Trans man kicked out of London gay sauna for not having a penis

Oh, please take me back to 1978.

Why would anyone think a gay man would want to have sex with someone who has a vagina between her legs?

Good.

Vaginas don't belong in gay saunas any more than penises belong in lady's locker rooms.

I am sick to death of having to pretend to support this nonsense.

Biological sex is real. Sexual orientation is directly linked to bio sex and the genitals that come with it.

Most gay men had to spend a good chunk of their life justifying why we don't find female genitals sexually appealing. Same with lesbians and penises. And now we are being marginalised and being told our hard-fought sexual orientations are inherently bigoted.

I'm done. Call your "front hole" whatever you want. But gay men have a right not to be into what you have between your legs. And tell your MTF sisters the same about lesbians not wanting their "lady dicks."

You've squandered what support you could have had by transing kids and shaming the Ls and Gs.

Now fuck off.

Damn it. My rant posted before I could finish signing off the way I wanted to at R3.

This fucked up is that this is twisted to make out like this is gays discriminating, when in reality it's protecting gays from people that have no business being there.

It's bad for business. Gay men would stop going there. Plenty of bisexual men would stop going too.

Because R3, "Jason, the vag-having "gay trans man" doesn't care what gay men want. She cares about getting validation, and she cares about getting dick while larping as a Fabulous Gay Man. Because she's been on Tumblr and realised she's far too sparkly and special to be an everyday straight woman.

And was she going to disclose being trans to any guys she was hoping to use? Or was she going to behave like other Aydens, who boast about using glory holes and dark areas of clubs and saunas to gain sex by deception?

Hint: She's already imposing herself on gay men just by intruding into a venue for males only, so she's shown she doesn't care about consent..

This happened to me in a darkroom in Spain. Reached around while fucking some ass on what I thought was a hot little tio and there was nothing to grip onto.

Lost my gold star gay status I guess.

Never went back to that bar. Never will.

Personal opinion aside - It’s actually about licensing laws which, at the best of times, are ridiculously arcane so it’s no surprise they don’t cover a situation like this clearly. As the sauna stated they are licensed for men only. Since the gender recognition act has not passed and is not written into law the trans man, legally, is a woman. The sauna would lose their licence.

I would be very surprised someone Trans would not be aware of this in all manner of situations. So the trans man in the article is either very dim or just didn’t give a shit.

Yuck! I don't wanna see that in my sauna

These deluded fucksticks (without real fucksticks) will be completely content to run a business into the ground just to prove a point. Just like the MTFs did with Michfest.

For all the pretend virtue-signalling from gay men, most are going to stop going to any "gay" sauna that allows biological women.

[quote] Since the gender recognition act has not passed and is not written into law the trans man, legally, is a woman.

The "trans man" is a female. The law is and those who support it are asses.

dick wilter.

Mentally ill women who take carcinogenic hormones and surgically mutilate their bodies are not men.

I'm not‽‽‽‽‽

Totally fine. It's not acceptable for trans "men" to infringe on gay men's spaces.

I really don't get this! If she wants to have sex with men, why not just be her bio female self? Plenty of straight women might want to have sex with gay men, but they have to accept it is not going to happen. So they have to settle for straight men.

I support trans rights in general, but this is a space for gay men and should be left as such.

Maybe someone could open a trans spa where trans men and women would be comfortable.

I agree that if the law changes then all the cis men will stop coming to the spa.

R15 - no matter how much facial fuzz she sticks on it, Buck has a female face.

Such is the world we live in that I count this a sane piece of news.

Ewwww r14.

Trans are invasive, mentally unstable, and do not respect others--especially the gender they want to mimic. They force themselves into spaces where they are not wanted, traumatizing all with their mere presence without the consent of those they trespass against. They do not like reality and think it's okay to force everyone into their twisted fantasy, taking dicks into women's restrooms and vaginas into gay men's saunas. They win trophies and medals right and left just for tucking their dicks in women's sports competitions. Why are we putting up with this? It's just wrong and feels like a constant violation.

[Quote]These deluded fucksticks (without real fucksticks) will be completely content to run a business into the ground just to prove a point. Just like the MTFs did with Michfest

Um not quite, and here's why. The concerns of cis-men carry more weight than those of cis-women. That being the case, this minor dust up at the "men's club" will not be addressed by the trans community with the same level of toxic response as when the MTFs (men) go after cis-women, physically compromising their safety. Can you imagine a contingent of FTMs showing up in any arena to fist fight any cis-male who openly rejects FTM theory? Not going to happen - because, despite the rhetoric claiming otherwise, MTFs inherently understand that we live in a patriarchal society. They won't dare encroach on mens' spaces because the know the consequences would be swift and deliberate. Like the highly educated and competent cis-woman who routinely gets passed over for promotion, they understand making a big stink about how they are undermined only makes the situation worse. Conversely, MTFs preseve their male sense of priveledge in all of their engagements. That's why they have no trouble knocking some sense into any cis-woman who does not fall in line with and accept their direction.

Am I wrong?

^FTMs inherently understand that we that we live in a patriarchal society.

(Sorry - I always get my trans letters mixed up)

To be fair it was Cheryl and she was stinking up the place.

R23: exactly, ftms are quickly put int their space while mtfs get to bully their way into everything, most women will shut up about, they know what it is like to stand up to men, it never ends well.

I bet the trans on this site have sweet fuck all to say about this story. Where are you loud mouth bitches at? Too scared to take on the men?

I’ve been to a sauna and seen a trans woman. No breast, but a vagina. It just seemed strange. Nobody seems to care or give her any attention. I think she actually just wanted the attention or a fight. Although who knows, there may be bi men or something who would want to fuck her. But mostly I think she was there to cause a scene, which no one did.

Why do people who are critical of the "trans" nonsense repeat terminology that legitimizes and normalizes it?

OP, this is a site for gays and lesbians to post things about gays and lesbians. This is not a trans site. Take your content to a trans site.

Oh do fuck off, r30. This issue directly affects GAY MEN

Thank you r31. Continue...

R29 Good question. I think it's because the whole trans thing is so confusing and invasive that language is changing so fast to accommodate it in certain realms. There are some professions where even using the wrong word or being politically incorrect with language would lead to a lawsuit or job loss. This, too, is a violation, but it's happening linguistically for legal reasons due to threats of discrimination but also due to the fact that trans is a relatively new category. When the trans decided they didn't want to be a new category, they then started forcing existing categories of gender to change to include their deranged world view.

Talk about DL catnip!

Lame r30.

[quote]Why would anyone think a gay man would want to have sex with someone who has a vagina between her legs?

Because gay men want to have sex with men, period! Some men have vaginas. Deal with it!

If r36 is a legitimate response and not a troll, I can think of no argument that could persuade someone so committed to anti-rationalism.

[quote]Some men have vaginas. Deal with it!

Thanks R36. I needed a good laugh before going to work.

Can someone please spare an FF for r36 (even if it's joking).

Well, now men can fuck other men's vaginas. That's nice to know. Thanks for the info R36. Now gay men can be vagina fuckers. There will be no need for churches to do gay rehab once this news gets out.

[quote]Because gay men want to have sex with men, period! Some men have vaginas. Deal with it!

Setting aside the flawed tautology, given the other premises (primarily that genitals don't define gender), shouldn't this statement be: "Some PEOPLE have vaginas. Deal with it!"

In which case, folks are free to choose to have or not have sex with anyone for any reason without having to explain or justify. "No" is a valid answer requiring no additional commentary.

Therefore, there is nothing with which to deal, per se. At our own, individual discretion, none of us have to deal with the anatomy of any other person at any time for any reason.

R41; it was clear that it was a men's sauna, not a mixed one. Women should not be able to define themselves as men to gain entry to a site that is designated men-only. Where does it end? Can a child define himself as an adult to gain access to adults only activities, such as driving, marriage, alcohol, armed forces, etc? Of course not. Restrictions are in place for a reason.

r42 reminds me of this gem of a story from British Columbia:

[quote]"I will say I am special needs and 3, so I am not in my 40s," he wrote to CBC.

r42 - you do realize that I am being critical of of r36's position, don't you.

[quote]Where does it end? Can a child define himself as an adult to gain access to adults only activities, such as driving, marriage, alcohol, armed forces, etc? Of course not. Restrictions are in place for a reason.

However, this is a very flawed and dangerous position. You need to learn some history before making hysterical and dangerous comments. This type of "slippery slope" argument was used and continues to be used in flawed extremes to argue against gay marriage, choice, and countless other fragile freedoms we currently enjoy.

It's a fucking MALE sauna for dick + dick activity.

YOU AREN'T A GAY MAN UNLESS YOU HAVE A DICK AND HAVE DEALT WITH DICK-RELATED (REAL / VIOLENT) HOMOBPHOBIC STRAIGHT ASSHOLES.

FUCK OFF PRECIOUS STRAIGHT BUTCH GIRL.

r44 please read r43 and get back to us

I'm sorry you're such a sexist (the real kind) that you think men and women behave differently because of their genetics and not how they were raised. You think a baseball cap and a dollar store moustache and spectacles makes you male? You think looking like a FOOL makes you the "gay" type of male? JFC.

It's technically a safe space for males just like a woman's changeroom is a safe space for women.

There are MANY straight men who will fuck you, stop ATTEMPTING to steal from us like the straights who steal everything good inclulding our sex, style, whatever, and leave us with the shit and then call everything that isn't stolen by non-gay people "fag shit". FUCK OFF FUCK OFF FUCK OFF.

When you get the shit kicked out of you by men for being a "fag" you can join in. So go get bashed so you can have the real GAY experience that you so desire. j/k, you still don't have the thing i.e. a cock, that would make you gay and / or attractive to gay men.

You. Don't. Deserve. It.

Spoiled little rich straight brat.

It's sex by deception.

No, I do not think people have the right to invade others' spaces and assume others' rights by virtue of self-definition, especially if they are unwanted or a threat to safety. On the other hand, gay rights take nothing away from the non-gay population.

r46 - reductio ad absurdum.

[quote]This type of "slippery slope" argument was used and continues to be used in flawed extremes to argue against gay marriage, choice, and countless other fragile freedoms we currently enjoy.

r43's example is one such ridiculous extreme. There are plenty of valid reasons that should be discussed when considering situations like this. I continue to subscribe to the position that your right to swing your arms ends where my nose begins.

However, validating the use of flawed arguments validates them. By supporting the idea that ridiculous examples constitute justified concerns, you validate every absurd argument for why gay people should not be allowed to marry - from people will begin marrying animals to children to the idiots marrying inanimate objects.

The sauna's is laughable, they're NOT standing their ground.

R39, done.

Men don’t have vaginas and women don’t have penises. I will support a person’s right to transition, but I disagree with it. But I don’t think that it should be banned. Sure, it’s a waste of money and the people who do it aren’t all there upstairs IMO, but hey, that’s America for you.

as a gay man I'm not going to get all fussy about male trans in my presence with or without clothes on. Let the straight fraus fight that battle.

ewww No Vag in bathhouses!!

No kids in the bathhouse either

[quote]I will support a person’s right to transition

But the person is not transitioning into anything. He remains biologically identical. What the person IS doing is medically mutilating himself to present as a socially-dictated, stereotypical image.

r18 you are adorable! see: r28. They don't want their own space, that would be too quiet and easy, they want to make a scene at every turn and feel righteous indignation.

honestly, I don't care if a trans man is in an all male environment. I tend to think its bullshit, but then I have had different life experiences and have always been very comfortable with my biological gender. I am fine with it as long as trans men are expected to respect a polte "NO" and not whine that they are entitled for all gay men to find them attractive.

r53 I will. There's a straightforward reason for it. There's no legal protection for cis men when a trans man is in sex oriented spaces. If a trans man claims sexual assault, the trans man will be treated as a woman under the law. No matter what the trans people like to believe, the law is not where they'd like to think. Any and all cis men will be investigated for sexual assault against a woman.

This is either reckless behavior by trans men who endanger everyone's safety and jeopardizes their legal protection or its intentional behavior to shut down all safe spaces for gay men. In either case - it's fundamentally antigay behavior targeting gay men.

valid point R59, but my point (R53 here) was more a lack of personal space conflict, not legal potentialities.

Duly noted.

The comments and feedback in the link are quite telling. Sex is being erased. Bisexual is fine, but homosexual isn’t and is outdated.

Gender is immutable. Gender identity, not so much...