Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So tonight has been amazing, and thanks for all who have given honest contributions. I don’t think @Fab is as inclusive as one would first think. It would be great to hear the counter arguments? " Yeah I don’t have one  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only demographic I'd say is maligned is by far it's biggest... single men." As the single voice for men's unoppressed by vagina, I can announce that all men's is dicks. Sad, but true. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You haven't presented your arguments as to why it isn't inclusive for us to counter though. " We;'ve probably heard them over the night in fairness, what there is anyway. I just think Fab for most people (not just single men) just takes quite lots of effort and time (and sometimes naturally wasted time), but if you do it well you can build a profile and it gets easier. Yeah some people prob have no issues finding fun from the get go, but what can you do? We are not them. And even them get let down or have slow nights. The privilege argument is just silly really, there are all types of people on fab and who knows who they are attracted to? You can't fit it into tiers really. Unless it's keen conversationalists vs fast talking libbertigibbets or something. And I think you can read a lot from most profiles anyway, even empty ones. pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria." Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So tonight has been amazing, and thanks for all who have given honest contributions. I don’t think @Fab is as inclusive as one would first think. It would be great to hear the counter arguments? " Why would you think Fab would be inclusive? Do you mean Swingers in general? There seems to be a belief from some people that Swingers are inclusive and will fuck anyone who asks. This is not true.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So tonight has been amazing, and thanks for all who have given honest contributions. I don’t think @Fab is as inclusive as one would first think. It would be great to hear the counter arguments? " OP why don't you think it's inclusive? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria." How is the view from your Ivory Tower .? A single bloke with vast success and many meet verifications sticking the boot in on other single blokes who havnt had their success comes across to me as a cheap shot. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes fab is very much inclusive. It gives equal opportunity to all its members. Some members might feel aggrieved at not achieving their desired result, but they have themselves to blame." Why do we only have ourselves to blame ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" How is the view from your Ivory Tower .? A single bloke with vast success and many meet verifications sticking the boot in on other single blokes who haven't had their success comes across to me as a cheap shot. " This is a perfect example of what I wrote above. Case in point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" How is the view from your Ivory Tower .? A single bloke with vast success and many meet verifications sticking the boot in on other single blokes who haven't had their success comes across to me as a cheap shot. This is a perfect example of what I wrote above. Case in point." Not everyone has been as lucky as you have been ,and I congratulate you on your success on here .But why stick the boot in on us who havnt had any success ? . It's hard enough as it is on here ,(impossible I'd say ),to get a breakthrough . Dont you remember when you had zero verifications? I don't begrudge the tiny minority of single blokes on here who have all the success, but if the boot was on the other foot ,I wouldn't be looking at blokes with zero success with contempt. You are in a lucky minority of single blokes on here mate , and I don't begrudge you that ,but the vast majority of us aren't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes fab is very much inclusive. It gives equal opportunity to all its members. Some members might feel aggrieved at not achieving their desired result, but they have themselves to blame. Why do we only have ourselves to blame ? " On other posts you have said clubs etc are not for you fair enough. but you have also said you live remote area ,poor public transport and you don't have transport so it would be back to your house . so your expecting single women to travel middle of nowhere to meet you at a local cafe for a coffee on chance she might want sex with you and it will have to be at your house. You really can't see that being an issue ? You have also been advised before about being negative yet day after day over several threads keep posting the woe is me ,nobody wants me. Its showing a pattern of obsessive behaviour and desperation which i would think would raise a red flag for a lot of people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria." Bravo | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" How is the view from your Ivory Tower .? A single bloke with vast success and many meet verifications sticking the boot in on other single blokes who haven't had their success comes across to me as a cheap shot. This is a perfect example of what I wrote above. Case in point. Not everyone has been as lucky as you have been ,and I congratulate you on your success on here .But why stick the boot in on us who havnt had any success ? . It's hard enough as it is on here ,(impossible I'd say ),to get a breakthrough . Dont you remember when you had zero verifications? I don't begrudge the tiny minority of single blokes on here who have all the success, but if the boot was on the other foot ,I wouldn't be looking at blokes with zero success with contempt. You are in a lucky minority of single blokes on here mate , and I don't begrudge you that ,but the vast majority of us aren't. " As usual you cherry pick the parts of a post that reinforce your self imposed point of view. I never alluded to all single blokes, just the ones, like yourself, that complain regularly and consider themselves victims in the schoolyard. I'm not lucky. That ivory tower you mentioned? I built it myself by working hard to join a community I admire and the view is quite nice up here thanks. Fab is the Garden of Earthly Delights. It's a very interesting tryptic painted by Hieronymus Bosch. You should have a look and choose suit which side of it you'd like to be on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I can't say whether fab as a whole is inclusive or not because I only speak to individuals. The forums are a different animal. There have been very productive forumites who get mentioned in dispatches for how lovely and inclusive they are but my personal experience with them in the forums is the exact opposite. There are groups open to anyone within reason and there are groups who are inclusively exclusive where you have to tick certain boxes. Those are the ones who class themselves as the real swingers and they sneer at everyone else. In regard to the comments above about some single guys being lucky I'll remind you of the old adage, "The harder you work, the luckier you will be". Working hard doesn't mean for a month or two and then stopping for a whinge break. Consistency is a requirement. " Stop for a whinge break ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So tonight has been amazing, and thanks for all who have given honest contributions. I don’t think @Fab is as inclusive as one would first think. It would be great to hear the counter arguments? " Why do you think Fab isn't an inclusive platform? Are you talking Fabswingers as a site or the myriad of members who use it? Finding it hard to answer without a bit more clarity | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nope. Mention any kink that is slightly out of the ordinary and you’ll see how closed minded swingers really areD" Absolutely this. The site is inclusive. It’s members are not x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes fab is very much inclusive. It gives equal opportunity to all its members. Some members might feel aggrieved at not achieving their desired result, but they have themselves to blame. Why do we only have ourselves to blame ? " Because there are many repeatedly asking for advice but changing nothing and keeping coming back for more advice and showing more negative attitude. Change nothing and nothing will change. Negativity is just not attractive. If the OP continues posting multiple negative threads and displays the same negative attitude in private messages, to be brutal, he might as well give up and leave Fab. More chance down the pub. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria." Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder " Your reply came across as really rude. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on. "Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it to be inclusive for me personally. I have found some great friends. The first 8 months I was here (not this profile) I was unable to meet due to an accident. I found the forum to be supportive & it genuinely got me through some tough times. I’ve seen some sad and tragic times here, where forumites banded together. I’ve seen some genuine outreaching and support when people have had non-swinging problems. I’ve seen some dickish behaviour, racism, sexism and various nastiness. But - it’s life. It’s a little corner of life & you get good & bad. Hand on heart - I have seen more good. I like it here." Me too! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded "It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project. "You think their intention is to exclude? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude? "Obvs not. Just no self-awareness. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness. "Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place "Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place
Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS."Raise it with them - I’m simply observing. They regard it as a “place” as every response they get, whether passive or active, reinforces it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place
Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS.
Raise it with them - I’m simply observing. They regard it as a “place” as every response they get, whether passive or active, reinforces it. "I and many other do but it's like talking to a brick wall. They are stuck in a self-fulfilling doom loop of negativity and rejection. They have it in their power to change things and break out of loop but very few want to. Well they say they want to and then make every excuse under the sun. Unsexy wallowing in self-pity is preferred. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place
Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS.
Raise it with them - I’m simply observing. They regard it as a “place” as every response they get, whether passive or active, reinforces it.
I and many other do but it's like talking to a brick wall. They are stuck in a self-fulfilling doom loop of negativity and rejection. They have it in their power to change things and break out of loop but very few want to. Well they say they want to and then make every excuse under the sun. Unsexy wallowing in self-pity is preferred. "You’re an attractive man with a good profile and that’s great but not everyone is able to do what you do. It reflects society in general - you can’t just tell poorer people to sort themselves out and get richer. People should try and be kind | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You’re an attractive man with a good profile and that’s great but not everyone is able to do what you do. It reflects society in general - you can’t just tell poorer people to sort themselves out and get richer. People should try and be kind " Your a analogy is flawed. The only people here who are poor are the ones that cry 'poor me'. Anyone, on any forum, so is a constant source of negativity is going to receive feedback in kind. All is fair in love and war | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place
Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS.
Raise it with them - I’m simply observing. They regard it as a “place” as every response they get, whether passive or active, reinforces it.
I and many other do but it's like talking to a brick wall. They are stuck in a self-fulfilling doom loop of negativity and rejection. They have it in their power to change things and break out of loop but very few want to. Well they say they want to and then make every excuse under the sun. Unsexy wallowing in self-pity is preferred.
You’re an attractive man with a good profile and that’s great but not everyone is able to do what you do. It reflects society in general - you can’t just tell poorer people to sort themselves out and get richer.
People should try and be kind "Well I don't want to be negative but I am wouldn't see myself as attractive at all and struggled on years like most. Bullied when younger for being positively ugly and still get plenty of rejection especially when people see my face picture. My profile is nothing special either but it has changed over many years as I've figured out how to improve. Also figured out how to play this Fab/swinging game, how to talk to people in better way to get the real me across, what best to do meet people and end up having sex. etc. I know some people don't want to change things or can't do this but many can. If they can't then and end up getting upset and posting a lot on Forum in a very negative way then I genuinely feel the kindest advice is to leave here. It can be a very brutal soul destroying place and not good for mental health. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You’re an attractive man with a good profile and that’s great but not everyone is able to do what you do. It reflects society in general - you can’t just tell poorer people to sort themselves out and get richer. People should try and be kind Your a analogy is flawed. The only people here who are poor are the ones that cry 'poor me'. Anyone, on any forum, so is a constant source of negativity is going to receive feedback in kind. All is fair in love and war" Right ok - get on with it then | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place
Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS.
Raise it with them - I’m simply observing. They regard it as a “place” as every response they get, whether passive or active, reinforces it.
I and many other do but it's like talking to a brick wall. They are stuck in a self-fulfilling doom loop of negativity and rejection. They have it in their power to change things and break out of loop but very few want to. Well they say they want to and then make every excuse under the sun. Unsexy wallowing in self-pity is preferred.
You’re an attractive man with a good profile and that’s great but not everyone is able to do what you do. It reflects society in general - you can’t just tell poorer people to sort themselves out and get richer.
People should try and be kind
Well I don't want to be negative but I am wouldn't see myself as attractive at all and struggled on years like most. Bullied when younger for being positively ugly and still get plenty of rejection especially when people see my face picture. My profile is nothing special either but it has changed over many years as I've figured out how to improve. Also figured out how to play this Fab/swinging game, how to talk to people in better way to get the real me across, what best to do meet people and end up having sex. etc. I know some people don't want to change things or can't do this but many can. If they can't then and end up getting upset and posting a lot on Forum in a very negative way then I genuinely feel the kindest advice is to leave here. It can be a very brutal soul destroying place and not good for mental health. "Ok - maybe they will leave then and everyone can breathe a little easier | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place
Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS.
Raise it with them - I’m simply observing. They regard it as a “place” as every response they get, whether passive or active, reinforces it.
I and many other do but it's like talking to a brick wall. They are stuck in a self-fulfilling doom loop of negativity and rejection. They have it in their power to change things and break out of loop but very few want to. Well they say they want to and then make every excuse under the sun. Unsexy wallowing in self-pity is preferred.
You’re an attractive man with a good profile and that’s great but not everyone is able to do what you do. It reflects society in general - you can’t just tell poorer people to sort themselves out and get richer.
People should try and be kind
Well I don't want to be negative but I am wouldn't see myself as attractive at all and struggled on years like most. Bullied when younger for being positively ugly and still get plenty of rejection especially when people see my face picture. My profile is nothing special either but it has changed over many years as I've figured out how to improve. Also figured out how to play this Fab/swinging game, how to talk to people in better way to get the real me across, what best to do meet people and end up having sex. etc. I know some people don't want to change things or can't do this but many can. If they can't then and end up getting upset and posting a lot on Forum in a very negative way then I genuinely feel the kindest advice is to leave here. It can be a very brutal soul destroying place and not good for mental health.
Ok - maybe they will leave then and everyone can breathe a little easier "....maybe they will breathe easier. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Not just a pretty face! (It's a joke before anyone comes for me...) This is one of the best summaries of Fab I've seen. Spot on.
Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded
It does make sense. Because that group exclude by the attitudes they project.
You think their intention is to exclude?
Obvs not. Just no self-awareness.
Actually I think their self awareness is to the forefront - they know their place but it doesn’t mean they have to like being in that place
Can you not see how self-defeating that attitude is? "Their place". FFS.
Raise it with them - I’m simply observing. They regard it as a “place” as every response they get, whether passive or active, reinforces it.
I and many other do but it's like talking to a brick wall. They are stuck in a self-fulfilling doom loop of negativity and rejection. They have it in their power to change things and break out of loop but very few want to. Well they say they want to and then make every excuse under the sun. Unsexy wallowing in self-pity is preferred.
You’re an attractive man with a good profile and that’s great but not everyone is able to do what you do. It reflects society in general - you can’t just tell poorer people to sort themselves out and get richer.
People should try and be kind
Well I don't want to be negative but I am wouldn't see myself as attractive at all and struggled on years like most. Bullied when younger for being positively ugly and still get plenty of rejection especially when people see my face picture. My profile is nothing special either but it has changed over many years as I've figured out how to improve. Also figured out how to play this Fab/swinging game, how to talk to people in better way to get the real me across, what best to do meet people and end up having sex. etc. I know some people don't want to change things or can't do this but many can. If they can't then and end up getting upset and posting a lot on Forum in a very negative way then I genuinely feel the kindest advice is to leave here. It can be a very brutal soul destroying place and not good for mental health.
Ok - maybe they will leave then and everyone can breathe a little easier
....maybe they will breathe easier. "Maybe - I wouldn’t recommend this site to anyone of an even slightly delicate disposition | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded " I think you may find a lot of people from this category are exclusively looking for women to meet with one-on-one. So yes, they are excluding couples, men, TVs, swinger socialising, clubs, gangbangs, parties, and in general all the things a swinger site stands for, which is ultimately about sharing sexual expression with multiple others. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded I think you may find a lot of people from this category are exclusively looking for women to meet with one-on-one. So yes, they are excluding couples, men, TVs, swinger socialising, clubs, gangbangs, parties, and in general all the things a swinger site stands for, which is ultimately about sharing sexual expression with multiple others." I wonder if that’s true? My take is that they would meet anyone for anything. Interesting point though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fabs as a site is inclusive. The Forums can sometimes seem less so to some. Why get bent out of shape over it. They're just people who live in your phone. You're never gonna get the complete answer you want. Concentrate on thread killing, that's much more satisfying "I made a similar point - albeit in a less sophisticated manner - but it didn’t go down well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded I think you may find a lot of people from this category are exclusively looking for women to meet with one-on-one. So yes, they are excluding couples, men, TVs, swinger socialising, clubs, gangbangs, parties, and in general all the things a swinger site stands for, which is ultimately about sharing sexual expression with multiple others." Yes some truth to this in many cases. Think many would be far better off on more one on one type dating/hook up sites as not really swingers in the broader sense. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fabs as a site is inclusive. The Forums can sometimes seem less so to some. Why get bent out of shape over it. They're just people who live in your phone. You're never gonna get the complete answer you want. Concentrate on thread killing, that's much more satisfying
I made a similar point - albeit in a less sophisticated manner - but it didn’t go down well. "That's partly my point. I don't factor how it goes down into it. I'm more pissed off about omitting a question mark on my post. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The only demographic I'd say is maligned is by far it's biggest... single men. As the single voice for men's unoppressed by vagina, I can announce that all men's is dicks. Sad, but true." Is they affiliated to the Peoples Front Of Judeah? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Why do we only have ourselves to blame ? " Whom else would you blame for members of your preferred sex not finding you attractive? If you display a similar attitude in your attempts to engage and meet up with people, I’m not surprised you’ve been unsuccessful. Neediness, desperation, and entitlement are most unattractive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Here is something to think about: Fab is not entirely inclusive, but not in the way everyone usually talks about. Everybody has equal opportunity to distinguish themselves. As with other places where people interact, personalities may clash, grudges can be formed, and people can be made to feel unwelcome and even ostracised, but this is people discriminating against each other, it is not the platform. The part of these discussions that is most often overlooked is this: success here is mostly based on one’s facility and grasp of the written language. This is far more important than the quality of your photos or your age and physical attributes. If you can demonstrate, humour, warmth, wit, intelligence and integrity, and make the effort to properly engage through posts and messages, then you stand a much better chance of forming connections and arranging meets. Fab, like almost all internet platforms, requires its users to write to each other. So if you struggle to write, if you’re not very eloquent, if your vocabulary is limited, then Fab is going to be a harder nut for you to crack. So while this place and these forums are inclusive of a person’s race, religion, orientation, gender identity, kinks and fetishes (not to be confused with an individual’s attitude towards such things), the nature of the platform itself discriminates against people who lack the ability to express themselves through written communications. So the secret to success here (and elsewhere on the internet) isn’t to take better photos or go to the gym or diet or any of that stuff, It is to practice and develop the ability to express yourself in interesting ways through the use of the written word. Just an observation Xx" That's a pretty good take and a great contribution to the discussion. I would suggest that photos do matter more to some and perhaps matter in addition to good writing for others. No amount of eloquence is going to trump a gallery of dick picks and a silhouette profile pic People are stimulated differently. I will intuit far more from a person's choices and aesthetic in their photographs because that his how I process information. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not inclusive if you’re under 30.  "I'm very much looking forward to the extra opportunities to meet people next year when I turn 3p0 
I'd say it's inclusive. People generally tend to help each other out. Personal preferences will always be a thing though, so don't internalise any rejections! Be polite and move on | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not inclusive if you’re under 30. "Surely that's a club you can eventually join | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not inclusive if you’re under 30. "• Tell me about it: I'm 29½" around the waist. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not inclusive if you’re under 30. "Lucky for us then pickle  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not inclusive if you’re under 30. "Isn’t it cub? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not inclusive if you’re under 30.
Isn’t it cub? " ok maybe it is a little bit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not inclusive if you’re under 30.
Isn’t it cub?
ok maybe it is a little bit"See… that wasn’t too bad now was it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder Your reply came across as really rude. " .But so will the first post in fairness, to many readers anyway. Aggrieved people don't "spew" that often, most of them just need to adjust to this place. Before long the OP will be calling posts like the above 'virtue signalling'! He just needs to learn the ropes and try not hang himself with them. People who speculate here (hardly a crime) do need a strong chin sometimes. They may 'misjudge' but is that ultimately such a great deal in such a place like this? There is something about Fab (which it possibly can't help) that can make all kinds of people a bit brash and rude sometimes imo. I think a lot of 'complainers' actually chug along until someone out there just gets unnecessarily pissy with them in a way that does come across as totally entitled. So better to tell them it happens, remind them it's not always the case - and not call them mewers and pukers imo. I point again to Search via Browse but of course it always involves resilient speculation. Single men especially have to speculate. I think we pretty much all do personally. pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder Your reply came across as really rude. .But so will the first post in fairness, to many readers anyway. Aggrieved people don't "spew" that often, most of them just need to adjust to this place. Before long the OP will be calling posts like the above 'virtue signalling'! He just needs to learn the ropes and try not hang himself with them. People who speculate here (hardly a crime) do need a strong chin sometimes. They may 'misjudge' but is that ultimately such a great deal in such a place like this? There is something about Fab (which it possibly can't help) that can make all kinds of people a bit brash and rude sometimes imo. I think a lot of 'complainers' actually chug along until someone out there just gets unnecessarily pissy with them in a way that does come across as totally entitled. So better to tell them it happens, remind them it's not always the case - and not call them mewers and pukers imo. I point again to Search via Browse but of course it always involves resilient speculation. Single men especially have to speculate. I think we pretty much all do personally. pt" Thanks for telling us all how to do it once again. I'd be lost without you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder Your reply came across as really rude. .But so will the first post in fairness, to many readers anyway. Aggrieved people don't "spew" that often, most of them just need to adjust to this place. Before long the OP will be calling posts like the above 'virtue signalling'! He just needs to learn the ropes and try not hang himself with them. People who speculate here (hardly a crime) do need a strong chin sometimes. They may 'misjudge' but is that ultimately such a great deal in such a place like this? There is something about Fab (which it possibly can't help) that can make all kinds of people a bit brash and rude sometimes imo. I think a lot of 'complainers' actually chug along until someone out there just gets unnecessarily pissy with them in a way that does come across as totally entitled. So better to tell them it happens, remind them it's not always the case - and not call them mewers and pukers imo. I point again to Search via Browse but of course it always involves resilient speculation. Single men especially have to speculate. I think we pretty much all do personally. pt" OP asked a question. I believe I have a fair and balanced answer Your point may be true for new and early stage members and I'll point out that there is a difference between asking for advice and ignoring that advice light to start complaining or posting thinly veiled side swipes at the generally successful membership. I was referring to those that are in here quite a long time and are regularly contributing to the general malaise they create as a group. I stand by my words. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder Your reply came across as really rude. .But so will the first post in fairness, to many readers anyway. Aggrieved people don't "spew" that often, most of them just need to adjust to this place. Before long the OP will be calling posts like the above 'virtue signalling'! He just needs to learn the ropes and try not hang himself with them. People who speculate here (hardly a crime) do need a strong chin sometimes. They may 'misjudge' but is that ultimately such a great deal in such a place like this? There is something about Fab (which it possibly can't help) that can make all kinds of people a bit brash and rude sometimes imo. I think a lot of 'complainers' actually chug along until someone out there just gets unnecessarily pissy with them in a way that does come across as totally entitled. So better to tell them it happens, remind them it's not always the case - and not call them mewers and pukers imo. I point again to Search via Browse but of course it always involves resilient speculation. Single men especially have to speculate. I think we pretty much all do personally. pt Thanks for telling us all how to do it once again. I'd be lost without you. " .Just my opinion like everyone else  At least I'm not a virtue ram or a sheep with a kicking hoof.
I was just going to add that as a CD with tonnes of pics and a decent amount of attention I do think that Fab set out to make this site as inclusive as they could.
And in reality that is pretty much all anyone can do on such a public site surely?
All they need is that TS/TV forum, and maybe a little work in ethnicity handling too.. places can often be worked on a bit. Some more obvious sign posting perhaps. What we do get for just a few quid (especially the speed) is amazing really.
pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yes it's very inclusive, it's just finding the pocket of like minded people. The mistake people make is to try to be liked by all, it's never gonna happen. Once you find your people, and ignore those who aren't, things work out "Very true. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So tonight has been amazing, and thanks for all who have given honest contributions. I don’t think @Fab is as inclusive as one would first think. It would be great to hear the counter arguments? " It’s as inclusive as it can be, as a website, but I suspect that’s not what you mean. Fab isn’t too different to the ‘real’ world, attractive people will have plenty of opportunity to get laid, people who aren’t as attractive will have less. The big difference is the power rests with women, they have massive amounts of men to pick from and quite rightly pick those who they are attracted to the most. Nobody is owed sex, and if you aren’t getting any then the only place to look for the reason why is in the mirror. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder Your reply came across as really rude. .But so will the first post in fairness, to many readers anyway. Aggrieved people don't "spew" that often, most of them just need to adjust to this place. Before long the OP will be calling posts like the above 'virtue signalling'! He just needs to learn the ropes and try not hang himself with them. People who speculate here (hardly a crime) do need a strong chin sometimes. They may 'misjudge' but is that ultimately such a great deal in such a place like this? There is something about Fab (which it possibly can't help) that can make all kinds of people a bit brash and rude sometimes imo. I think a lot of 'complainers' actually chug along until someone out there just gets unnecessarily pissy with them in a way that does come across as totally entitled. So better to tell them it happens, remind them it's not always the case - and not call them mewers and pukers imo. I point again to Search via Browse but of course it always involves resilient speculation. Single men especially have to speculate. I think we pretty much all do personally. pt Thanks for telling us all how to do it once again. I'd be lost without you. .Just my opinion like everyone else At least I'm not a virtue ram or a sheep with a kicking hoof.
" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it's important not to get fab and the forum confused. As a platform fab is inherently inclusive by design and as such doesn't discriminate by race, age, religion, sexuality or kink. Anyone can join and put whatever they want in their profile. The forum is a little different. There are regular users and friendship groups that can be easily seen as cliques. These groups can often be a loud minority and may appear to some as gatekeepers. The population of aggrieved single men will of course have their own opinion and are most likely to put forth that they are not included. This will have no bearing on their race, age, religion or sexuality. Rather it will almost certainly focus solely on the fact that no one appears to want to meet them. They will spew such arguements for non inclusivity such as 'women will only meet men they attracted to' and 'I read the advice and chose to ignore it therefore obviously the problem your sense of entitlement.' In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria. Thank you for the very lengthy reply. Great essay fodder Your reply came across as really rude. .But so will the first post in fairness, to many readers anyway. Aggrieved people don't "spew" that often, most of them just need to adjust to this place. Before long the OP will be calling posts like the above 'virtue signalling'! He just needs to learn the ropes and try not hang himself with them. People who speculate here (hardly a crime) do need a strong chin sometimes. They may 'misjudge' but is that ultimately such a great deal in such a place like this? There is something about Fab (which it possibly can't help) that can make all kinds of people a bit brash and rude sometimes imo. I think a lot of 'complainers' actually chug along until someone out there just gets unnecessarily pissy with them in a way that does come across as totally entitled. So better to tell them it happens, remind them it's not always the case - and not call them mewers and pukers imo. I point again to Search via Browse but of course it always involves resilient speculation. Single men especially have to speculate. I think we pretty much all do personally. pt OP asked a question. I believe I have a fair and balanced answer Your point may be true for new and early stage members and I'll point out that there is a difference between asking for advice and ignoring that advice light to start complaining or posting thinly veiled side swipes at the generally successful membership. I was referring to those that are in here quite a long time and are regularly contributing to the general malaise they create as a group. I stand by my words. " .That suddenly sounds very general though. I've been on and off the forum for maybe 7 years now, to me the 'long timers' you refer to are more on the more politicised side (whether sexual or cultural or whatever). I think these particular inclusivity 'super novas' keep coming from different people who are typically in the 'new to a year' range. And they blow out. Sure some other people who have stuck with the forum often lend their support, but not all that many imo. And often it's in defence of the reaction they are seeing! Most people get philosophical on Fab in time. There is no harm defending someone when you see a reason to, it's entirely their prerogative. pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" .That suddenly sounds very general though. I've been on and off the forum for maybe 7 years now, to me the 'long timers' you refer to are more on the more politicised side (whether sexual or cultural or whatever). I think these particular inclusivity 'super novas' keep coming from different people who are typically in the 'new to a year' range. And they blow out. Sure some other people who have stuck with the forum often lend their support, but not all that many imo. And often it's in defence of the reaction they are seeing! Most people get philosophical on Fab in time. There is no harm defending someone when you see a reason to, it's entirely their prerogative. pt " That's fair. I take your point and you have made it graciously. Perhaps I too will mellow out in time. I will readily admit that I have quite a reactionary response to overwhelmingly negative posts and my opinion above reflects accurately how I feel at the moment. I will try to be more open to a little growth and a touch of patience. Thank you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive in what way? I’ve read your other posts in the last 24hrs, and in that context I’m assuming you’re trying to say it’s not inclusive because you’ve not been successful? " I blame the instant coffee, we've all been outcast, my god dam coffee preference! Mrs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive in what way? I’ve read your other posts in the last 24hrs, and in that context I’m assuming you’re trying to say it’s not inclusive because you’ve not been successful? I blame the instant coffee, we've all been outcast, my god dam coffee preference! Mrs " This coffee division has to end. I like nothing more than an oat flat white made painstakingly slowly by a barista so hip I can barely look at them But I also love a good cup of instant and a biscuit. It's the 90's. It's my mother's house. And it's fast! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive in what way? I’ve read your other posts in the last 24hrs, and in that context I’m assuming you’re trying to say it’s not inclusive because you’ve not been successful. I blame the instant coffee, we've all been outcast, my god dam coffee preference! Mrs This coffee division has to end. I like nothing more than an oat flat white made painstakingly slowly by a barista so hip I can barely look at them But I also love a good cup of instant and a biscuit. It's the 90's. It's my mother's house. And it's fast!" I mean we’re not totally against instant coffee but we draw the line at people who prefer instant to proper coffee. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" .That suddenly sounds very general though. I've been on and off the forum for maybe 7 years now, to me the 'long timers' you refer to are more on the more politicised side (whether sexual or cultural or whatever). I think these particular inclusivity 'super novas' keep coming from different people who are typically in the 'new to a year' range. And they blow out. Sure some other people who have stuck with the forum often lend their support, but not all that many imo. And often it's in defence of the reaction they are seeing! Most people get philosophical on Fab in time. There is no harm defending someone when you see a reason to, it's entirely their prerogative. pt That's fair. I take your point and you have made it graciously. Perhaps I too will mellow out in time. I will readily admit that I have quite a reactionary response to overwhelmingly negative posts and my opinion above reflects accurately how I feel at the moment. I will try to be more open to a little growth and a touch of patience. Thank you. " Hey no worries. The OP did push this quite far in the end. I sometimes go an extra mile sometimes just for balance I think. pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" In short, the least inclusive group are the ones who are the least successful and complain the most. They call out both couples and single women for not meeting people they are not attracted to and they marginalise successful males as stereotypes based on arbitrary criteria." An excellent response. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean we’re not totally against instant coffee but we draw the line at people who prefer instant to proper coffee." Uh oh!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive in what way? I’ve read your other posts in the last 24hrs, and in that context I’m assuming you’re trying to say it’s not inclusive because you’ve not been successful? " That's exaclty how I read it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Have a lovely Sunday all, I am off down the pub. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean we’re not totally against instant coffee but we draw the line at people who prefer instant to proper coffee. Uh oh! "We’re obviously very middle class | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
, where we believe things can be made better. Much better to be specific about what you'd like and then get attention paid to it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fab needs to be more 'with the times' then inclusive. TS/TV needs to be removed and given its actual correct and non slur names. " This | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...TS/TV needs to be removed and given its actual correct and non slur names." • Which is/are...? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...TS/TV needs to be removed and given its actual correct and non slur names. • Which is/are...?" It is, upholding inclusivity by allowing individual genders to have their own categories. Transvestite's and Transexuals do not belong in the same category. Then there's the demi's. The asexual spectrum Other apps, like Feeld are already streets ahead. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive in what way? I’ve read your other posts in the last 24hrs, and in that context I’m assuming you’re trying to say it’s not inclusive because you’ve not been successful. I blame the instant coffee, we've all been outcast, my god dam coffee preference! Mrs This coffee division has to end. I like nothing more than an oat flat white made painstakingly slowly by a barista so hip I can barely look at them But I also love a good cup of instant and a biscuit. It's the 90's. It's my mother's house. And it's fast! I mean we’re not totally against instant coffee but we draw the line at people who prefer instant to proper coffee." I'm out. Mrs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...TS/TV needs to be removed and given its actual correct and non slur names. • Which is/are...? · It is, upholding inclusivity by allowing individual genders to have their own categories. Transvestite's and Transexuals do not belong in the same category. Then there's the demi's. The asexual spectrum Other apps, like Feeld are already streets ahead." • That descriptive ^ didn't answer my question. Oh well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...TS/TV needs to be removed and given its actual correct and non slur names. • Which is/are...? It is, upholding inclusivity by allowing individual genders to have their own categories. Transvestite's and Transexuals do not belong in the same category. Then there's the demi's. The asexual spectrum Other apps, like Feeld are already streets ahead. " I used to feel that re TS/TV but I think Fab have it OK now. Fab is a website too it's worth noting (both mobile and browser), it's not strictly an app. Feeld needs a huge update. The moment you 'like' someone you instantly cannot see or contact them unless they 'like back'! Feeld don't warn you though, so before you know it you've lost the chance to look properly, sort out your profile/pics or pre-contact etc. They won't change it so it keeps losing it's customers. People don't go back to it so they don't see their likes... it's self defeating, and its losing the really good publicity it had for a while. Personally I don't think it need Fab to be all that inclusive in it's categorising, though bisexual men can be top, bottom or versatile but they can't search that way on FS (yet can on FG) .... there are a few things they could iron out given that for Couples these things can matter. It is a swinging site after all, ie very couple orientated from its start. It might help if there was an umbrella term to tick for non binary people maybe. There was a thread that ended up (if not started out) mocking sapiosexuality the other day - a lot of people clearly don't understand the breadth of genuine sexuality out there. Some see a lot of newly-named sexuality as in-vogue people just being awkward or whatever, but of course its all been named because it genuinely exists and always has. It's all about dealing with minorities. I'm just not sure Fab needs the 'long list' though, but who knows what will happen in the future. It's a very fast and functional yet tight and limited platform (look at this forum) run per its budget according to them, so there might be some technical things it cannot do. pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP Are you coming back? Should I send a message from the thread? Do you think he might reply? Will he give his availability lol
"He had a good old laugh yesterday but that might be it for a bit. I'm hoping he actually scored from it! pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A brothel is probably more all inclusive if it’s a guaranteed shag you want without the other person having to actually like you or if you don’t want to put in the hard work needed to stand out from the other x thousands of guys on here." Don't brothels discriminate against the financially challenged | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean we’re not totally against instant coffee but we draw the line at people who prefer instant to proper coffee. Uh oh!
We’re obviously very middle class "Friends get so peeved with me when we meet for coffee and I ask for the nearest thing to instant  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I mean we’re not totally against instant coffee but we draw the line at people who prefer instant to proper coffee. Uh oh!
We’re obviously very middle class
Friends get so peeved with me when we meet for coffee and I ask for the nearest thing to instant
"So is Gold Blend mutton dressed as lamb? I could never work that out. pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No way !!!! Massive difference between a TS and cd/TV......they put us together no idea." It was done decades ago when the world was less aware in general. The problem is that they continue to not fix it. Cal | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" How is the view from your Ivory Tower .? A single bloke with vast success and many meet verifications sticking the boot in on other single blokes who haven't had their success comes across to me as a cheap shot. This is a perfect example of what I wrote above. Case in point." Lol exactly what I thought!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmm, well as noted by above posters, the fab site itself is inclusive as anyone can join so long as over 18. As for the forum - of course there will be groups/friends/regulars, as you find on any forum based site. It is just human nature. Nothing to take personally or be offended about. Swingers in general - well, no different than nonswinging people. You choose whom to connect with and whom you wish to sleep with. Just because a person may choose to partake in sex with multiple people doesn't mean they have to sex with every person who wants it. People always have the right to choose. It appears some men/people think Fab is a sweetie shop and once in you can just pick what you want and have it. In reality it is a free choice site and not a free sex site. It seems fairly reasonable to me really. MrsAbz " Excellent response! Love that - free choice not free sex Unfortunately some men and even couples on here do not respect a woman exercising her right to choose who they want to play with. Just because we love lots of sex or kinky sex doesn’t mean we will sleep with anyone. Some people might, and that’s cool too - if anonymous random sex is your kink, go for it! But I personally cant handle people who gets abusive or uppity because I specify choices and preferences. Not everyone will like everyone. That doesn’t mean I’m racist or homophobic or that Fab is not diverse - it just means some features and characteristics (unintentionally!) turn my brain and body on more than others | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No way !!!! Massive difference between a TS and cd/TV......they put us together no idea. It was done decades ago when the world was less aware in general. The problem is that they continue to not fix it. Cal " I think Fab use TS/TV (and no CD at that level) because it makes sense *sexually*, ie in terms of what people (often couples) tend to be looking for on here. People here often go for transexuals (TS's) or convincing transvestites (TV's) - often with their own full breasts but not always - but stop at 'part timers' (from half-decent CDs like me, to hairy men in the mrs' tights - or even ones nefariously posted by someone else's hubby  ).
If they want someone with a working penis (not a post-op transexual or transwoman obviously) they express that. I get that there is quite a big potential difference here, but in terms of being dedicated to what they are (and feeling like a woman or actually becoming a transwoman) I think the gap between TV and CD is larger than the gap between TV ans TS. On Fab at least. A lot of TV's here very-much associate with womanhood, and are just closer to TS's than CDs on here to me. Penis and boobs or no, gender just seems to factor on Fab.
I just wish Fab would provide a dedicated a forum, whatever they decide to call it. TS/TV (or 'TS and TV' perhaps?) would be fine with me fwiw. As a CD I'd just come along.
Ok....
Just a TV forum?
(TS and CD can just blend?  )
Politically-speaking - and as 'involved people' on Fab often infer without tending to fully express it (which is frustrating to a lot of interested people I think) - the argument would be for Fab to have just a TV thread and let TS people just blend into the community as many if not most of them wish to anyway. CD's could just blend too, as before (and of course we all use the Lounge etc anyway I may as well add.)
 Here's a thing: some fully-transitioned people no-doubt sign up to Fab as women.
So would Fab keep their 'TS/TV' if they had a 'TV' (or 'Transvestite') forum?
If fully transitioned people are choosing either option why not? Transitioning though? Maybe 'TS' on a sexual-preference site I think most people would say. So choice is good here I think.
As I've said, I think Fab has settled for what it has for good reasons.
I think we do all need to understand that there are clearly some problems with ALL of these approaches. Some TVs feel they shouldn't have to fully transition to be trans, and even discount parts of their genitalia whilst keeping them. Those people might rather be called transwomen than transvestites, and colloquially as women too. They are very unlikely to sign-up to Fab as women though I'm sure.
Maybe that's why it's all so hard to express? 
This is a *real thing* for sure (only a genuine 'terf' would say otherwise), but it's just not a simple subject I'm afraid. Even though yes, we are all human
And of course, behind everything, is the deep-seated need of many people at large to protect concepts of traditional boundaries (such as the oldest fought-for Right there is), and the desire for many to ensure we correctly protect the long-term needs of young children too. *Surely though that doesn't have to factor though in terms of choosing between the labels TV and TS*? Sometimes quite-provocative people interrupt various threads with the word "woman" when nobody there has mentioned it at all! Be kind people, and sensible too 
Ironically we probably need the forum just to discuss the forum's name!
Sadly too-many ultimately-unhelpful fabbers (and worse  ) land in the relevant threads when they are posted into a more general forum. Being given a dedicated forum would engender a little more natural respect from them I feel. Also people could talk to each other in its various threads without being constantly interrupted by this kind of existential debate too.
I'm glad at least some of us have the courage  (and that's what it does take sadly) to properly spell out how they feel about this though, wherever their opinion lies. Nothing at all will change otherwise I fear.
pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No way !!!! Massive difference between a TS and cd/TV......they put us together no idea. It was done decades ago when the world was less aware in general. The problem is that they continue to not fix it. Cal " I think Fab use TS/TV (and no CD at that level) because it makes sense *sexually*, ie in terms of what people (often couples) tend to be looking for on here. People here often go for transexuals (TS's) or convincing transvestites (TV's) - often with their own full breasts but not always - but stop at 'part timers' (from half-decent CDs like me, to hairy men in the mrs' tights - or even ones nefariously posted by someone else's hubby ).
If they want someone with a working penis (not a post-op transexual or transwoman obviously) they express that. I get that there is quite a big potential difference here, but in terms of being dedicated to what they are (and feeling like a woman or actually becoming a transwoman) I think the gap between TV and CD is larger than the gap between TV ans TS. On Fab at least. A lot of TV's here very-much associate with womanhood, and are just closer to TS's than CDs on here to me. Penis and boobs or no, gender just seems to factor on Fab.
I just wish Fab would provide a dedicated a forum, whatever they decide to call it. TS/TV (or 'TS and TV' perhaps?) would be fine with me fwiw. As a CD I'd just come along.
Ok....
Just a TV forum?
(TS and CD can just blend? )
Politically-speaking - and as 'involved people' on Fab often infer without tending to fully express it (which is frustrating to a lot of interested people I think) - the argument would be for Fab to have just a TV thread and let TS people just blend into the community as many if not most of them wish to anyway. CD's could just blend too, as before (and of course we all use the Lounge etc anyway I may as well add.)
Here's a thing: some fully-transitioned people no-doubt sign up to Fab as women.
So would Fab keep their 'TS/TV' if they had a 'TV' (or 'Transvestite') forum?
If fully transitioned people are choosing either option why not? Transitioning though? Maybe 'TS' on a sexual-preference site I think most people would say. So choice is good here I think.
As I've said, I think Fab has settled for what it has for good reasons.
I think we do all need to understand that there are clearly some problems with ALL of these approaches. Some TVs feel they shouldn't have to fully transition to be trans, and even discount parts of their genitalia whilst keeping them. Those people might rather be called transwomen than transvestites, and colloquially as women too. They are very unlikely to sign-up to Fab as women though I'm sure.
Maybe that's why it's all so hard to express?
This is a *real thing* for sure (only a genuine 'terf' would say otherwise), but it's just not a simple subject I'm afraid. Even though yes, we are all human
And of course, behind everything, is the deep-seated need of many people at large to protect concepts of traditional boundaries (such as the oldest fought-for Right there is), and the desire for many to ensure we correctly protect the long-term needs of young children too. *Surely though that doesn't have to factor in terms of choosing between the labels TV and TS*? Sometimes quite-provocative people interrupt various threads with the word "woman" when nobody there has mentioned it at all! Be kind people, and sensible too
Ironically we probably need the forum just to discuss the forum's name!
Sadly too-many ultimately-unhelpful fabbers (and worse ) land in the relevant threads when they are posted into a more general forum. Being given a dedicated forum would engender a little more natural respect from them I feel. Also people could talk to each other in its various threads without being constantly interrupted by this kind of existential debate.
I'm glad at least some of us have the courage (and that's what it does take sadly) to properly spell out how they feel about this though, wherever their opinion lies. Nothing at all will change otherwise I fear.
pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" So is Gold Blend mutton dressed as lamb? I could never work that out. pt" Ha! Possibly. I’m more of a Nescafé girl myself. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"...TS/TV needs to be removed and given its actual correct and non slur names. • Which is/are...?" Transgender is the term used for anyone who isn't cis gender. Lumping ts in with cd is a harmful stereotype also. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fab as a web site is very inclusive. Anyone over 18 can join free of charge and if they abide by the rules can post pictures, send messages and contribute to the forum. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No way !!!! Massive difference between a TS and cd/TV......they put us together no idea." If someone identified as a woman 24/7, wouldn't they just put woman though. I always assumed the TS/TV label, was for anyone who didn't identify as a woman 24/7 tbh, that their dressing was for sexual reasons not gender. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No way !!!! Massive difference between a TS and cd/TV......they put us together no idea. If someone identified as a woman 24/7, wouldn't they just put woman though. I always assumed the TS/TV label, was for anyone who didn't identify as a woman 24/7 tbh, that their dressing was for sexual reasons not gender." Its a difficult one. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No way !!!! Massive difference between a TS and cd/TV......they put us together no idea. If someone identified as a woman 24/7, wouldn't they just put woman though. I always assumed the TS/TV label, was for anyone who didn't identify as a woman 24/7 tbh, that their dressing was for sexual reasons not gender." That can be dangerous for transgender people though. There have been cases of trans people getting murdered in some cases for 'misleading' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fab as a web site is very inclusive. Anyone over 18 can join free of charge and if they abide by the rules can post pictures, send messages and contribute to the forum. " This
Fab is inclusive.
People sometimes aren't.
Same as the big wide world.
Expecting otherwise would be both naive and futile and will cause little more than frustration and disappointment.
As always, if people aren't enjoying life on site then the door is always open. Nobody is forced to be here. Nobody has to be here. Why do something that makes you unhappy rather than just stop? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive? Thinking ALL women are slags on here and are begging for single men when they are married! Could this be the issue ? "You might be on to something here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive? Thinking ALL women are slags on here and are begging for single men when they are married! Could this be the issue ? "You mean they aren’t?
Admin: can I have a refund on my site supporter fee?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aside from the fact that it doesn’t make sense - the “least inclusive” lumpenproletariat doesn’t exclude people, they are the ones who are excluded I think you may find a lot of people from this category are exclusively looking for women to meet with one-on-one. So yes, they are excluding couples, men, TVs, swinger socialising, clubs, gangbangs, parties, and in general all the things a swinger site stands for, which is ultimately about sharing sexual expression with multiple others. I wonder if that’s true? My take is that they would meet anyone for anything. Interesting point though " The vast majority of my messages are from single men and couples who want a one on one meet and only on their terms. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also, no. The site’s never going to be inclusive whilst it only allows for two genders and lumps both binary and non-binary trans people in with cross dressers. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Inclusive? Thinking ALL women are slags on here and are begging for single men when they are married! Could this be the issue ? " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also, no. The site’s never going to be inclusive whilst it only allows for two genders and lumps both binary and non-binary trans people in with cross dressers. " .Fab puts trans (as TS) with TV and keeps 'CD' as a category though. Trans is a more common term now than TS I have to say. Another issue for the mix I guess. A lot of TVs (if not most of them) see themselves as a lot more than just 'cross dressers'. I tried to deal with that in my post above. It's not easy as JennyTV says, so it wasn't super-short I know.. Also (re the danger post), any confusion-related danger for a transperson who wants to join Fab as a woman, can surely be got around by including the information (transwoman perhaps?) in their profile and messages? I'm sure Fab is the best place in life really to fully hide (or ignore, forget, disregard etc..) such a potentially compounding thing regarding sexual specifics. So best to say. pt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP Are you coming back? Should I send a message from the thread? Do you think he might reply? Will he give his availability lol "I am just back from serving 48 hours on the naughty step for airing my dirty laundry in public. I like the way you turn my absence into a cry to bait the regular posters and poke fun at a mistake I think manny Fabbers have made them selves. Having been able to reflect on the subsequent posts I think my original question is and has been justified. There is a massive disconnect between what the members of the TNBi/ LGBTQ+ community understand as tolerance and what the binary ones among us believe. But I’m back. How can I help you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP Are you coming back? Should I send a message from the thread? Do you think he might reply? Will he give his availability lol
He had a good old laugh yesterday but that might be it for a bit. I'm hoping he actually scored from it!
pt"Funnily enough I did. Got me seen and had some real help with creating a new profile. Thanks to all the positive help I received from my friends. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP Are you coming back? Should I send a message from the thread? Do you think he might reply? Will he give his availability lol
I am just back from serving 48 hours on the naughty step for airing my dirty laundry in public.
I like the way you turn my absence into a cry to bait the regular posters and poke fun at a mistake I think manny Fabbers have made them selves.
Having been able to reflect on the subsequent posts I think my original question is and has been justified.
There is a massive disconnect between what the members of the TNBi/ LGBTQ+ community understand as tolerance and what the binary ones among us believe.
But I’m back.
How can I help you? "Welcome back I'm 17th in from your OP, and my question was Why do you think its not inclusive? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP Are you coming back? Should I send a message from the thread? Do you think he might reply? Will he give his availability lol
I am just back from serving 48 hours on the naughty step for airing my dirty laundry in public.
I like the way you turn my absence into a cry to bait the regular posters and poke fun at a mistake I think manny Fabbers have made them selves.
Having been able to reflect on the subsequent posts I think my original question is and has been justified.
There is a massive disconnect between what the members of the TNBi/ LGBTQ+ community understand as tolerance and what the binary ones among us believe.
But I’m back.
How can I help you?
Welcome back
I'm 17th in from your OP, and my question was
Why do you think its not inclusive?
"I think it’s is not as it could be. The opportunity to set your identity is limited and this naturally leans favouring binary identities. What do you think? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP Are you coming back? Should I send a message from the thread? Do you think he might reply? Will he give his availability lol
I am just back from serving 48 hours on the naughty step for airing my dirty laundry in public.
I like the way you turn my absence into a cry to bait the regular posters and poke fun at a mistake I think manny Fabbers have made them selves.
Having been able to reflect on the subsequent posts I think my original question is and has been justified.
There is a massive disconnect between what the members of the TNBi/ LGBTQ+ community understand as tolerance and what the binary ones among us believe.
But I’m back.
How can I help you?
Welcome back
I'm 17th in from your OP, and my question was
Why do you think its not inclusive?
I think it’s is not as it could be. The opportunity to set your identity is limited and this naturally leans favouring binary identities.
What do you think? "With that specific topic I'm not as knowledgeable as I'd like so will not comment, I do think that in other areas of the fab universe its inclusive such as being able to write the specifics of what the person wants from the site | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
