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

how times change

How times have changed.

Whereas transition was something not to even contemplate for us, here is a young trans person who felt the opposite pressure. She looks and sounds extremely passable but decided it wasn't for her despite the social media presence of young transitioners potentially inspiring her to.

We are all different and I happen to think she's rather a smart cookie as well...


indoctrination

As transgender people, organized religion hasn't really been our friend however on the other hand it has often had little to do with true spirituality. I needed to learn this over time and much of what I was taught growing up was steeped in the judgmental superstition of society instead of what some creator would demand of me.

Regardless of your belief system, you are a child of the universe and have been endowed with uniqueness and goodness of spirit. You have probably never wished anyone ill will and you have tried your best to live within the absurd coordinate system of humanity. Yet somehow belonging to the LGBT community was entirely your fault.

As I have grown older this inherent irrationality became increasingly evident to me. I knew I was a fundamentally good person and yet I was different in a way which was not of my choosing. Hence with this comprehension my self appreciation and esteem grew in proportion.

Religion for me today seems forever trapped in the misinterpretat…

let's please read carefully

This post is prompted by a recent comment I received to one of my older posts and I wanted to address it.

I used to wonder why some transgender people accepted Blanchard’s work until I think I figured out why: they may not have examined it closely enough. They would experience cross gender arousal and then accept it was Autogynephilia without properly understanding what the term meant and what the theory said: it is an invented sexual “illness” which makes people transition. In other words, it is the arousal itself which causes this desire and not a pre-existing gender identity which does not align with birth sex. Of course, Blanchard has no explanation for the origin of his proposed “illness” only that it is a form of sexual deviance.

My counter proposal? we transition despite this arousal. In other words, the transgender identity is pre-existing and the arousal is the result of the mismatching of burgeoning sexual feelings towards females and this misaligned identity; it is not per…