Skip to main content

all that matters

When Ray Blanchard wrote his findings in his book in the late 1980's the world was a very different place and he was taking a snapshot of the society at the time and how transgender people fit into it. This means there were very few female to male transsexuals transitioning and the early and late onset pattern (essentially following the fault lines of androphilic and gynephilic orientation) appeared to be somewhat predictable.

Of course what has actually happened is that the new openness of today has begun to dismantle this simplistic model. Gynephilics are transitioning sooner and female to male transsexuals are far more visible.

What this suggests to me is that we are dealing with a spectrum rather than a rigid model and with AGP now debunked by the new generation of trans researchers and trans people themselves, we are seeing something closer to what Harry Benjamin proposed which itself was far from perfect.

If you permit me the use of archaic definitions for a moment, the old dividing line between transvestite and transsexual is even more blurred than ever showing us that trans people themselves have trouble self diagnosing. I have mentioned here recently that Benjamin would often get the diagnosis wrong and his type III transvestite would suddenly transition. Regardless both those definitions have fallen out of favour and are no longer used by today's generation.

So at the root we are back to the concept of what we call gender dysphoria which we don't really understand. To say otherwise would be being disingenuous.

In this spectrum concept you don't so much have fixed typologies but instead people dealing with their dysphoria differently depending on their circumstances; androphilics more readily transitioning because of the alignment with orientation and gynephilics resisting due to misalignment.

But the debates rage on because people need personal narratives to understand themselves and justify decisions they have made in life and when someone else's threatens yours it stirs the impetus for spirited discussion. The reason we go in circles is that we are missing data.

Is gender dysphoria real? You better believe it is and many who follow this blog have experienced its power.

The difference for me now is that my internal peace keeps me from needing to argue very vehemently any longer. All I need to know is that the evidence we seek is beyond our grasp; at least for the moment.

Comments

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…

looking past cross gender arousal

Jack’s latest Crossdreamers post got me thinking about cross gender arousal and how it could be avoided; also whether it even matters. This with particular focus on the inability to relate of someone on the outside looking in.

You see, sexuality is a very complicated thing to begin with and when you then add gender identity ambiguity it becomes a recipe to really confuse someone.

So imagine that you are a little boy who identifies as a girl but then along comes puberty and short circuits everything by having the sex you identify with also be the sex you are attracted to. For in essence this is what happens to all all male to female gender dysphoric trans persons who are attracted to women.

So I ask myself: can I imagine a scenario where this inherent contradiction would not produce sexual confusion? The answer is that I cannot.

I am in the unique position, like many of you, to have experienced an early identification with the feminine become sexualized later on. This brought confusion…

"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.