The real "autogynephilia deniers"

[Eryn]

...Indeed, since a rather high percentage of women experience sexual arousals involving their own mental image of themselves as women, i.e. the same damned thing Blanchard says is the root cause of gender dysphoria for female attracted trans women, perhaps this is, ironically enough, further evidence that trans women are, in fact, just women!...

Our society is much more tolerant and encouraging of women deriving intimate pleasure from their own actions. Women are continuously admonished to "feel sexy" and "pamper yourself" and are often depicted with rapturous, near-orgasmic expressions while using products in advertising and other media. Men are not encouraged to be so self-involved. It is no surprise that transwomen follow the path of ciswomen in this regard.

[Mayo]

I thought Dr.Blanchard broke some serious ground in the subject ( although much of the data was flawed ) he at least made the attempt, in what I arguably consider daring at the time studies..

So , as flawed as the studies may be ( because of the data used and how it was applied to individuals ) Dr. Blanchard was to many a pioneer and he set the bar ..The Wright brothers didn't fly a jet, Henry Ford didn't invent the automobile but they did have the "first" in their respectful fields that made them pioneers and I am 100 percent positive that they made plenty of err's in their journeys.. I'm not saying in any way Dr. Blanchard was an expert ..

This is certainly true - to a degree. Freud, Krafft-Ebing, Ellis, Kinsey and others were all pioneers in human sexuality. But problems occur when the theories are retrogressive or when they cater (deliberately or otherwise) to a particularly damaging world-view - look at the 'racial theories' of the 17th - 20th centuries that were used to justify colonialism, discrimination and genocide by whites toward people of colour, and the eugenics movement that grew out of those theories. Freud's views are terribly sexist. John Money has been criticized for his views on intersex people. Blanchard's typology has denied many people the opportunity to transition and compelled others to falsify their experiences in order to pass the 'gatekeepers'. Et cetera.

Science is (fortunately) self-correcting, but harmful theories can stick around for quite a long time before they are finally overturned. Yes, it's good that someone is doing research on these topics, but when theorists become so wedded to their ideas that they become overly invested in them despite evidence to the contrary then that becomes a problem.

[Lucy_Bella]

True Mayo,

To a point as well..

Just like the Wright Brothers ,who never dreamed airplanes would be jet powered and because of that helped us explore outer space..Do you think that at the time they flew those short few seconds at Kitty Hawk they knew that they actually could have helped pave the way to space exploration? Maybe ...But it took years of other people contributing to what they started to make that happen....

Dr. Blanchard , was only as good as what he had to work with..Now had Dr. Blanchard been T/G T/S or T/F he may have understood at the time during his studies that there was an actual spectrum ( he kinda did to his credit) .. But as the "Transgender" movement continues to become some what acceptable Dr. Blanchards theories become more flawed ..Because a broader spectrum is exposed..Leaving Dr. Blanchards Theories original would be like flying the Wright Brothers plane to the moon..

[PaulaQ]

But just being wrong, and most scientific hypotheses turn out to be wrong, doesn't explain the hysterical extreme hate that he gets from sections of the trans* community. He, after all, generally supports transgender rights and has even argued for public funding of TG related surgeries. I suspect that the real reason has nothing to do with the quality of his science and everything to do with the fact that he doesn't buy into the feminine essence narrative favored by so many in the trans* world. They criticize his science and offer mysticism as an alternative.

Does this guy sound like an ally?

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/her...alks-about-sex

You'll note he doesn't seem to believe trans men exist.

http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conw...rdResigns.html

Blanchard's work has done enormous harm to the trans community, pathologizing our condition, and giving ammunition to those who believe we shouldn't receive treatment because we are delusional. This guy's ideas have almost certainly killed people.

Look, the guy believes those of us who are attracted to men are really gay men in the closet, trying to increase our pool of partners by attracting straight men. Does anyone here not see the glaringly obvious stupidity of that idea? Is it even worth seriously discussing the rest of his crap given that idiocy? (Hint - I wish I was just a gay man, it would be so much easier.) He believes that the rest of us are paraphiliacs suffering from extreme delusions and chronic psychological disorders.


Do these articles on the observed physical similarities between the brains of trans women and cis women seem like mysticism to you? Our brains are wired like cis women's in some crucial respects. What is difficult to understand about this? The other sexually dimorphic organs of the body can and sometimes do develop in inconsistent ways. So it is with the brain.

http://transascity.org/the-transgender-brain/