American Ladyboy or just pretty?

I know him.
He is just a pretty gay dude. Not a ladyboy or TG.

He seems just pretty.

But let me ask you, when he sent this pics to you, did you ask him if you could use them on this board? I would in fact be very annoyed if I found a pics of myself, having sent it in private, on any board.
If you have not asked him, it is lack of respect of the guy to make it public here.
Brandon this is not only a respond to you, but I have felt it many times before.
Even guys and girls working in the sex for money industri, or freelancers, should be given some privacy.

[elephantspike]

Hansi makes a good point, Brandon. If these pics were sent to you privately, you shouldn't post them without his permission.

I don't have a rule etched in stone about this, as there is so much grey area. Obviously you can post pictures of famous people without their permission, but on the other side of the scale, we've had posters who've posted pictures of other posters without their permission just out of malice.

These are squarely in the middle of the grey area, I'd say, so I'll leave it "up to you".

[Dodger]

Pretty, no doubt, but more masculine looking than the average Thai ladyboy.

According to my ladyboy BF, Thai ladyboys fall into two distinct categories. Category one, is what he desribes in his somewhat limited english vocabulary, as "gay ladyboys," and category two are "true ladyboys." Gay ladyboys are fem, either dress like a boy or a girl, and usually prefer the bottom role, although are versatile and sometimes enjoy the top role. True ladyboys, again, based on his description - not mine, only enjoy the bottom role, prefer having sex (and relationships) with heterosexual or bi-males, and see themselves as being 100% female.

IMO...(and I can hear the doors slamming now), a true Thai ladboy (referred to as Phet Thee Som - or Third sex) is the most beautiful creature on the planet, including Thailand.

OK...I'm otta here !

[MARK]

Re photos boys when I first did my web sight I took photos of the boys in the bar with out thinking after the sight was up and running a few boys asked me to take there pictures off which I did at once, now I all ways ask the boys if they want there picture on the web sight or not. Silly thing for me to do and not showing much respect for not asking :idea: :idea:

Hansi makes a good point, Brandon. If these pics were sent to you privately, you shouldn't post them without his permission.

I don't have a rule etched in stone about this, as there is so much grey area ..... so I'll leave it "up to you".

ES, with all due respect this appears to be a little at odds with the last statement I recall you making about the publication of people's photos without their permission (pictures-pictures-pictures-t14164.html?hilit=photo#p135733 (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/pictures-pictures-pictures-t14164.html?hilit=photo#p135733) ):

"OK, as a general rule, you can't post pictures of people without their permission. тАж.. I don't want to see photos and/or names posted without the permission of the subject in posts that publicize details about the subject's personal life тАж..."

I feel HansiThe2 has more than a good point. Brad the Impala summed up the problem very well in the link:

"However there are too many "eccentric" posters, with axes to grind, and bile to vent, to allow unsubstantiated allegations against named or photographed individuals to be posted. Just fair play only to have this restriction тАж"

In the link you referred a poster being "credible" as being a deciding factor in whether you would allow such photos or not - while we all have different ways of measuring credibility, I would have thought that "eccentric" would have been a more appropriate (and very generous) description of brandumb.

[elephantspike]

I don't see what it is that you think is "at odds" with waht I stated above:


Hansi makes a good point, Brandon. If these pics were sent to you privately, you shouldn't post them without his permission.

I don't have a rule etched in stone about this, as there is so much grey area. Obviously you can post pictures of famous people without their permission, but on the other side of the scale, we've had posters who've posted pictures of other posters without their permission just out of malice.

These are squarely in the middle of the grey area, I'd say, so I'll leave it "up to you".

and what I stated in the thread you liked to:




OK, as a general rule, you can't post pictures of people without their permission. I can't really tell if you have permission, especially if it is a face shot in an avatar or someone in the background in a group shot, but as long as it is a picture that doesn't denigrate the subject in any way, I'm going to assume that it is fine unless some credible party puts fourth a reasonable objection.

If you post pictures and/or names and accusations, it is definitely a really bad violation. That's the kind of stuff that can put this site out of business. Repeated violations on this one may result in banning.

I don't want to see photos and/or names posted without the permission of the subject in posts that publicize details about the subject's personal life, especially if it includes details that may be considered detrimental to the subject's reputation.

I'm trying to grant Thaiworthy some leeway in this matter, as I believe that his heart is in the right place, and that he genuinely is concerned about the welfare of this young man, but given what I have stated above, I need to ask Thaiworthy to please, please, voluntarily remove the photos of the young man in question, and especially those of his family. Those pictures make that thread go well into the Grey area (and probably beyond) of what is the general board policy as stated above.

It seems to me it is a restatement of the exact same policy applied in a somewhat different situation.