FabSwingers.com > Forums > Mobile Web App feedback > Put TS women and CD/femboy as separate categories
Put TS women and CD/femboy as separate categories
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *r53 OP Man 3 weeks ago
Ardwick |
Love for everyone but I think TS women and CDs should a separate category instead of putting them all as one
Since they are not the same and usually appeal to different audiences as well
Cheers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
How people identify is for their personal benefits and wellbeing, not for things including the improved usability of others.
As the above person suggests, this has been discussed at extreme length, throughout Fabs history |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Love for everyone but I think TS women and CDs should a separate category instead of putting them all as one
Since they are not the same and usually appeal to different audiences as well
Cheers "
AFF? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *r53 OP Man 3 weeks ago
Ardwick |
I completely agree that how someone identifies should always be respected and should primarily serve their own wellbeing, not the convenience or preferences of others
My point is purely about classification, not preference or value.
Trans women are medically and socially recognised as women. Crossdressers, by definition, are not women and generally do not identify as such. Those are two distinct categories, and grouping them together feels like an oversimplification where everything that isn’t CIS gets placed into a single bucket
Given that the platform already uses categories, it seems more accurate and inclusive to allow people to self-categorise in a way that reflects those differences, rather than collapsing them into one catch-all label. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *r53 OP Man 2 weeks ago
Ardwick |
It's not that I don't read it it's the fact that I don't have to because they are categorised
I'm sorry just as a doctor and a person of modern day this just is a bit strange that an inclusive website like Fab is ignoring this |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *r53 OP Man 2 weeks ago
Ardwick |
I want to reduce any tension here, as I think my point may be getting misunderstood.
I’m not asking for people to be “sorted” for my convenience, and I fully respect that how someone identifies is about their own wellbeing first and foremost. I’m not arguing that anyone should be defined differently.
My point is simply about consistency. Cis men and cis women are categorised distinctly and clearly. For everyone else, those distinctions exist ie TV/TS/CD but are often collapsed into a single umbrella category. That difference in treatment is what I’m trying to highlight.
Any added convenience for viewers would be a by-product, not the goal. The goal is clearer, more accurate, and more inclusive self-categorisation applied consistently across the platform.
That’s all I’m trying to say. I genuinely enjoy Fab and appreciate the community, just sharing my two cents  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I maybe over simplifying things but here goes.
I understand what the op is saying but at the same time I don't think fabswingers is the place for having TV & TS in a "separate categorys" would make that much difference in the grand scheme of things as many do not read profiles.
Where as on the sister site "fabguys" I find it more basic you have a choice M,MM & TV/TS when searching would be a added benefit.
It's H writing this & I'm a bi male for reference. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *r53 OP Man 2 weeks ago
Ardwick |
Thanks again to everyone who’s contributed. I appreciate the thoughtful responses x
I wanted to respond to the point that Fab may not be the right place for clearer distinctions because many people don’t read profiles.
My concern is that, this effectively shifts the burden onto certain members to provide additional explanation, either in their bio or later in private messages, simply to avoid misunderstanding. Cis men and cis women aren’t expected to repeatedly clarify who they are, that clarity is handled at the categorisation level.
When that clarity isn’t applied consistently, it can lead to situations where conversations progress and then stall because someone feels they have to ask a deeply personal question just to understand compatibility. That puts both people in an awkward position and can feel unnecessarily intrusive.
For me, the issue isn’t about filtering or convenience. It’s about applying the same standard of upfront clarity across the platform, so no one is placed in a position where they have to justify or explain their identity mid-conversation.
I fully respect that identity is personal and self-defined. I’m simply suggesting that clearer, consistent categorisation can actually reduce discomfort rather than create it.
Appreciate everyone engaging with this; it’s good to be able to discuss it openly  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I want to be a tree 🌳 "
Ok, but what kind of Tree are you.
Do you identify as a hardwood, softwood, deciduous or non deciduous?
Are you a native species or non native species?
Do you identify as an invasive species lol...
Only joking.... Just put you down as he's got wood 🪵🪓 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
