Jump to content
You are not logged in ▶️ Click to sign-up or login ×
ASEANNOW Official TikTok account is now LIVE! -Follow Us!

Poll: Half of all foreigners are contemplating or have had a sexual experience with a lady boy

webfact

By webfact
in Thailand News

Recommended Posts

Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

I never heard cis as a prefix in other contexts, so when I first heard the term without definition I assumed it was short for cissy. 

You assumed wrong.

It simply means gender identity the same as your birth gender.

It has nothing to do with sexual orientation or effeminacy.

Ladyboys are typically NOT cisgender people. 

I get that some died in the wool people are resistant to learning new words to them but it is a useful word. People know what transgender means and there is no reason they can't know what cisgender means too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 742
  • Created
  • Last Reply
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

You assumed wrong.

It simply means gender identity the same as your birth gender.

It has nothing to do with sexual orientation or effeminacy.

Ladyboys are typically NOT cisgender people. 

I get that some died in the wool people are resistant to learning new words to them but it is a useful word. People know what transgender means and there is no reason they can't know what cisgender means too. 

Yes, I know what it means now. It's nothing to do with being dyed in the wool about language though. It's not by any means a mainstream term, rather something of an insider expression, less than 20 years old and coined by a German sexologist. I think it's unrealistic to expect people to hop on board and start using these terms, especially when they often occur in the context of lots of other insider expressions, both science and slang based. If you read a sentence such as "there was a butch, a tom, a femboy and a couple of cisgenders", what are people expected to make of it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Yes, I know what it means now. It's nothing to do with being dyed in the wool about language though. It's not by any means a mainstream term, rather something of an insider expression, less than 20 years old and coined by a German sexologist. I think it's unrealistic to expect people to hop on board and start using these terms, especially when they often occur in the context of lots of other insider expressions, both science and slang based. If you read a sentence such as "there was a butch, a tom, a femboy and a couple of cisgenders", what are people expected to make of it? 

Not much because that sentence is just a jumble without any focus. It's not a bad sentence because you used cisgender. It's just a bad sentence. I actually disagree with you. I think within a short period of time, almost all educated people are going to understand what cisgender means. It's very useful in any discussion about issues related to transgender people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Not much because that sentence is just a jumble without any focus. It's not a bad sentence because you used cisgender. It's just a bad sentence. I actually disagree with you. I think within a short period of time, almost all educated people are going to understand what cisgender means. It's very useful in any discussion about issues related to transgender people. 

It's obviously not a complete sentence, and I'm not expecting any grammatical awards for it. But this is typical of the sort of context I've heard it used before - if you want a complete sentence, just preface what I wrote with "Working at the sex shop..." or something similar.

 

I think when marginalised groups use this sort of language it often marginalises them further. It comes over as the same sort of insider gobbledygook used in the tech industry, or the type of hypersensitive language used by social activists anxious not to cause offence.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

I have a long standing interest in human sexuality and sexual orientation. But at some point, all of this new terminology just starts getting overly complicated. Like guys. Likes girls. Likes guys and girls. That seems to cover the vast majority of people.

Elsewhere in the article though he asks is it a gay thing, and the reply is no, it's different. In other words, those who like ladyboys would immediately lose interest if the same ladyboy was to crop their hair and dress as a man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

It's obviously not a complete sentence, and I'm not expecting any grammatical awards for it. But this is typical of the sort of context I've heard it used before - if you want a complete sentence, just preface what I wrote with "Working at the sex shop..." or something similar.

 

I think when marginalised groups use this sort of language it often marginalises them further. It comes over as the same sort of insider gobbledygook used in the tech industry, or the type of hypersensitive language used by social activists anxious not to cause offence.   

Sorry I don't believe people use the word cisgender in the way you suggest. Those other terms are more like slang. Cisgender is indeed more scientific like transgender. People wouldn't generally mix styles of words like that in the same sentence. Language evolves and some words stick and others don't and meanings change. I reject your characterization of commonly understood slang as gobbledygook as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Sorry I don't believe people use the word cisgender in the way you suggest. Those other terms are more like slang. Cisgender is indeed more scientific like transgender. People wouldn't generally mix styles of words like that in the same sentence. Language evolves and some words stick and others don't and meanings change. I reject your characterization of commonly understood slang as gobbledygook as well.  

You're denying that slang in the tech industry is gobbledygook? I recommend you watch Silicon Valley which lampoons it to hilarious effect. Insider language is always marginalising, whether you like it or not. Even transgender isn't commonly used colloquially, even though it's probably somewhat better understood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, lamyai3 said:

You're denying that slang in the tech industry is gobbledygook? I recommend you watch Silicon Valley which lampoons it to hilarious effect. Insider language is always marginalising, whether you like it or not. Even transgender isn't commonly used colloquially, even though it's probably somewhat better understood. 

I wasn't talking about tech terms and you know it. Cheap deflection.

You seem to have an agenda that I can't relate to but have fun with it. 

My opinion is that cisgender is a serious, very useful, relatively new term and I think it will become totally mainstream in any more serious discussion about issues related to GENDER identity. As issues around transgender people have become much more common, it seems obvious to me that the useful related word cisgender will become more common as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Sorry I don't believe people use the word cisgender in the way you suggest.

Just google cisgender together with any of the other words I mentioned, you'll see plenty of examples. To complicate the issue further, it gets frequently shortened to cis - the scientific and slang terms are frequently used interchangeably and together. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I wasn't talking about tech terms and you know it. Cheap deflection.

Reread my post #540. I equated gobbledygook with tech insider slang, and am saying that insider language in any genre becomes alienating to those not in the clique. Cisgender is very much in this category, even though I agree it's a precise term. But common folk don't use expressions like cisgender or transgender, and I doubt that's likely to change anytime soon. Just read back through the thread if you're in doubt.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JemJem Gold Member

JemJem

Posted
Posted

I am very open-minded about sexual/sexuality stuff; and, if someone wants to spice up his/her sex life, all power to him/her.

 

I am curious as to about what percentage of ladyboys in Thailand are 'pre-op' (my wild guess is that percentage must be in the 80-90 range). And, among the pre-op folks, what percentage definitely plan to go for the op, I wonder.

 

Also, I am curious as to what difference in attitude there is among those foreigners who have had or want to have sex with a ladyboy, regarding pre-op versus post-op ladyboys.

 

Come on, we need more polls ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, JemJem said:

I am curious as to about what percentage of ladyboys in Thailand are 'pre-op' (my wild guess is that percentage must be in the 80-90 range). And, among the pre-op folks, what percentage definitely plan to go for the op, I wonder.

Probably right. Full op is probably very expensive and fraught with health complications.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted

Again, like it or not, cisgender has already become a mainstream word. FACT.

I think it's not a fad word at all. It's here to stay.

 

Quote

 

'Cisgender' has been added to the Oxford English Dictionary

The term is defined as 'designating a person whose sense of personal identity corresponds to the sex and gender assigned to him or her at birth'

 

 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/cisgender-has-been-added-to-the-oxford-english-dictionary-10343354.html

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lamyai3 Silver Member

lamyai3

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Again, like it or not, cisgender has already become a mainstream word. FACT.

I think it's not a fad word at all. It's here to stay.

Doesn't mean a thing. Hangry, mansplaining and tomgirl are in there too - doesn't signify widespread use or acceptance.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/hangry-mansplaining-oed-new-words-oxford-english-dictionary-a8187786.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gecko123 Gold Member

Gecko123

Posted
Posted

From the Stickman article (post #487):

....That's why guys have a thing for ladyboys. We offer more than a woman. When a guy sees our cock he gets excited.

...80% of men like it that we have a cock....

...With farang guys, most like it that we have a cock.... If a ladyboy is post op, that's another style. Different guys like different styles but most like a ladyboy with a cock....

...For farangs, they like our style. <I am sitting with 5 ladyboys who are tall, some well over 180 cm and to be frank, a couple are really quite masculine. It's unlikely that even those unfamiliar with ladyboys wouldn't realise that something was "amiss".>

...If you want a pussy, go with a lady. If you want a new experience, go with a ladyboy.

...Some guys don't want to be seen with a ladyboy or they are scared. For most it is a secret. One reason they use an escort service is for secrecy.

...I try to kiss their backside and then push my little finger in his ass. Then I ask very gently, like "May I put it in a little, I will not hurt you, you can try".

...I tell them when they fxxx me I feel very horny so when I do them they will feel the same...

...Every guy says it is his first time and he just wants to try for the first time but some guys are so good I know they have been with many ladyboys before!

 

Nothing gay going on here, folks. Keep moving, people. Repeat after me, class: there's no connection whatsoever between ladyboy and gay culture.

Screen-Shot-2017-04-14-at-11_04.08-PM-1100x1006.png.8cc724e62bd939ee6c3e1c45012a98ea.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bert bloggs Gold Member

bert bloggs

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Jingthing said:

From a global perspective you are wrong. Straights still dominate everywhere and always will. Gay visibility is no threat.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Sorry mate ,i certainly do not see gay visibility as a threat ,but i am sick and tired of having to listen to "minoritys" going on and on and on and on , cant they just give it a rest and just get on with whatever it is they like to do or be and not have to shout it from the bloody rooftops all the time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ivor bigun Gold Member

ivor bigun

Posted
Posted
On 5/23/2018 at 8:05 PM, Jingthing said:

Again with the confusion. Sex acts and sexual orientation are not the same thing. Most admirers of ladyboys have a straight orientation. End of.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Sorry but anyone who fancies playing with another persons penis or having one inserted where the sun dont shine is not of a completley  straight orientation ,End off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smo Senior Member

smo

Posted
Posted
On 5/22/2018 at 5:45 AM, Gecko123 said:

@smo

Thank you for a very informative post. My main bone of contention (no pun intended) on this thread was with those claiming that knowingly engaging in sex with a ladyboy is a totally heterosexual act because the ladyboy "presents as female." I understand the point you, Jingthing and others have made about why a completely homosexual man might not find ladyboys sexually desirable, but am I correct in concluding that you are in agreement that knowingly engaging in sex with ladyboys is something other than a completely heterosexual orientation?

 

I'm also curious if you have any response to points I made in earlier posts (#399 & #406) which asked at what point does a feminized gay start to lose his sexual appeal to another gay guy because he has taken feminization too far and become too womanly, and how you reconcile the historical popularity of gay cabaret, (which celebrates female impersonation and flamboyance) with the assertion that gay men are not sexually attracted to men who endeavor to present themselves as women.

 

By the broadest stroke, there is no threshold as to when a ladyboy will "technically" become a turn-off - ie a stopsign signaling when his feminization topples (what is left of) his masculinity. A first impression is enough for both my big and little heads to say, thanks, but no thanks. To put it crudely, a pair of shaved balls might be considered, to me as a gay man, ahem...tempting, while a shaved (and god help me, perfumed) armpit is not! 

 

I didn't think my guy (that got away) from the previous episode who wanted to bed me in drag, was ATTRACTED to ladyboys, not so much as using them as a "straight" curtain to camouflage his " gay closet." I would say he's COMFORTABLE being intimate with - as opposed to being attracted to - ladyboys than with any (other) sexes. (But he craves their dick that's for sure.) In other words, he's so closeted that he couldn't even admit to himself that he "does" guys. But in his own mind - to himself and this is what counts - he is hetero, if only because he does DWDs (aka dames with dick) and come hell or high waters will stick to his principle. I imagine that if he ever finds himself in bed with a naked guy shorn of all female accoutrement that would freak him out he won't be able to get it up. (Wish I had known this at the time, oh well, you live and learn.)

 

If this could be of any help, my Gay-O-meter goes like this: If a) a guy doesn't want to have anything to do - or the general reaction is being repulsed by - another guy's penis +  b) does want to do everything to a (god-given) vagina then => he's straight. In reverse if c) a guy doesn't want to have anything to do - or the general reaction is being repulsed by - a (god-given) vagina +  d) does want to do everything to another guy's penis then => he's gay. (Anything infinitely within the range between these two "poles" are beyond my grading abilities!)

 

That said, just because I'm gay that doesn't mean that I would automatically sleep with any all and sundry gay male - and that I would act like a sissy (don't mean this to be a derogatory term, but you know what I mean) or want to carry on like Angelina Jolie. (Unfortunately this is still the misled concensus among the general populace and the annual Gay pride does little to  help in this regard.) In the same sense that because you (the general you) are straight doesn't mean that you want to sleep with any old hag (don't mean this to be a derogatory term, but you know what I mean) - or "grab them by the pussy" like Trump! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...