Playboy to Feature Its First Transgender Playmate

[techbeck]

3 minutes ago, sc302 said:

Biology is science. Genetics is science. Science is definitive. They define what you are prior to having a thought.

Anything else is based on feeling. Feelings can be changed and manipulated. But feelings are your own.

Thought this was quiet clear.  People may associate with a different gender than their own, but their physical makeup dictates who they biologically and how the works perceives them.   I know some people say transgendered people have a mental illness, which I think is wrong. 

 

If you are a guy and want to be a woman (or vise versa) and that makes you happy, more power to you.  And as long as PB states that the woman is transgendered, then I doubt many people buying the magazine will have a problem.  Tho it still could hurt PBs rep as some people are very against the idea of transgender.

[+Warwagon MVC]

Let's say hypothetically that this goes completely south and 90% cancel their playboy subscription. Then they are going turn it around and somehow make it the fault of the subscribers,  calling them transgender haters.

[-T- Member]

59 minutes ago, warwagon said:

Let's say hypothetically that this goes completely south and 90% cancel their playboy subscription. Then they are going to come back and somehow make it the fault of the subscribers how they hare transgender haters.

Nobody cancelled when Tula(Caroline Cossey) was in there in the 90's or any of the others. Perhaps they're not as bigoted as some might believe

[The Evil Overlord]

3 minutes ago, -T- said:

 My partner is a trans woman and I cannot support a site that clearly would not welcome her participation  

Honestly? I salute you sir.

[Circaflex]

1 minute ago, -T- said:

This is not the first time a trans woman has appeared in Playboy,

Correct, but she is the first playmate being featured in Playboy.

 

2 minutes ago, -T- said:

How pathetic it must be to be so insecure that some pictures of a woman in a magazine are causing you to feel it's forced upon you.

She isn't a woman, she was born a man. That is the big discussion around this. Essentially it is being forced, Playboys is a gentleman's magazine that has catered to heterosexual males, the model may have similar features of a woman now, but the model was born a male. The big discussion seems to be, why wasn't there another magazine created to cater to those who enough trans models? It could still be under the Playboy publishing, but could be a different magazine entirely.

 

3 minutes ago, -T- said:

My partner is a trans woman and I cannot support a site that clearly would not welcome her participation  

Whoa now, no one has said anything remotely close to that. We are talking about a man, who now looks like a woman, being featured in a magazine geared towards heterosexual males. Sorry we don't have the same tastes, but that doesn't mean it is wrong. I don't see anywhere in this thread where that was said.

[techbeck]

4 minutes ago, -T- said:

Such a magazine already exists, has done so for 20 years now. 

 

This is not the first time a trans woman has appeared in Playboy, there have been others in other countries, and even some trans models go under the radar in other magazines.

 

I stand by my earlier remark, many comments on this thread are disgusting, bigoted, and archaic. How pathetic it must be to be so insecure that some pictures of a woman in a magazine are causing you to feel it's forced upon you.

 

I've been a member of this site for such a long time and i've been a sub repeatedly, and the responses in here make me unlikely to ever subscribe again.  My partner is a trans woman and I cannot support a site that clearly would not welcome her participation  

Just ignore those who offend you.  Lots of others here that do and will not.  It does suck that we live in a day/age where people cannot look past who someone is on the outside and look deeper on who they are on the inside.  Personally, I talk to everyone who same way.  Does not matter if you are black, white, asian, gay, trans...whatever.  As long as you act like a human and treat people right, then I have no problem with you.  Treat me bad no matter how you associate, then we have a problem.

[-T- Member]

1 hour ago, Circaflex said:

She isn't a woman, she was born a man. That is the big discussion around this. Essentially it is being forced, Playboys is a gentleman's magazine that has catered to heterosexual males, the model may have similar features of a woman now, but the model was born a male. The big discussion seems to be, why wasn't there another magazine created to cater to those who enough trans models? It could still be under the Playboy publishing, but could be a different magazine entirely.

 

1

Nobody is born a man, she was born a male child, but was not and never will be a man.

 

She presents entirely as female, has an entirely female body and if she wasn't headline news, nobody would have a clue as to her birth gender.  The genetics argument is bollocks, as nobody has their chromosomes printed on their head, it's all just immature children worried about being "tricked!" as they're so fragile in themselves that they cannot concede that a trans woman might be attractive. 

 

To add again, such a magazine already does exist, and that whole genre of adult entertainment is one of the fastest growing in the USA if not the world. Trans people are not going anywhere

[+Warwagon MVC]

If you think about it, it's kind of like if there were a transgender magazine, which up to this point featured 100% transgender individuals, after all that's only people buy this magazine and not Playboy. Now all of the sudden they have their first non-transgender female as the cover girl. If that were to happen, I would side on the side of the transgender people who think it's stupid. I would be like "That is stupid"

[-T- Member]

1 hour ago, warwagon said:

If you think about it, it's kind of like if there were a transgender magazine, which up to this point featured 100% transgender individuals, after all that's only people buy this magazine and not Playboy. Now all of the sudden they have their first non-transgender female as the cover girl.

The transgender magazine has featured cisgender women in it before, because, and this might surprise you, but those that like trans women, also like cisgender women

[margrave]

Not to offend anyone, but I can't help wonder if birth/gestation anomalies could result in different gender 'parts' then the rest of the body. A mismatch from the blueprint chromosomes. Like reading the blueprint wrong if you will. Hermaphrodites for example maybe.

 

Of course, if this did result in a different gender brain it would not receive the correct hormones if the rest of the body was a mismatch. No Testosterone, or estrogen to further that genders' brain development.

 

Also, I bet if we take a blood sample from these individuals, it will still come back male, or female since the chromosomes cannot be changed.

[techbeck]

2 minutes ago, warwagon said:

If you think about it, it's kind of like if there were a transgender magazine, which up to this point featured 100% transgender individuals, after all that's only people buy this magazine and not Playboy. Now all of the sudden they have their first non-transgender female as the cover girl.

I doubt there would be much of a problem with a woman being featured on a transgender magazine.  Normal males/females (lack of a better work, no disrespect intended) are accepted in society and the world.  Transgendered, no so much and this is where the main issue lies.  Acceptance.

[+Warwagon MVC]

1 minute ago, techbeck said:

ITransgendered, no so much and this is where the main issue lies.  Acceptance.

 

That, and your average heterosexual man doesn't want to masturbate to a transgender. But the feeling i'm getting in this thread for those who are arguing for it, are using the argument that it's just not accepted yet. Do they think that once it's accepted that heterosexual males will be like "Oh, it's accepted now? Great now I want to masturbate to it" No, that's not going to happen, which begs the question then what's the point of doing it in playboy.

[-T- Member]

1 hour ago, warwagon said:

That, and your average heterosexual man doesn't want to masturbate to a transgender. But the feeling i'm getting in this thread for those who are arguing for it, are using the argument that it's just not accepted yet. Do they think that once it's accepted that heterosexual males will be like "Oh, it's accepted now? Great now I want to masturbate to it" No, that's not going to happen, which begs the question then what's the point of doing it in playboy.

Yet again, there is no such thing as "A transgender" it's not a noun, the term you are looking for is "a transgender woman" 

 

You're best sticking to awful jokes and not bigotry

[sc302 Veteran]

 
She presents entirely as female, has an entirely female body and if she wasn't headline news, nobody would have a clue as to her birth gender.  The genetics argument is bollocks, as nobody has their chromosomes printed on their head, it's all just immature children worried about being "tricked!" as they're so fragile in themselves that they cannot concede that a trans woman might be attractive. 
 

And that is sort of my point. People have been forced or manipulated into thinking one way or another.

If people were truly left alone to decide for themselves, without outside influence by peers, media, or parents, what would happen?

We are the sum of our experiences and this can manipulate/change what we perceive as fine and normal as well as our own feelings towards something.

[dadwacker]

This is a product of our messed up society, I feel sorry for what wrong influences the kids today are going to be subjected to in the future.. It's all kinds of wrong nowadays 

[+Warwagon MVC]

 

It's like if a lions magazine wanted to try something new for its next issue. I'm not making fun of transgender people, but to a heterosexual man, this what a lot of them are thinking when Playboy all of the sudden does something like this.

[techbeck]

12 minutes ago, -T- said:

Yet again, there is no such thing as "A transgender" it's not a noun, the term you are looking for is "a transgender woman" 

 

You're best sticking to awful jokes and not bigotry

Best look up bigotry and compare it to what some are saying here.  Lots are not bigot comments, just their opinions.   I have not read the past 7 pages, but I have not seen anyone so far saying they are intolerant of transgendered people or are making fun of them.   Also, if someone says the wrong word towards transgenders, does not make them a bigot either.

[DConnell Member]

18 minutes ago, warwagon said:

That, and your average heterosexual man doesn't want to masturbate to a transgender. But the feeling i'm getting in this thread for those who are arguing for it, are using the argument that it's just not accepted yet. Do they think that once it's accepted that heterosexual males will be like "Oh, it's accepted now? Great now I want to masturbate to it" No, that's not going to happen, which begs the question then what's the point of doing it in playboy.

Precisely. @DeusProto said earlier that "cis males will have to learn to accept it". That depends entirely on your definition of accepting. Treating transgendered with the same respect and courtesy that I would anyone else? Certainly. Going against my own preference and dating someone transgendered? Sorry. I just can't think of someone born male as anything other than a man. I'm just not interested, just like some women aren't interested in me, and my current gf isn't interested in black guys. It isn't intolerance, nor is it bigotry. It's just what a particular person is attracted to.

 

Similarly, if I'm seeking out that kind of material, I want depictions of a genuine woman. I don't want to look at pics of a trans woman, no matter how effective the surgeries and treatments were.

[The Evil Overlord]

1 minute ago, warwagon said:

 

It's like if a lions magazine wanted to try something new for its next issue.

The problem I see here is one I've seen before. 

Upbringing, there are countless examples throughout history I could call upon, and will refrain from, as they've also been argued to death, hell I've spoken to deeply seeded ('belief') members who think homosexuality is an abomination, alongside racial cross bred children, hell, I've seen hateful, and even extremist reviews of games and TV shows that had elements of homosexuality within. 

(But this will only lead to the derailing of this topic)

[-T- Member]

1 hour ago, warwagon said:

 

It's like if a lions magazine wanted to try something new for its next issue.

 

Except it's nothing like that at all. We get it, you don't accept trans people are the gender they have transitioned to, this does not harm you in the slightest yet you persist with the pathetic comparisons 

 

1 hour ago, techbeck said:

Best look up bigotry and compare it to what some are saying here.  Lots are not bigot comments, just their opinions.   I have not read the past 7 pages, but I have not seen anyone so far saying they are intolerant of transgendered people or are making fun of them.   Also, if someone says the wrong word towards transgenders, does not make them a bigot either.

Bigoty : obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices. Seems apt

[techbeck]

21 minutes ago, -T- said:

Bigoty : obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices. Seems apt

And who here is being a bigot?  Saying that a transgendered person not belong in PB does not make someone a bigot.  What @Warwagon said, is not bigotry either.

Edited October 23, 2017 by techbeck

[The Evil Overlord]

2 minutes ago, techbeck said:

Best look up bigotry and compare it to what some are saying here.  Lots are not bigot comments, just their opinions.   I have not read the past 7 pages, but I have not seen anyone so far saying they are intolerant of transgendered people or are making fun of them.   Also, if someone says the wrong word towards transgenders, does not make them a bigot either.

They're playing it safe, that is a banning offence and is covered by the site rules.

[-T- Member]

1 hour ago, techbeck said:

And who here is being a bigot?  Saying that a transgendered person not belong in PB does not make someone a bigot.  What Warwagon said, is not bigotry either.

I accept your viewpoint on this but we shall agree respectfully to disagree. 

[Tahaha]

6 minutes ago, -T- said:

Except it's nothing like that at all. We get it, you don't accept trans people are the gender they have transitioned to, this does not harm you in the slightest yet you persist with the pathetic comparisons 

 

Bigoty : obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices. Seems apt

The same could be said of those promoting LGBT.

[-T- Member]

1 hour ago, Tahaha said:

The same could be said of those promoting LGBT.

Nobody is promoting anything other than equality. That's a ridiculous statement