A Moral Question (92)

Actually, although what PLM has said could be considered robust, she hasn't broken the AUP at all. She hasn't called you a name. The AUP says...

However, you may not use IC to call other users names ("you're a twat!")

In the same way that we would not say that a pro dom who chooses to sub in her private life, or also works as a pro sub needs to let a client know this, then a TG Mistress could argue that as she is today represents how she is.

I think this question does have has an ethical dimension in terms of how one operates professionally and also about self disclosure in general. How transparent must a pro dom be about other aspects of their lifes that would not immediately be apparent during a session but would, had the client had the information up front, would have resulted in them not being booked?

I have known a couple of submissive males who only found out later that the pro dom they sessioned with was TG. In a few cases I have been asked if a pro dom was born female. Aware of the individual's status, this put me in the difficult position of not responding, or I would be either be forced to lie or to out the individual in question. My silence has of course spoken volumes as the usual response would be 'no, whatever made you think that?'.

The sub males in question have either not wanted to session with TGs or have had mixed feelings about their experience (mostly negative). I feel the preferences of the client should be to the fore, when they book a pro dom session. They are the ones paying, a not inconsiderable sum of money, and have many reputable doms to choose from. As it would be likely to cause offence to actually ask if the stunning woman they are contemplating serving used to be a man, I don't think the onus should be on the client to have to ask this question.

I can only imagine that a ts pro-dom or pro sub does not reveal their status that they either ardently want to feel as they would if born female. They would rather not refer to the past, which no longer has a meaning to them in terms of identity. In much the same way as a well known pro dom does not say on her site she worked exclusively as a pro sub for a number of years and married her master. Also, presumably some clients would not be looking to be advised on what makes dom woman tick by someone who used to be male or do not what to spank the naughty schoolgirl who may have been at their boys school alongside them!

I wouldn't use the word 'immoral' if a TG does choose not to reveal their status, after all legally they are not obliged to, but I would suggest that it is misguided and ill advised to conceal their history, due to the possibility of detection by the client. However, I sympathise with the difficulty of doing this when it relates to a life that may be now long behind them and which they could consider does not have a bearing on the current situation or the way they deliver a session. In the same way that we would not say that a pro dom who chooses to sub in her private life, or also works as a pro sub needs to let a client know this, then a TG Mistress could argue that as she is today represents how she is.