Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This week's sign of the apocalypse. Problem is that lately we have been getting 2 or 3 or 4 signs every week!
Transexualism is nothing new to America. The New York Daily News ran a front-page story on December 1, 1952, under the headline "Ex-GI Becomes Blonde Beauty". She was Christine Jorgensen, the first openly transexual in America. She had reconstruction surgery. There was no apocalypse as a result.
I am free to look and comment on whatever. Pound sand. How's that?
LOL - I'm a progressive because I'm pointing out YOUR hypocrisy.
That's rich.
Notice, I've not made any comments to people who are posting they're against this. Only you. Why? Because you told someone else if they don't like the SI swimsuit edition that's too bad and they don't have to look at it.
As soon as I say the same thing to you - you become unhinged. How about the other poster is free to say he doesn't know why SI still has a swimsuit edition and if you don't like it, YOU can pound sand?
Your criteria are flawed, because clearly women who do not have kids, have passed menopause, have had hysterectomies, or are congenitally or surgically sterile, you would consider women. Unless you don't.
Therefore either all those women are not women, or your criteria are not complete.
The issue I have with your criteria is that it puts a 50Mt hydrogen bomb under 50 years of feminism, and pushes the detonator. The whole argument of feminism is that people are not defined by their genitals, yet, here you are throwing it under the bus.
Victoria's secret caters mostly to female shoppers. SI is geared mostly to male sports fans. I have no issue with transgendered people they have a right to live their life as they want. However part of the whole swimsuit issue is to feature beautiful woman that guys long after. Putting a dude on there is not ok. Anymore than putting a gay dude on the cover would be. Some guys are into this sort of thing but they have mags and websites for that.
In other words, transexuals who are attractive make some straight guys feel uncomfortable about their sexual orientation. If so, there are surely other models in the issue that are real women to really get turned on to.
In other words, transexuals who are attractive make some straight guys feel uncomfortable about their sexual orientation. If so, there are surely other models in the issue that are real women to really get turned on to.
I suspect the nail has been hit firmly on the head.
LOL - I'm a progressive because I'm pointing out YOUR hypocrisy.
That's rich.
Notice, I've not made any comments to people who are posting they're against this. Only you. Why? Because you told someone else if they don't like the SI swimsuit edition that's too bad and they don't have to look at it.
As soon as I say the same thing to you - you become unhinged. How about the other poster is free to say he doesn't know why SI still has a swimsuit edition and if you don't like it, YOU can pound sand?
LMAO that you don't even see what you're doing.
Again, did I say the couldn't look at it or want to BAN it? No. That's the difference but you don't get it and I guess you never will. No hypocrisy in commenting on something or saying you don't like it.
If you want to look at Trannies or even be one, knock yourself out! Though one has to wonder why the topic sets you off like it does.
I suspect the nail has been hit firmly on the head.
So if you don't agree with the entire LGBT mantra you are either Gay yourself of secretly like Trannies. Wow, consider yourself firmly part of Woke culture.
Your criteria are flawed, because clearly women who do not have kids, have passed menopause, have had hysterectomies, or are congenitally or surgically sterile, you would consider women. Unless you don't.
Therefore either all those women are not women, or your criteria are not complete.
The issue I have with your criteria is that it puts a 50Mt hydrogen bomb under 50 years of feminism, and pushes the detonator. The whole argument of feminism is that people are not defined by their genitals, yet, here you are throwing it under the bus.
It is not "all women have periods". It is that NO MEN have periods.
Your definition of feminism that "people are not defined by their genitals" refers to ability, intelligence, or other qualities like that.
People absolutely 100% are defined by their genitals when it comes to GENDER.
XX chromosomes give a person "female" parts.
XY chromosomes give a person "male" parts.
The only exceptions are someone born with a chromosomal defect.
There are two choices except for those with birth defects. That is it. Two.
Removing parts of one's anatomy and adding other bits does not turn a man into a woman. He will still have greater upper body strength. He cannot bear a child. His voice is not that of a woman. He will have to take hormones.
If I put my cat in a dog costume, it will still be a cat.
These people are mentally ill. Perhaps it is a method of treatment to allow these people to identify as another gender. Maybe if they didn't they would be more likely to kill themselves, IDK. I have compassion for these people. It must not be easy.
However, to justify this as you are and pretend that it is normal and natural, by twisting logic and defing the laws nature, is completely absurd. The emperor has no clothes but you are one of the ones admiring his beautiful garments.
Last edited by calgirlinnc; 07-12-2020 at 12:41 PM..
So if you don't agree with the entire LGBT mantra you are either Gay yourself of secretly like Trannies. Wow, consider yourself firmly part of Woke culture.
I'm not saying that at all. SI are free to photograph anyone they choose for their swimsuit issue.
There's zero reason to be outraged that they chose a transwoman to appear in the issue. What's to be outraged about? Its their publication, and you don't need to buy it. So why is it an issue?
The only reason typically people get outraged over something that's a non-issue is that its punching one of their buttons, most often it provokes an internal response they find objectionable.
I'm not part of the woke culture, I dont care how someone dresses, how they augment their bodies, what they believe. I only object when I'm told that "I must..." to be part of the crowd. I'm not, nor ever have been or wanted to be part of the majority, The majority is typically insane, and self contradictory.
Honestly my view is I don’t care if your a women or a man, transgender, gay, or lesbian. People are people it’s their life let them make their decisions. But this was definitely a bold move my Sports Illustrated
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
