Miss Universe has a little secret...

Seachmall wrote: »

I see Miss Thailand taking it in 2013.

And 2014.

And 2015.

And 2016.

And...

Yes, Thailand is a great place for happy endings. They know how to rub and stroke people the right way.:D:D:D

It really doesn't matter what gender Ms. Universe currently is or has been. It's all meant as eye candy to be enjoyed at a distance and the chances of ordinary mortals like us ever touching one of them in reality, much less getting a god aul feel - is remote in the extreme. :)

CreepingDeath wrote: »

So he was surgically disguised as a woman to mask behavioural/self image problems. While that's up to him to do, doesn't mean the whole world has to play along with the charade.

On the other hand, Miss Universe is a physical beauty contest solely, so if she looks exactly like a woman on the outside, does it really matter if it might (might) be technically argued that she's still a man, and lacking female reproductive organs?

Also, I'm sad to admit that I'm so childish that when I see "Jelena Talackova" written out, my brain tells me it's "Jelena Tackle" for a second.

hondasam wrote: »

Did you see the pictures of Jenna Talackova,the contestant who was disqualified, she is a woman. She has had surgery and while not born a woman she is a woman now.

Quite correct. People in Ireland who have gone through the transgendering process can legally change their names, passports, driving licences and such.:) The John/Louise Hannon case before the Equality Tribunal last year attracted a lot of discussion in the media and online. Just because a Ms. Universe contestant was formerly a man is irrelevant, because today's techniques are so good. After all, the fact that they were once children does not make them any less adult.:)

As for those who shudder at the thought of "doing the business" with a transgendered woman, the reality is that they'd shag some of the better-looking ones for hours on end and notice nothing. How they'd feel afterwards if they ever found out is, of course, ceist eile ...:eek::eek::eek:

Seachmall wrote: »

If I got surgery to look like a giraffe, could I get employed at a petting zoo?



(I'd make a great giraffe by the way.)

Well, if you looked and acted exactly like a giraffe, then why not? I don't think the kiddywinks would be too bothered by your lack of giraffe organs.

CreepingDeath wrote: »

How far does that extend too ?
Men disguising themselves as women to compete in the Olympics?

It's "Miss" Universe for natural born women, not men in disguise.

If men who underwent transgender operations to become women retained superior strength and size (obviously not all men are bigger and stronger than women, but it's generally true) then that would be unfair.
If they lost these advantages, then it would probably be fine.

But I think overall it would be unfair to allow them to compete, as I'm pretty sure that the fact that the hormones injected as part of a procedure are determined by a doctor, and not by luck/genetic make up, would disallow transgendered athletes from major athletics events. Even though I'm sure they'd be given a "standard" amount of oestrogen etc which probably wouldn't give them any real advantage, the fact that they aren't competing with what they were born with would probably, and understandably, disqualify them.
I might be wrong on this though, other people would know more about it.

I don't see the problem with a transgendered Miss Universe contestant: it's not like they have much of an advantage.

RoverJames wrote: »

Sure the transgenders have been allowed in the Rose of Tralee with years.

Careful now.