Another bloke making another strong GC argument

[Oldstyle]

A bit of cheer to counter Liberty's recent statement that 'the GRA changes will only affect trans people and must be supported'.

twitter.com/AlteredSquid/status/1032647992476463105
Hope you can access this - it's lengthy but thorough and well-argued.

wow, it is long- twitter isn't really suited to proper thinking, is it?
I see his point about differentiating the two types of trans women, but I don't think it will help - the vast majority of the public will just be totally confused.

Thats good!

Interesting. Thank you for linking.

I'm happy to distinguish between AGP type (autogynephiles) and Homosexual Transexuals (HSTS).

Frankly, the AGP lot give me the utter willies. And yes, the pun WAS intended.

(namechange)

Yes, it is interesting. And no, Twitter is not the forum.

A good thread. Very clear in its political implications. Have been thinking for a while that the AGP/HSTS distinction is crucial. Thanks for sharing.

Someone on there says:

"I noticed too that the discussion is usually centered around transwomen. Typically when anything TS is discussed, transmen are overshadowed a lot by transwomen. I figured this being due to transmen being more stealth + being a small % of TS in the past, I believe. Not 100% sure"

Yes. that's because women are overshadowed by men, because most TW retain their penis, and men are more of a threat to women

Well we do already do that.

It's kind of the whole point. The distinction between transsexuals (truscum) and transvestite fetishists (AGP).

They transition for different reasons. And there's no real way to tell them apart. Other than nuance. Which doesn't work in any practical sense.

And yes, asking the AGP individuals to face up to this enrages them. They go straight for denial.

Whereas the HSTS community are far more open to the issue in general. They have a condition which is distressing and they don't want to be confused with fetishists. Understandably.

Sorry - found the 'thread unroll' version - much easier to read.
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1032647992476463105.html

I agree it's the whole point Datun - but until recently I was struggling with the Stonewall definition of 'trans' which is presented as a vast and amorphous spectrum. Realising that there are essentially just two typologies was a lightbulb moment for me (bit late to the party maybe and trying to catch up). Do you think that an emphasis on the two variants might assist the case, assuming anyone wants to listen?

I think that in their hearts people already know that there are two types. They just don't know that they know. In other words they don't know that the two types are presented as one.

People don't want to know - it's distasteful to discuss other people's private lives and genitalia, but when we as a society are being forced to participate in the public displays of sexual deviants, what other choice do we have but to pull the curtain wide and discuss this openly?

Yes, that's the problem. The general public has a hard time discussing human sexuality in its many forms with a straight face (without sniggering or disgust). The challenge is to establish that autogynephilia is a real psycho-sexual disorder, and to discuss it with compassion while at the same time maintaining that nobody should be forced to enable somebody else's paraphilia. That's what this is all about, right?

Do you think that an emphasis on the two variants might assist the case, assuming anyone wants to listen?

Yes, it's always important to make the distinction. Because it explains so much of the objection.

People do know. They do. Everyone knows there are such things as transvestites and cross dressers.

It's that tiny little dot connecting between them and the brave, stunning, marginalised group of transwomen, they they struggle with.

But as soon as they see it, it's instant. Because they do already know, there's just that slight connection to be made.

I really enjoyed reading that but he didn't say anything that hasn't already been said on mn.

Just out of curiosity, are there woman that are trans because the thought of being a man turns them on? Are there trans men that are attacked to bio men?

Placemarking to catch up later but that Liberty are on the TRA-dogma bandwagon as well.

I've not read yet but presumably he's talking about adults. Because with children there's the HSTS, the ROGD (mainly female?), the autistic spectrum kids and presumably some AGP at the older end? Or is there overlap in some of those groups? Do we need a Venn Diagram?

Placemarking to catch up later but hmm that Liberty are on the TRA-dogma bandwagon as well.

Here's their joint statement with amnesty.
www.amnesty.org.uk/we-support-reforming-gender-recognition-act

And what they said on their blog
www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/news/blog/have-your-say-gender-recognition-act-–-and-change-hundreds-thousands-peoples-lives-better

They seem to think we are transphobic and the GRA changes won't affect women.

Thanks for the links Crone. I had hoped Liberty of all organisations would be able to join the very obvious dots around freedom of speech and women’s rights here. I’m struggling to accept how the third sector and public sector have just abandoned women like this. And critical thinking.

To be clear form the outset, I am gender critical and am seriously concerned about self ID, however I'd be very careful about tying your objections to Blanchard's definitions.

1. I won't go so far as to say they are discredited, however they are heavily criticised and there are obvious problems with them.

1. Even if someone is autogynephile, that in itself is not a valid objection to allowing them in women's spaces, it's essentially just an extension of the 'gay men shouldn't be allowed in men's changing rooms because they fancy men' argument, which obviously won't get you anywhere.

If you have the time, watch this video by Contrapoints on YouTube.

She is a trans woman called Natalie Wynn who talks about this in some detail.

Yes she is biased towards the trans perspective, but her reasoning is sound and her videos are entertaining with very high production value.

Really good thread (although, yes, probably not best suited to Twitter).

And, of course, those in HSTS category aren't the ones who want medical diagnosis removed because they actually want to transition the old fashioned way with surgery etc and realise the necessity of the medical aspect. If this was just about identifying problems they had with the process then it wouldn't be so controversial. They also tend to be happy to say that their experience is different to women's.

The big issue is that most of the people on the Clapham omnibus think this is the group we are talking about (I used to) and that we are trying to remove the rights of genuine dysphoria sufferers. As soon as they realise that it's the AGP fetishists, they are horrified. But not enough know about the distinction.

PatriarchyPersonified

Blanchard's typology is accepted the world over by the psychiatric and psychological professions. No other viable analysis has ever been offered by any other in those professions.

DSM-5 lists autogynephilia as the motivator for transvestism

[ContraPoimt is not a professional authority on autogynephilia. A key aspect of AGPs is their denial of it.]

Thank you for that, Jacky. I've seen TRAs mention Blanchard and laugh at the definition, calling it outdated.

Jacky

I think you know that because a viable alternative hasn't yet been found, it doesn't mean the one proposed is the only possible answer.

That's the same argument biblical literalists use as their 'gotcha' argument. Because you can't explain where the universe comes from, then their explanation must be true. The flaw in logic is obvious.

The problems with Blanchard are numerous and cannot be handwaved away by saying that any trans women who doesn't fit into the two categories (most of them) must be lying.

Seriously watch Contrapoints entire video on this, she goes into considerable detail about her motivations for transition etc. Yes she might be lying, but to say that every trans person in the world who isn't a 'homosexual-transexual' is a liar, really?

And what kind of Orwellian world do you live in where denial of something is just further evidence of guilt?!

I thought it was really interesting, but then I already knew all that.

I am sure it has been said before, but a few of the more 'infamous' prominent TRAs have admitted they have been refused a GRC because they failed the psych evaluations. They know they are AGPs, we all know they are, we just need to get the message to the wider public and those trying to foist fetishists on women. And that is why they want self id, that is the only way they will get access to women and their spaces. Oh, and they fucking hate us.

I am always very careful when I talk to colleagues about this, to always say, I don't mean transsexuals, I am talking about fetishists and AGPs.

They seem to think we are transphobic and the GRA changes won't affect women.

But what do Liberty and Amnesty know about the law or human rights for that matter?

I would say to any lurkers, to anyone who has come to MN to educate themselves you have to choose between two views: on one side the two leading human rights organisations who consist of legal and human rights professionals and on the other side pseudonymous posters - the majority of whom have a strong ideological position.

I am sure it has been said before, but a few of the more 'infamous' prominent TRAs have admitted they have been refused a GRC because they failed the psych evaluations.

Which TRAs have said that they have been refused a GRC on psych evaluations?