You’re Wrong About Why People Change Gender - Dr Az Hakeem interview

WPATH (Yogyakarta Principles) wanted all distinctions to be eliminated. They no doubt recognised that people were sympathetic to body/gender dysphoria but not to the various -philias. If all these medical conditions and fetishes were grouped together then there would be more chance of men being accepted as women, no matter the 'condition'.
Dentons iglyo_v3-1-2.pdf would agree - keep it quiet, keep it under the radar. Of course vipers have a way of unearthing and the cover was blown.

the thrill of dominating women by being in / taking over their spaces - knowingly not ‘passing’ but forcing their presence through current social expectations

Without a shred of evidence other than my own experience of older TW, I see this ^^ as their primary motivation. In adolescent/young autistic men, I see the driver/s coming from being highly susceptible to external commentary in online gaming communities paired with deeply rigid black and white thinking. Once the idea is implanted in their minds, it’s very difficult to change.

Re the above, the info from ROGD Boys is relevant whether someone is on a pathway to AGP or not. Obviously not all males who identify as females are AGPs.

On this point, I would echo @TWETMIRF 's question above:

I think it's extremely disingenuous to dismiss the very real experiences of women but you keep doing it. Why is it so hard for you to admit that not every trans person is sincere in their belief that they should be the opposite sex and that a sizable number are absolutely doing it for a sexual thrill? There are transwomen who are very happy to say that it's sexual for them so why do you insist on invalidating their lived experiences?

Surely we could all agree that any transwoman who is motivated by sexual desire (clothing, anatomy, bodily function) rather than a true belief that they have a "gendered soul" should be ostracised from the trans community?** Obviously many such people will claim to hold a belief when it's just a front that allows them to follow and act out their sexual feelings, but some readily admit it. History suggests that there have always been people who use the goodwill and belief of others to hide in plain sight e.g. the PIE infiltration of Liberty/NCCL and the seemingly neverending revelations that come out of the church (the latest being that Justin Welby didn't act on what he knew about John Smyth).

**All of us on this thread. I'm not suggesting that this would be possible in the trans community at large. What might swing it is the growing proportion of females who identify as male or non-binary if they become aware of what's going on. Although taking testosterone will increase their libido, it is unlikely that many will have been motivated to transition by sexual desire.

Well said.

I can only assume it's important when someone is young enough to be helped; to understand and work though their feelings e.g. an autistic boy who is confused about his emerging libido and is being encouraged to explore that confusion sexually. This could be in an online community such as anime or where the boy uses a female avatar. In both cases the blurring of boundaries between fancying a character and fancying yourself as the character may be difficult, in the context of the mixed messages that children are subject to about what it means to "be" female or male.

Once it's established as a behaviour that is going to escalate, whichever driver it is, it seems less important to make a distinction. Autism or not. At this point...

The men in this category (or categories) are so keen to sweep up the kids, autistic young men and guys with internalised homophobia because they are great cover for them.

If there are any parents of adolesent boys who identify as female reading this thread, this new roundup of info from the excellent website "ROGD Boys" may be of interest:

https://www.rogdboys.org/effects-of-estrogen-on-males

Lots jumped out, particularly this:

The overall mortality risk for medicalized TIMs was 80% higher compared to non-medicalized males in the general population (standard mortality rate [SMR] 1.8, 95% CI 1.6-2.0). (It was also higher than biological females in the general population [SMR 2.8, 95% CI 2.5-3.1].) Some of the major causes of death include cardiovascular disease (21%), cancer (32%), infection-related disease (5%), and suicide (7.5%).

The increased cancer risks were thyroid and testicular cancers. Obviously some will have their testicles removed, but that comes with other health risks because the testicles contain the source of natural hormones that the body needs. If the testicles are still there, presumably they can start providing hormones again if the person stops taking testosterone suppressants.
Suicide rates for medicalised males who identify as female are also alarmingly high. 7.5% (in the excerpt above) compared to a general male population rate of 0.0174%, according to this from the ONS:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/suicidesintheunitedkingdom/2023#:~:text=1.,highest%20rate%20seen%20since%201999.

On RODG he has not dealt with it as a therapist.

I read his book and i struggled with some of his distinctions with all the sub groups

My take away from what he says is that gender dysphoria is not a condition in of its self. It is as cough, a symptom of something else. That is deep rooted in childhood.

That makes sense to me.

I am, or want to be a caring and empathetic person and so have been on that be kind journey.

I have as a woman strode by and with feminism, whatever that means, on and off, fell out with it many years ago when women denied their own biology, thought we could be or compete with men.

I realise now we are women, womb havers, chest feeders, birthing people, whatever the men’s want to call us now, and the silly women who think that they can be men.

I am an older person now, but that does not make me a fool.

I no longer give a shit about the detail, the analysis of what is the causation of the bonkers situation we find ourselves in.

In a nutshell anything or anybody who tells me that trans is a reality can fuck right off and i don’t care who i piss off.

Yes, I don't get the transvestite vs AGP distinction that Dr Az makes.

Neither did i. Eddie izzard was happy seeing himself as a transvestite for years, now looks and behaves like many self confessed AGPs.

To be fair, i dont think he'll have had much dealings with girls. I think he is focused on adults and has been working exclusively in the private sector for a while now.

Yes, I don't get the transvestite vs AGP distinction that Dr Az makes. It all seems to be about getting off on humiliation and submission because of misogynistic perceptions of women, whether the arousal is from clothing, other stereotypes of feminity, physiological (having periods and using sanitary protection, lactating etc) or anatomical (having breasts, vagina). Many also have in common the aggression and arousal from deliberately infringing women's spaces and getting away with it or enjoying women's discomfort. So they simultaneously occupy the oppressor and oppressed role - the ultimate, erotic power trip for them.
The men in this category (or categories) are so keen to sweep up the kids, autistic young men and guys with internalised homophobia because they are great cover for them. It also muddies the water further for those of them who have multiple paraphilias (they tend to have more than one) - paedophilia and zoophilia, for example. You can see this in every 'family friendly' Pride event - they have precious little to do with the LGB now.

You're right! The time given to girls and ROGD is about 4 minutes at the end of of a nearly hour long interval.

I used to work in higher ed in the UK and I remember when we were learning about the (then) new disability discrimination legislation, the key phrase was "reasonable adjustments".

In other words, it was recognised that budgets are not bottomless and that other people - colleagues, other service users - also have needs and rights which cannot just be waived without discussion.

Maybe in the stampede to look progressive (or to avoid being sued!) this principle has been lost sight of somewhat.

What I’m not seeing in this is a fetish (paraphilia?) associated with wanting to be dominated (by men) in the way men perceive women are. And, separately, the thrill of dominating women by being in / taking over their spaces - knowingly not ‘passing’ but forcing their presence through current social expectations.

Ultimately, as said above, there are probably 1000s of different permutations of this, as it seems there is with men sexuality in general. And this again the difference and danger of children being swept up into this ideology,

I hadn't really thought in this context before, but your use of the word "accommodate" makes me think, this movement has maybe managed in part because we also now have a lot of emphasis, at least notionally, on accommodating medical needs.

Which would make having it in the medical sphere important, if the claim is these are medical needs that should be accommodated just like having automatic doors or giving a student extra time to complete an exam or an exemption on being called on in class.

It could also be part of the reason sectors like education have fallen in line they way they have - these are also sectors that seem to go really far with accommodation in other cases without any consideration of how it affects others, and in fact say that considering such effects in inappropriate. (For example the larger effect on teaching of having certain students the professors aren't allowed to question in class.)

I've thought for a long time that we won't see the end of this movement until it's been really discredited medically and scientifically, because as long as that remains, there are grounds to take action on that basis, and the requirement to accommodate is part of the mechanism for that.

This ^

Feeling uncomfortable with your male sex, or wishing you had a woman's body to fetishise, should absolutely remain as some obscure mental health issue.

There really is a collective madness at large which says we need to accommodate this with laws and women's compliance.

The problem is the diagnosis of gender dysphoria is only a description of (traditionally) male behaviour. But that description has been used by some to suggest that there is a way for a man to become a woman, and force women to pretend some men are women.

What should have remained a obscure psychiatric term has been weaponised by men who want to impose their presence onto women.

@ButterflyHatched
I think it's extremely disingenuous to dismiss the very real experiences of trans people who spend lifetimes struggling with crushing gender dysphoria (sex dysphoria?) as just a fetish or unaddressed diagnostic overshadowing.

I think it's extremely disingenuous to dismiss the very real experiences of women but you keep doing it. Why is it so hard for you to admit that not every trans person is sincere in their belief that they should be the opposite sex and that a sizable number are absolutely doing it for a sexual thrill? There are transwomen who are very happy to say that it's sexual for them so why do you insist on invalidating their lived experiences?

Surely the best way for society to find a way to balance the rights of women and trans people is for both sides to be honest. At the moment things are very one sided, women talk about why it's harmful for males to be in what should be single sex spaces but trans people keep flogging the lie that they 'just want to pee' despite all the evidence that proves otherwise.

I finally got round to watching this video.

It's always interesting listening to Dr Az speak.

I thought that was the value of the interview, tbh. They were talking quite often about male sexuality, male fears, male socialisation etc.
I agree that the difference between female and male experiences on this topic seem hugely divergent.

I agree. It's not my main point of interest on this topic but it's an important one to understand for a holistic view.

I get the impression that Dr Az might say that the various sub-categories don''t necessarily understand the distinctions he's making and their own motivations very well, and can be confused by the social messaging and medical pathways.
And I suppose any of these groups could have other issues laid on top of whatever is behind their cross gender identification, like personality disorders, or other paraphilias that will complicate their behaviour.

This makes sense. However, I don't agree with him that many "GC" people have an incorrect understanding of autogynophilia. Blanchard coined the word and, as other PPs have said on this thread, as an umbrella it covers transvestic as well as anatomic drivers. Recognising the difference is important though and he explains that really well: the difference isn't in the risk to women, it's to the person with the autogynophilia. The risk being that those driven by an ananomically-led desire may make irreversible changes to their body and experience regret (because their sexual urge is no longer there), whereas those driven by transvestism are not likely to do this. I'm assuming the distinction is important when it comes to working with these people therapeutically.

Perhaps that's what he means by people having a poor understanding?

It's still very different from internalised homophobia being a driver. This remains distinct, as per Blanchard's description of a homosexual transsexual. This is presumably the best understood of the previous and current cohort of people presenting at gender clinics.

I guess the biggest takeaway for me from this video is that he's thinking about how this current, wider cohort of males could be helped therapeutically and that understanding the root of their distress is key. It's been said many times on other threads that the current demographic of young people presenting at gender clinics is completely different from the small number of cases in the past. Mostly that means looking at the impact on girls who identify as male or non-binary (because they represent the biggest numbers), but there has also been a rise in boys who identify as female. Autism is a massive part of it for both males and females, but the distinction between transvestic and anatomic autogynophilia is obviously important here too.

He's not the only person to talk about this. Sue and Marcus Evans, Joe Burgo, Stella O'Malley and others are also looking at it. I hope that adolescent males get better access to therapeutic help. It would ultimately benefit society as well as the individuals themselves (The biggest elephant in the room is the significant increase in sexualised content that this young cohort of males is exposed to with online porn and anime etc, all deliberately blurring boundaries. It's a perfect storm, unfortunately).

Dr Hakeem is insightful, but he did suggest that some men are less harmful than others - the ones who wanted to live unnoticed for example.

Dr Hakeem is insightful... from a male point of view. Many men, even those who acknowledge the harms of transgenderism, just can't seem to see what the problem is from a female point of view.

He mentioned Jan Morris as, I think, one of these harmless trans people who just wanted to blend in. Morris's daughter Suki has a different take on just how 'harmless' JM was.

Jan Morris was a trans pioneer — and a cruel parent

We should just forget about what the cause is, or treating them, because then we might feel sorry for them?

Where did i say this? As oldcrone says, im looking at it from the perspective of women having to live alongside these men.

Dr Hakeem is insightful, but he did suggest that some men are less harmful than others - the ones who wanted to live unnoticed for example.

There are a lot of seemingly unrelated excuses why men are pretending to be women. I think women and girls are best to keep in mind what they all have in common and the environment that allows it.

Twenty years ago the majority of these men wouldnt be demanding to be called women. Is there more men autistic, gay, men who have trauma now? Or have laws, media coverage, teaching in schools, porn allow sexist men to reduce women to an identity they can adopt?

There's obviously a place to look at individuals and why they might want everyone to treat them as women. I think the conversion therapy bill is going to be detrimental to individuals. But different reasons don't lead to different types of behavior, so as women and girls forced to live alongside these men, how is knowing their underlying conditions helping us?

The post you replied to didn't mention anything about causes or treatment.

@illinivichseemed to be just making the point that trans identifying males who are gay or autistic are not necessarily benign and that making a distinction between different types of trans and suggesting that some types are harmless, acceptable or pitiable might be a mistake, since all of them view women as a costume, which is, in itself, harmful to women.

Causes and treatment are a different issue altogether.

If there was any conclusive tests for brains, they would be used to diagnose.

The studies have weak correlations at best due to not testing like for like.

However, desperate people are desperate to make out they are in someway different from the sex category they reject.

Do you feel this way about all people with trauma related beaviours and mental illnesses? Lots of those people can engage in very antisocial behaviour. We should just forget about what the cause is, or treating them, because then we might feel sorry for them?

I mean - I get told off on MN pretty regularly because I don't tank an enabling line with addicts who are being anti-social which seems to be the current approach among progressives, but I wouldn't go so far as to say we shouldn't talk about the origins and causes of addiction and its related anti-social manifestations.

I looked into this brain structures thing a few years ago and dimly remember it wasn't very convincing. Only a few studies actually on people not given hormones, little if any attempt to control for things like homosexuality, autism or other possible confounding factors.

In any case, a neurological explanation (these men's brains are in certain respects more like typical women's brains) and a psychological explanation (they have a fetish) are not necessarily in competition.

There's also no reason why tiny physiological differences in the brain should take precedence over the rest of a person's physiology where this is entirely sex-typical. It's perfectly valid to separate toilets on the basis of genital structure, and sports on the basis of bone and muscle structures. In neither case is it obvious that brain structures should have anything to do with it. We don't urinate with our brains, or throw balls with them.

One also wonders why, if brain structure differences are such a well-established feature of trans people, no trans people are advocating brain scans to distinguish the true trans from the fakes.

The trans umbrella is dangerous because its grouping men with women, adults with children. The various names for adult men - transvestite, transsexual, cross dresser is less so because they all have the same thing in common - they are all adult men.

We are conditioned to be more sympathetic to men who arent top dog, even though their actions are hurting everyone around them as much as the less sympathetic cases.

The autistic man, gay man or porn influenced man are all seeing women as an identity they can become rather than real people. All of them expect women to accept what they are saying, and put our needs secondary to them. They just have different excuses why they are doing it.

We are then lead to believe that the autistic man, or the gay man are victims, and ignore the danger they are to women. An autistic young man could be influence by porn as much as the middle aged transitioner, the gay man might want to physically hurt women as much as any man.

Im just aware that these conversations frame the types of trans identifying men as being benign. And i don’t think that's true.