hey I'm writing a paper on why there are more mtf then ftm

>>5983491
you're making a huge assumption just by stating that there are more trans women than trans men. no one knows this for sure, there have never been reliable studies done afaik. the studies we DO have are incredibly imbalanced (i think one of the ones that people commonly cite was based off of sex reassignment surgery patients, which obviously will have a larger mtf population represented). and everything else is just anecdotal/experiential evidence.

methinks you should choose a different paper topic desu

>>5983528
I was just thinking the same thing i was looking at the reports my self couldn't find anything conclusive.

Probably the same reason why there's twice the numbers of gay men vs. women. The mechanism that cause brain feminization and masculinization are unrelated.

>>5983491
>Implying there has been any significant scientific research done on the matter

Just a bunch of idiots mutilating themselves, what's there to report?

I have seen more dyke girls, the kind that really look like ugly/retarded guys, than actual ftm.
Im not sure if there are more mtf than ftm, but mtf are more attention whorish, and that gives them more exposure.

>>5983491
fetishism and lenient doctors. most mtfs are married transvestites (transbians)

File: 1425856450835.gif (2MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x180px

I don't think there is more mtfs than ftms, I think the issue is visibility.

Most people never bat an eye at ftms, mostly because testosterone is magnitudes more powerful than estrogen. Also ftms are less likely to opt for SRS/GRS for the fact that it is not as well researched or as widely practiced as mtf SRS/GRS and the results are grotesque to say the least while mtf's can achieve much aesthetically better results.

This is all speculation though, if there were a study to show accurately that there are more mtfs than ftms, it may be possible that females are more flexible than males with their gender and sexual expression, so may not feel the need to undergo treatment to change their sex permanently.

Your paper is going to have a lot of holes if you stick to the facts since this is very much uncharted territory at this time, but best of luck to you regardless OP.

>>5983491
>why there are more mtf then ftm transgenders
>i need some solid evidence on this stating that this is a trend
There isn't any.

>i would like some more information on what causes this
>I would like some solid evidence
There also isn't any.

>but opinions from experts are welcome as well
Oh hon, you should find loads of those from plenty of experts*


>* Please note that the stark lack of any real data on this subject means that these people are not actually experts. Instead they are just people talking out of their ass.

File: 1414712702387.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>5983491

>>5983491
try and use the scientific method.
you don't start with an assumption and try to support it.
what you're supposed to do is come up with a hypothesis, and think about all of the ways it could be disproven as well as just proven.
the more proofs against your hypothesis you're able to rule out, the more sure you can be of your hypothesis.
if you merely try to establish a proof for your hypothesis. all you are doing is proving that it could be a possibility. to claim on that basis that it is truth would be a huge assumption.

but sure i'm willing to aimlessly postulate about your own ideas.to state it is a trend. hmm. well, it's one hell of a serious leap of faith for a socialised male to jump on the bandwagon of altering their endocrine system and pursuing life-changing surgery that makes them irreversibly sterile, and it's a hell of a trend for such a person to jump on when their entire lives, males have it drilled into them socially that they have to meet the strictest ideals of masculinity of have it entirely thrown into question, and for them to be so derided for it.

i've heard some feminists both cis and trans saying it's sexism and that "masculine is the default and feminine is bad and derided" etc but it misses entirely the point that natal females are not discouraged from expressing themselves in a feminine way.
it needs the context of who exactly is acting a certain way. and sure you could say "well women are allowed to be more feminine because they're seen as inferior" etc but i would argue on the contrary, natal females are born with the innate worth that being able to carry pregnancy have, whereas males have to prove their worth as from a biological, reproductive standpoint, they have none, are expendable and replaceable.

>>5984355
so natal females are given more leeway in their expression than males and i think it shows in the trans community. there are probably more MtFs in this respect because there is less leeway for them to be feminine in the first place, than there is for FtMs to be masculine.
a FtM could spend earlier life living as a tomboy, many come out first as lesbians and perhaps being within the lesbian scene and may be at least in part, content with being a butch dyke.

this isn't even to mention all of the demifluid trenderqueer tumblr gender expressions where hey, i'm taking a stab in the dark here but most of them seem to be natal females.

i know i'm offering no more proof to back my postulations up than you were but, it's my uncorroborated belief that if there are social factors to the higher apparent number of MtFs than FtMs, it is not because the MtFs are being inflated by a "trend", but because the FtMs are finding other outlets for their dysphoria, are less likely to make the leap to being counted as trans, and can engage in more masculine pursuits than natal males can engage in the feminine without the same degree of social reprisal, so they're less visible.

asides from that there is the possibility that GID is a neurological disorder, most likely caused by prenatal hormonal dysregulation, and regardless of whether the child is XY or XX, the mother is almost always without exception (apart from the odd intersex pregnancy) XX, so maybe XY fetuses are more prone to being bathed in the wrong hormones.

>>5983491
>Now I am doing this for a report

sure you are billy

>>5983491
There's the standard claim that natal females are allowed to express masculinity much, much more freely than natal males can express femininity, so the pressure on natal females to transistion is far less. but I have another hypothesis.

It's theorized than gender dysphoria may be caused by the fetus receiving a "hormone shower" of the opposite sex's hormones at some point in development, thus causing a disconnect between their mental sense of gender and their physical sex. Following this, I would propose that it's probably more likely that a male fetus is accidentally exposed to female hormones than that a female fetus is accidentally exposed to male hormones, as all mothers are female, so when a fetus is gestating it's a lot more likely for it to accidentally receive a dose of female hormones than of male hormones.

Of course, that theory is purely conjecture and you shouldn't include it as anything more unless you can find some sort of reliable source on it, but it's just a thought I've had.