Ladyboy or not?

[KimDidMeGood]

Hahaha, would you mind?

Anyway, I just googled her (Nong Poy) and apparently she underwent surgery quite a while ago so I would hardly classify her as Ladyboy.

[TroyinEwa/Perv]

So as time goes by, the ladyboy moniker fades away? Never....born a boy, you are a boy. No matter how much knife you've undergone.

 

OH.....ruling requested. Gay or not? Boy or not? I'll abide by your words.

[KimDidMeGood]

Strictly speaking you're right, as "ladyboy" is a generic term, covering various types of people.

 

Also, the way I worded it was not ideal. It's not just about the surgery, it's the idea that someone like Nong Poy is incredibly feminine, arguably even more feminine than the absolutely female (hot!) bargirl I had fun with last week-end; so that plus having no more male genitals makes me feel that Nong Poy is quite far from the usual perception of "ladyboy".

 

Anyway let's not get into an endless and useless philosophical debate over this. Nong Poy is HAWT, period.

[TroyinEwa/Perv]

Ok.......just not my type is all.

[Flashermac]

As to their being female, well no ... they still lack the internal female organs. I've got nothing against ladyboys. They just don't interest me. Up to you.

 

 

[Torneyboy]

Mine either ...

[Torneyboy]

Each to their own..imo

[shygye]

As to their being female, well no ... they still lack the internal female organs. I've got nothing against ladyboys. They just don't interest me. Up to you.

 

 

How would you classify Jamie Lee Curtis?

[preahko]

anyway, to make the distinction with confidence from a still photo is far from foolproof...I can always tell in person (especially if they walk even one step), not always from a photo

[Old Hippie]

As to their being female' date=' well no ... they still lack the internal female organs. I've got nothing against ladyboys. They just don't interest me. Up to you.

 

[/quote']

 

How would you classify Jamie Lee Curtis?

 

 

 

 

Wasn't that story about Jamie Lee Curtis debunked? I seem to recall reading that...also seem to recall reading it was true...in any event, I don't find her hot...

 

Seems the verdict is still out...

 

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/jamieleecurtis/a/jamieleecurtis_2.htm

 

 

http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/jamie.asp

 

 

This reminds me of the Richard Gere/Jerry Penacoli/fill in your favorite star here rumor about the gerbil up the ass. Everyone knew someone who new a nurse/doctor etc who worked at the hospital where the actor was taken and the gerbil removed...that was bullshit, and most likely there is at least some bullshit involved here (With Jamie Lee) as well.

 

As was pointed out in the Urban legend link, she is NOT the first actress to have this rumor spread about her:

 

"...Why Jamie Lee Curtis?

 

It bears pointing out that Ms. Curtis was neither the first nor the last female celebrity accused of gender ambiguity. Marlene Dietrich, Greta Garbo, and Mae West endured similar whisper campaigns during their respective heydays, according to Paul Young, author of L.A. Exposed: Strange Myths and Curious Legends in the City of Angels (St. Martin's Press, 2002). So did '80s disco star Grace Jones. One thing all of these famous performers have in common is a marked degree of androgyny -- either in appearance, or behavior, or both -- that sets them apart from other women. Curtis, who easily passes for "butch" when she dresses down for a role and has her hair cut short, has also been singled out for what film critic Bill Cosford once called her "androgynous appeal." ..."

 

 

"...And then there is the matter of her name. Some have speculated she was christened "Jamie Lee" because it wasn't clear at birth whether she was a boy or a girl. Not so, according to Curtis' mother, actress Janet Leigh, who says the gender-ambiguous name was just a practical choice.

 

"At that time," she told Village Voice columnist Michael Musto in 1998, "we didn't know ahead of time if it would be a girl or a boy, so when I was pregnant with Kelly, my best friend Jackie Gershwin said, 'Why don't you call the baby Kelly, so if it's a girl, it works, and if it's a boy, it works?' And she thought the same thing with Jamie. The babies were named before they were born because Jackie said, 'This way, we won't have to worry about it!'"

 

Speculation has also centered around the fact that Curtis and her husband, Christopher Guest, adopted their two children instead of conceiving -- the implication being that perhaps Curtis couldn't conceive because of her allegedly "abnormal" physique. It's a question that will have to go unanswered for now -- and perhaps forever -- since neither Curtis nor Guest seems keen on speaking publicly about their reasons for adopting.

 

"...The 'Proof'

 

Without a doubt, the main driving force behind this gossip is the fact that Jamie Lee Curtis's alleged intersexuality has long been spoken of as a given in medical school classrooms, even though her name has never appeared in a textbook or journal article in connection with intersex conditions. But a rumor is still a rumor, even from the lips of a board-certified physician. All the more so, in fact, given that any physician who actually treated Curtis couldn't have revealed such information without violating patient confidentiality laws.

 

The only document that has ever been offered as "proof" was a 1996 op-ed piece in the Baltimore Sun written by William O. Beeman, associate professor of anthropology at Brown University, entitled "What Are You: Male, Merm, Herm, Ferm or Female?" The relevant passage reads as follows:

 

As a result, there are perhaps millions of XX males and XY females living in the United States today. These are cultural males with male genitalia who are genetically female, and cultural females with female genitalia who are genetically male. The film star Jamie Lee Curtis is one well-known individual who is genetically male, but phenotypically female.

 

And there we have it in black and white, it would seem, except for two tiny caveats. First, according to Professor Beeman the pertinent sentence was deleted from the published article. Second, the reason it was deleted was that Beeman's attempts to track down the plastic surgeons to whom intermediate sources had attributed the statement were "totally unsuccessful." In other words, Professor Beeman had simply repeated an item of scurrilous gossip.

 

Which leaves us, at the end of our investigation, in the same place we started: face-to-face with an unsubstantiated rumor. Twenty-odd years of hearsay later, there is simply no evidence to support it. Any honest appraisal of the facts, I believe, must arrive at the same conclusion reached by L.A. Exposed author Paul Young, to wit, "the rumor that Curtis suffers from AIS (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) has never been proven and is almost certainly false." ..."

 

 

So in summary, until it is proven 100% true, than she/the topic have no credible bearing on this topic of discussion.