Skip to main content

iron clad

I have no need or urge to revisit AGP as I have dealt with it at great length in this blog.

However, here is Felix Conrad using so much iron clad common sense and logic that it's hard for me to resist posting a link to his response to those still weighing its merits.

Yes your sexuality has been impacted so whether you transition or not, just make sure to be happy in the process and live your life. Remember that AGP is just a narrative and not science but I will let Felix explain that....

http://transcendmovement.com/if-youre-still-arguing-about-autogynephilia-you-dont-understand-it/


Comments

  1. I don't really care about Blanchard. For all intents and purposes his day in the sun is over. The issue for me with AGP (I use the name only because it's handy) relates to what Dara Hoffman-Fox wrote in the book "You and Your Gender Identity: A Guide to Discovery": many trans people in their soul-searching wonder, is it this (i.e., being trans) or only that (e.g., a fetish, the result of childhood trauma, etc.). I had plenty of childhood trauma and have also experienced dressing and feminization as erotic so it's no wonder I have wondered if I'm truly trans or not.

    I know that I am transgender and one way I dismiss those doubts is to remember that my trans feelings arose and were consistent for as long as I can remember, from age 3 or 4. I believe that these feelings acquired an erotic quality around their being the forbidden fruit. From that context it's entirely natural that I would experience fantasies and other erotic enjoyment. But that doesn't deny the fact that I am transgender whether or not I transition.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The AGP hypothesis can cause such internal distress because as the evolved organisms we are, our sexualities overpower us. Whatever portion of our subjectivity latches onto our biological urges will latch on tight and insist on our attention.

    And it can't help that earlier taxonomies drew a distinction between "cross dressers" whose gender variance entailed an erotic component, and transsexuals, whose gender variance was strictly about identity. Given the complexity of the human mind and human sexuality, such simple distinctions just can't be helpful. How many binaries must I reject in one lifetime?

    And it most certainly can't help that we in the Americas have descended from societies so uptight about Juan sexuality in the first place that anything outside the bounds of marital missionary-position sex has long been demonized and shamed.

    Some people born ostensibly reproductively male will identify as female. Some of those people will desire to alter their bodies. And some of those will find the thought of altering their bodies erotic, and that it becomes a part of their sexuality.

    Okay. So what? Those are just empirical facts. Divorced from our puritanical yet prurient culture, they're not al that troublesome.

    Ultimately, each of us just needs to figure out what will bring us peace and wellbeing, however we understand ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the problem was exactly what you have identified: the stigma associated with these realities as viewed from a societal perspective and not the realities themselves. From the vantage point of our puritanical society they stigmatized because no one wants to be viewed as abnormal or as an outcast. Yet the realities persist and must be accepted and repatriated because they won't be changed and the challenge then becomes acceptance.

      I like what Felix says in that no one has any bloody clue what makes one transgender so just make up your own narrative and go with it...

      Delete

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…