Skip to main content

a wonderful read

I have rarely seen a better analysis of Autogynephilia than what is contained on the website of Clare Flourish and I strongly recommend that you read it for yourself. The logic is sound and clear as a bell and the text is wonderfully written.

Clare has come to exactly the same conclusion that I did some time back.

The text can be found here


Profile picture

Comments

  1. I contend that the whole Blanchard theory and movement pushing it (Bailey, Bradley, Zucker, Raymond, et al) is an ideology, not a scientific theory.

    They started from two main tenets:
    "any sexual activity not directly, or as part of preparing for, heterosexual mating was wrong'. They came to this from two main directions: firstly eugenics, that offshoot of evolutionary theory, secondly religion.
    "transitioning MtF is the worst possible outcome for a person and society and has to be prevented". Though they never have adequately explained why this is so, but there are many quotes by them that state this.

    My read on this comes from a deep misogyny by them.

    At the core there is an implied misogyny, females as merely passive sexual receptors for 'masculine' males. They repeat this in their 'studies' all the time. such as females can NEVER have a sexual paraphilia. All women, except a few lesbians, are bisexual. females never have sexual fantasies about themselves (and hence trans men cannot have ‘autorandrophilia’)....and so on.

    While they all started off as anti-gay ‘researchers’ (despite several of them being gay) with all sorts of ideas on how to prevent it (sissy boy syndrome and all the rest) their ideology combined with their deep misogyny created an incredible hatred of trans women.

    The Blanchard 'theory' is a perfect vehicle for this ideology. It enables all trans women to sexualised and hence marginalised and dismissed. It deals only with hated (by them) trans women.

    The development came over a decade or so. The effeminate boy and adult was long a target for them in their attempts to work out ways of preventing homosexuality. This naturally extended to transsexuals which, in their view, were just ‘extreme’ effeminate gay males.
    Their problem was all those (by the early 80s even increasing) transsexuals who were female attracted, or bisexual or worse asexual. Which blew their long cherished ideas out of the water.

    Along comes Blanchard and (pinching ideas form all over the place and massaging data) came up with ‘Autogynephilia”. A perfect ideology that could not be proven wrong.

    It fitted the prejudices of the times perfectly and allowed the gatekeepers, right up until the late 1990s, to deny the majority of transgender people the tools (HRT/GRS/etc) to transition.

    Mission accomplished as far they were concerned, create a moral/ideological/social environment that minimised, as far as they could, people transitioning and keep them marginalised. In this they were essentially following Jefferies in ‘morally mandating transsexuality out of existence’.

    Everything they did and currently do is aimed at this goal.

    The very language they use , the misgendering, the sexualisation,, their continual allusions to ‘deception’, the endless statements about being ‘mentally ill’, the very denial of ‘gender identity’, their tacit, passive and now even active support for TERFs, organisations like NARTH, religious organisations and all the rest.
    When the US Family Council quotes Zucker (for example) about how to prevent children from becoming transgender …and even gay …. and he does not cry out from the roof tops decrying the use of his work by such extreme groups.. well what can you say.
    When a couple of them explicitly support TERF groups…well again what can you say….
    When they attack trans activists by misgendering them and sexualising them…..
    Their endless fight to retain reparative therapy for trans children and deny them acceptance (plus puberty blockers, etc)…..
    Their questionable professional ethics (such as remote diagnosing)…..
    Their also questionable competency, such as Bailey, apparently, being unaware of the standard use of T blockers in HRT, or the lack of follow up studies on the 650+ gender variant children that have gone through CAMH over the decades….

    Fortunately they are disappearing, but the damage they caused ..even the suicides they are responsible for….

    ReplyDelete
  2. Things happened for a reason so be thankful for everything. Thank you for your wonderful article. I hope you could inspire more people. Please visit my site.

    triciajoy.com

    www.triciajoy.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. I really enjoyed reading your article. I found this as an informative and interesting post, so i think it is very useful and knowledgeable. I would like to thank you for the effort you have made in writing this article.


    edupdf.org

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

prejudice disguised as objective rectitude

So here is Professor Jordan Peterson perhaps justly calling out the excesses of political correctness gone mad. But then he extends it to not indulging transgender people the basic dignity of being addressed in their preferred pronoun. To do so for him would cost nothing and to stand on literal principle seems to serve little use other than to send a message of disdain.

If you have transitioned or even live as the opposite gender is costs me nothing to address you in your preferred pronouns. What difference does it make to me and what am I trying to tell you when I don't?

Peterson wants to stand on his rights to call reality what it is except that in this case the exact objective escapes me. But of course the right wing Federalist is in love with him because he calls a spade a spade.

If I see a rock I can call it that but then the rock doesn’t have any feelings. To address a transgender woman "her" and "she" is not undermining my rights as a person in any way b…

"Oh please its 2016!"

I have mentioned before that I have a lovely young couple living above the unit next to mine. Well the other day as I was getting in the door, she and I overlapped for the first time with me dressed as a woman.

We had a nice conversation and at some point I mentioned the obvious which was that I had told her future husband that they might see me in a different guise from time to time so they wouldn't wonder about who the strange woman was. She just looked at me almost rolling her eyes while smiling from ear to ear and said:

"Oh Please it's 2016!"

For the record she was also very complementary regarding my choice of attire.

I could care less at this point in my life what people think but it is still lovely to see the millennial generation's freedom of spirit and acceptance so lacking in previous generations. Yes they have their own foibles, as does every generation, but this area certainly isn't one of them.

the pseudoscience behind gender dysphoria

The real science as to what causes gender dysphoria still awaits.

Harry Benjamin was on to something except he didn’t have the scientific evidence to back up his suspicions hence, like a true scientist, he negated to draw conclusions. His hunch, based on treating so many patients over his lifetime, was that one is born with a predisposition to be gender dysphoric.

However, with inconclusive brain scans and no DNA marker (as of yet) we are left with believing the word of people who need help and only want to lead happy and productive lives.

The best we have been able to muster since Benjamin's death in 1986 was to amass statistics on who gets a boner imagining themselves as a woman which is in equal parts pathetic and disappointing. For this is not really science at all but is instead playing with interview data that doesn't point to anything definitive or conclusive. I have dealt with this problem at great length in my blog.

The whole thing started with Kurt Freund's obses…