Why do gays often hate Transgendered or Intersexed people?

[smc]

Originally Posted by Smoothie

I'm sorry, but you know nothing about me. We disagree on some points, and I think we agree on many others. I'm probably too outspoken as you say. Please take care and understand that I was "trying" to defend my dignity in my reply to you. If I was the fool to you, I may be the fool. I defend trans rights on the political level every day. However, I don't get scorned by them often.

I did not say you were "too outspoken." I don't like having words attributed to me that I did not say or write. You are correct that I "know nothing about" you. However, unlike you, I did not write anything to suggest that I do know anything about you beyond what I have read here. You, on the other hand, made all sorts of implications about me well beyond anything you could possibly know from what I've written here on this site. If you do know more, perhaps you would care to come clean in a PM. There are some shenanigans that have gone on; perhaps you know something about that?

I am sure you are correct that we agree on many things. For instance, I agree with your statement that "not ALL transgendered people are gay" ... even though I cannot even remotely agree that saying that is the same as your original post, in which you wrote: "I am a personal believer that all trans women and men are straight whether they get reassignment surgery or not" Nor can I agree with anything that might seem to equalize those statements.

I am not sure what to make of the last statement in your post above: "However, I don't get scorned by them often." Perhaps you would care to explain? It reads to me like another attempt at impugnation ... and I hope I'm wrong about that.

[Smoothie]

Originally Posted by smc

I did not say you were "too outspoken." I don't like having words attributed to me that I did not say or write. You are correct that I "know nothing about" you. However, unlike you, I did not write anything to suggest that I do know anything about you beyond what I have read here. You, on the other hand, made all sorts of implications about me well beyond anything you could possibly know from what I've written here on this site. If you do know more, perhaps you would care to come clean in a PM. There are some shenanigans that have gone on; perhaps you know something about that?

I am sure you are correct that we agree on many things. For instance, I agree with your statement that "not ALL transgendered people are gay" ... even though I cannot even remotely agree that saying that is the same as your original post, in which you wrote: "I am a personal believer that all trans women and men are straight whether they get reassignment surgery or not" Nor can I agree with anything that might seem to equalize those statements.

I am not sure what to make of the last statement in your post above: "However, I don't get scorned by them often." Perhaps you would care to explain? It reads to me like another attempt at impugnation ... and I hope I'm wrong about that.

Everything you have said about me is an implication. Other members have written me to encourage me to contact ILA because of your replies. Once again, not so liked.

[aussiepride]

He wrote ...scorned by them EVER... Not often. Changes the meaning a bit

Originally Posted by smc

I did not say you were "too outspoken." I don't like having words attributed to me that I did not say or write. You are correct that I "know nothing about" you. However, unlike you, I did not write anything to suggest that I do know anything about you beyond what I have read here. You, on the other hand, made all sorts of implications about me well beyond anything you could possibly know from what I've written here on this site. If you do know more, perhaps you would care to come clean in a PM. There are some shenanigans that have gone on; perhaps you know something about that?

I am sure you are correct that we agree on many things. For instance, I agree with your statement that "not ALL transgendered people are gay" ... even though I cannot even remotely agree that saying that is the same as your original post, in which you wrote: "I am a personal believer that all trans women and men are straight whether they get reassignment surgery or not" Nor can I agree with anything that might seem to equalize those statements.

I am not sure what to make of the last statement in your post above: "However, I don't get scorned by them often." Perhaps you would care to explain? It reads to me like another attempt at impugnation ... and I hope I'm wrong about that.

[Smoothie]

Originally Posted by aussiepride

He wrote ...scorned by them EVER... Not often. Changes the meaning a bit

It appears that he has some personal "shenanigans" to work through.

[smc]

Originally Posted by smc

... I am not sure what to make of the last statement in your post above: "However, I don't get scorned by them often." Perhaps you would care to explain? It reads to me like another attempt at impugnation ... and I hope I'm wrong about that.

Originally Posted by Smoothie

Everything you have said about me is an implication. Other members have written me to encourage me to contact ILA because of your replies. Once again, not so liked.

Originally Posted by aussiepride

He wrote ...scorned by them EVER... Not often. Changes the meaning a bit

Originally Posted by Smoothie

It appears that he has some personal "shenanigans" to work through.

Smoothie, let's see how honest you are. You know that my quote of what you wrote is from your original post. I quoted it using the QUOTE function without any alterations, as is shown in my post. After I answered you, you went back and changed the last two lines (one from "often" to "ever" and the other line completely). Then, it would appear that you were in contact with aussiepride. Then the two of you decided to use the revised post to make it look as if I misquoted you. However, it clearly shows that you were editing your post. Perhaps this is only visible to moderators (I'm not sure), but it can all be made public.

So, tell the truth: that's what happened, right? It really doesn't matter whether you confess, because the truth stays the same in either case.

[aussiepride]

Originally Posted by smc

Smoothie, let's see how honest you are. You know that my quote of what you wrote is from your original post. I quoted it using the QUOTE function without any alterations, as is shown in my post. After I answered you, you went back and changed the last two lines (one from "often" to "ever" and the other line completely). Then, it would appear that you were in contact with aussiepride. Then the two of you decided to use the revised post to make it look as if I misquoted you. However, it clearly shows that you were editing your post. Perhaps this is only visible to moderators (I'm not sure), but it can all be made public.

So, tell the truth: that's what happened, right? It really doesn't matter whether you confess, because the truth stays the same in either case.

I WOULD SERIOULSY HOPE THAT FALSE ACCUSATIONS ATTACKING ANOTHER MEMBERS CHARACTER WOULD BE TREATED AS A VERY SERIOUS OFFENCE. I would dearly hope that if you post an accusation such as that, that you would also provide some proof..OTHERWISE A BIG APOLOGY SHOULD BE POSTED.

I read your post first then went back to smoothies post and saw that the quote was different, and I commented as such. Now.. To be honest I cannot say if the original post had been changed by smoothie. Looking at it now, it appears it may be a possibility... But to a person reading it as is posted, there appears to be an error.

The only contact I had with smoothie via PMs was TO OFFER A SUGGESTION IN HOW TO DEAL WITH ANOTHER MEMBER OF THIS FORUM WHEN YOU THINK YOU ARE BEING BULLIED OR UNREASONABLY ATTACKTED.

I know that mods have access to the pm... And I know the you smc have read what PMs we wrote. I can glady post the pm I you wish.. And you can show me, baring some secret code I have developed with smoothie in 1 pm, where we both conspired to manipulate posts and then make you look like You misquoted.. Now either post your proof of this conspiracy, or post my Aplogy. Simple. Be a man.

[smc]

Originally Posted by aussiepride

I WOULD SERIOULSY HOPE THAT FALSE ACCUSATIONS ATTACKING ANOTHER MEMBERS CHARACTER WOULD BE TREATED AS A VERY SERIOUS OFFENCE. I would dearly hope that if you post an accusation such as that, that you would also provide some proof..OTHERWISE A BIG APOLOGY SHOULD BE POSTED.

I read your post first then went back to smoothies post and saw that the quote was different, and I commented as such. Now.. To be honest I cannot say if the original post had been changed by smoothie. Looking at it now, it appears it may be a possibility... But to a person reading it as is posted, there appears to be an error.

The only contact I had with smoothie via PMs was TO OFFER A SUGGESTION IN HOW TO DEAL WITH ANOTHER MEMBER OF THIS FORUM WHEN YOU THINK YOU ARE BEING BULLIED OR UNREASONABLY ATTACKTED.

I know that mods have access to the pm... And I know the you smc have read what PMs we wrote. I can glady post the pm I you wish.. And you can show me, baring some secret code I have developed with smoothie in 1 pm, where we both conspired to manipulate posts and then make you look like You misquoted.. Now either post your proof of this conspiracy, or post my Aplogy. Simple. Be a man.

Moderators DO NOT have access to PMs. The site owner DOES NOT have access to PMs. They are completely private, which is why they are called "Private Messages." So, retract your "I know" statement, which is completely false.

I did not accuse you of changing the post. If that is how it came across, I take responsibility for it and apologize. I DO NOT apologize for anything else in the post. I will not go into any further detail about you or past things on this site, aussiepride, pending further moderator intervention ... except to say that your intervention with Smoothie is representative.

But as long as we're demanding apologies, how about you get yourself over here and apologize for putting words in my mouth. I've been waiting:

http://forum.transladyboy.com/showpo...74&postcount=9

[smc]

Originally Posted by aussiepride

I WOULD SERIOULSY HOPE THAT FALSE ACCUSATIONS ATTACKING ANOTHER MEMBERS CHARACTER WOULD BE TREATED AS A VERY SERIOUS OFFENCE. ...

aussiepride, Smoothie went back and changed his post after I responded so that a false accusation could be made that I misquoted him. Given what you write above, I assume that you agree it should be treated as a "very serious offence" ... perhaps even punishable by a lengthy (or permanent) ban from the site.

Yes?

[aussiepride]

Originally Posted by smc

aussiepride, Smoothie went back and changed his post after I responded so that a false accusation could be made that I misquoted him. Given what you write above, I assume that you agree it should be treated as a "very serious offence" ... perhaps even punishable by a lengthy (or permanent) ban from the site.

Yes?

If by yes you also include yourself for accusing me of some coordinated effort.. Then by all means yes.. Ban yourself as well.

Looking back to your post, it could appear that its possible that smoothie change his post, but then again, it appears that you didn't quote directly from his post ( to be clear we are talking about he said.. Ever. And you think he originally posted ...OFTEN), as his post appears in the middle of a sentence u wrote.. Not the normal way a quote would appear if it was quoted using the quote button.
Now that means I don't know who is right..
To be honest i thought you made a little Freudian slip when u quoted him.. I know I had to re read his post carefully to see the error. I had a little chuckle because I innocently thought that such a simple, one little word could change a whole argument. I had no idea it would blow up to this.
I regret picking up on it now.

[aussiepride]

Originally Posted by smc

Smoothie, let's see how honest you are. You know that my quote of what you wrote is from your original post. I quoted it using the QUOTE function without any alterations, as is shown in my post. After I answered you, you went back and changed the last two lines (one from "often" to "ever" and the other line completely). Then, it would appear that you were in contact with aussiepride. Then the two of you decided to use the revised post to make it look as if I misquoted you. However, it clearly shows that you were editing your post. Perhaps this is only visible to moderators (I'm not sure), but it can all be made public.

So, tell the truth: that's what happened, right? It really doesn't matter whether you confess, because the truth stays the same in either case.

The bit on bold is what I took offense at.
This is a direct accusation of wrong doing.
If you make it based on some "history" than that's just plain childish
If mods etc cannot see the PMs, then I was wrong about that. Sorry, I just assumed that ALL facets of a site were under their control.

[smc]

Originally Posted by aussiepride

The bit on bold is what I took offense at.
This is a direct accusation of wrong doing.
If you make it based on some "history" than that's just plain childish
If mods etc cannot see the PMs, then I was wrong about that. Sorry, I just assumed that ALL facets of a site were under their control.

I believe that you did not conspire. I did not directly write that you did; I really meant that at a minimum each of you decided to use the revised quote as I described. If you did not know it was revised, I accept that, and I apologize for the wrongly placed accusation.

As for your "childish" statement, I reject that as an insult. Further, I think that history on this site has meaning. For instance, I am still waiting for your apology for putting words into my mouth that I never wrote and then attacking me for them. And I am still waiting for your explanation in another thread regarding yet another post, in which you use feigned ignorance about something to make an attack. (Perhaps both of these will be there when I finish typing this.)

Patterns are patterns, whether you like them to be noticed or not. Call it "childish" if you must, but it doesn't change reality or its relevance.

[aussiepride]

Thanks for the apology.
As for the other posts, I am awaiting the results of a recent study I commissioned into "do chicks love muscles". The results should be available soon.

As for THIS thread, can it be brought back on track?
Albeit from all that has happened, the OP does raise some interesting topics.

I myself have only heard of this from other ts, but they have told me that gay men dislike ts.. For whatever reasons they don't know.
.. But strangely.. I have a few lesbian gg friends who love ts, girls in drag etc... Although they too sometimes say it with a slight smirk (I take that as they giggle at them when they see one like most non admirers seem to do).

Perhaps if anyone has any insight into why gay men think this way?

Originally Posted by smc

I believe that you did not conspire. I did not directly write that you did; I really meant that at a minimum each of you decided to use the revised quote as I described. If you did not know it was revised, I accept that, and I apologize for the wrongly placed accusation.

As for your "childish" statement, I reject that as an insult. Further, I think that history on this site has meaning. For instance, I am still waiting for your apology for putting words into my mouth that I never wrote and then attacking me for them. And I am still waiting for your explanation in another thread regarding yet another post, in which you use feigned ignorance about something to make an attack. (Perhaps both of these will be there when I finish typing this.)

Patterns are patterns, whether you like them to be noticed or not. Call it "childish" if you must, but it doesn't change reality or its relevance.