduce all that. And my detailed description may make me sound like a genital fetishist - but really, if you're not massively interested in your sexual partner's genitals, I can't really see sex being very successful (unless you subscribe to the RM school of thought: sex is a success so long as your partner "copes" while you get a shag).

@DancelikeEmmaGoldman do you mean a readit user with three Ds in his name? I thought he was found out the be fake, though I'm not sure how the photos were faked...?

How come the TRAs are going after Mumsnet and not the likes of Datalounge or KiwiFarms. Well I know why, it's because mumsnet are seen as women = should do as we are told by the menz. The TRAs don't dare try it on with the male based forums. Makes me so angry.