The Case Against Autogynephilia

it's the jews

File: 748.jpg (29KB, 190x219px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 190x219px

>>8584522
>Dr. Julia M. Serano
>transwoman.

Yeah your going to have to try harder to disprove it then linking something written by an old agp-hon that deluded herself into thinking she is a real woman

>>8584522
I'm an opponent of Blanchard and IMO the strongest argument against autogynephilia as a cause rather than effect of gender dysphoria is the whole neurological intersexuality angle pushed by Swaab and Diamond.

>>8584548
The term is often severely misused but this is an actual, proper ad hominem. A logical fallacy.

File: IMG_0730.jpg (1MB, 943x1250px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 943x1250px

>>8584548
Please, read the article instead of relying on an ad hominem to dismiss what you don't like..

File: de4b19d6f3a920d2dcf35f6ad4b0c35d.jpg (14KB, 141x149px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 141x149px

>>8584577
>>8584565
Im going to instantly reject anything written agaisnt agp if it is written by an AGP trans woman.
Show me something that isnt written by a transwoman and then i will read it .

>>8584593
Not OP so I have no horse in this race but that's still a logical fallacy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If you're interested in off-topic arguments against the taxonomy (rather than AGP in specific) then there's the mountain of evidence pointing to transsexuals of all orientations having feminized/masculinized brains before any medical intervention.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexuality#Genetics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4699258/
http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2005to2009/2006-atypical-gender-development.html
http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2015to2019/2016-transsexualism.html

I suggest that we don't derail the thread though.

>>8584522
>Julia Serano

>>8584635
>>8584577

>>8584548
>>8584577
>>8584593
>>8584635
AGP trans women who oppose AGP theory are universally suffering from "narcissistic rage."

This is an observed psychological phenomenon. It is not an ad hominem, it is a scientific fact.

>Shame and Narcissistic Rage in Autogynephilic Transsexualism
http://www.annelawrence.com/shame_&_narcissistic_rage.pdf

File: 3c7c6dbac5f7bea4cd6b6ffb5bc2584d.png (200KB, 499x546px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 499x546px

>>8584650
>http://www.annelawrence.com/shame_&_narcissistic_rage.pdf
>>8584634
this is exactly what im getting at. agp's are increadibly ashamed and think that being agp invalidates their identity as transwomen so they will do anything to say that its false.

>>8584671
look agp is a thing but it doesnt have anything to do with transsexualism so fuck off with ur agp fetish.

File: 1461878442110.png (162KB, 284x281px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 284x281px

>>8584683
>look agp is a thing

true

>doesnt have anything to do with transsexualism

except it causes gender dsyphoria and you know thats why people transition :^))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

>agp fetish.

XDDDDDDDD

>>8584683
>but it doesnt have anything to do with transsexualism
[citation needed]

>>8584650
>>8584671
Guess all of those cis scientists are angry autogynephiles in disguise :^)

>>8584697
>she (agp) can't provide citations

>>8584705
Already did. See:
>>8584634

>>8584709
None of those say
>but it doesnt have anything to do with transsexualism

Calm your narcissistic rage and start following the conversation.

>>8584522
While I'm not a supporter of Blanchard, I've been watching the back and forth with his followers and the others posting against them. I've read the Blanchard intro stuff now, then the Anne Lawrence article, and now this.

This rings most true to me as a sense. It makes some great points (the one about pedophilia and Lawrence's points is crushing imo), and the smaller points that I knew were ones I had problems with too. So yah....this definitely seems to make more sense than 'if you weren't born with a script for Estradiol in hand, you're AGP!'.

Thanks for pointing this article out, OP, you're doing good.

>>8584725
NPDs always project. It's easy to tell how sick you are in practice blanchardfag

>>8584725
They do say, however, that transsexuality is biological and isn't caused by autogynephilia. Beyond a doubt.

Bah, brains are borrring. Like, all that complicated neurobiology stuff is for nererrds lmao. Trust muh sociological fantasies supported by nothing but my own opinion!!! ITS RITE I SWEAR! ITS ESOTERIC ALT KNOWLEDGE FROM KEK ITSELF!! OVERTHROW THE SYSTEM LIKE DARWIN AND COPERNICUS!!

>>8584746
>they don't say what I claimed, but they do say something completely different! so there!

Look I'm not going to stop thinking you're AGP just because you play stupid.

>>8584755
I SWEAR!!! TRUST KEK!! PRAISE KEK!! MEME MAGICK WILL MAKE BLANCHARD RIGHT EVEN WHEN SCIENCE DOESN'T! OVERTHROW THE SYSTEM!!!!

>>8584750
>>8584764
The defense rests.

>>8584690
that dysphoria you say you have comes from your fetish not from a neurological sex development problem at birth. Nothing wrong with it it's just a different thing separate my transsexualism. Like all agps say they transition for sexual reasons and not identity reasons.

>>8584842
>Both straight and gay MTFs undergo largely identical abnormal neurological natal development
>Only one is trans because of it, the other is half-female in the exact same way but isn't trans, they become trans later on due to a fetish
Ludicrous.

>>8584522
I can't reply to all of it, but here's some responses to Serano's article:

> However, pitting
> autogynephilia against an overly simplistic
> “feminine essence narrative” ignores a more
> nuanced view that I will refer to here as the
> gender variance model, which holds that gender
> identity, gender expression, sexual orientation,
> and physical sex are largely separable traits that
> may tend to correlate in the general population
> but do not all necessarily align in the same
> direction within any given individual

That's not a model, it's an anti-model; you're just saying that all outcomes are possible, but the strength of your model lies in ruling out various outcomes.

So for example, since Blanchardianism places every trans woman as either HSTS or AGP, we can infer *a lot* (namely, everything that the typology tells us) from very little information about the person (just knowing a single fact necessary to classify them as either).

If you're not going to say how correlate, your model is useless for reasoning about trans people in general and needs a lot of information before it even becomes applicable to specific people.

> If autogynephilia is to
> be taken seriously as a theory, it should explain
> the observed differences in MtF transsexuals at
> least as well as (if not better than) the gender
> variance model.

If the gender variance model is to be taken seriously as a theory, it should explain the observed correlations in MtF transsexuals at least as well as (if not better than) the Blanchardian model.

> (a) that Blanchard’s
> subtypes were not empirically derived but rather
> stemmed from his initial grouping of individuals
> based on their sexual orientation, thus, “begging
> the question” that transsexuals fall into subtypes
> based on their sexual orientation;

Everyone had already noticed that this was the case; Blanchard's theory is an attempt to explain the connections that are really really obvious.

>>8584957
> (b) that he
> did not include nontranssexual female control
> groups;

The theory implicitly proposed here is that cis women are also AGP. At some point I'm going to do a third cis female AGP survey to look into this again, but really it's not an easy thing to test. Blanchard's AGP scale was designed with trans women in mind, and in my experience it is really hard to design one for cis women.

(The Moser study is junk science.)

> Smith
> et al. (2005) also found that 53.8% of their
> nonandrophilic and 29.5% of their androphilic
> MtF subjects reported having experienced
> cross-gender arousal (both these percentages are
> significantly higher than those reported by either
> FtM group). While this suggests that crossgender
> arousal may be more common in the
> nonandrophilic MtF population, the difference
> between these groups is not nearly as pronounced
> as Blanchard claimed and does not support
> his contention that cross-gender arousal is
> strictly associated with nonandrophilic (but not
> androphilic) MtF transsexualism

PsHets exist!

When Anne Lawrence reclassified the "androphilic" subjects who had been married to women as autogynephilic, the difference increased to the levels Blanchard found.

> First, a nonclinical MtF
> population (recruited primarily via the Internet)
> was studied—such a group would be expected
> to give a more accurate account than
> Blanchard’s research subjects, as their answers
> were anonymous and could not be used to
> deny them the means to transition.

You can't find HSTSs in internet samples. I don't know why, and it's probably not unfair to say that this is kinda suspicious (I've complained a lot to Trent about this), but the only implication you'd be able to draw from this is "HSTSs don't exist" (or implications adjacent to this, such as "HSTSs are much rarer than previously thought, at least relatively"), not "A*P is not the explanation for the most common kind of transness".

>>8584962
> {that thing where AGP fades with time}

I really want to examine this phenomenon a bit more before commenting on it.

> The third and perhaps most damaging finding
> for the presumption of causality is that many
> nonandrophilic MtF individuals report that they
> experienced an awareness of wanting to be female
> long before they ever experienced crossgender
> arousal.

This is adequately explained by the romance hypothesis or similar; children can be and often are attracted to each other, so we should expect the equivalent with AGP, even if there is no sexual arousal.

> {some complaints about the romance hypothesis}

Here's an alternative way of conceptualizing the romance hypothesis that may be more intuitive (at least, it was for me):

Allosexual people who are not able to find a partner will be distressed about this. We might think of "finding a partner" as a way of "actualizing" their sexuality, and then say that people who can't actualize their sexuality will be distressed. This distress is not purely sexual, and romantic attraction is probably more important here than sexual attraction (i.e. prostitutes don't make incels satisfied). The equivalent of "finding a partner" for autogynephilia is obviously "being a woman", and so autogynephilia causes dysphoria.

> Given the lack of empirical evidence to support
> this autogynephilia-as-romantic-love hypothesis,
> Lawrence’s argument is not very persuasive

Lawrence's theory may not be proven, but it shows that it is perfectly possible for AGP theory to be true without always being linked to overtly sexual things.

>>8584970
> It makes sense that
> pretransition transsexuals (whose gender identity
> is discordant with their physical sex) might
> imagine themselves inhabiting the “right” body
> in their sexual fantasies and during their sexual
> experiences with other people

Gender identity is overrated.

Yes, it makes sense that someone who conceptualizes themselves as female would imagine having a female body in their sexual fantasies, regardless of their biology. (Perhaps this can explain why HSTSs score non-zero on the AGP scale?) However, A*P trans people experience A*P arousal before they begin conceptualizing themselves as their transitioned-to sex.

The problem here is that you're calling gender dysphoria 'discordant gender identity' when it really isn't.

> We also live in a heterosexual-male-centric
> culture, where female bodies and feminine
> gender expression and presentation are routinely
> objectified and sexualized to a far greater
< extent than their male/masculine counterparts
> (American Psychological Association Task
> Force, 2007). This might account for why
> both androphilic and nonandrophilic MtF
> transsexuals experience far higher levels of
> arousal in response to cross-dressing than their
> FtM counterparts (Smith et al., 2005).

Agree, that sounds plausible.

> This
> would also explain why a significant percentage
> of nontranssexual women who have been
> administered questionnaires similar, or virtually
> identical, to Blanchard’s Core Autogynephilia
> and Autogynephilic Interpersonal Fantasy
> surveys display autogynephilia (Moser, 2009a;
> Veale et al., 2008)

The Moser study is flawed because their attempt to translate the autogynephilia scales to apply to natal females is broken.

The Veale study is flawed because they did not attempt to translate the autogynephilia scales so that they apply to natal females.

>>8584957
>That's not a model, it's an anti-model
???
How useful a model is has nothing to do with whether it is true or not.

>>8584957
>you're just saying that all outcomes are possible
they are though
>the strength of your model lies in ruling out various outcomes.
if your model rules out outcomes that do actually take place in reality its a really shitty model lmao
>observed correlations
you don't have any of those, facts are not your strong suit lmao

>>8584970
>I really want to examine this phenomenon a bit more before commenting on it.
Already explained by Lawrence if it is real.

>>8584970
A theory is backed with the weight of scientific consensus. Lawrence is a fringe researcher who believes furries are secret plushophiles because fursuits exist (literally - that's her argument).

To call anything she has fielded a "theory" is misunderstanding basic scientific terminology, something I would only expect from a blanchardposter.

>>8584980
Models that are useful are generally useful because they are getting at some underlying truth. Smart anti-Blanchardians know this and acknowledge that the two-type typology is useful while questioning that the theory interprets the things correctly.

>>8584996
Even if you state that all outcomes are possible, it can be useful to talk about how probable they are. Blanchardianism+noise outperforms the gender variance model every time.

>>8585048
The typology isn't useful exactly because it twists facts relating to orientation into non-existent etiological explanations. It makes the truth harder to see by wrapping them with false information.

>>8585025
No it's not; Lawrence explains how AGP can motivate transition without overt sexual elements, but the explanation of how the overt sexual elements fade is dubious. My guess is that the fading is overstated or misinterpreted, but I don't know yet.

>>8585035
Sorry, I was using 'theory' in the colloquial sense.

>>8585062
>using colloquialisms in a scientific debate

Dropped!

>>8584650
>http://www.annelawrence.com/shame_&_narcissistic_rage.pdf
That's glorified opinion piece, not a scientific fact.

>>8585138
Are you aware it was published in Archives of Sexual Behavior?

>>8585166
>The journal was established in 1971 by Richard Green, who served as its editor-in-chief until 2001.[1] He was succeeded by Kenneth J. Zucker.[1]
>Zucker
Sounds credible

>>8584875
They have different brains the fuck are you on about.

>>8585200
Nice opinion post.

>>8585252
The differences are roughly the same as the differences between straight and gay people. Both groups exhibit neurologic intersexuality.
>>8584634

>>8585048
>it can be useful to talk about how probable they are
true, there's a lot more outcomes that are highly than just these two vague groups

I read te article, and I'm convinced AGP is fake. Good stuff.

>>8585259
It's 4chan after all. But good to know you advocate conversion therapy.

>>8585270
the difference is large enough to constitute one as being an identity issue that should be respected and treated like every other female while the other one is more sexual in nature thats the distinction. Nothing wrong with that but it needs to be understood.

>>8585303
>can't win on the facts
>I'll just make up lies!

>>8585706
>lies
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1025647527010

>>8585714
>you advocate conversion therapy.

>>8585785
You considered that journal credible, so yeah.

>>8584957
>we can infer *a lot* (namely, everything that the typology tells us) from very little information about the person
In other words you're stereotyping.

>>8584962
>You can't find HSTSs in internet samples.
That's because HSTS is so narrowly defined, and AGP is such a catchall dumping ground that pretty much everybody has at least one AGP trait, which is enough to be dumped into the AGP bin.

>>8584970
>This is adequately explained by the romance hypothesis or similar
Epicycles
>Allosexual people who are not able to find a partner
WtF more epicycles

>>8584559
So i'm a very blanchardian AGP. I've experienced a lot of discomfort during puberty that never fully went away. I didnt have physical dysphoria until much later. Never been good at being a dude i'm shy, anxious and introverted. Could I be neurologically intersex after all? It would sure be nice instead of the ELTE theory.

>>8587260
I think that's the view that makes sense. You obviously can't deny that the fetish exists but it seems like it is an effect of dysphoria rather than a cause.

>>8585339
They share almost all of the same abnormal neural features, and the ones they don't share are also found in gay men i.e. they're related to androphilia rather than being a woman. There is no ground for treating them differently given that these features certainly predate any fetish and are set by natal development. The two different etiologies model just doesn't match up with this information.

File: 1498722583341.gif (2MB, 389x413px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 389x413px

Holy shit a proper debate!

File: 1498882350024.jpg (44KB, 546x367px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 546x367px

>>8587554
>1 off
JUST

She's a butthurt tranny hon. Unpassable

>>8584522
>author is a hon
why am I not surprised

>>8585825
Do you think the APA is credible?