so, I like to wear women's clothes. I've been crossdressing since i was around 17 years old. I thought it was a fetish, that AGP shit that gets tossed around so often, because I'd jerk off and then be done with it
but, for the past couple of years, I've wanted to become a woman. I've tried to weigh out the negatives and positives and all that. and I'm pretty sure it's not worth it.
but here's the thing, I'm extremely suicidal, as in I've overdosed three times and been in a coma for a few days because of it.
should I continue living as a bearded man and just be stoic about this petty shit, or should I follow my dreams and be forsaken by my friends and family?
It sounds like things are coming to a head for you. Like, you're already killing yourself, not even just thinking about it.
Give your dreams a shot. Can't really out-stoic the trans.
Speaking of, check out all these claims about Ernest Hemingway that I haven't corroborated>>5601030
I'm mostly in the homosex threads, but whenever I see a thread like this, I kinda feel sorry for the OP. Some confused kid who started crossdressing for fap material, with a pretty normal life, now with the intense desire to drop hormones and get his dick chopped off, 3 years later. I'm just not sure what to say, but I feel like people aren't seeing the whole story of this.
They're suggesting that fetishes grouped under the "AGP" umbrella cause transgender feelings. It's a Freudian psychology theory that's been gaining popularity on /lgbt/ for the last several weeks.
There's not a lot to it, really, but it is very comforting to be able to blame porn, media awareness, some barely-conceived childhood trigger, or societal "degeneracy" for a condition more or less necessitating becoming a pariah for a time. It gives an answer to transgender feelings that is simple, requires little research or insight, and externalizes all cause. More, it provides the illusion that young people beginning to explore their identity and sexuality can be "scared" "straight", if only they abandon their exploration early enough. They'll allude to "the rabbit hole", and postulate a certain depth past which there is no return.
I think it's hooey, but that's completely irrelevant to your issue, OP. If you live in a place that is not actively hostile to trans persons, you are advised to seek a therapist to talk all this over with. Based on everything you've said, I suspect they'll recommend anti-depressants if you have none, and transition - sorry for the spoilers. The good news is, they'll be eager to offer any assistance you could want with explaining what you're going through to friends, family, and employers, and have a wealth of information resources on hand at various levels of detail and interest to distribute. They'll also be adamant about putting you in touch with other people and groups that can help make transition smoother, and less isolating. The anti-depressants will probably be forced on you, t b h, although the rest will go at whatever pace, if any, you're comfortable with.
Strongly advise against doing nothing and hoping for the best.
What feelings prompted your suicidal thoughts? Was it yourself or the world? Do you experience strong dysphoria? If so, is it constant?
If you experience strong, persistant dysphoria which is a primary cause of your suicidal tendency, AND you have a chance of passing, THEN transition is a good option. Otherwise, you need different therapy.
I don't suppose it's impossible. I'm just very unconvinced by it, especially after hearing and reading the testimonies of many self-identified "4-chan AGP" trans women. I'm not interested in saying "you're wrong about yourself"; even if it were so, I don't imagine that kind of hostility and presumption will help anyone.
Regardless how things look in reality, which none of us are equipped to perceive, the conflation of transgender feelings with sexual expression seems inevitable in some cases, given that about 43% of trans people only develop discomfort/clarity with regards to their greener identity at some point during puberty.
Do you suppose it's too unlikely, given our culture, for a person's (especially male) first gender-affirming experience to be a fantasy, sexual or otherwise? Would you be able to tell such a trans person apart from a hypothetical person who becomes trans as a consequence of those fantasies? The progression from there doesn't look dissimilar.
The one becomes more wrapped up in those sexual fantasies because they're the only affirming experiences they have, and orgasm feels good, the other becomes more wrapped up in their fetish because, as a proper fetish, they increasingly need it to get off, which feels great. The one begins expanding on their fantasy, conceiving of increasingly non-sexual scenarios to insert themselves in (as the other sex), and it becomes increasingly hard for reality to stack up with its lack of gender-affirmation. The other one expands on their fantasies, conceiving of increasingly non-sexual scenarios (that add depth to the fetish) and becomes fixated on and desirous of these fantasies whether or not sexual release follows.
I'd rather we research this than just fall back on Freudian emasculation-babble and some terminology looted from Blanchard, then call it a day, case closed. No replicable study points to a (statistically significant) sexual origin for transgender feelings.
So I hope you'll understand my reluctance to accept the universality, or even commonality, of the AGP-as-cause explanation. I can't deny the possibility, but its inability to prove itself and reliance on equally unprovable relics of psychotherapy make me deeply sceptical. It makes me wish I could live more lives so I could study more fields, though.
so what is your alternative provable categorization? the female-brained one, with evidence including the nebulous bstc study? if not, what?
regarding the "provable" aspect do you propose to throw out all psychology yet unsupported by neuroscience?
do you disregard the often wildly different self-identifications, behaviours, and life paths of self-described AGPs or fetishists and early or late onset transgenders?
>so what is your alternative provable categorization? the female-brained one, with evidence including the nebulous bstc study?
The evidence is very clear, its flaw is that it doesn't say much. "There is a likeness between these categories and these others, somewhere here" leaves us with strong evidence of a neurological element shared between those categories. The study lacks the what, but gives us a that and leads into the why.
>regarding the "provable" aspect do you propose to throw out all psychology yet unsupported by neuroscience?
Hardly. But if your hypothesis can only ever be found accurate by you and your disciples in one location on Earth, it's unworthy of recognition as an explanation for a general psychological phenomenon. "4-chan AGP" has less than that, and I give it the credence that deserves.
>do you disregard the often wildly different self-identifications, behaviours, and life paths of self-described AGPs or fetishists and early or late onset transgenders?
Hardly. How a person comes to understand themselves has a significant impact on how they express that, and the resultant life experience that follows produces further divergence. The path of a modern young transitioner embraced by their family, supported by medicine, and largely accepted within their community is as different as the path of a modern late transitioner jumping through hoops and playing to the whims of their NHS representatives for years without satisfaction of their needs have some of the same landmarks on them, but they're as alien to one another otherwise as you'd expect.
Why would I expect someone who came to a more holistic understanding of their gender identity early to follow the same path as a person whose only, *shameful* release was sexualized for years on end? Why would I expect them to reach the same conclusions about who they are, even when their feelings are very similar?
The point is that the evidence for the "acceptable" current theory is very slim itself - the whole scientific basis of transgenderism is very weakly supported. Essentially
>we have a few guesses as to what might cause some cases, but really we don't know. what we do know is that in the meantime these treatment protocols appear to help
I think pejoratively using "disciples" is unnecessary and part of the reason why it's instantly discredited. Frankly, a fetishistic cause for SOME cases of transgenderism or a related, possibly yet unnamed disorder is not even allowed to be considered. It's rejected purely on the fact that many people don't like the idea of it. This is one reason why we need to talk about it, because only by discussion can we ever hope to have some real study. It is already seen how the brain can change form based on habits and how some fetishes can cause some people to do quite unusual things. I don't see how it's unreasonable to suggest that an AGP-like fetish could behave similarly.
Many people have given the very idea of a fetish an extreme negative moral value. Even the often reviled Blanchard was merely attempting to categorize, not to insult; to understand, not to deny care. That is the fault of therapists or doctors, who decided that anyone who exhibited fetishistic characteristics ought to be denied any form of treatment. This is a holdover that I think is one cause of the stigmatization of "fetishism," and we hope to tear that down.
>early vs late
Yes, I agree that upbringings can lead to some differences, but I think you miss the point. Acknowledging differences in early and late ONSET (i.e. not when treatment began, when a trans identity was clear) and andro- and gynephilia trans people is not a value judgment. It's not saying one is better, more trans, more deserving of care, more real than any other.
Categorization is simply that; categorization helps in the search for the best way to deal with troubled people. The same treatments and therapy for people in one category may not be the best for people in another.
This is the ultimate issue - how can we learn more in order to best help clearly troubled individuals? Lumping in fetishist-like "possible trans" people with every other type doesn't help. These people do not identify with more mainstream narratives (and no, I don't mean solely TruTrans (TM)) and trying to force them into them is unproductive and harmful. I don't see much difference in telling these people they are just repressed, in denial, deluded, whatever transwomen than telling a "standard" transwoman 50 years ago that she's just a deluded and repressed gay man.
I don't think that demanding these people try to identify with narratives that they simply can't relate to is helpful, while another exists that brings them together with other people who suffer from similar problems. I don't think it is helpful to artificially claim that the "acceptable" categorizations are founded on rock solid evidence while these "fringe" theories are just ramblings and nonsense when in reality very little knowledge exists. Accordingly, if you really want to help these people I would urge you not to insult and to argue with their narratives and to suggest that they are deluded. If you truly believe that they fall in the same category as the mainstream trans narratives, I would urge you to encourage them to consider the possibility and to maybe seek therapists (however, I believe that they are largely unsympathetic to nonstandard narratives, and this is supported by several anecdotes of poor therapists. unfortunately, it's difficult to determine beforehand which therapists may be more open-minded). If your goal isn't to help them, then just stop tbh fam.
Personally I think media represents what the masses of people think and want, even if they're unwilling to say it. Fashion models are the way they are because men and women both want that fantasy, even if the reality of the fantasy is awkward. So I think media is a representation of what is already there, otherwise why indulge in it?
Weird shit exists in all people, it's whatever. The main issue I think is that people fail to see a connection with testosterone and its effect on the mind of trans women. I'm no doctor (yet at least kappa) but what I'm getting at is testosterone does things mentally to you. A mind is an abstract concept, the brain is the actual engine by which we run. We all like to pretend mind and body aren't interconnected but they are vastly connected, to the point I think we can't escape our own genetics.
In summary of these two ideas, I think that people are confusing correlation with cause, and possibly cause with effect. Indulging in these kinds of fantasies might be a likely result of being trans rather than transitioning being a result of the former. There is not enough research to conclude anything at the moment either way though, as with most things argued over.
No. Again, if his students, as you prefer, step outside his facilities, it becomes impossible for them to reproduce the results of his research. It has been attempted on more than one occasion. It's irrelevant that he was simply categorizing, his categorical distinctions cannot be reproduced. They may exist, but his reasons for believing they exist have been *proven* inconclusive via this process. I don't mind you tearing down the stigma around fetishism, but don't use discredited studies as part of your basis for it.
Since that leaves you with precisely no evidence, not "weak" evidence, I feel more than content offering alternate explanations. You can claim to belong to this category, but as soon as you start declaring that other people do, again, with absolutely no evidence supporting you in it, it deserves to be suspect. Whether the category be AGP or other. This is why it's rejected as something you are working constantly to subscribe other people to, thread after thread, and with the full support of every troll and all, unsurprisingly.
I've heard the AGP narratives. Many times. Whether it be Dr Anne Lawrence claiming a near-identity between our condition or amputation-fetishists seeking to increase their access to amputees by crippling themselves, or be it a channer boldly claiming that "most trans people are just sissy fetishists who took it too far", you need to stick to telling your stories and letting others connect with them, and back the hell off with all this dictating other peoples' stories to them. Because that's what I object to, and that's why I demand you have better support for your categories. If you like your box, fine. If you want to shove other people into it, prove you've got a damn box.
Way to go, fixate on the Blanchard name and ignore everything else just like every other moron on this board. Keep that in mind if you ever want to derail a thread.
Again, evidence can never be found if the very idea is too "offensive" to be deemed worthy of investigation.
>you need to stick to telling your stories and letting others connect with them, and back the hell off with all this dictating other peoples' stories to them
You first! I can't believe you don't recognize the irony. I never try to force someone into a narrative they don't identify with, but you do it in every single fucking thread, and I can tell because you're always posting with your attention-whore code. You're the one shoving people into boxes.
I didn't ignore the rest of your post, it just lacked any substance.
As for prescribing others' identities, you're free to claim I do it; I have a trip you can trace it all back to. But I expect you'll find I, with regularity, suggest further consideration and support over taking a label and living with it. I've probably messed up before, and if I'm not cautious I'll do it again. Thankfully, I get to own those fuck-ups.
I suppose, being anonymous, you are simultaneously innocent and ignorant of the incessant push by anonymous to identify every trans person as AGP, and every fetishist as a transition-to-be.
I came into the thread to answer OP's questions about these two trolls, and offer an unabashedly biased view of the theory they were espousing.
Then I suggested seeing a therapist and outlined how things would likely shake out with even a mediocre therapist.
If you're upset that I don't like the (simultaneous) recruiting and stigmatizing of questioning persons who've had fetishistic interaction with gender non-conforming images and behaviours, I think it's you showing a startling lack of empathy.
>but you do it in every single fucking thread
You probably don't want to argue using hyperbole. It rarely works out.