Quote Originally Posted by Fab Karen View Post
Someone laid out their opinion of the word as society's definition. It was shown that concept was in error.

You're throwing out insinuating questions, maybe you could just clearly state what you mean to say? Hook-up messages & panty pics ( etc. ) do not define gay people for example.


Insinuating? I couldn't have been more explicit! :D


And of course, explicit hookup messages and panty pics are excluded from this site for a reason. The moderators do not enforce these rules on a whim. And the members who support these policies do so expressly to keep this site from being like the sites that do allow them. But of course, you know that. A line has been drawn between allowing non-explicit general discussion of boyfriends and sexual fantasies on one hand, and any direct, explicit statements of sexual contact between crossdressers in real time. Someone owns and runs this site, and they have a right to set any rules they want. The rest of us can either accept them or move on. That doesn't mean that the rules are sent down from a mysterious god above - they are rational, and they have rational aims. I chose to discuss my understanding of those rules, and how they fit into the discussion at hand.

Hookup messages and panty pics certainly don't define gay people, but they d*mn well do define many crossdressers. I'll be happy to pass on some of the offers I've had if you don't get them. :D Whether you call such people gay or bisexual matters little - wives of crossdressers would have no such doubts. Which leads me back to the point I brought up so clearly above, no? :D