Transvestia

but unfortuantely the immense majority of TV's must support that feeling with appropriate externals in order to erase the BB looks nature gave us. As to the picture Kay sent me, I admit "the pose is not entirely lacking in feminine grace", but my question is: why do we find it necessary to put the query in the negative? I am sure that the very same picture and pose IN A DRESS would have been "fully endowed with feminine grace". I also refute the argument which many TV's use to dismiss non-feminine traits to the effect that there are many women who are worse than the TV in certain departments. I have a friend who is not bothered by his baritone voice because, "there is a woman in my neighborhood who has a deeper voice than I have." Why should we choose as models the defective GG's? Isn't it bet- ter to at least try to emulate the cream of the crop? If I may be allowed to bring up the subject of female impersonators, let us remember that on the stage they try to look their very best. They know that there is an audience watching and criti- cizing. So, when a TV dresses and goes to a TV party, or knows that he may be seen by the public in the street, or that he will be watched by TV wives, he most certainly has to contend with an audience. Shouldn't he do as much as the female impersonator on the stage, namely, to look his very, very best? So girls, wear slacks to your hearts' content (if that's what makes you feel feminine) when you are at home, alone!!!

As to bathing suits, I admit that I have two of them which I wear at the resort when I am alone. Only once did I pose in a bathing suit with two other TV's and I am still trying to track down that picture in order to destroy it. Susanna looked simply awful. There was too much of the BB showing. Of course I could rationalize, like some of my TV friends do, and say that there are some girls who have thinner thighs than Susanna. This ought to make me happy, right? But it DOES NOT! The pic- ture still makes me look terrible. I am honestly

50