What's the best way to help redpill the alt-right and /pol/

File: 1902,_Cézanne,_Study_of_a_Skull.jpg (95KB, 800x589px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 800x589px

>>7973238
What makes you so sure Blanchards typology is correct to begin with?

>>7973238
if this shit gets mainstream attention im pretty sure its gonna ruin acceptance

i mean they already think were delusional now their gonna think were perverts too

id rather keep it secret u uncle tom motherfucker

>>7973238
Firstly, stop killing yourselves. No ones going to believe you aren't insane if you keep killing yourselves even after curing yourself with hormones and dick choppings

Secondly, distance yourself from furries, transtrenders and general snowflake attention whoring.

Finally, compromise. Shoving totalitarian progressive rhetoric down someone's throat is about the last way to get people who literally can't understand your reality is about the last way to be accepted.

>>7973265
But we're not perverts. It's a legitimate orientation just like being gay or straight.

It can only help acceptance.

File: 30958093458.png (1MB, 1262x1420px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1262x1420px

>>7973332
but that's not what i'm talking about you snappy little cuck. read it again, slowly.

>>7973332
THIS

>>7973238
Make a /pol/ thread to explain it or make a thread here and link /pol/ to it.

>>7973265

The memes must flow.

>>7973355
cara quit being a cuck yourself and answer >>7973246.

Also I'm getting really sick of your shit, I see what you are trying to do and it's fucked up / a waste of time / not going to work. Why don't you just transition instead of attempting to push your misconstrued bullshit to a group of people that hate us to begin with regardless of what blanchard thinks of us.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (324KB, 3000x1687px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 3000x1687px

Stay the fuck off pol you fucking fags

>>7973238
>Blanchard HSTS/AGP dichotomy
Those are kind of their beliefs by default. They just don't know the terminology.

>>7973246
What makes you doubt it?

>>7973415
>I see what you are trying to do
What is she trying to do?

>>7973465
>What makes you doubt it?

I think parts of the typology may be true / useful to some mtfs but it's also become obvious that a lot of the studies proponents of blanchards theories rely on are flawed for various reasons. Also as a mtf that would best fit into the A*P typology their are many things / assumptions blanchard would make about what my choices are for transitioning / my sexuality that feel inconsistent with my experience of the world / are ridiculous. Also, how blanchard can assume that AGP is the cause of dysphoria instead of being one of the many ways it can manifest seems unfair / an area of the theory that needs better explaining.

>What is she trying to do?

Essentially cara is attempting to push her divisive, completely and utterly baseless understanding of blanchards typology to a group of people that hate transgender people to begin with but may be sympathetic to caras interpretation because it excludes a large majority of TG people from being considered legitimate.

>>7973557
>their are many things / assumptions blanchard would make about what my choices are for transitioning / my sexuality that feel inconsistent with my experience of the world / are ridiculous.
What are the inconsistent and ridiculous things?

>but may be sympathetic to caras interpretation because it excludes a large majority of TG people from being considered legitimate.
It can exclude all TG people if they interpret it to >>7972907

>>7973238
/pol/ is more likely to accept AGP and non-trans than trutrans, simply because dysphoria is an obvious condition that requires treatment. On the other hand, many conservatives are all about body freedom. Saying "I just wanted to mod myself like you guys mod your trucks" is going to be much more successful than "I'm a real woman!"

>>7973662
>On the other hand, many conservatives are all about body freedom. Saying "I just wanted to mod myself
>conservatives
>in favor of body freedom
>modding

It's another episode of "I'll pretend I've never met a conservative and surely everybody will fall for it because they've never met even one conservative duuur."

File: a9af7cb7cf72fe0f5bb0ec0c1986dec045c35b19.jpg (52KB, 870x490px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 870x490px

>>7973615
Please don't view this as me attempting to run away from our conversation, I have to leave for work in about ten minutes so I don't have time to go into great detail about what exactly I'm referring to. I'm assuming you are the agp anon I've been communicating with over email, I'll write you a more in depth response tonight when I get off. If I'm mistaken who you are you can drop a throwaway email here and I'll respond through that or if this thread is still alive tonight when I get home I can respond that way as well.

>>7973692
I should have been more specific. Libertarians are a sub-set of conservatives. And yeah there's the obvious caveat of abortion. They're not logically consistent on the position but they do sometimes advocate it: like when they freak out about blood-taking DUI checkpoints or illegal detentions.

>>7973695
I am. Looking forward to your email!

>>7973704
Libertarians are just conservatives who lie and pretend even harder to be human. They'll promise you they're in favor of body freedom until you vote for Trump Jr., then they'll make body freedom illegal.

>>7973711
You're probably right. My analysis is based off of the common sentiment I hear "I don't care what they do with their body but I'm not gonna call them that". Still, it's the best avenue I can think of since they are always screeching about liberty. The prompt was for how to convince them, after all.

>>7973715
The best avenue for securing freedom and safety for trans people is for everyone to vote for Trump Jr.? Do you ever try taking this retarded drivel outside of 4chan or the internet? How does that work out for you?

>>7973726
> The best avenue for securing freedom and safety for trans people is for everyone to vote for Trump Jr.?

I didn't say that, at all. I was talking about what things to *say* to a conservative to get them to be ok with transition. I would never advocate for *anyone* to vote for that cheeto. I know this is a sensitive topic but please try not to jump to conclusions.

>>7973465
What makes me doubt it? The fact that mathematically and procedurally it makes no sense.

Sampling Errors.
>The number of subjects with clinically diagnosed gender dysphoria is not provided, therefore some, or even all, of them are not relevant subjects for study.
>It is not stated if any of the sample had transitioned, were in the process of transitioning or were considering transitioning.
>Gender dysphoria was self diagnosed by the subjects and transsexuality was determined by a single question, thus not following WPATH or DSM diagnostic guidelines.
>Low or sub-threshold self measured gender dysphoria subjects, and self admitted transvestites were included in the full sample for factor determination (30% of the sample).

Technical Statistical Analyses Errors
> No tests for normality were undertaken, given the high Coefficients of Variation (CV) shown (the highest being 523%) non-normality should have been considered and tested for.
>The core statistical test (Newman-Keuls) has a high ‘false positive’ rate, is not valid for varying sized sample data and not valid for non Gaussian data.
>Sample sizes were averaged using the Harmonic Mean (most commonly used in financial analysis), no results or discussion was provided as to why this was chosen in preference to other means or the impact on the Newman-Keuls test results or why another and valid test was not used.

Question Errors.
>The questions followed the Core-Sub Question design. While this is appropriate for detailed analysis, it leads to score inflation when used as a measurement scale. If the Core question is answered with a yes, then at least one other Sub question will automatically be answered with a yes as well.
>No measures of intensity (frequency or recency of fantasies or actions) were used.
>The core question (#12) in the Autogynephilic Interpersonal Fantasy Scale is incorrect, with a score being given for non interpersonal fantasy behavior, thus the results would be inflated for this test

>>7973465
Blanchard’s 1989 paper where he ‘proves’ AGP for heterosexual, asexual and bisexual trans women (relative to birth sex). He did nothing of the kind, in fact his own results disproves his hypothesis.

His analysis used a poor and inappropriate statistical test (infamous for false positives), not designed for varying sample sizes and requires continuous Gaussian data to be valid (data is discrete, non gaussian and bounded).

Sample sizes: homosexual: 117, hetosexual 19, bisexual: 58, asexual 18.
Core Autogynephilia Test
Asexuals and Heterosexuals were significantly the same.
Heterosexuals and bisexuals were significantly the same.
Asexuals and bisexuals were NOT significantly the same, meaning the other relationships barely met statistical validity..

Visual inspection shows Asexuals and Homosexuals had similar Core AGP scores.

Autogynephilia Interpersonal Test
Homosexuals, asexuals and heterosexuals were significantly the same with all having low scores.

He assumes that AGP causes asexuality and bisexuality in trans women, with no proof.
He stated that bisexuals are not really aroused by men at all.
He stated that asexuals are such because AGP ‘crowds out’ their sexual desires…again no proof.

So there you have it, Blanchard’s own results do NOT show (in fact disprove) the hypothesis that ‘homosexuals transsexuals’ (HT) do NOT have AGP, and ALL hetero/asexual/bisexuals (H/A/B) do and are all the same.

>>7973732
I can tell you already voted for that cheeto because you've spent all of this time suggesting that people have conservations with Republicans, which they should never do, and not once mentioned the fact they should have conservatives with Democrats.

Fuck off Cara, you stupid cunt.

>>7973773
*conversations

>>7973773
I'm sorry you feel this way.

> you've spent all of this time suggesting that people have conservations with Republicans

That's the point of the thread. It's literally in the OP.

> which they should never do

I'm not sure I agree, but ok.

> and not once mentioned the fact they should have conservatives with Democrats.

That's because it wasn't part of the hypothetical discussion. You're right it absolutely makes sense to talk to democrats about this, but that wasn't even part of the discussion until you brought it up.

>>7973784
I can tell you're not sorry about anything, because you're still typing worthless shit.

>>7973793
ok, bye

>>7973759
>>7973751
Cara will ignore this post because it is concrete and rational evidence that shows the holes in that stupid hack, Blanchard.

>>7973797
Oh, please do leave you dog shit.

>>7973759
>He stated that bisexuals are not really aroused by men at all.
I definitely got pseudo-bisexuality just like he said.

>>7973265
It's the only way to prevent the creation of illegitimate trannies. Agp's must go.