Ladyboy's are fags

[Bangkoktraveler]

Thanks a lot Old Hippie, see if I tell you any more of my secrets.

[MooNoi]

He's just unsure of his sexuality and that is why he started the thread.

 

Too true Teddy.

 

I think he's been in Iraq for a while...

 

Must get lonely over there and alter one's judgement at times.

 

I guess "any hole's a goal" when you're in that situation!!

 

[Khun_Kong]

Honey, I already explained this, agree to disagree, and all that...You I and others know these people exist, some of them on this board, some posting (perhapses) in this thread...? I WILL NOT name names.

 

Agree to disagree- we either have a different sample set or the same people tell you and I different things.

 

Thinking about it, I do know one guy who has now said on 3-4 occasions that he has woken up in the morning after a night of hard drinking with a ladyboy next to him. He does appear to be in a state of extreme denial ("Not only am I not gay, but I keep fucking ladyboys by accident").

 

[whitelotuslane]

That's true. Okay. But, heterosexual men are NOT attracted to dicks. It's kinda what makes them, well ... hetero ain't it? That wiring you speak of does not include being attracted to penises, right? Or is that just another 'fetish'?

 

Yes, exactly. Now we're getting somewhere. My personal fetish is armpits though, and Paris Hilton.

 

So what you are saying here is you'd rather fuck a pretty young Katoey than an ugly old woman?

 

Yes. The only thing the ugly old woman could have going for herself sexually is a double-X chromosome, and I don't know about you, but chromosomes don't turn me on. Can't even see the damned things without a microscope. It's actually a complete no-brainer: "I like screwing sexy fit chicks with big tits", and in a P4P setting that's all pretty fake from the get-go. So scared people are of 'a homosexual act' that they'd rather fuck a chromosome or a plastic blow-up doll compared to a rather more convincing semi-artificial doll that is a katoey.

 

Here's where you show your obviously flawed thinking WLL. They, the Miss Tiffany humans, are men, males of the human species, not 'chicks'. They are chicks with dicks or dicks thinking they are chicks, or guys who have had their dicks lopped off so they can be seen as being chicks, but they are NOT chicks. I've seen many expats who have been here a long time fall into this thinking of them, transgenders/katoeys, as being a 'third' sex. Of calling the katoeys she rather than he. I've seen it, but I don't buy it, and I still see them for what they are ... men.

 

They very nearly got into the new Thai constitution as a third sex, which may still happen in the future. I would applaud that, though for practical reasons it's actually unlikely.

 

Anyway, I read your post with great interest and I think we can wrap this one up; it all comes down to if you define homosexuality on a biological/physical level or on a mental level. If the former then there's no argument that screwing a katoey is a homosexual act, that's just the scientific biological facts and no amount of arguing will change that. (Be it PC / left-wing arguing or not, though what does political orientation have to do with sexual orientation I wonder)

 

On a mental level it's a lot more complex though. Fucking a plastic doll is pretty sad, but people wouldn't draw a person's heterosexuality in doubt. Why not; it sure isn't a woman that person is fucking, it's something artificial made to look like a woman and most likely designed and manufactured by men. Same with erotic stories, manga/cartoons or art; it's written/constructed to entice sexually, but there's no actual female involved. Most erotic stories are written by men, even! Isn't that gay, to get sexually excited reading about sex acts with women that came directly from the (male) author's mind?

 

Sexually, the whole attraction-thing doesn't hinge on the question of the katoey considering him/herself female or male or something else, it hinges on presenting a sexually attractive package that appeals to heterosexual males.

 

Thought experiment: You may be able to construct an over-the-top katoey starting with an actual woman as the first building block. (I'd start with Paris Hilton, please ) The surgery & mechanics involved would be a bit trickier to get right, plus women who might go for such surgery would more likely be of a more dikey pursuation rather than a Jenna Jameson-pursuation which would spoil the overal package a bit. But such practical issues aside, from your and Old Hippie's biological viewpoint this would NOT be gay I suppose?

 

Bangkoktraveller wrote:

 

Maybe one of the reasons men bonk men/ladyboys is that some men find it easier, or at least in their home country, to have sex with a man then with a lady. With a lady, they have to wine and dine them which translates to cost and time. Whereas with a gay man, just letting him know you want sex is probably all that is required

 

I don't believe that for a second. I wouldn't know if gay men are like that and have zero (if not negative) inclination to find out, but chatting with ladyboys leads me to believe they're 24/7 committed to trying to be MORE female than most women are, and that very much includes all the associated bullshit & tantrums. Not sure if that is intentional only, or a result of the female hormones they take, or both.

[Bangkoktraveler]

"I don't believe that for a second. I wouldn't know if gay men are like that and have zero (if not negative) inclination to find out"

 

Ahhhh, for the sake of argument, how can you say you don't believe what I wrote but then turn around and say you have no knowledge about that sort of thing? Makes no sense to me. Absoulutely none.

[Bangkoktraveler]

"I do know one guy who has now said on 3-4 occasions that he has woken up in the morning after a night of hard drinking with a ladyboy next to him. He does appear to be in a state of extreme denial ("Not only am I not gay, but I keep fucking ladyboys by accident")."

 

Yelp, clasical case of qualifiness. Everything must be qualified.

 

I know of one farang who thinks like this:

[color:red]

"not gay because ladyboy sucked my cock.

But even when I sucked his cock, he didn't cum in my mouth.

But even when he did cum in my mouth, I didn't swallow."[/color]

 

And it goes on and on. You noticed how he qualified everything with a but(t). Ask him if he is gay when it comes to anal sex with a ladyboy and he still qualifies it with but(t)s.

 

After a while, it sounds like all he is talking about are but(t)s. Imagine how he would qualify the situation when getting but fucked from behind while giving head to another ladyboy in front of him. And of course, he would not be gay.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Zaad]

WLL,

 

On a mental level it's a lot more complex though. Fucking a plastic doll is pretty sad, but people wouldn't draw a person's heterosexuality in doubt. Why not; it sure isn't a woman that person is fucking, it's something artificial made to look like a woman and most likely designed and manufactured by men.

 

I think it says squat about a person's sexual preference since (in my book) fucking an object ain't sex. We can label it as we want, as having sex with a doll, but there's no telling IMO if there aren't at least two people involved in a physical sexual act.

 

I think we're too quick to draw conclusions here.

And the mental aspect is absolutely irrelevant.

 

Another example.. masturbating over a picture of a male. Gay or not? Well.. definitely seems like it but you need to have stronger evidence in order to classify a person's preference. Who knows, maybe that person would never consider trying the real flesh and bones, so why the wild assumptions?

 

Cent,

So what you are saying here is you'd rather fuck a pretty young Katoey than an ugly old woman?

 

WLL,

Yes. The only thing the ugly old woman could have going for herself sexually is a double-X chromosome, and I don't know about you, but chromosomes don't turn me on.

 

And a transformed male does turn you on? Hey, no problem, to each his own, but no thanks, I'll pass. I'd rather boink the old lady if I ever run into the unfortunate circumstance of having to make a choice.

[whitelotuslane]

"I don't believe that for a second. I wouldn't know if gay men are like that and have zero (if not negative) inclination to find out"

 

Ahhhh, for the sake of argument, how can you say you don't believe what I wrote but then turn around and say you have no knowledge about that sort of thing? Makes no sense to me. Absoulutely none.

 

LOL.. Either you have a problem with understanding basic written English, or someone else was doing the quoting for you and forgot to quote a bunch.

 

Below I'll add what it was you were trying to quote so it makes sense at least to the the non-dyslexic folks in the audience.

 

--------------------------------------

 

Maybe one of the reasons men bonk men/ladyboys is that some men find it easier, or at least in their home country, to have sex with a man then with a lady. With a lady, they have to wine and dine them which translates to cost and time. Whereas with a gay man, just letting him know you want sex is probably all that is required

 

I don't believe that for a second. I wouldn't know if gay men are like that and have zero (if not negative) inclination to find out, but chatting with ladyboys leads me to believe they're 24/7 committed to trying to be MORE female than most women are, and that very much includes all the associated bullshit & tantrums.

 

(I do hope that most in the audience would understand the concept of limiting the scope of my statement to ladyboys only, and not wishing to make any claims on the validity of your statement applied to gay men who are not ladyboys.)

[Old Hippie]

Pride week just about having wrapped up here, I have been treated to tons of Gay/lesbian/trans gender propaganda. Bottom line is, we are all in agreement, come out and support/acknowledge your sexuality. Don't hide it.

 

Had lunch with my cousin today, and the topic in the cafe was gay teens/suppression/denial of their sexuality/orientation. The consensus is/was too many people want to deny who/what they are, and this brings on too many problems for these people.

 

The bottom line here is, acknowledge who you are/what you are, and let it be a source of pleasure/happiness in your life, not a source of pain and humiliation. This is all I am trying to say when I ask people why they deny who /what they are.

[whitelotuslane]

I know of one farang who thinks like this:

 

"not gay because ladyboy sucked my cock.

But even when I sucked his cock, he didn't cum in my mouth.

But even when he did cum in my mouth, I didn't swallow."

 

And it goes on and on. You noticed how he qualified everything with a but(t). Ask him if he is gay when it comes to anal sex with a ladyboy and he still qualifies it with but(t)s.

 

After a while, it sounds like all he is talking about are but(t)s. Imagine how he would qualify the situation when getting but fucked from behind while giving head to another ladyboy in front of him. And of course, he would not be gay.

 

I must admit that the above scenario makes some inroad towards the fruity side of the field.

 

Of course you're just making it up out of thin air, but assuming it was for real then I doubt this person would call himself 100% straight, with a straight face.

 

Still it's basic human freedom to decide for yourself who and what you are. I don't see why this is such a challenge to people, then hide it in "oh I don't mind people being gay, sure, live and let live, as long as they'nt bothering me they can do whatever they want, BUT they must admit it, admit! Admit! you raging fag, how dare you claim to be as straight as I am!!" etc.

 

If you don't mind people being gay then please also don't mind people being whatever they choose to be, or perhaps they don't feel that application of a pre-fab label to their behaviour is a very urgent topic of discussion. Let it go.