Skip to main content

two little problems

The Blanchardians have two problem areas to contend with that weaken their cause. These involve the early years as well as the later ones in the life of a transgender person.

If they want to prove that being transgender is rooted in sexual perversion they need to establish that arousal is present at all phases otherwise their argument doesn’t really work.

The excerpt from J Michael Bailey’s book I included in my recent blog posting contained a reference to a 3 year old getting a chubby when looking at a woman’s clothing catalogue. This sounds pretty dubious as a start and certainly doesn’t correlate with any personal experience before I hit puberty. I suspect it doesn’t resonate with most of you either.

The other major issue they have is that if gynephilic transsexuals are strictly driven by sexual arousal why don’t they regret their decision to transition once the sexual engine has been greatly diminished. After all, nothing gives you a cold shower like a dosage of female hormones in that they shrink your equipment as well as greatly reducing libido.

Like the aforementioned randy toddler scenario they start doing cartwheels to try and explain it in their writings but fail quite spectacularly.

Conversely, if the dysphoria comes first then what we might be witnessing is a warping of the sexuality of gynephilics due to its effects. This means that the burgeoning sexual feelings of the child will impact the approach to their dysphoria depending on whether they are heterosexual or homosexual with the former doing their best to suppress and the latter looking to embrace since their internal sense of gender aligns with their sexuality. However even this distinction seems to be shifting somewhat with the newer generation of transgender people.

Interesting stuff and neither the Blanchardians nor I have conclusive proof for our arguments although I tend to think mine sounds more plausible because it would help explain what we actually see in the real world. At least I don't pretend to state that my argument is based on science because that doesn't actually exist yet.

The fact is that the regret percentage between homosexuals and heterosexuals who transition is about the same which doesn’t correlate with what this clan is trying to tell us.

Comments

  1. Very well said. I certainly never got a chubby (love that word!) when in kindergarten I preferred playing with the girls, nor when I watched tv and studied the female actors so carefully because I wished I could participate in her experiences, nor when I perused women's clothing catalogs in grade school. The Blanchard people clearly came to a conclusion then looked for "facts" to support it, and discarded anything that didn't fit. And then they had the gall to represent it is as science.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Emma your experience is typical of the transgender people I know in that your childhood was devoid of sexual overtones. They only appeared at puberty and even then at our dismay which only contributed to our self rejection.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No chubby's for me at 4 years old when I dressed in my mom's dress, put on her red lipstick, and declared to my retired Coast Guard Captain grandfather that I was a little girl.

    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…