• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Playboy to Feature Its First Transgender Playmate

ThoughtEx. said:
1. You only jerk off to women who are your exact type?

2. You assume you're in her league if you were to meet in a bar? Why because she's trans and she would be lucky for any guy to hit on her?

If I were to meet her in a bar, I wouldn't be checking her out to make sure she was "passable". I'd just enjoy her company, if she chose to share mine. That's what being secure is.
Click to expand...

1) Nobody jerks off to playboy anymore. Most people probably don’t even use their computers. They probably use their smartphones.

2) Why do you WANT people to jerk off to a Trans person? That’s weird. If you don’t want to...you don’t want too. If the idea kinda grosses you out...who the hell are you to attempt to cram the idea that someone is sexually confused and wrong for going AGAINST their desires? Sounds pretty ****ed up if you ask me. But then I didn’t expect logic when someone decides a transgender playboy model is worth a crusade over. :eye roll:
 
PleasantValley said:
As a young man they had not yet been invented.
I still contend young men would rather screw than play video games.
No matter what the era.
Click to expand...

We were not your average guy trying to meet girls. We were bartenders at clubs, weddings and restaurants. The amount of time we then spent after work drinking and meeting even more girls was a lot. Just chillin playing pool smoking cigars or playing video games without girls was a welcome diversion.
 
blackjack50 said:
1) Nobody jerks off to playboy anymore. Most people probably don’t even use their computers. They probably use their smartphones.

2) Why do you WANT people to jerk off to a Trans person? That’s weird. If you don’t want to...you don’t want too. If the idea kinda grosses you out...who the hell are you to attempt to cram the idea that someone is sexually confused and wrong for going AGAINST their desires? Sounds pretty ****ed up if you ask me. But then I didn’t expect logic when someone decides a transgender playboy model is worth a crusade over. :eye roll:
Click to expand...

It's a strange position he is holding. Not that there's anything wrong with being aroused by transgender people but if that's your thing but if it's not then I don't understand the problem anyone has with you not wanting to look at it.

Strange thing to be so upset about
 
CLAX1911 said:
It's a strange position he is holding. Not that there's anything wrong with being aroused by transgender people but if that's your thing but if it's not then I don't understand the problem anyone has with you not wanting to look at it.

Strange thing to be so upset about
Click to expand...

Yes. Odd indeed
 
joG said:
You mean they have different DNA? So do men and women. Didn’t you know? ;)
Click to expand...

Men and women can have either male or female DNA in their body, or both. Neither can have dog DNA naturally in their body (as in born with it).
 
FastPace said:
That's a strawman (creating an argument someone did not make to attack that argument they did not make). I never claimed nor insinuated women that are Democrats don't adopt.

I said few women that are Democrats adopt children. As in few relative to the whole of the women that are Democrats.

Here was my statement in fact:
Click to expand...

This statement means pretty much nothing without some other information, as in how many women as a whole adopt children, and references to back both up. Otherwise this is about as bad as stating "most Republicans have never served in the military" or "less than 10% of Republican women have served in the military". Both statements would be true. But the way they are phrased is as an accusations specifically directed at Republicans rather than the true nature of the situation, which is that less than 10% of the US population has served in the military, so it would stand to reason that both statements would be true, but very little argument against Republicans could be made using those statements (dependent on what the initial claim is).

Also, around 20% of females who are within or past childbearing age have or have had their own children. Around 10% cannot have children, and around 10% more do not want (and many take measures to prevent) having their own children.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Perhaps that in and of itself is an insecurity.

I didn't think there whatever come a time where you would have to be politically correct in the partners you seek.
Click to expand...

Well I guess I’m a bigot for really enjoying being with a half Asian woman rather than a half woman Asian. :shrug:
 
roguenuke said:
Men and women can have either male or female DNA in their body, or both. Neither can have dog DNA naturally in their body (as in born with it).
Click to expand...

Are you sure? In the process of evolution we acquired all sorts of DNA from fish to monkey. But, if you say there is no wolverine in is, i'm okay with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom