Why are white people more than thrice as likely to be AGP

Because blacks kill trans women of color and AGPs are the most likely to be killed.

>>8188309
But OP, that isn't what your statistics show.

Your statistics show black people are far more than thrice as likely to be AGP as white people.

I'm really confused by these numbers

They are a percent of the n group that displays tranvestic fetishism, right?

I'm pretty sure 78% of white guys are not tranvestites.

>>8188319
If that was the reason there'd be less black trans people per capita but IIRC that's not true.

>>8188323
Look carefully.

>>8188326
The study was conducted on transwomen, not the general population.

>>8188333
Ah okay. My guess is repression, I think a culture needs to be sufficiently sexually liberal before AGP's will transition. It may also be a function of having children later in life.

Countries have really variable trans statistics, like Eastern Europe has always been FtM primarily.

>>8188333
>The study was conducted on transwomen, not the general population.
Which is why it can't tell how likely black and white people are respectively to be AGP unless we know the racial sampling is representative of the trans population.

>>8188338
The idea that culture is a factor is a sensible one. Note that this study was conducted in New York though so at the very least everyone studied were Americans from a certain region. Why is it about black culture that makes developing AGP less common, then?

>>8188345
The rates are unlikely to be precise but they're probably in the ballpark given the large sample size.

>>8188353
In that case, I've run the numbers and for every 80 black AGPs among black people there are 526 white AGPs among white people.

Black people are far more likely to be AGPs.

>>8188345
this is nuttbrock (2009), which was a representative sample of nyc's trans population
>>8188319
hstses are more likely to be killed than agps because hstses have higher-risk lifestyles -- which itself is secondary to racial and economic status rather than being directly caused by etiology
>>8188338
>It may also be a function of having children later in life
can you explain what you mean by that? my best reading of it is 'people have kids before they transition', but that isn't true for hstses
are you suggesting there's a maternal age effect for transsexualism?

>>8188369
What are the racial percentages for NYC?

>>8188369
*Waves peace flag*
How're you, Trent? Been a while. I see you've gone tripfag.

>>8188349
I don't know if it makes it less likely to develop, but it's definitely a culture rife with homophobia. As an AGP I probably would've ended up being a fucked up man if I hadn't found out about transition and been open enough to accept it.

Black people have kids at an average of 24. Hispanic people have kids at an average of 23. White people have kids at an average of 27. Some studies have shown a link between parental age and homosexuality, sorta inconclusive though.

You can't ignore possible social forces that might drive disproportionate numbers of androphilic black trans women to cities.

>>8188372
2010 census:
33.3% non-hispanic white
22.8% non-hispanic black
12.6% non-hispanic asian
0.2% native american
0.7% non-hispanic 'other' (specified because most 'others' list themselves as hispanic)
1.8% non-hispanic mixed
22.8% hispanic (any race)
>>8188374
i'm alright i guess
posting rarely compared to how much i used to
the trip is helping because it prevents me from posting in every goddamn thread out of fear of looking like an attention seeker

>>8188380
We can actually probably address this via 4chan statistics. I'm willing to bet a lot more black MtFs here are bisexual or lesbian than in that study.

>>8188380
regarding parental age and homosexuality, iirc that's a side effect of the extremely robust association between homosexuality (both hscs and hsts) in natal males and number of older brothers
the association discovered by...ray blanchard
people with more older brothers tend to be born to older parents by default
it disappears when you control for that, plus if it were the dominant factor here you'd expect an *under*representation of hstses amongst ethnic groups with earlier childbearing ages

>>8188389
Oh yeah and there's also age factors coming in here, white people, for whatever reason, have waaay more people in their 30s transitioning. Which are obviously, vastly majority going to be AGP type.

The younger you come to grips with dysphoria the more you're gonna like dick. I transitioned at 20 as a whitie and I'm sorta fond of dick, but not cocklusting. An early transitioner whitie is gonna be majority straight by a big margin

>>8188309
This chart makes no fucking sense.

What is the difference between a lifetime and a lifecourse?

What are the numbers? Percentages? Percentages of what? They don't add up.

How can asexuals have fetishes?

Is this chart people with fetishes for being transvestites or for fucking transvestites?

>>8188408
>How can asexuals have fetishes?
They might mean anallosexuals.

>>8188408
>What is the difference between a lifetime and a lifecourse?
lifetime = has ever done it
lifecourse persistent = has done it consistently throughout life
>What are the numbers? Percentages? Percentages of what? They don't add up.
they're prevalence percentages, not meant to add up
so, for instance, 82% of trans women exclusively attracted to women (listed as 'heterosexual' because the protocol in these studies is to base attraction from natal sex) have *ever* engaged in transvestic fetishism, and 69% have done it consistently throughout their life
>How can asexuals have fetishes?
someone who self-identifies as asexual can in fact be autosexual and not attracted to others, which is generally considered to be the situation for the vast majority of asexual-identified trans people, backed up by studies like this that find high agp rates in 'asexuals'
>Is this chart people with fetishes for being transvestites or for fucking transvestites?
being

agp is a smart people thing

>>8188414
>so, for instance, 82% of trans women exclusively attracted to women (listed as 'heterosexual' because the protocol in these studies is to base attraction from natal sex) have *ever* engaged in transvestic fetishism

Ok, so this chart is only sampling trannies?

>>8188427
yes, it's a sample of nyc's trans population in the late 2000s
ironically the study was done to disprove blanchard by showing the differences in agp by orientation aren't statistically significant
good job

>>8188414
Why do so many A*Ps end up autosexual?

>>8188440
They aren't *deterministic*, which poses a problem to a binary classification scheme, but yeah there's a clear tie between gynephilia and autogynephilia. On the other hand you have homosexual AGPs so..

What If Everyone Is Wrong But A Bit Right?

>>8188458
>What If Everyone Is Wrong But A Bit Right?
Then bring on the conversion therapy, but remember it won't work for everyone.

>>8188465
What does that have to do with anything? I was talking about our esteemed researchers, not the fundie randos.

>>8188309
>>8188369
Nuttbrock's study is fundamentally flawed in multiple ways and his conclusion doesn't follow from his dodgy numbers >>8171626

The study is worthless and wrong, likely intentionally so because of a personal agenda to fake Blanchard as being wrong, the same personal agenda as plenty of posters on this board.

>>8188482
nuttbrock lol

>>8188482
>There would be a safer sample if we could compare the no androphilia high gynephilia and high androphilia no gynephilia participants without the rest.
>Let's exclude people who may not fit typology to prove the typology correct
You are fucking retarded.

>>8188482
>Being such a blind zealot that even Trent disagrees with you
Reals>Feels

>>8188482
second person you quoted
i both agree with you and, unless you became a blanchardian before coming to /tttt/, am the reason you agree with me
this thread just happens to be about the least shoddy bit of nuttbrock's study

>>8188496
Are you a straight ftm or something, Trent?

>>8188482
also, for the record, nuttbrock is not as bad as you're making it sound
the spin he placed on it was shit, but the conclusions itself are semi-solid and even he'll admit they went a lot closer to blanchard's than he expected
the problem is the people who listened to the spin

>>8188499
She's a homosexual woman, at least according to Blanchard.

File: sage test results 3.png (14KB, 491x339px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 491x339px

>>8188499
yes

>>8188502
Please take me out on a date

>>8188494
>>8188496
Way to prove me wrong homie. It's one thing to disagree with the analysis of the results (as little of it as there is) but why do you call the statistics themselves into question? I don't think there's a valid reason to dismiss them that isn't as valid for any of Blanchard's non-phallometric samples.

>>8188493
The data as we are shown it makes it literally impossible to even attempt to work out which participants are AGP or HSTS.

>>8188494
The blind dogmatism is the belief in worthless studies like this because of personal agendas.

>>8188496
OP pretends the numbers in that pic refer to AGP and HSTS people, when it cannot possibly be used for that. See >>8171626

>>8188500
>nuttbrock is not as bad as you're making it sound
If it wasn't as bad as I was making it sound, what I'm saying would be untrue.

It's entirely true, as you evidently know or you'd be correcting me.

>>8188505
eh, i was trying to criticize the analysis more
i don't think that anon's criticism is specifically the results, they appear to agree that the issue is because nuttbrock was...not very good at separating his groups
to see what i mean by that, read veale et al and then bailey and lawrence's criticism of it -- it had an extreme example of 'bad at separating groups' where every single trans woman analyzed was agp but some were labelled hsts despite extremely high scores on agp scales
>>8188506
friend, i already read that post
the fact remains that nuttbrock found very low transvestic fetishism rates in black and hispanic trans women compared to white, and that's an interesting finding that fits in with other known things about the demographics of trans women and is worth discussing

>The data as we are shown it makes it literally impossible to even attempt to work out which participants are AGP or HSTS.
If Blanchard is correct all it would take for a transsexual to be HSTS is for them to be exclusively androphilic, and vice versa for the rest.

>The blind dogmatism is the belief in worthless studies like this because of personal agendas.
Yeah sure I'm the dogmatic one.

>OP pretends the numbers in that pic refer to AGP and HSTS people, when it cannot possibly be used for that.
But ALL MTFs are either exclusively androphilic and thus HSTS or vice versa.

>>8188512
>friend, i already read that post
Then you are aware how shoddy the bit of the study in OP is.

If that is the least shoddy part I'm glad I didn't let myself be tricked by the zealot into bothering to waste my time on any more of it than I needed to too see it was worthless.

>>8188516
>If Blanchard is correct all it would take for a transsexual to be HSTS is for them to be exclusively androphilic
...anon, no
plenty of trans women who self-report as exclusively androphilic have autogynephilic etiologies
that is in fact what the whole concept of meta-attraction deals with -- 'pseudo-bi' was an afterthought

How do I stop hating myself for being agp

You blanchardians won't even let me entertain the delusions that I have a fucked up lesbian brain at least

How am I supposed to live with this?

>>8188521
lesbians have male brains according to blanchard so you do!

>>8188525
Afaik Trent argued that he felt fundamental difference between cis lesb and transbians

>>8188512
Well, thanks for clarifying. I don't see a reason to believe that Nuttbrock fucked up when it comes to properly separating people but I agree that the conclusion does not follow. To be fair he specifically said that for now the conclusion is highly hypothetical.

Mind naming the papers that criticize it, or linking them?

>to see what i mean by that, read veale et al and then bailey and lawrence's criticism of it -- it had an extreme example of 'bad at separating groups' where every single trans woman analyzed was agp but some were labelled hsts despite extremely high scores on agp scales
I'll say one thing here: that's an expected result if you believe that HSTSs can be AGP or are trying to prove that. The issue is establishing that someone is exclusively androphilic first.

>>8188520
Sure, but that does not by itself mean that every self-report of this sort is false.

>tfw blacks confirmed for the master race
no one tell /pol/

File: 1267066462368.jpg (56KB, 531x531px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 531x531px

Whites (and Jews) are self-aware and self-critical. Even as children, they'll pick up on the fact that they're discouraged from being GNC. Though they may not fully understand the implications until later in life. That's where the repression comes from. If you have no impulse control, you'll simply BEE URSELF. Hence the swishy little mudskins, with scarcely a hint of neuroticism. There's a price to pay for that, of course. They're treated like shit, and they're more likely to get into sex work. I'll take my problems over being disowned and riddled with AIDS, thanks. I'll even check my fucking privilege while I'm at it.