A question for trans folks

File: trollart.jpg (47KB, 642x590px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 642x590px

>oh this post again.

Legit trans people transition because they would rather live a life CLOSE to what it could have been than not live as their true gender at all.

Being attractive or not really doesn't play into it. I mean fuck if we could be hot then awesome. However, it doesn't make a difference in terms of the decision to transition or not.

Which is why real trans people get pissed when kids come into the passing threads posting "Do I have potential?! I think I would be hotter as a girl."

Those kids are not really trans and will make a mess of their life.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to know if you are passable, or if you have potential. But if your only going to do it if you will have good results you shouldn't be wasting time thinking about it in the first place.

>>7727566

Well, being an ugly bitch would suck, but not as badly as being a guy. I can't make use of my life as a male because it doesn't motivate me for shit. Being an unattractive girl would give me some kind of impetus to do something with my life. I'm AGP, by the way.

>>7727601
>Legit trans people transition because they would rather live a life CLOSE to what it could have been than not live as their true gender at all.
Please stop repeating this.

Trutrans want to be treated as a girl, so just passing is more important than looking pretty, although of course looking pretty is good. They don't care about the body much.

AGP want to be the kind of girl men are attracted to, so being physically female and being hot are more important and acting and being treated as female is less important.

Don't confuse demanding to be able to enter female spaces etc for being somehow more legit.

>>7727635
No, YOU stop repeating your nonsense. The first person was correct; you are inventing shit.

>Don't confuse demanding to be able to enter female spaces etc for being somehow more legit.

This isn't even related to the previous two points. Jesus christ.

>Trutrans want to be treated as a girl, so just passing is more important than looking pretty, although of course looking pretty is good. They don't care about the body much.

Caring about your body is, and has always been, an important diagnostic criteria of a gender identity disorder. You are literally arguing with long-established key features of transgenderism. STOP POSTING THIS "TYPOLOGY" SHIT. It's straight-up disinformation that will only confuse people trying to figure out if they're trans.

>>7727566
Of course I'd transition if I wasn't going to be good-looking. Being good-looking is not the point.

>>7727694
This. The 'trutrans' 'typology' needs to die. You are super correct

>>7727694
>It's straight-up disinformation that will only confuse people trying to figure out if they're trans.
You mean like your post >>7727601 telling people they aren't legitimately trans based on nothing but your own personal prejudices?

>>7730635
Are you really the kind of tiresome person who accuses every anon that agrees with other anons of being the same person? That really wasn't me.

But again, they are correct. Someone whose motivation for transitioning is "I would be hotter" ISN'T trans and IS going to make a mess of their life.

I don't know what "personal prejudice" you're accusing me of. Basic logic?

File: twopeople.jpg (49KB, 992x249px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 992x249px

>>7730744
>>7730635
Since I am the person who wrote the original response to this nut job, just thought I would show everyone factually that there are indeed two people here and we agree. rofl.

>>7728230
I don't need to prove true trans people exist directly. (Despite that medical science already has, which is why government funded transition is a thing in the first place)

I can just prove that one transtrender exists. (I define "transtrender" as someone who transitions without experiencing ANY dysphoria) And that not all transpeople are transtrenders or just want to look hotter... Which there by means there is a group of people who are also legitimatly trans/suffering gender dysphoria, and are not transtrenders. . . This group of people are what we call "truely transgender" or "trutrans."

-------------------------
Now that all that is out of the way you might be saying so what. Even if trenders/people with alternative motivations for transition exist who cares?

Well Trans people are representing an ever growing cost for government health care, and tax payers. As if that wasn't enough, the almost always poorly represent the community while simultaneously being very vocal. (And without gender dysphoria they lack the empathetic ability to understand what being trans is in the first place. So they are bound to do a shit job.)

Finally, when those people do realize their mistake (Because if you aren't really trans you often WILL develop dysphoria because of transition.)

Then they de-transition and right wing idiots use them as props to launch anti-transgender legislature, and otherwise set back the progressive movements the transgender community is making at great cost.

I hope that makes sense. I also don't want to bump this, but still wanted to set things straight.

>>7727694
>Of course I'd transition if I wasn't going to be good-looking. Being good-looking is not the point.
For some people it is. Why throw away fitting in as your natal sex if you won't have a better life post-transition?

>be blanchardian anon
>click on thread
>see this
sometimes my painstacking constant explanations of how the 'trutrans/agp' interpretation of the typology that /tttt/ used until the past week or so is bullshit seem to be getting through to people, but sometimes this shit happens

>>7730842
Thanks, anon-who-is-not-me. LOL.

>>7735312
>implying it's better to be miserable and good-looking vs. ugly and content

I have known people (who I actually do believe were genuinely trans) who sorta made the former choice; not because they'd even be "ugly" so much as because they thought they'd be so utterly unpassable that it would ruin their lives.

I empathize a lot with that kind of decision.

But at that point, again, it IS about fitting in and not so much about being "ugly." I know some people who were really conventionally attractive as their natal sex and they basically gave that up. It definitely sucked for them to lose that, but it also wasn't worth being unhappy.

>>7735349
Okay, serious question Blanchardian anon (since I'm unclear if your issue is just with the OP or the whole thread). Let's accept that your typology is correct for the sake of argument.

Do you disagree that there are ALSO people who qualify as "trenders," who aren't really trans and who can end up dsyphoric even from the effects of taking low dose HRT?

>>7735738
>vs. ugly and content
>but it also wasn't worth being unhappy.
True contentedness from being cis was never on the table. Being ugly and having transitioned isn't content happiness for everyone.

>>7735738
>Do you disagree that there are ALSO people who qualify as "trenders," who aren't really trans and who can end up dsyphoric even from the effects of taking low dose HRT?
i agree that those people exist, given that as a young trans guy i am forced to see them every goddamn day of my life
they're also irrelevant to the typology, and when they're brought up in conversations regarding it it's just people misinterpreting hsts to mean 'trutrans' and assuming trendscum and agp are connected (though differentiating between the more legitimate end of trendscum and the crazier end of aap can be difficult sometimes)

>>7735349
Start a blog then you can just link to whichever post addresses a particular misconception.

>>7735907
i made a wordpress account about a month ago, actually
i should start writing posts on it

>>7735910
I find your posts enlightening and helpful. I ought to have read studies like you have, but I haven't, and your research and explanations on this board help make up for that.