Why are FTMs so much more tolerated than MTFs? From a biological

>>6984328
Mtfs come with too much mental baggage and are a pain to deal with.

>>6984328
They know how to dress and can pull it off.

>>6984328
at baseline, ftms are much rarer than mtfs. the gap is narrower now and i'm not really sure why -- the best conclusion i can draw is that it's related to the fact that autism is disproportionately common amongst ftms andi vice versa. i used to believe neither ftm or autism rates were genuinely increasing, but seeing how they tie into each other the only conclusion i can draw is that they both are. the question is what could raise prenatal testosterone like that when for the most part it's estrogen levels that are rising?
i suspect it might be because an mtf who presents female in an era before physical transition triggers the uncanny valley more than an ftm presenting male in that era
plus something something gender roles

File: 1466232612750.jpg (186KB, 480x540px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 480x540px

>>6984328
Cis straight women have a personal obligation to maintain masculinity as form of protection/catering unto themselves. They constructed the view that a feminized male is inferior/due to the fact that that male no longer "serviced" them in the the traditional sense. Their most genius move was convincing men that the feminized man was a threat to their masculinity/sexuality, rather than the threat to a woman's that they perceived. This is the reason for the extremely violence towards homosexuality and transexuality, particularly towards transwomen.

>>6984364
Yeah I've heard of this theory before but I am not convinced

Why would women be able to so strongly "convince" men to do what is essentially against their own reproductive success?

To what degree can women even be colluding to do this if there are so many who are staunchly feminist?

>>6984328

To start, normal people in the first world don't refer to women as "wombs". You sound like you just learned about biology and your autism is in a rage over this titillating new info. The human population is fine and most people don't think that way despite what /r9k/ tells you.

With that said, it's because FTM assimilate way better than the other way around. Test is forever. Transmen will usually end up passing, but Transwomen will usually always look like crossdressers unless they transition really early, can afford tons to facial surgery, or are just genetically blessed with boyband femme looks. Also because MTFs are associated with gay men and white straight men who still direct most of media, politics and culture find them ickier than lesbians.

>>6984328
>From a biological perspective, (assuming trans people will be infertile) having more FTMs is terrible ... Meanwhile having more MTFs actually decreases the selection pressure on males

It's the same thing with how people hate gay men but don't give a shit about lesbians. Stupid people have forgotten their lizard brains.

>>6984363
>at baseline, ftms are much rarer than mtfs. the gap is narrower now and i'm not really sure why

I'd posit that they're more or less even, just ftms had less need to transition in the old days. It's easier to hide curves than create them, it's easier for a female to pass and live as male than the opposite, so not only are mtfs more visible but there's a greater need to medically transition. And the gap is beginning to close because the options for ftm transition are becoming more well known and acceptable.

Pure conjecture on my part though. I also don't believe autism rates are rising, but that we're simply better able to recognise the signs and diagnose it than we were in very recent history.

>>6985712
well, i'm an autist ftm, so that informs my position
the spot on the autism spectrum i occupy and the severity of my dysphoria is why i'm not totally convinced of either of your statements. i'm at a point where i can talk and appear intelligent but i'm totally incapable of caring for myself, and i've met a decent number of other people around the same level -- if autism was historically about 2% of the population as it is today, there would be a much greater historical record of people with normal to high intelligence but severe adaptive disabilities. some famous geniuses seem to function around that level, but not many.
and while if i were born a trans man in, say...the scottish enlightenment of the eighteenth century (drawing on my grandmother's birthplace here), i would have just lived as a man who told peers who questioned my height and voice of my unfortunate but private glandular condition, there are times a lot further back than the eighteenth century. there is no recorded ftm equivalent of the hijra or the kathoey, no way that ancient communities where people couldn't hide their past conceptualized trans men. some people would argue that trans men in those eras just lived as masculine women, but having lived what dysphoria feels like i can't buy that for a second. the only conclusion i can draw is that trans men weren't common enough to make that a thing that would survive in the historical record.

>>6985738
also, inb4 sworn virgins
some sworn virgins were definitely ftm, but they weren't a kathoey-style group at all
they were more like two-spirit, which is often appropriated as being a trans group but doesn't actually look much like one when you consider the context they existed in even though there were trans two-spirits

>>6985738
>if autism was historically about 2% of the population as it is today, there would be a much greater historical record of people with normal to high intelligence but severe adaptive disabilities. some famous geniuses seem to function around that level, but not many.
As far as I understand, it's historically been lumped in with other conditions like schizophrenia and mental retardation (which also have a history of being misunderstood). So the capacity for high intelligence in autistic people probably wasn't really understood until more recent years. I doubt people would have thought to draw a connection between an 'eccentric' genius (who we'd now recognise as a high functioning autist) and someone who's been labelled mentally ill/retarded (who we'd now recognise as a low functioning autist, with a much greater intellectual potential than once thought).

Quickly googling it now, the term itself was only coined about 100 years ago, which really isn't much time overall to understand it. So our ability to reliably observe the condition and diagnosis statistics throughout history is fairly limited to the last century or even half century.

>there are times a lot further back than the eighteenth century. there is no recorded ftm equivalent of the hijra or the kathoey
This is certainly an interesting point, and something I know too little about to really hypothesise one way or another.
But, while you might very well be right, I do think it's also possible that it's a case of modern attitudes being projected onto history - modern society largely ignores trans men, so we likewise don't register historical evidence of trans men simply because we don't expect to see it. Which isn't an uncommon phenomenon, and can be similarly observed in modern interpretation of history as it relates to women, as an example (modern expectations of passivity clouding evidence of female warriors, crafted artefacts wrongly presumed to me made by men, etc).

>>6985894
well, myself and the people i'm referring to can't really be categorized as 'low' or 'high' functioning is the problem here (i suspect the LFA/HFA overlap-free dichotomy will go down as one of the worst ideas in the history of autism research), though it's true that people within my context would often be labelled as 'schizophrenic' (and even today we're disproportionately likely to have the extreme experiences given that label in the modern age), especially given the adaptive disability aspects tend to become crippling around adolescence or early adulthood rather than childhood. but even though mid-functioning autistic people are ignored enough today that someone in a hundred years discussing autism history might still think they were a recent development of their era, the historical (even recent historical) lack of awareness that one can be congenitally adaptively disabled without being intellectually disabled -- which, to my knowledge, occurs only in the context of autism -- implies it was far rarer once than it now is
and you're right about the projection of modern attitudes, though at the same time i suspect that might overstate how many trans men there were historically rather than understate it. can we really say with certainty that people like james barry and charley parkhurst were men in the wrong body rather than women in the wrong social context? even when you get as recent as billy tipton it's a huge question mark

>>6984328
Just an opinion but it may come down to classic misogyny, don't mean to go all tumblr on you all but it's generally "better" (not in all cases i'm aware of problems that only men face BECAUSE they're men but yeah) to be a man in this society. When a man transitions to a woman they're giving up they're privileges that they may not even know they have, whereas when a woman transitions to a man they're gaining those privileges. On a similar note, being feminine is still deemed generally as weakness and inferior because of years of social conditioning.

>>6985894
also i wish 'low-functioning' autistic people were considered to have high cognitive capabilities
the myth of intellectual disability in autism is another one that's going to go down as destructive

High school biology: the thread

>>6985913
>well, myself and the people i'm referring to can't really be categorized as 'low' or 'high' functioning is the problem here (i suspect the LFA/HFA overlap-free dichotomy will go down as one of the worst ideas in the history of autism research)
Which just further goes to show how recent society's understanding of autism is. Even today, people are being miscategorised, and their abilities and disabilities misunderstood. What I'm arguing is that history was even more guilty of this, which is the reason visibility of autism in history is so low. It's not that people who were congenitally adaptively disabled without being intellectually disabled didn't exist, it's simply that they were wrongly presumed to be intellectually disabled and consequently weren't treated or documented in a way that allowed them to be recognised as autistic.

>the historical (even recent historical) lack of awareness that one can be congenitally adaptively disabled without being intellectually disabled -- which, to my knowledge, occurs only in the context of autism -- implies it was far rarer once than it now is
I'd argue it was just as prevalent, but that, as you mention here >>6985978, the myth of intellectual disability in autism simply prevented that awareness.

There are many conditions that are well recognised in modern society that were horribly misunderstood in history. People with simple psoriasis used to be lumped in with leprosy and ostracised from society for fear that it would spread, even though we now know psoriasis is non-contagious and easily treated. That doesn't mean it didn't exist in history simply because people weren't aware of it, just that history's sufferers were badly misunderstood, and that the data is obscured by misdiagnosis.

>though at the same time i suspect that might overstate how many trans men there were historically rather than understate it.
Very true.

As a side-note, is there more accurate terminology to replace LFA/HFA?

>>6984328
Who says that that is the case?

>>6984328
If you're going to argue that the loss of a viable womb is the loss of an asset to society in general you have to be objective and also include the fact that a man hacking off his balls is also a loss of a valuable asset as neither person will be able to participate in procreation.

I'm all for it, though. The less you retards procreate the quicker this dumb snowflake shit will go the way of the dodo and we can get back to business as usual instead of coddling a bunch of man/womanchildren who can't take a walk to a water fountain without getting their feelings hurt.

In all honesty, any individual born with XY chromosomes pretending to be a woman or YY pretending to be a man is a loss to society and a charade that lasts a lifetime. You're both equally degenerate.

Your point would be valid if we were bonobos, but humans are violent creatures. Whether its biological or cultural more strong males means you can compete with other groups "better."

>>6986106
i've seen people propose 'support labels' that function on someone's adaptive abilities as opposed to assuming every ability has to be in the same sphere, which i suspect is the closest we have right now to a replacement for functioning labels
>>6986213
>any individual born with XY chromosomes pretending to be a woman or YY pretending to be a man
>or YY pretending to be a man
>YY chromosomes
even aside from the fact that phenotype and karyotype can be discordant for cis people, that's an amazing level of stupidity you've got there

>>6986213
You're incredibly stupid. Homosexuality and transsexuality arent gonna be selected out anymore than intersexuality and other infertile-by-birth conditions are. Only powerful genetic manipulation could achieve that.

>>6986213
>a man hacking off his balls is also a loss of a valuable asset as neither person will be able to participate in procreation.

Not really. Wombs are more valuable than balls. 50 females and 1 male mean 50 potential pregnancies. 50 males and 1 female means 1 potential pregnancy.

And it's not like this is a random concocted reasoning either. Males are the ones who die in wars, go down with the ship, and check out creepy noises at night, because they are simultaneously less biologically necessary to human survival and more physically capable of defending the herd. That this instinct doesn't apply to transgender people is an exception.

>>6986253
You're incredibly stupid if you somehow believe that an entire population that actively mutilates their genitals to the point of not being able to functionally reproduce won't eventually be weeded out be evolution.

Like, do you think storks really drop off babies in the cabbage patch or something? Or do you just hold on to hope that you'll be able to brainwash enough weak-minded people to keep this "movement" going?

>>6986317
Its been millions of years for mammals and a billion years for sexual reproduction, sorry but there isn't a shot in hell of disorders of sexual development just vanishing on their own you fucking dumbass. That isnt how evolution works.

>>6986317
As long as there is an awareness of intersex conditions (including in the brain i.e. transgender) then there will be people trying to change their sex/gender. It doesn't really have much to do with "passing on genes" as much as it does prenatal hormonal effects in the womb and socialization

>>6986216
Well humans are somewhat similar to bonobos so I think it's reasonable to make the argument.
You're right about the group thing though, and I'm pretty sure that is the most significant reason for it. Losing a male of the group is a loss of an able bodied contribute who can't even procreate. They are quite useless in that regard.

>>6986213
Losing a sperm generator isn't really a big deal since it's very cheap to make. I don't think this has much to do with it

>>6985939
I pretty much think this too. I don't like to go full tumblr but it seems that the dislike of femininity is pure misogyny. Woman converts to man = more men, more masculinity, more power in the group, etc
Man converts to woman = loss of power in the group, one less soldier/builder/hunter

This view basically considers reproduction to be the only value of femininity, and if you can't carry a baby (FTMs) then you better contribute in the form of being a disposable work drone (like most men). MTFs can't do either of those things so they're considered worthless

Same reason tomboys are more accepted than feminine men, and lesbians are more accepted than gay men.

There are much strictly gender roles placed on men than women.

>>6985801
There are a lot of historical examples of women taking up the dress and lives of men. Also be my bf

Straight cis man perspective here

The harsh truth is that ftms are more tolerated because deep down nobody normal actually sees transgendered as the sex they want to be. So ftms are still females deep down to the cis man, so they still retain all their female privilege ie men white knighting for them, men being against violence against women

We males don't truly see ftms as men, if we did then assaulting a male would be the same as assaulting a ftm but that's not true, it's far worse to assault an ftm because deep down everyone still sees her as a weak defenceless woman who needs male protection

The parallel is that mtfs are also still seen as MEN which means they don't get the female privilege of male protection, most people deep down will never accept a mtf as an actual women, they might say they do but unconsciously mtfs will always be faggy freaks in women's clothes, and men like this have always been fair game for male violence.

There's probably some evolutionary reason for the acceptance or prevalence of gay bashing and male derisions of especially effeminate and faggy males, I'd guess from my experience at an all boys school evolution selected for feminine male hatred from other men so that men are forced to be manly and tough which is good for tribe protection

That's just a wild guess but it's probably something along those lines

The harsh truth is the vast majority of people do not and will not ever unconsciously recognise trans people as the sex they are trying to be. Sure it's fashionable now to be tolerant ie consciously accepting of the sex they want but unconsciously and in a hell of a lot of cases including minei will never consciously accept a ftm as not a female anymore, and unconsciously she will always be a female to me, and therefore will always retain female privilege which includes male protection and acceptance

>>6984328
>gee why is everyone okay with this tiny group of people who don't matter and never say or do anything, but everyone's really squicked out by this gigantic herd of trender idiots who use their fetish as an excuse to promote laws and norms which will enable them to sexually assault women and children with impunity

It's a mystery, OP.

>>6987357
>gigantic herd of trender idiots who use their fetish as an excuse to promote laws and norms which will enable them to sexually assault women and children with impunity

nigga u serious?

>>6984328
I like how you think of women as baby incubators and nothing more

>>6987327
>evolution selected for feminine male hatred from other men so that men are forced to be manly and tough which is good for tribe protection
Yeah I tend to agree with that view, it's a good explanation for the negativity associated with feminine men. From a societal perspective they aren't very useful (can't be strong and protect and can't gestate). In most cultures where some sort of male-to-female intermediate gender existed it was always in some specific niche of the legal system or as sex objects (or both).
Aside from considering their worth, there is also the hypothesis that it can serve as protection from sexual assault against minors. A lot of homophobia/transphobia is concentrated in areas where children are affected because of the potential effect on them
http://www.sciencedirect.com.sci-hub.cc/science/article/pii/0162309596000428

>>6987473
I don't really think of women as such. I'm actually a pretty staunch feminist and despise gender roles, but I think that are very logical reasons for them which stem from biological/cultural evolution. Intrasexual competition is a defining feature of social behavior, especially in mammals like us. It makes sense to talk about it in this way when considering macro scale trends.

File: widowmaker 1903241243.jpg (31KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 480x480px

>>6984363
>FTMs are much rarer than mtfs
Not true. Fewer FTMs got SRS and most statistics - especially older ones - only count trans-people who got SRS.
>the gap is narrower now and i'm not really sure why
The gap is narrower now because the newest statistics do not only count the post-SRS-transsexuals.
>autism is disproportionately common amongst ftms
I've never heared about that. Interesting. But maybe FTMs only get diagnosed with some kind of mild autism (asperger's syndrome) because they have uncommon interests for a girl and do not function properly in social contexts due to their gender dysphoria.
Also, I think that "autism"/"aspergers" is overdiagnosed nowadays.

>>6984364
Nah, I don't think it were cis straight women who made people transphobic.
The number one reason for transphobia - I don't like the term but use it anyway to avoid inventing new terms - is the fear of straight cis men of being a) not straight, b) not manly and c) not cis. A transwomen can trigger his fear of homosexual feelings, his fear of being less a man and the fear of his own feminine side.
Many men who put transwomen down either want to have sex with badly or have strong transfeelings themselves. And, of course, there are these men who just are aggressive towards transwomen because they happen to be easy targets quite often.

>>6984557
I agree with most of this.
But I don't think that MTFs are that fucked up. Sure, HRT is doing magic for most FTMs. I've rarely seen a FTM that was so unlucky in the genetic lottery that he'll never pass.
MTFs need a lot more luck and effort in order to pass as a woman, yes. The age of starting HRT is definitely a factor but I can show you unpassing MTFs who started HRT at 14 and I can show you passing MTFs who started at 33. It's all about the bone structure and male puberty can work really, really fast on that one. So even starting HRT with 14 does not automatically make a MTF passable. It's still the FTMs who are way better off.

>>6988048
>Many men who put transwomen down either want to have sex with badly or have strong transfeelings themselves.
I've found this to be somewhat true from experience.

I think it's important to consider the context of the situation though. Males don't really lose anything from interacting with a trans girl aside from potentially some of their time. It only becomes an issue if it's a social setting in which there's potential for others to pass judgement. That's why most homophobic attacks and general harassment happens from groups, especially of lower tier men. Great way to bolster your own in-group position and do something fun.

>>6987415

He should serious to me m8 in fact I agree with him, keeping a low profile and being casual about things are how they become tolerated.

Shoving your girly dick (or lack there of) in the face of every normie and demanding that they lick to for the glory of mtf is a great way to make people hate/ oppose you.

>>6987473

Women are baby incubators so that I may make more feminine women and more feminine women to be baby incubators so that they may make more feminine men and feminine women so that they may be baby etc. etc. etc.

One day we will conquer the world desu.

>>6988109
Feminine women don't make feminine men.
Sons of feminine women tend to be rather masculine tbqh.

>>6988048 (me)

>>6985738
But there are a lot of recorded FTM cases in history:
>Megilla (Lucian reports on this)
>Queen Christina of Sweden becoming some Count or something
>Robert Shurtliff (18th century)
I don't know more. But there are, just google "FTM in history", you'll find quite a lot and may even enjoy to read the primary sources.
And consider that MTFs are clocked easily, especially without HRT. It's much easier to appear as a man when you're born female. I think there were a lot of FTMs in history who just didn't get clocked or were not reported on.

>>6987327
>no normal people consider trans-people as the gender they identify with
You are assuming that all trans-peole don't pass as the gender they identify with in the first place. I know from experience that this is not true. But, of course, there are very unpassable transpeople out there who are not perceived as the gender they identify with.
>FTMs are still considered women by men and experience female privileges
Have you ever met a FTM who did HRT for some years? I recommend to you not telling them that you still see them as a girl, there are a lot FTMs out there who look 100% manly and very masculine to me. Just google Balian Buschbaum. Do you really see him as a girl who needs protection from men? I don't think so.
>MTFs are still perceived as male by men and therefore get bullied
Well, this happens. But again you are assuming that there are no passing and maybe even attractive MTFs out there. I again can tell you that this is not true. Generally people are more acceptable of transwomen than you think when the latter put effort in it.
Here's the thing: You cannot change your first perception of people around you. A transwomen might tell you that she is trans and you still perceive her as a woman because she looks, acts and even smells like one. You might be disgusted by the thought of her being a women but this thought is not part of your first perception.

>>6988125

Urban myth. Even if it was true we'd be selecting for feminine traits so inevitably that would be corrected through natural eugenics.

Also my mother is extremely feminine and I take largely after her. Pls explain this.

>>6988153
Saying that people who pass are considered their preferred gender is a total non-sequitur

By definition they are percieved in a specific way, that perception is all that matters when it comes to social interaction. What the poster you're replying to is describing is the reaction of people who consciously recognize someone as trans.

>>6988153 (me, continuation)

>>6987327
Then again, a transwomen telling you she's a woman won't change anything in your primary perception of her. That's the error of all the tumblrinas and SJWs: You literally cannot change these primary impressions you get from a person. Yes, you can be tolerant and use the correct pronouns. But nobody can force you to literally see somebody as something (feminine, masculine, beautiful, disgusting). Education etc. may override these perceptions: "Hey, that person is disgusting but I've met a lot of people who looked disgusting and turned out to be fine", but this will always be an overwrite.

>>6988172
>Saying that people who pass are considered their preferred gender is a total non-sequitur
No. Saying that people who pass are considered their preferred gender is a tautology because passing and being considered as the preferred gender by other people is exactly the same thing. That was my point.
>What the poster you're replying to is describing is the reaction of people who consciously recognize someone as trans.
He writes about FTMs and MTFs in general. And he says that mtfs will "unconsciously" always be faggy freaks in women's clothes and tolerant people are accepting them in their gender only "consciously". I meant the same thing with the term "overwrite", I'm not a native speaker, so don't judge me for using odd words, please.
The thing is that this poster assumes that the large majority of MTFs and FTMs do not pass which is -nowadays- not quite true imho.

>>6988261
Only about half of trans people I met have been passing, and that's from a sample size of young uni students. I'm pretty sure the ratios are even worse when considering everyone older. It'll probably be another decade or so until we start seeing a lot of early transitioners who pass perfectly.

>>6988165
>Pls explain this.
You're an exception.

>>6988290
Yeah, I agree. And, again, this was my point against this view (>>6987327).

>>6988294

Then I am the future.

Fear me senpai. Fear my and my soft body, and my elegant features.

Gas the normies, species evolutionary preference war now.

>>6984328
thankfully, as we discovered several hundred years ago, humans are capable of what we call "rational thinking." which means it does not really matter if they are reproductively capable or not, because people can (theoretically) use their highly evolved brains to come to the conclusion that trans people are humans just like anyone else, and deserve as much compassion as the average person. of course, some people choose to disagree with that, for varying social reasons.
>What is the basis of the strong disapproval of femininity in men?
this is a question you're probably never going to get a straight answer to, but i suggest if you really want to know, you ask literally anyone other than 4chan. if you want the short answer: patriarchy.

>>6985738
i think a lot of it is that we can't really tell if someone was living as male because of dysphoria, or because they wanted the advantages and freedoms that were not available to women. even up until the 1970s/80s or so. and until the concept of "trans" became well-known, those instances would pretty much all have been written off as lesbians who wanted to hide their sexuality, or women who wanted to fight in wars, etc.

>>6988425
>if you want the short answer: patriarchy.
OK well I pretty much already accept this view. I just want to push it a little further to find all the nuances.

>>6986538
>if you can't carry a baby (FTMs) then you better contribute in the form of being a disposable work drone (like most men). MTFs can't do either of those things so they're considered worthless

Oh shit, I think you cracked the code

>>6988290

Young Uni students will be early in their transition, dude, most will probably look fine when they're older.

>>6988781
The MtFs won't without FFS.

The tiny FtMs won't either.

I agree that more of them will pass in the future, but there are still a lot of older hons who started transitioning recently. Realistically even in a few decades when getting access to trans health care for younger people will be easier there will still be a fair amount of people who are partially repressed and start transitioning much later in life. It might even be more accepted for them to do so, which means it will stay prominent.

>>6987327
>someone who looks female will be thought of as female

...Well duh? Except most trans men look very much male after the necessary amount of time on T.

Passing trans women still inspire hate, passing trans men still inspire apathy. The reason for this discepency cannot be put down to the relative privilege of their birth sex when the general population is unable to perceive their birth sex.

>>6988800
>The MtFs won't without FFS.
Many will and do.

>The tiny FtMs won't either
Manlets exist.

And the prominence of non passers is irrelevant. Someone who's perceived as their birth sex because their body has developed in that way for an incurable amount of time does not mean someone who passes will also be perceived as their birth sex.
You could argue that public misperceptions based on non-passers is the cause for attitudes towards trans people - ie, people assume passing trans people don't exist - but its just that, a misperception.

>>6988832
>Manlets exist.
not happily tho

>>6989757
get a load of this guy cam

I'd marry geohotz in a heartbeat

>>6989775
is he known to be a manlet or something?

>>6988048
see my reference to the lack of historical conceptualizations of trans men as to why i've come to the conclusion we used to be much rarer
i used to think it was truly equal and just obscured by statistics, but i can't reconcile that with the historical record
also, autism overdiagnosis is just as much a meme as 'low/high functioning' and 'autistic people are often intellectually disabled'. the only group that are overdiagnosed are people with syndromic intellectual disability (e.g. down's syndrome), which is just about incompatible with autism but still widely diagnosed because of the autism and ID meme. physiological females are actually extremely underdiagnosed -- there are more autistic ftms without a diagnosis than allistic ones with, though i've personally met examples of the latter.
>>6988153
>>6988449
>>6986831
i've researched ftms in history but as i said earlier the problem is you can't make a call on if any given physiological female living as male did it because he was ftm or because she wanted to disregard gender roles
>Also be my bf
are you a qt3.14 grill who likes making art and talking about /x/ stuff and owns at least one book on serial killers and can marry me so i can get a murica green card (not a third worlder, just sick of australia)? if so, absolutely

>>6990188
>i've researched ftms in history but as i said earlier the problem is you can't make a call on if any given physiological female living as male did it because he was ftm or because she wanted to disregard gender roles
Same is true for physiological males living as female.

>>6984328
>Why are FTMs so much more tolerated than MTFs?

At least I make sure to not tolerate either.

Ask yourself and be honest. On general, are FTMs as loud and obnoxious as MTFs?

>>6995647
yes