Thank You from a Trans Lurker

[Seethlaw]

I want to thank you all wonderful people for fighting the good fight despite everything that's been thrown at you. I was an intermittent lurker for years before your arguments finally made it through my barriers. I'm in awe of your courage and tenacity and impossible patience!

I'm a trans man from another European country. I used to be extremely baffled by you GC people. I couldn't help but wonder what on Earth possessed you to go after trans people. I couldn't understand how anyone could think that trans people, that minuscule minority, was any kind of threat to anyone. I was devastated when I learned that one of my favourite authors (not JKR) had "gone TERF".

Again and again, I went back to what I thought were the basics: there is nothing wrong with being trans, and we just want to live our lives in peace.

But stuff happened over the years, some in real life and some on MN where I would lurk once in a while. Coincidentally, it was on the day of the UKSC ruling that I found myself here again, and I was absolutely horrified, and I finally accepted the unacceptable: it was never the TERFs going after the trans. It was the trans going after women's places and even the very definition of the word "woman".

Since then, I've watched the fallout of the SC decision. And my stomach has been sinking as trans person after trans person has come here, trotted out the same old, long-debunked arguments, and hurled abuse and disrespect in the name of "Me, me, me!" And the thing is, I can't even fool myself that they are not "real" trans people.

Back when I transitioned, more than a decade ago, in my country, I searched for trans support groups, and I encountered that very phenomenon of trans people (mostly trans women, though by no means all of them) demanding that the world twist around them. I told myself then that they were not representative of trans people, but the thing is: they are the loudest ones, and the most demanding ones - and as such, the most visible ones. I don't know yet what I can or will do about that, but at least now I'm aware that when people talk about trans people, they might be thinking of such individuals.

Thank you to anyone who read that far, and thank you again for everything you've done. You people rock 👍 !!

This is what has baffled me all along. My husband is a trans man and he would rather cut off his own ear than advertise that fact. He just wants to get on with his life as his chosen gender and it not be “a thing”.

I always think there are two groups of people, trans people and then attention seeking folk who aren’t really trans, they just want special attention and see this as a way of getting it.

While I broadly agree with what you're saying, I think the being 'really trans' idea is a bit of a red herring. There is no criteria for being 'really trans'. We are told that anyone who says they are trans, are trans.

@JamieCannister
Perhaps the first level of AGP is "I get off imagining myself as a woman"
The next level is "I feel uncomfortable in my body because it gets in the way of getting off imagining myself as a woman".
Well, my personal experience would be the exact opposite to what you describe. Again it depends on the definition as to whether or not I would count as AGP, but my gender dysphoria dates back to young childhood (external evidence exists by age 6, I'd self-report it started even younger, as long as I remember). Then during puberty my sexuality developed, and could be characterised as AGP. I imagine this way round to be a common scenario, but who knows? Because my gender dysphoria is anatomical, it's perhaps not surprising that the AGP would be too.

I think that in the real world it is a bit of moot point - we can't tell who is gender dysphoric and we can't tell who is AGP, so we kind of have to treat them the same. But in an ideal world I would do the impossible and make it a serious criminal sexual offence to take autogynephilia or transvestic fetishism public, and only allow gender dysphoric people to cross dress. I know this can't be done (and certainly not without authoritarian laws which are undesirable).
I hope we can all agree that anti-crossdressing laws are a huge issue! Who dictates what counts? Hopefully indecent exposure laws suffice.

Again I think thought that you're viewing it as people are either honestly suffering (GD) or dishonest perverts (AGP) and not that actually in many cases it's both. Dr Anne Lawrence describes that GD is the push that makes someone reject their birth sex and AGP is the pull that draws them towards the other. It's an interesting way of looking at it.

An interesting counter-intuitive statistic I have seen is that those with AGP are more likely to get SRS, and to be genuinely satisfied with the result, than those without. It's a head scratcher for sure.

For all these reasons I think your suggestions that AGPs should be treated with hostility and restraint, whereas GD people should be supported, is missing the point of the real interaction between these things. I think the truth is unpleasant and messy, but so much better to understand the world from a position of truth. For years psychiatrists considered AGP to be a contra-indication to GD and therefore transexuals learned to hide their AGP in order to be allowed surgery and hormone treatment. These people both honestly experience GD and want to transition, and honestly do experience AGP arousal. They just learn to hide the latter.

In my head, an ideal society would accept that some boys are going to be experiencing AGP and, rather than treating them like criminals, would provide positive role models for how they can manage their lives. What is such a boy expected to do in today's society? Hide it and be ashamed. Or transition and be celebrated as a trans woman. I personally think it's the people that have been repressing and hiding it for years that end up with a very unhealthy and dysfunctional relationship with their sexuality that leads them to do awful things. If they had a socially acceptable outlet from a young age, I tend to think it would be less of a problem.

Regardless of what any activists say, I think we can agree with the evidence of our eyes that trans people do indeed fall into different categories, with different needs and I think it would make sense for this to be handled.

@TheHappyBug
This is what has baffled me all along. My husband is a trans man and he would rather cut off his own ear than advertise that fact. He just wants to get on with his life as his chosen gender and it not be “a thing”.

I always think there are two groups of people, trans people and then attention seeking folk who aren’t really trans, they just want special attention and see this as a way of getting it.
There are probably a lot more than two categories. But yes, I agree with Seethlaw and your husband that day-to-day I really don't want to be having deal with or think about the fact I'm trans, so seek to pass for that reason. Deep down I don't care if people know though, I just worry about experiencing harassment or abuse. If I knew no one would treat me any worse, I'd be happy for everyone to know. I wonder if your husband feels the same?

AGP, otherwise known as transvestic fetishism, is a paraphilia. As with most paraphilias, it is predicated on the basis of non consensual participation. A transvestic fetishist gets off on the responses of other people. The victims have not consented to these acts, thats the point. Whether it's discomfort or outrage, the victims' responses are the point.

The charged acts often involve exhibitionism, but can also include theft of fetishistic items like underwear, frotting, etc.

So no, it can not and should not be sanctioned and supported. Any more than other paraphilias can or should be accepted. It's no different an argument than the 'MAP' acceptance movement.

I've certainly seen it defined that way before Arabella, but I don't think that's how Dr Blanchard originally defined it, nor how a lot of the follow on literature I've read defined it.

Certainly if it's defined that way it's a very different scope and 'problem', my posts were referring to Blanchard's definitions.

Blanchard discusses definitions in this paper.

https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s10508-005-4343-8

It doesn't really matter to others what a man's sex fantasies are, unless they involve non consensual participation.

Any male seeking access to women's spaces is motivated at root on the basis of a sexual drive.

His demand is in itself evidence that his motivations are sexual.

Jusr wanted to say I wholeheartedly agree that non-consensual sexual behaviour is a serious soceital problem, and that the motivation is irrelevant, it needs dealing with.

That said, my understanding is that non-consensuality is not part of the definition of AGP. Though it certainly is an aspect in some cases.

Sorry, I'm on mobile so can't respond more properly or reread the link you sent.

Thanks for the insight, @TroubledWatersTW

It feels quite refreshing to actually exchange information and views that isn't point-scoring! (And I wish this happened more often)

How interesting and refreshing to read this full and frank discussion. Shows how the ‘no debate’ view has held back this conversation. One that might have helped resolution and better support, and far less harm, for children, teens and parents if these conversations had been allowed a decade ago.