Peak Transing

[Apollo440]

This thread on AIBU has been joined by some aggressive TRAs who are doing sterling work peak transing the more delicate areas of mumsnet.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3634784-to-not-want-to-sign-off-my-emails-with-preferred-pronouns

Real TWAW No debate or your c*nts type. Carry on I say!

Catching up and running three hours late on the thread, but that lengthy passage on autogynephilia caught my eye.

Mainly because I've been in a relationship with a very honest AGP for eight years.

I've a great respect for Blanchard's work, but he misses the blindingly obvious.

It's fuelled by porn (from early days looking at mother's knicker catalogue right through to modern sissification sites online) and involves objectification to the point of fetish. And the fact that the feminine is considered submissive and degrading is a rather large part of it.

Admittedly my source is anecdotal, but this is not a neutral, harmless thing.

Right, back to the merry-go-round...

I'm still a bit confused about why I should automatically agree with somebody just because they're trans.

Not sure what you think you should agree? Are you making up people's reactions?

But at the very least, don't ignore them.

I've a great respect for Blanchard's work, but he misses the blindingly obvious.

This is possibly because when Blanchard was practising online porn did not exist to the extent that it does in our most recent years?

*Datun Sat 13-Jul-19 18:29:498
I do love that access to this site via this board has increased what was it, twelvefold or sixteen fold? In one year?

And yet it's the same hard-core of posters re-running the same thread over and over again. Baffling isn't it?

Unless of course most of those new readers don't agree with you at all, and are keeping a weather eye on the board.

MNHQ don't care either way, it's all about the click-throughs after all.

And no, I'm not now, nor ever have been, a bloke.

Tyrotoxicity

Have you visited the transwidows thread? There are a lot of similar experiences there. And tons of support.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3471122-trans-widows-escape-committee-2-the-trans-widows-strike-back

My main observation with Blanchard is that, although he has studied everything, none of it is through the lens of a woman, feminist or otherwise. And it shows.

My main observation with Blanchard is that, although he has studied everything, none of it is through the lens of a woman, feminist or otherwise. And it shows.

Absolutely agree. So some of his insights are good, and some of them aren't.

See also: Ray Blanchard interviews recorded on You Tube:

www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Ray+Blancard

My main observation with Blanchard is that, although he has studied everything, none of it is through the lens of a woman, feminist or otherwise. And it shows.

Indeed .. his analysis cannot possibly be through the "lens of a woman".

'T'was ever thus. No analysis is expressed through the lens of a woman .. hence the requirement for feminism.

Perhaps someone needs to statistically analyse the names on feminsit chat next, anecdotally I would say that the names of posters are harder to remember now meaning that there are more distinct voices. ALthogh on thread like this, the diversity is restricted

oops!

"No analysis is expressed through the lens of a woman " should have been:

No analysis of this is expressed through the lens of a woman .

This is possibly because when Blanchard was practising online porn did not exist to the extent that it does in our most recent years?

That's part of it, but I think Datun has hit the nail on the head.

Just like the medical pioneers of "sex-change" treatments, it never occurred to him to consider actual women in any of this. I lost a lot of respect for Blanchard when I read that he okays AGPs for transition if he thinks they're not a threat.

Trust me, they're a threat. By the very nature of the fetish, they are a threat.

But the threat wasn't recognised then, and it rarely is now.

Thanks for the heads-up, Datun - I've been dipping in and out of that thread since its early days. Tinsel has invited me over there too, I'm just considering what to say.

"No analysis is expressed through the lens of a woman " should have been:

No analysis of this is expressed through the lens of a woman.

This is why the threads written by the Trans Widows are so valuable.

These threads are the publicly available record of the impact on children and women,

Just like the medical pioneers of "sex-change" treatments, it never occurred to him to consider actual women in any of this. I lost a lot of respect for Blanchard when I read that he okays AGPs for transition if he thinks they're not a threat.

Trust me, they're a threat. By the very nature of the fetish, they are a threat.

Not one gram of disagreement from me here, Tyrotoxicity.

And yet it's the same hard-core of posters re-running the same thread over and over again. Baffling isn't it?
Exactly! But apparently it's others who are being repetitive

When it cones to autogynephilia, any women and children involved are invisible.

This is why the threads written by the Trans Widows are so valuable.

Absolutely. That one thread serves to illuminate in a nanosecond what Blanchard tries to convey over days. And still doesn't really succeed, in my opinion.

I wish I could contribute or give a perspective on AGP but my transitioning didn't come about either by transvestic fetishism or erotic target identity inversion. I can honestly say with hand on heart I've never fantasised about wearing women's clothes or "being" a woman.

I can however see how damaging it is though and how it was never seen as a threat until now.

Unless of course most of those new readers don't agree with you at all, and are keeping a weather eye on the board.

Is this a variation on the theme from TRA Twitter that it's only about 5 women with lots of sock puppet accounts?

I went away the other weekend with some friends. I've never spoken to them about gender issues before, but happened to be chatting to one guy about Owen Jones, who said, "I quite like him in general but he seems to be a right dick about all this trans stuff."

I know it's just one example, but I keep seeing more pop up, often quite subtly. People on Twitter retweeting the occasional GC view etc. And people aren't stupid, they are aware that if they dare say anything that could be construed as "transphobic" they could be lambasted. But they are there, under the radar, quietly having their opinion reinforced by fuckwittery that is the TRA position and approach. (When I first came to this I was pretty neutral and saw it as two sides having an argument, but then I saw how one side used threats and intimidation far more than the other and it made me wonder, and led me to be much more GC, even though I don't agree with everyone on the GC side.)

So I can well imagine that there are large numbers of people who are watching with interest, but don't necessarily shout about it. The TRA approach probably has worked to stop some people speaking up, but it will massively fail in actually winning hearts and minds.

To be honest, Hamster, I'm glad you can't contribute much on the AGP topic. I wouldn't wish the experience on you; you've had enough to deal with as it is.

I don't imagine the threat will be taken particularly seriously any time soon, however. It's a fetish, and apparently we're supposed to celebrate those these days.

The alternative analysis for AGP is HomoSexual TransSexualism [aka HSTS].

The TRA approach probably has worked to stop some people speaking up, but it will massively fail in actually winning hearts and minds.

It does. And I think people are appreciative of people who speak up. When I've posted GC stuff on Facebook I've had pushback, but always likes and comments of support from people I haven't seen in years.

Rose it’s really not same ppl
Since I cam here about a year ago I can’t tell yo7 how this board and posters on it has grown

Same as twitter and same as real life

Ppl see the threats to women and girls
And they don’t like it

A year ago this thread would of been full of deletions
No more

NO don’t think there are a lot of pretend accounts here’s. It’s surprisingly hard to get distinctive tone of voice and consistent backstory I suspect

This thread got... interesting! I used to read threads like this as a fence sitter, hoping to find answers to questions like "how do you define 'woman'?" or "what actually is a gender identity? How can you feel female?". I still do hope to find a poster willing/able to answer those questions, but until then I'll kill time campaigning for the rights of women and children to be upheld.

Aaaaanyway, on that subject, Rose you said that you used to be more GC but then some stuff you read elsewhere changed your mind. What have you changed your mind on and can you link me to something compelling that you read on it? Asking in good faith btw - any area of this I can take off the list of stuff to feel anxious about would be brilliant.

On a separate note, I really don't understand why someone would change their mind regarding the arguments because they found posters here rude. Even if everyone here was actually a total horror, the arguments would still stand or fail on their own merit. I'm not sure what the perceived rudeness is supposed to be opening people's eye to?

My main observation with Blanchard is that, although he has studied everything, none of it is through the lens of a woman, feminist or otherwise. And it shows.

It's the Upside Down, really.

Blanchard et al were the ones to greenlight heterosexual XYs to surgically/medically transition. But now transactivism hates them because they've got what they needed and don't like the idea of sexologists going about suggesting that XY hetero transition has a sexual motive. Conversely, feminists now stick up for them because they suggest that XY hetero transition has a sexual motive, despite the fact that they were the ones who came up with the absurdly sexist concept of "living as a woman".

It's like the plot of a Black Mirror episode.