Post-op models

[Guest]

(post-op lover @ Jun. 12 2006,20:34) So, frankly, I'd discount 2nd and 3rd hand opinions.  If you know posties who've gone one way or the other, great, then we have merely 2nd hand opinion.  To share the opinions of pre-ops on the success or not of SRS, well, that's barely better than useless.

point well-taken, POL......  I suppose I have just heard so many stories [2nd, 3rd, 4th-hand]  that I begin to take it as gospel.  I also have a hard time believing that some quack in some dirty hospital on the outskirts of BKK can somehow make a working vagina in 3 hours, but it has taken nature hundreds of thousands of years to get this correct.  and all for under 3000 dollars....call me crazy.

  Yes..... this is a business.... too bad we don't have more people voting, I would seriously consider taking the vote as a sign of how the website thinks overall, but less than 10% of site members have voted and that's not enough to get a true feel for what members want.

[Guest]

(JaiDee @ Jun. 13 2006,01:42)

(post-op lover @ Jun. 12 2006,20:34) So, frankly, I'd discount 2nd and 3rd hand opinions.  If you know posties who've gone one way or the other, great, then we have merely 2nd hand opinion.  To share the opinions of pre-ops on the success or not of SRS, well, that's barely better than useless.

point well-taken, POL......  I suppose I have just heard so many stories [2nd, 3rd, 4th-hand]  that I begin to take it as gospel.  I also have a hard time believing that some quack in some dirty hospital on the outskirts of BKK can somehow make a working vagina in 3 hours, but it has taken nature hundreds of thousands of years to get this correct.  and all for under 3000 dollars....call me crazy.

  Yes..... this is a business.... too bad we don't have more people voting, I would seriously consider taking the vote as a sign of how the website thinks overall, but less than 10% of site members have voted and that's not enough to get a true feel for what members want.

Also you are assuming that the forum members who are voting are also site members which is not necessarily the case.

[Guest]

(JaiDee @ Jun. 12 2006,19:03) beyond help.   Some are wishy-washy..... "maybe, I not sure yet".... they can still be saved!   Especially if they

This is an interesting line:

    "they can still be saved !"

Is the pronoun "they" being used to reference the LB, their souls or their penises? I suspect LB.

What are the LB being "saved" from? I stipulate that this Southern Baptisty expression implies one thing: to prevent someone from becoming worthless in the eyes of the greater power.

These relationships with LB are marked by high power-distance and a perverse inequality... one party has more power, largely on the basis of money.

I hope we all agree that a post-op-loving falang would be acting in his own interests if he were to tell a LB that she will be happier by getting cut.

If a pre-op-loving falang tells a LB that she will be saved by not getting cut, he is nonetheless acting in HIS own interest.

If a dick-worshipper did not pay money to worship dicks, he might be more credible when advocating on behalf of another individual's dick.

Unfortunately, the conflict of interest remains.

In my humble opinion, transsexuals should not be made to feel that their importance to others is determined by the presence or absence of a body part.

On another note...

No bird dog here can pretend to know what is best for these LB. Many readers travel across the world to pay money to stick their dicks into some feminized guy's asshole. Oh, the lengths some will go to for an orgasm!

Contrast this with the situation of the average Thai transsexual. Poor, with a poor family, and guilt about a hereditary obligation to take care of the family while feeling like she is in the wrong body. I conjecture that for these transsexuals, the ability to orgasm is not what is first and foremost in their minds. After all, how often do Venuses from Chiang Rai travel great distances to pay money to sodomize Western men?

How ridiculous is it to compare the two cases and say, with zealousness even, that a poor Thai transsexual will be unhappy if she strays from the cock?

[Guest]

Keep it simple....

We are having a rational discussion about CUTTING off someone's DICK.

Is there any person here that would even remotely think of subjecting themselves to this?

I appreciate Sangabriels logic, but I cannot get behind his me-too-you-too aproach. I feel pretty safe sticking tot he side that DOES NOT involve mutilating someone's only sexual organ.

Hell-OH!!! Does this take a lot of logic?

It seems absurd to me to say "Hmm, chopping off dick, not chopping off dick... you are both sides too involved, none can be partial, therefore neither is acting in her best interest."

I'm going to say 99 times out of a hundred I feel pretty safe being in the right if I am standing up against CHOPPING OFF SOMEONE'S DICK.

[post-op lover]

I've always thought there are too many dicks in this world. And just not enough pussy.

I think JD's right: if you've got a formula that mostly works, and have a sample like this poll, it would be silly to change things.

However, you do have some insight from the minor sites you've helped set up, such as Jannie's personal site. Does she get a lot of traffic and emails from that? How might that compare to sites for some pre-ops? For instance, would a Jannie-only site be feasible? Any contemplation of trial runs for a commercial post-op only site?

On the other hand, figuring out the balance of the cost, payments, marketing, etc., would be another hassle.

Frankly, I know what I like, but if I were in JD's shoes, I'd probably do it his way. And if he were in my shoes, he'd want to get out.