If, if if..... "If" you found a post-op tranny attractive you'd fuck her. And "if" money grew on trees we'd all be rich. You'd no more knowingly fuck a post-op MTF tranny than Gul would. But saying you might keeps in you good with Team Tranny and the PC Brigade.
Look Wombat, just 'cause someone botched your surgery, and no one will have sex with you, that doesn't mean it's fair for you to badmouth other transsexuals who were lucky enough to avoid your fate.
This whole thread is TLDR. Do we really need 29 pages on Bruce/Caitlin Jenner? Fuck. She's had her 15 minutes. Time to move on.
if I had the time to do the selections, and had a clear idea of your taste in women (assuming...) I could show you photos of 1,000 attractive women, 200 of which were trans women, and be very very certain you couldn't correctly identify which 200 were the ones no one would fuck. Certainly there are a LOT of old and ugly trans women, but we aren't out in the clubs trying to pass the fuckability test either. Not that I say this to change your mind, since you don't really believe ANYTHING you post anyway, but just to call bullshit for the hell of it.
It was a wonderful speech she gave at the ESPYs. She's doing exactly what I hoped she would, which is to use her notoriety to uplift those in need of love, kindness, respect, and acceptance: those who have no voice. Here's a video of the full speech for those who missed it:
Looks like Caitlyn is about to be brought up on manslaughter charges. http://wjtv.com/2015/08/20/sheriffs...ter-charge-for-caitlyn-jenner-in-fatal-crash/
Not sure what the law is in California, but in a lot of states, a rear-end is almost always considered to be the fault of the person who ended up in the back end of someone else for following to closely, not paying attention, etc.
I've been told by a few others here that isn't the case in CA. Given that most people drive like morons here, many insurance companies will fault the guy that got rear ended for braking to suddenly in ill-timed lane changes (which has caused many a near miss that I've seen in my daily commute). As it should be, really.
I saw on the news that the DA will decide to charge her (or not) in the coming weeks. If she does do time, would it be in a men's or women's facility? I'm thinking men's. Furthermore if I was her, and faced time in the slammer, I'd get my will in order PDQ.
well now see I wasn't even going to bother to respond until I saw ^that^ 1. 50/50 there will be charges, if for no other reason than to avoid a circus 2. in the events of charges, it's not at all certain a conviction could be obtained (rightly or wrongly) 3. if in fact a conviction were obtained, it's a virtual slam dunk you'd see a suspended sentence and a fine, BECAUSE 4. there's NO WAY the state wants to deal with the confrontation between the typical jail's backward housing policies* and the intense spotlight this case would be under from advocacy groups 5. in the astonishingly unlikely event a sentence was enforced, it would be in the most "country club" of settings where the implication that a violent, let alone deadly, attack is easily the most laughable notion posted on this site (outside of a comment from The Flashlight) in the last year if not more. After all, the alleged offense was clearly non-violent in nature and you don't put those people among the violent offenders. *For the record, the correct procedure is to house the inmate with the gender with whom they clearly and convincingly identify, as certified by medical professionals. With allowances for certain mitigating factors (such as the offense convicted for was sexual in nature, for example). This should be universal for anyone whoes fully transitioned upon intake, unquestioned (except for sex offenses) in those MTF for whom HRT has killed sex drive, and presumptive barring compelling contrary evidence in all cases. The only state-interest mitigating circumstances (that is, a circumstance not dictated by the convicts own conduct) would be in the case of FTM trans men for whom it might be deemed they cannot gaurentee the safety of one with a vagina in prison with violent male offenders.
It's pretty universal that it's the rear-ender's fault unless it can be proved that (a) the person in front backed into you (insurance fraud); or (b) the person in front cut you off. Dashcams are your friend.
She was driving her car at an unsafe speed and crashed into another car which contributed to that person's death. There is nothing "alleged" or "non-violent" about it.
Anything that must go to trial to be established is considered "sledged" - in some cases not that it happened, but whether it rose to the level of criminal offense. Not everything that results in a death is considered violent. Take off the political-biases lenses for half a sec. Words mean things.
The charges being considered against Jenner are misdemeanor charges that very rarely result in prison time, even for people who can't afford high-powered lawyers. The charges don't even rise to the level of reckless driving; they'd be based on negligence instead. The big issue with the potential charges isn't jail time but rather how a guilty plea or verdict would affect the civil cases arising out of the accident.
No. Allegedly is an adverb used to convey that something might have happened but there is no proof. There is PLENTY of proof that this accident happened and Jenner was a part of it. You should take your own advice and consult a dictionary before commenting.Manslaughter is very much a violent act and the Sheriffs investigators are making a recommendation to the prosecutor to charge her with such. I care about facts not stupid social horseshit.
Unless a police car rear ends you, as was the case of my pregnant wife three years ago. Then it's your fault for not...something?
The state of California houses hundreds of transgender. In fact it recently agreed without court order to provide SRS to a MTF lifer. Besides, the criminal courts don't care about the pressures the prison system may or may not face when handling a transgender.
Haven't followed this too closely, but IIRC, the bitch in the car she rear-ended was texting while driving and made a sudden stop on a winding downhill in Malibu. So, bitch on phone suddenly brakes and the person behind them is at fault? Or the person behind them is a celebrity and therefore they're assumed liable? Gee, tough choice...
I don't see anything anywhere about the dead driver texting while driving, but she was driving with an expired license and did, by the accounts I've seen, break very hard and suddenly. Jenner wasn't speeding, wasn't intoxicated, wasn't using a phone, and wasn't doing anything else that would ordinarily draw a ticket at the time of the accident. Jenner probably was following too closely, but not unusually closely--we have too many cars on the road with the result that way too many drivers follow too closely in moderate high-speed traffic to stop safely if the car in front of them stops suddenly.
