Soul man

[blackteasplease]

Had this 1980s film been mentioned here re the trans debate?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul_Man_(film)

A white boy who takes tanning pills to make himself black and geta scholarship? I remembered it dimly but just looked it up and it seems really apt. He realises all the advantages he's had being white and that he can go back to being white and having that privilege at any time!

I'm not saying that fetishists are humiliated by their kink, I'm saying that humiliation is their kink. Have you not explored forced feminisation?

@IAMcorbyndallas I can't think of any parallels whereby a lad identifies as something he isn't in order to win a prize or scholarship. Can anyone else think of one?

Benjamin Butterworth, who self-ided as black to get to an LGBT student conference and deprived a black student of that place.

Fetlife is to be avoided but if you want to research the matter, Rat, that is where you would start.

I'm lost as to exactly what you're saying that has to do with how likely someone is to pretend to be the opposite sex in order to take advantage of some opportunity (e.g. A scholarship, as per the film, or sport in later example). I did try and find an interpretation which kind of made sense in that context, but now I'm even more confused!

What the bloody hell has the kinky world of sissification got to do with this film about a bloke taking tanning pills to get a scholarship for ethnic minorities??

I don't much care to distinguish between men who are genuine in their (false) belief that they are women, and those who are disingenuous in claiming they are women.

Neither are women, and the net result on actual women is equally negative for both groups of men.

Men are never women, no matter the depth of their conviction, and women's right to their own boundaries is sacrosanct.

So... there may or may not be a link between the film's protagonist and some conceptual (probably rather dim) pretend-trans person... but not distinguishing between different "types" of trans people any tenuous link is, um, irrelevant?

Men are never women, no matter the depth of their conviction, and women's right to their own boundaries is sacrosanct.

This is the heart of the matter. Everything else is just noise.

I second BarrakerBarmer

That's the crux of it.

In my view men will never be women. If you're born male you are MALE. There's no experience to be had that's remotely similar to a female. Even if a man 'passes' to most, he's not spent a single second in a female body, constricted from birth by gender and sex.

*Everything else is just noise.×

....or the subject of the thread.

It was a general comment about transgenderism, Rat. I thought the the subject of the thread was an "irrelevant" and "tenuous" comparison, "not in the least bit realistic" and a "reeaally long shot"?