What do you think? These days there seems to be more competition (just take a look at instagram). Do you think people would make a big deal over her looks if she was the age she was in 2009 today? How would she stand against the Hadid sisters, Kylie Jenner and all the rest.
shareShe would definitely give them a run for their money.
shareYou act like women have gotten better looking in the last 10 years. They haven't.
Yeah, everyone would still know she's a nice looking girl. Who gives a fuck about Instagram?
Indeed. The only way they've gotten "better" looking is that more and more fakery is used as far as apps/retouching/photoshop. A better question might be could a lot of these IG women compare in real life/on video to 2009 MF?
shareSeriously, if anything standards have gotten significantly lower. I mean Hollyweird has been trying to push the likes of Cara Delva.. whatever as some sort of sex symbol "it" girl and she looks like a transexual junkie.
shareWhat’s wrong with transsexuals?
shareIt's not the preference of most men but If you're into that i guess nothing is wrong as far as you're concerned so go get em tiger.
shareso if “most men”(a bold claim from someone who doesn’t know “most men”) aren’t attracted to to something, it’s bad or wrong? What an odd way to look at the world.
shareI don't think it's particularly "bold" as much as it is simply accurate to surmise that most men don't have a preference for transsexuals but seriously if that's what you're into, go for it buddy.
shareTo claim you know what “most men” are into is in fact a bold statement. And again, one that is neither here nor there. Your implication was that being trans was in some way wrong, or bad. So by your follow up posts you have once again reiterated that it is your belief that not being attractive to men is somehow wrong or bad. Worthy of mockery, as you have demonstrated.
Perhaps you have an answer that doesn’t involve me? Or a sweeping blanket statement that you have no facts to back up?
One would have to live in quite a sheltered
bubble to not be able to confidently surmise this about most men but If you need reassurance or approval of your potential preference for transsexuals or whatever else you may be into that's not my burden but by all means go nuts .
And still making it about me. Try again.
shareIf my answers frighten you then you should cease asking scary questions. ;)
But seriously don't take my word for it. Go take a survey on the general male population for a reality check on this issue then get back to me. Apart from that I'm afraid it's not my job or interest to some how give you reassurance.
You’re answers aren’t answers to anything I’ve asked you. You made a derogatory statement. You haven’t touched it, instead making odd jokes about my sexual interests. It’s my experience that those that hide from questions are the ones under the spell of fear.
You would you like to take one last attempt to clarify your statement or are you content to be seen as a bigot?
ARE YOU DENSE? DUDE IS NOT REFUTING YOUR CLAIM OF MOST MEN NOT BEING INTO TRANSEXUALS.HIS POINT DISTILLED DOWN FOR YOU TO UNSTAND IS....
WHY DOES IT HAVE TO GIVE YOU A BONER FOR IT TO BE GOOD?
He doesn't need to take a survey dude. Everybody knows this to be true.
Most men aren't attracted to other men. Most men aren't attracted to trannies.
He's just "butt hurt" about it.
Obviously most men are not into transsexuals. That's not a very bold claim at all.
shareSpeaking for people you don’t know, is a bold claim. It’s also not the point. Does not being attractive to most men make it ok to speak of trans persons in a negative way?
shareMight as well question whether or not the average man is attracted to vacuum cleaners.
I don't think we should be cruel to trans people, but I do think the sense of being another gender is indicative of mental illness. I don't think it makes sense to normalize it. We can be compassionate but it's something that needs to be treated, as any other illness needs to be treated.
well, the world health organisation disagrees with you. Might be something to consider, your opinion vs research and informed observational conclusions.
But it’s good you agree that we shouldn’t speak of people in a derogatory way just because they are different or not attractive to us, as that was my original point. The other poster has seemed to deflect to make it about something else. Regardless of what people believe, we should give people basic human respect and not use them as the but of poor jokes.
When people have their God-given bodies mutilated to be something their very own DNA says they're NOT, it's a clear indication of mental/spiritual illness. So it's not something to be celebrated and encouraged.
Now IF your knee-jerk reaction is to call me a "bigot" for merely stating this position (rolling my eyes) then you are a bigot for not tolerating other viewpoints, not to mention a Liberal fascist.
(See how easy it is to use Lib non-logic against them?)
A bigot is someone that is intolerant of others for no rational reason. The facts don’t support your world view, but you persist in them anyway. Tell me, does ignorant fit you better?
But let’s take a look at what you wrote, see if we can’t get the old cobwebs blown away. DNA. Your assertion is that dna should be telling these people who they should be, and that they are choosing not to be that, correct?
Dna when you dumb it all the way down is nothing more than a series of on/off switches. So why is so hard to believe that sometimes switches that should be off, are on? Dna errors happen all the time. I don’t see people spitting venom at six fingers or toes.
You’re assertion is that it’s a choice. So let’s say that’s true. So what? Does it harm you in some way that you must seek out arguments like you have done here? Making sweeping generalisations of political stance as though it some how gave you the right to call me names because you disagree?
Perhaps, if you feel you get called names a lot, it’s because you invite it by doing the same. See, here’s the difference between you(a bigot) and me. I don’t care enough about you to demand that you are seen as less than everyone else. I don’t dont try to shut you up, I think the opposing voices should be heard. I don’t think I’m right on all things and I’m happy to be proven wrong. You think because people don’t conform to your world view that they are wrong, or bad. You don’t conform to my world view, yet I don’t have any issues with you existing in the world.
Do you see the difference, or are you just looking for an argument so you can call a stranger on the internet names some more?
A bigot is someone that is intolerant of others for no rational reason.
The topic: why does not being attracted to trans persons make it ok to speak about them in a negative or derogative way?
Whataboutism and deflection won’t get you anywhere in this conversation. The question is simple. Answer it, or move on.
I chose the conversation I'm interested in: YOU slandering utter strangers as "bigot" because they disagree with your illogical Liberal positions.
Speaking of deflection, that's precisely what you're doing here -- deflecting from the topic of our discussion because the simple (blatant) facts don't support your position.
I encourage you to look in the mirror more often rather than accuse people of the very thing you're guilty of doing.
Try again.
shareDo you support circumcision? If so, you're a hypocrite
shareThere's a huge difference in cutting off a little foreskin for legit religious or health purposes and cutting off the sex organ itself due to mental illness/liberal indoctrination.
Personally, I'm not in favor of circumcision but, more importantly, the issue's irrelevant to the believer (Galatians 5:6). What matters is circumcision of the heart: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+2%3A28-29&version=HCSB.
Thank evolution I'm an atheist.
shareI can relate and wish you well in your spiritual journey, my friend. But allow me to humbly share something to reflect on...
To suggest that everything in the universe came about through accident and that there’s no Intelligent Designer is like expecting a Boeing 747 to emerge out of a metal scrapyard after millions of years. It’s absurd.
Moreover, the idea that there's no Creator conflicts with the scientific axiom of biogenesis — life only proceeds from life.
So the question is not IF there's an Intelligent Designer, but rather WHO is the Creator.
Agreed. They're pushing that androgynous look harder than ever. Also, bubble headed pinnup girls have never been more out. You have to be an angry feminist to get anywhere in the business today. Fox may be one of the last T&A starlets the industry ever turns out.
shareIf you want to know what heterosexual men like just turn on hip hop. One of the few genres of fashion/entertainment not run by gay men and lesbians who are into the 12yo boy look.
shareMore competition? From whom? Many of the hottest actresses currently are the same ones who were also around in 2009. Instagram? Uh no, I'm not going to take a look at that shit. And who the fuck are the Hadid sisters? Kylie Jenner I have heard of but have no idea who she is or what she looks like so I can't comment.
shareLook up Madison Beer
shareI looked her up. Did she used to be hot and has now ruined herself with Botox and fillers or is google showing me two different people? Anyway, Botox and fillers aren’t “hot”.
shareOk I just did. Who is that and what about her? The photos that show up in google seem pretty inconsistent. In some she looks alright, and in others she looks like a generic fake bimbo. Unless it's bringing up 2 different people.
shareThe women you mention as "competition" are not very attractive especially compared to Megan.
shareShe was very hot in 2009 and if that version was transported to 2019 I don't know why she wouldn't get the same reaction.
Btw...she's STILL very hot! Absolutely gorgeous.
She looks old and too plastic now. The nose job and lip injections was fine in 2009... but all the other stuff years later made her look weird. Botox was a bad idea and she did it at like 25!
share