So if I get what people are saying, shemales have both sex organs?
Dicks and boobs. Sometimes vaginas, but that's less common.jsnipy wrote:
So if I get what people are saying, shemales have both sex organs?
Oh comeon, it's the internet.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
maybe they like breasts so much they want their own, but still want to fuck womenNeXuS4909 wrote:
Then why do they keep the penis then?Buckles wrote:
People undergo surgery to change gender because they are essentially born in the wrong body. Imaging being born with your male personality, but in a female body. How uncomfortable would that be for you?
/thread over lol
The things that can be different from typical males/females:jsnipy wrote:
So if I get what people are saying, shemales have both sex organs?
Male external genitalia
Male internal genitalia
Female external genitalia
Female internal genitalia
Male secondary characteristics
Female secondary characteristics
And there is possible blurring within each category, like partly male/partly female genitalia.
Oh come now. I have no problems with people of different races/religions. If someone *somehow* was born that way, ok, whatever, but they can just keep it to themselves. But, having surgery so you can be a freak? Thats disgusting, I dont think there is ANY reason why you should want, or need to do that. Doesnt make me a mini hitlerZimmer wrote:
Tbh, it's people like you who are the scum of the earth. It's fascists like you who create the tension between races and religions. A disgrace to the human race? Who the fuck are you to judge that? God?Wallpaper wrote:
TBH its disgusting, and a disgrace to the human race. If there is some kind of genetic defect that causes it, fine, but they can keep it to themselves. If there isnt, and they have surgery for it, go die.
Go start your mini hitler cult, but I promise I will hunt you down.
Blah blah, see aboveFlemishHCmaniac wrote:
Jawohl mein Führer.
Actually, you just stated otherwise. By defining them as "freaks". Just because they don't suit your perfect little world doesn't mean that they should be branded that or be called disgusting. You are disgusting for having such old fashioned views. Get out a bit more and see the world. It's not black and white.
And why should they keep it to themselves? Do they not have the right to express themselves? Just like you are right now?
Jawohl mein Führer, indeed.
And why should they keep it to themselves? Do they not have the right to express themselves? Just like you are right now?
Jawohl mein Führer, indeed.
I'm with zimmer all the way.
People work towards what they think will make them happy often by going the opposite direction we are.. We can't try and sear them 'right' because when you're talking about something you deem 'correct' you're probably against the opposite side. Being against anything is one of the greatest ways to waste endless amounts of time and energy without getting anything out of it.
Let people do whatever they want. As long as it doesn't hurt anyone you couldn't ask for more.
People work towards what they think will make them happy often by going the opposite direction we are.. We can't try and sear them 'right' because when you're talking about something you deem 'correct' you're probably against the opposite side. Being against anything is one of the greatest ways to waste endless amounts of time and energy without getting anything out of it.
Let people do whatever they want. As long as it doesn't hurt anyone you couldn't ask for more.
Zimmer, calm down. Just because he has strong feelings about something one way or the other, doesn't mean that he's a fucking mini hitler and he wants to start a cult, culling all those who do not fit in with his perfect world. No.Zimmer wrote:
Actually, you just stated otherwise. By defining them as "freaks". Just because they don't suit your perfect little world doesn't mean that they should be branded that or be called disgusting. You are disgusting for having such old fashioned views. Get out a bit more and see the world. It's not black and white.
And why should they keep it to themselves? Do they not have the right to express themselves? Just like you are right now?
Jawohl mein Führer, indeed.
I for one, do think that it is fairly disgusting for a male/female to change or partially change sexes, but that is just my view, and I share that with Wallpaper. You don't have to launch an attack at people, like what you said .Sup does.
I have also learned something, I did not know that it could be a genetic defect. If that is the case then that can't be helped, and my views change, but when they go parading around, it crosses a line. Type 'shemale' into Google, and 100% of it will be porn. I guarantee.
And also Zimmer, try not to be so condesending.
#rekt
Strong feelings? Excuse me? Once you start branding certain people as "freaks" and think they are "disgusting", that isn't strong feelings anymore and that is plainly just insulting and spitting in those peoples faces. I see no need for that; if he DOESN'T AGREE WITH IT, then he states that. He DOESN'T FUCKING BRAND PEOPLE. Jesus, do you understand the concept of being a civil human being? Or is that too hard?
The word disgusting for people just disgusts me ( ironic, eh ), if you go as far as to brand someone as disgusting because of their feelings/emotions, then you are low. Very low.
You can express your feelings without being a dickhead. If you don't agree, then say "I dislike this/that" or "I don't find it appropriate", but when you people go as far as to start spitting in their faces, something has to be said.
I will be condescending when your utter ignorance to the world and to peoples feelings is shown, as it is right now. Your inability to accept other people for who they are is just about as pathetic as what Hitler was doing.
You find it so normal to just say "disgusting" and "sick" when talking about people; if everyone was like you, then there would be quite a few more wars. Learn to comment on something without using such low wording.
The word disgusting for people just disgusts me ( ironic, eh ), if you go as far as to brand someone as disgusting because of their feelings/emotions, then you are low. Very low.
You can express your feelings without being a dickhead. If you don't agree, then say "I dislike this/that" or "I don't find it appropriate", but when you people go as far as to start spitting in their faces, something has to be said.
I will be condescending when your utter ignorance to the world and to peoples feelings is shown, as it is right now. Your inability to accept other people for who they are is just about as pathetic as what Hitler was doing.
You find it so normal to just say "disgusting" and "sick" when talking about people; if everyone was like you, then there would be quite a few more wars. Learn to comment on something without using such low wording.
That is the stupidest thing I have ever read in my entire life. GG.Freezer7Pro wrote:
Ontopic, paraphilias only appear on humans, and that's for a reason. We humans have simply evolved way too far. You don't see dendrophiliac dogs or technophiliac monkeys. Humans aren't made to be this advanced, we're made to be chimps.
Maybe disgusting and sick are not the words are I should have used, I used them out of lack of anything else to say really. Once you point that out, I have realsied that maybe I should re-word it to; "I don't agree with or support people undergoing partial sex changes."Zimmer wrote:
Strong feelings? Excuse me? Once you start branding certain people as "freaks" and think they are "disgusting", that isn't strong feelings anymore and that is plainly just insulting and spitting in those peoples faces. I see no need for that; if he DOESN'T AGREE WITH IT, then he states that. He DOESN'T FUCKING BRAND PEOPLE. Jesus, do you understand the concept of being a civil human being? Or is that too hard?
The word disgusting for people just disgusts me ( ironic, eh ), if you go as far as to brand someone as disgusting because of their feelings/emotions, then you are low. Very low.
You can express your feelings without being a dickhead. If you don't agree, then say "I dislike this/that" or "I don't find it appropriate", but when you people go as far as to start spitting in their faces, something has to be said.
I will be condescending when your utter ignorance to the world and to peoples feelings is shown, as it is right now. Your inability to accept other people for who they are is just about as pathetic as what Hitler was doing.
You find it so normal to just say "disgusting" and "sick" when talking about people; if everyone was like you, then there would be quite a few more wars. Learn to comment on something without using such low wording.
There. Better?
I also think that maybe you attack people a bit too much because they have a view that is different to yours, or maybe it is what you perceive as bad? I don't know, but as you have said yourself, everyone is different, and entitled to be themselves. Just accept that.
And as a side note, don't you fucking dare call me ignorant to the world or other people's feelings. You don't know me, you're just basing it on ONE view I have. And stop comparing people who don't accept shemales to Hitler. Completely different. In a way, this shows your ignorance to the world, but as I have said, I don't know you, so I can't say.
#rekt
There you go, you had nothing else to say, showing how you can't accept it. Some brains just can't, and I am okay in accepting that; but when a human can't use civil words to describe their feelings towards others, then the world falls apart.
My view? I have no view on this, that is why I am attacking you. Because your view is so skewed and so narrow that it makes me sick ( see, irony again ) to see such a guy, who seems to be clued up about the world, sink down to the low levels of describing someone as disgusting. I am indifferent to people with sex changes; whilst others think its good and other think its bad. That's fine. Up to a point. I accepted that a long time ago, but you have to accept that not everyone will agree with your view. I don't disagree or agree with your VIEW, I disagree with the way you explained and expanded on that view. When you can't think of anything civil or nice to say, don't say anything at all.
I apologise for me telling you off for your ignorance. I know I have no right whatsoever to say that, but when I see someone judge me with a remark which is
A. Wrong and
B. insulting
then I will justify why that is not the case.
My ignorance to the world? Because I made a comparison of you to Hitler? My comparison of you to Hitler was correct on my terms and on the basis of this argument. You can't accept someone different, like Hitler. Okay, I admit, it's low to say something like that; as it was initially aimed at Wallpaper, but sometimes you have to think carefully of how you phrase certain things. I couldn't care less what your brain really thinks of them; if indeed you spew up when you even think about it - but that is not my point, my point is that when it comes to being a human being, the best thing you can do is be civil. Without that special gift that animals don't have, we would have ripped ourselves to pieces a long time ago.
My view? I have no view on this, that is why I am attacking you. Because your view is so skewed and so narrow that it makes me sick ( see, irony again ) to see such a guy, who seems to be clued up about the world, sink down to the low levels of describing someone as disgusting. I am indifferent to people with sex changes; whilst others think its good and other think its bad. That's fine. Up to a point. I accepted that a long time ago, but you have to accept that not everyone will agree with your view. I don't disagree or agree with your VIEW, I disagree with the way you explained and expanded on that view. When you can't think of anything civil or nice to say, don't say anything at all.
I apologise for me telling you off for your ignorance. I know I have no right whatsoever to say that, but when I see someone judge me with a remark which is
A. Wrong and
B. insulting
then I will justify why that is not the case.
My ignorance to the world? Because I made a comparison of you to Hitler? My comparison of you to Hitler was correct on my terms and on the basis of this argument. You can't accept someone different, like Hitler. Okay, I admit, it's low to say something like that; as it was initially aimed at Wallpaper, but sometimes you have to think carefully of how you phrase certain things. I couldn't care less what your brain really thinks of them; if indeed you spew up when you even think about it - but that is not my point, my point is that when it comes to being a human being, the best thing you can do is be civil. Without that special gift that animals don't have, we would have ripped ourselves to pieces a long time ago.
meh, what do I care. I don't need to have sex with them, so I don't care. If it makes them happy, I'm fine with it. They are a bit weird (at least to me), but I prefer them over the hordes of complete retards I have to interact with daily.
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
Of course a large part of it is culturally determined and conditioned, but some part isn't. If it was and there was no difference, everyone would have to be bi-sexual in essence.Aries_37 wrote:
What I don't see the logic in this tbh. What makes a brain from a female different to the brain from a male? A large part of it is the fact that the female/male brain has been conditioned from a young age to become accustomed to the body that it was born with and the growth and development of the brain is therefore linked to that body. In other words you should be used to the body you were born in unless at birth you somehow have memory of a previous life. How is it possible that one day you think 'hey this penis I've had all my life doesn't belong to me'. People who decide they want surgery do it because of social conditioning (ie its a choice they make) or a mental issue.Lai wrote:
1. Take one male subject of the species
2. Take one female subject of the species
3. Take the brain from the female subject
4. Take the brain from the male subject
5. Take the brain you took from the female subject and put it in the brain cavity of the male model
Voila,..
It's like Buckles said,.. they're not insane or anything, they're probably perfectly normal females only someone made a little mistake. I wouldn't call them mentally imbalanced, it's just that their brains are out of balance with their bodies.
note: in the example provided above, the female model is not re-fitted with any brain while the male subject's brain has become obsolete. This could be considered to be ethically immoral and one could of course fit the male brain in the female model. However, in the example provided, the functionality of the female model and the male subject's brain are irrelevant to the argument being made and any attempts to re-establish their functionality are therefore omitted from the example.
Are you saying that the only reason you're not gay is because your parents told you not to be? (sorry, couldn't resist )
Well noone knows for sure why people are heterosexual, but it's possibly hormone related. So in guys the testes produce the hormone DHT which has an effect on the brain and determines attraction. Therefore a 'female brain' in a male body would get nuked with testosterone till she was attacted to women It's just a theory but it's one of the more credible ones.Lai wrote:
Of course a large part of it is culturally determined and conditioned, but some part isn't. If it was and there was no difference, everyone would have to be bi-sexual in essence.Aries_37 wrote:
What I don't see the logic in this tbh. What makes a brain from a female different to the brain from a male? A large part of it is the fact that the female/male brain has been conditioned from a young age to become accustomed to the body that it was born with and the growth and development of the brain is therefore linked to that body. In other words you should be used to the body you were born in unless at birth you somehow have memory of a previous life. How is it possible that one day you think 'hey this penis I've had all my life doesn't belong to me'. People who decide they want surgery do it because of social conditioning (ie its a choice they make) or a mental issue.Lai wrote:
1. Take one male subject of the species
2. Take one female subject of the species
3. Take the brain from the female subject
4. Take the brain from the male subject
5. Take the brain you took from the female subject and put it in the brain cavity of the male model
Voila,..
It's like Buckles said,.. they're not insane or anything, they're probably perfectly normal females only someone made a little mistake. I wouldn't call them mentally imbalanced, it's just that their brains are out of balance with their bodies.
note: in the example provided above, the female model is not re-fitted with any brain while the male subject's brain has become obsolete. This could be considered to be ethically immoral and one could of course fit the male brain in the female model. However, in the example provided, the functionality of the female model and the male subject's brain are irrelevant to the argument being made and any attempts to re-establish their functionality are therefore omitted from the example.
Are you saying that the only reason you're not gay is because your parents told you not to be? (sorry, couldn't resist )
didnt read byond this postZimmer wrote:
Bullshit. Wow, you really think you know the answers to life?.Sup wrote:
-Not thinking/acting like a normal person.Zimmer wrote:
Describe to me what a mental inbalance is.
Tell me what cool means.
What is good?
-something likable
-Something that satisfies us
Cool is someone likeable? Wow, I am sorry, but I have met way too many "jocks" in my life to say anything like that.
And tell me, please, what is normal? There is no definition for it. If you think there is one, then you have an incredibly narrow view on life.
Cool is whatever WE, as a person, think it as; each person has a different definition. You cannot pinpoint the definition.
Go on, go try and define "cool" on Google. You can't.
http://www.answers.com/normal&r=67
nor·mal (nôr'məl)
adj.
1. Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard, pattern, level, or type;
http://www.answers.com/cool&r=67
cool (kūl)
adj.
6. Slang.
1. Excellent;
2. Acceptable;
Wow, such a smartass in our midst. Such a smartass that he actually thinks he is right.
Okay then Mr.Knowitall then what is "a norm"? Yeah, exactly.
What is "acceptable"?
Every person in this world has a different definition for those words, so they cannot be defined. Wow, I never knew someone would be so stupid enough to actually come back on that. Oh the hilarity.
Okay then Mr.Knowitall then what is "a norm"? Yeah, exactly.
What is "acceptable"?
Every person in this world has a different definition for those words, so they cannot be defined. Wow, I never knew someone would be so stupid enough to actually come back on that. Oh the hilarity.
Well, i (hope) i can safely define "a norm" as the majority.Zimmer wrote:
Wow, such a smartass in our midst. Such a smartass that he actually thinks he is right.
Okay then Mr.Knowitall then what is "a norm"? Yeah, exactly.
What is "acceptable"?
Every person in this world has a different definition for those words, so they cannot be defined. Wow, I never knew someone would be so stupid enough to actually come back on that. Oh the hilarity.
But acceptable ranges from opinion to opinion.
So if 99% of a 1000 people had cancer that would be normal?SEREVENT wrote:
Well, i (hope) i can safely define "a norm" as the majority.Zimmer wrote:
Wow, such a smartass in our midst. Such a smartass that he actually thinks he is right.
Okay then Mr.Knowitall then what is "a norm"? Yeah, exactly.
What is "acceptable"?
Every person in this world has a different definition for those words, so they cannot be defined. Wow, I never knew someone would be so stupid enough to actually come back on that. Oh the hilarity.
But acceptable ranges from opinion to opinion.
In certain context, yes, but in this context, you can't.SEREVENT wrote:
Well, i (hope) i can safely define "a norm" as the majority.
But acceptable ranges from opinion to opinion.
In this context, a norm means something normal, usual or whatever. Since when are people normal? Since when are peopley a majority of something?
Yes it would be, the only reason it isn't is because not 99% of the people have it.jsnipy wrote:
So if 99% of a 1000 people had cancer that would be normal?SEREVENT wrote:
Well, i (hope) i can safely define "a norm" as the majority.Zimmer wrote:
Wow, such a smartass in our midst. Such a smartass that he actually thinks he is right.
Okay then Mr.Knowitall then what is "a norm"? Yeah, exactly.
What is "acceptable"?
Every person in this world has a different definition for those words, so they cannot be defined. Wow, I never knew someone would be so stupid enough to actually come back on that. Oh the hilarity.
But acceptable ranges from opinion to opinion.
You could of course point at area's with a significant higher percentage of people suffering from cancer like for example the Tjernobyll area, but then you're just not zooming out enough; it would still be a minority on the entire world population.
but by that logic, if 99% of 1000 people were shemales, then the 1% who was not, would be "abnormal". So using that as a basis for comparison, or catagorization, on either side of the argument, is invalid. and that is the point, it's merely a matter of perspective, the perspective being opinion.Lai wrote:
Yes it would be, the only reason it isn't is because not 99% of the people have it.jsnipy wrote:
So if 99% of a 1000 people had cancer that would be normal?SEREVENT wrote:
Well, i (hope) i can safely define "a norm" as the majority.
But acceptable ranges from opinion to opinion.
You could of course point at area's with a significant higher percentage of people suffering from cancer like for example the Tjernobyll area, but then you're just not zooming out enough; it would still be a minority on the entire world population.
EXACTLYRoosterCantrell wrote:
but by that logic, if 99% of 1000 people were shemales, then the 1% who was not, would be "abnormal".
Its a trap!