Posted

Having a month long poll for allowing Transwomen.

Moderation Profile

Posted by Douggy510 2026-05-03 18:13

I would like to kindly ask for a real long month long poll to see where people really stand on this. Because I don't think a week or 2 would do such a big thing justice that would drastically change things. In the past each polling did go up for those who wanted Transwomen post op. So to make it fair in 2 ways this time I would like to see a longer poll and also place a point of concede where if the poll result swings past a threshold for the Transwomen, it would be honored even if NO is the highest still. Cause logic behind it is that if so many want them. it would be worth the upset to the NOs. It'd be recoverable. Example would be if No has 60% and Yes has 50% that would be a fair spread for saying ok the Yes broke 50% so let's go for it. What with voting shenanigans that may happen and stuff.

Comments (17)

Going back and looking the first Poll had 70% No 22% Yes. That was a stern No. But when the Poll was done a second time it was 65% No 34% Yes. Still a clear No but there was a noticable difference. Even in the comments there was less hate the 2nd time around. Also if you include the Yes, but with no penis, then you start seeing that the clear No gets a bit less clear even more. Those were only "week" long polls.

Posted by Douggy510 2026-05-03 19:19

If this idea gets more than 20 upvotes and the number of downvotes is less than half the upvotes, we will post a new poll. I doubt that will happen.

Posted by Pryda Admin 2026-05-03 20:36

Should it get close to that, we will evaluate who has voted and exclude accounts that appear to be made for this poll. Just to stop you from having the idea, Douggy510 ;)

Posted by Pryda Admin 2026-05-03 20:38

I am confident people will want a real poll that is done up right and a month long instead of just a week. I seen people try to add Transwomen just lately. The want is there and people are going to continue to try and slip one past the detector so to speak.

Posted by Douggy510 2026-05-03 21:24

So the thinking here is that if you have enough polls the No side will get tired of voting and you will win? That's not how polls should work.

Posted by Pingupop 2026-05-20 20:00

If the 23rd chromosome is xy the individual is not a woman and therefore can't be a babe.

We've already done polls that said no to trans there is no reason to do another. If you desire to look at trans there are other sites you can go to. There is no reason to include trans here as they are not and never can be a babe as they are not women. That's a very simple biological fact. And, since biology is a "hard" science (objective tests and objective results) it takes precedence over subjective flights of fancy that say that males can actually be females.

Personally I say no to include trans in Babepedia.com.

And I do believe that the OP is hoping that if he gets enough polls run that eventually the "No's" will get tired of voting and that trans will then be allowed.

Posted by Reddog44 2026-05-20 22:22

I've done a bit of a cleanup in the comments section here to keep the discussion on track.

Posted by Pryda Admin 2026-05-23 03:15

Maybe start a separate Babepedia-like website? People who don't like trans will not be confronted with their pages on here and the people who do like trans still get a "transpedia" with the same options/layout provided here on Babepedia. Heck, maybe Pryda et al. even like to do or help with this sister website.

Posted by Miraak11th 2026-05-25 00:04

Miraak11th I've been thinking this same thing for over a fortnight, I was about to say it here, Someone already did it hahaha.

It's kinda the best option you know. All the things said, plus, people that don't like shemales would probably downvote shemales to 1 or 2, just for the fact of being a shemale.

Posted by reydelfuego1 2026-05-25 15:26

You can polish a piece of glass until it's brilliant, but it's still not a diamond. It's just glass. Changing the appearance doesn't change what it is. I understand people have differences of opinion and I fully support that; people can like whatever they wanna like. But me personally, I have no interest in looking at guys no matter how pretty they try to make themselves appear. To each his own. I would fully support the idea of a separate 'Transpedia' site as mentioned by Miraak11th. I'd never go to it, but I have no problem with people who are into that having a place for their own likes. I see no need to have them mixed together in the same site, though.

Posted by jeffyb69 2026-05-25 15:47

Terrible idea... this is Babepedia, keyword "Babe", not "Kayfabe".

Posted by LeLoyon71 2026-05-26 03:56

I'd be perfectly fine with a 2nd site. I'd even help with it.

Posted by Douggy510 2026-05-26 08:47

Creating a 2nd site for trans women is not something we're considering, but if someone is interested in doing it and serious about it, send us an email.

Posted by Pryda Admin 2026-05-26 18:44

Nope

Posted by Daedalus56476 2026-05-27 10:33

If trans people are allowed ... I think the name won't be "Babe"pedia anymore...

Posted by evilyvan 2026-05-31 17:34

Hunter Schafer is definitely a babe imo

Posted by vicdic 2026-05-31 21:14

NO.
It doesn't matter if you "define" yourself something. If you attach to yourself a rotor blade you don't become assault helicopter - and no, I don't think we need another tag for that.

Boobpedia, despite it's name lists mainly bigger sizes. Even if I might not agree with them having such preference I won't petition a name change to "bigboobpedia" , or "bigboobonlypedia", nor will I demand including Gina Gerson or Keira Knightley there. It's just is what it is. So kindly please, leave "Babepedia" as it is, too.

Posted by Kwaq 2026-06-01 08:31