The UK Babe Channels Forum

(14-12-2011 12:31 )jbrum77634 Wrote: [ -> ]That's definately a ladyboy, no doubt whatsover .....

I know! It really does beggar belief how people have such a job spotting them

(14-12-2011 12:31 )jbrum77634 Wrote: [ -> ]That's definately a ladyboy, no doubt whatsover .....

It hasn't always been so obvious. Balloon was a steady fixture on the shows before the penny dropped. See this thread; worth a look just to check out Stan's post where he's still so unsure about the possibility of transgender performers, he "demands" to see some "gynaecological close ups of their bits" to confirm his suspicions (if it's so obvious from looking at their shoulders, breasts and arses, why would you need to see such close ups?). People can remember history as subjectively as they want; that thread shows that the realisation that shemales were part of the mix didn't dawn instantaneously.

Addison, those posts were long before Balloon arrived on the scene, and I don't see anything there that highlights my doubt. The remark about demanding "gynaecological close ups of their bits" was said as a joke - the joke being that it was a means of getting explicit shots of the girls' bits. Believe that or not - and I very much doubt you do, but there's nothing I can do about that.

If I could be arsed searching thoroughly enough, I have no doubt I could find you countless examples proving that I called the ladyboys as soon as they arrived on the channel - and I was in doubt right from the very start. I flagged them up for months - to much ridicule - before everyone else started to have their own doubts.

(14-12-2011 18:47 )Addison Wrote: [ -> ]

(14-12-2011 12:31 )jbrum77634 Wrote: [ -> ]That's definately a ladyboy, no doubt whatsover .....

It hasn't always been so obvious. Balloon was a steady fixture on the shows before the penny dropped. See this thread; worth a look just to check out Stan's post where he's still so unsure about the possibility of transgender performers, he "demands" to see some "gynaecological close ups of their bits" to confirm his suspicions (if it's so obvious from looking at their shoulders, breasts and arses, why would you need to see such close ups?). People can remember history as subjectively as they want; that thread shows that the realisation that shemales were part of the mix didn't dawn instantaneously.

I dont have any issue with LBs/Shemales - I've spent a lot of time in Thailand and they are a normal site there in all walks of life. I personally havent seen a single LB on the channels here that isnt immediately recognisable for various reasons, some more obvious than others. Balloon is one of the more feminine examples however.

(15-12-2011 11:33 )jbrum77634 Wrote: [ -> ]I personally havent seen a single LB on the channels here that isnt immediately recognisable for various reasons, some more obvious than others.

Quite. They stick out like the proverbial big thumb. This inability to spot them is as mystifying to me as is the inability to spot fake boobs.

I have no problem the LBs. Not really my thing, but I can see they have an appeal for some. They are, however, pretty easy to spot, especially when they're sat next to Ice and their arms are bigger than her legs.

(14-12-2011 23:29 )StanTheMan Wrote: [ -> ]Addison, those posts were long before Balloon arrived on the scene

Okay, my dating could be out!

(14-12-2011 23:29 )StanTheMan Wrote: [ -> ]The remark about demanding "gynaecological close ups of their bits" was said as a joke - the joke being that it was a means of getting explicit shots of the girls' bits. Believe that or not - and I very much doubt you do, but there's nothing I can do about that.

I sense concern stemming from genuine uncertainty underlying the request.

(14-12-2011 23:29 )StanTheMan Wrote: [ -> ]If I could be arsed searching thoroughly enough, I have no doubt I could find you countless examples proving that I called the ladyboys as soon as they arrived on the channel - and I was in doubt right from the very start. I flagged them up for months - to much ridicule - before everyone else started to have their own doubts.

Until then, all we have is the thread I've linked to. In that one, you don't seem completely sure early on, and you chime in with your doubts after Chilly and SOCATOA have blazed the trail.

(15-12-2011 11:33 )jbrum77634 Wrote: [ -> ]I dont have any issue with LBs/Shemales - I've spent a lot of time in Thailand and they are a normal site there in all walks of life [...] Balloon is one of the more feminine examples however.

Agreed. Balloon's femininity is exceptional; a league apart from all the other AB transgender presenters that have appeared so far.

This has nothing to do with AB as such but it does show that in Thailand the Third Gender is fully accepted....

http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/avia...-its-wings

(17-12-2011 03:51 )Addison Wrote: [ -> ]

(14-12-2011 23:29 )StanTheMan Wrote: [ -> ]If I could be arsed searching thoroughly enough, I have no doubt I could find you countless examples proving that I called the ladyboys as soon as they arrived on the channel - and I was in doubt right from the very start. I flagged them up for months - to much ridicule - before everyone else started to have their own doubts.

Until then, all we have is the thread I've linked to. In that one, you don't seem completely sure early on, and you chime in with your doubts after Chilly and SOCATOA have blazed the trail.

Absolute nonsense. I did warn you that you wouldn't believe me. And not only can I not be arsed trailing through old threads to prove I flagged up the ladyboys LONG before anyone else here, I don't feel I need to prove anything anyway. What matters is what I know

Well it looks today that the rules have become all the more relaxed with Kipsy and Candy far more flirty and both Nadia and Ice up on their knees this afternoon.

I love the way Kipsy is constantly changing her look with three or four different outfits during the morning session.

.