tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post133134523046122539..comments2024-03-26T16:19:11.382-07:00Comments on Crossdreamers: A Transgender Psychology 1: The Role of the UnconsciousSally Molayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02015510914816971645noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-60653199425050674112013-10-21T00:04:28.484-07:002013-10-21T00:04:28.484-07:00@Mike
Thank you for your kind words. Do not hesit...@Mike<br /><br />Thank you for your kind words. Do not hesitate to share your story here or over at Crossdream Life. We respect your anonymity.Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-83848672997191859472013-10-20T12:26:28.048-07:002013-10-20T12:26:28.048-07:00Very good reading. I like the research you girls ...Very good reading. I like the research you girls have done. This is the most informative blog I have ever read on the subject and the references for further research are fantastic. I would like one day to find a place to discuss my own lifetime of repression but that is another deal. I can at least discuss this issue now with others anonymously now and I am grateful for the insight(s) Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-31728904179208631652013-09-15T23:58:47.624-07:002013-09-15T23:58:47.624-07:00Glad to hear from you Emma-Louise, and thanks for ...Glad to hear from you Emma-Louise, and thanks for the thumbs up!<br /><br />Take care!<br /><br />JackJack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-8906508180492167232012-04-16T10:43:15.227-07:002012-04-16T10:43:15.227-07:00@Anonymous
1. No; I am not going to say that male...@Anonymous<br /><br />1. No; I am not going to say that male to female crossdressers are posessed by the anima.<br /><br />2. There are people out there who know next to nothing about the psychological concept of the subconscious. Hence the introduction. But it is time to wake up now!Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-26220540804724763302012-04-15T23:37:54.924-07:002012-04-15T23:37:54.924-07:00So you wrote an article to tell us that one day yo...So you wrote an article to tell us that one day you're going to write an article explaining autogynephilia in terms of Jungian psychology? Wake me up when the actual article is written. <br /><br />Presumably you're going to say that crossdreamers are men possesed by their anima. Is there more to it than that? Crossdreaming is sort of projecting your anima onto yourself instead of others. But if it projected onto you are really projecting it...sorry getting confused.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-86935668857451193792012-04-15T07:23:18.685-07:002012-04-15T07:23:18.685-07:00@wxhlup
"It does seem that the points I and ...@wxhlup<br /><br /><i>"It does seem that the points I and others have issue with, have either been downplayed or suppressed in the posts."</i><br /><br />I have not downplayed anything. It is just that you and I are disagreeing as regards the origins of crossdreaming. I feel no obligation to actively defend theories I do not agree with. <br /><br />I am going to address your concerns, though, but that might take some time. I was well versed in Foucault before I started this blog, but I had not read Butler and D&G until now. It will take som time before I have digested all they have to say. <br /><br />They seem to have no capability whatsoever of making their ideas understandable for people who do not have a doctorate in postmodern philosophy at the Sorbonne. They claim they are working to liberate people from the power of capitalist society but seem to have no interest in communicating with the people people they are to liberate. This intellectual arrogance offends me, and I beg you, please, please start writing in a way that more people can understand!<br /><br />I find it immensely ironic that you expect me to be the person who are to popularize their ideas for them.<br /><br /><i>"Seeming rooted in a central political theme aimed at sanitising the condition and reducing it to an abstraction of a gender condition. "</i><br /><br />Is this how you read my blog? Now wonder you are so agitated. I do not recognize any of this, unless, of course, you simply mean that I am trying to make people understand that crossdreaming is a natural condition that fits well within the expected diversity of human nature. Of that I am guilty.<br /><br />"... there is no major presence like Jack for a consistent alternative way of self identification. As a result I think I have found myself becoming ever louder and strident."<br /><br />I have invited you to write a guest post about your view earlier, and you declined the invitation. <br /><br />If you want your view to be known in a broad and coherent matter, you must take responsibility for this yourself. Set up your own blog. I promise you, I will do all I can to make it known.Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-51122263547086448732012-04-15T03:38:57.227-07:002012-04-15T03:38:57.227-07:00"This is the blunt attitude disturbs me"..."This is the blunt attitude disturbs me"<br /><br />-This is very understandable. I am aware of much of this behaviour. The problem is it is for the most part born out of irritation. The posts on this blog are very much a focal point on the internet for a large amount of people with AGP. It does seem that the points I and others have issue with, have either been downplayed or suppressed in the posts. Seeming rooted in a central political theme aimed at sanitising the condition and reducing it to an abstraction of a gender condition. <br /><br />Also there is the difficulty in the community, in which most new arrivals come with the presupposition of being sick or gender dysphoric etc, where there is no major presence like Jack for a consistent alternative way of self identification. As a result I think I have found myself becoming ever louder and strident.wxhluyphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17997134183477787458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-36383223073428901772012-04-14T23:53:53.110-07:002012-04-14T23:53:53.110-07:00A very interesting post as always. I think that th...A very interesting post as always. I think that the unconscious is important to who we are, and me personally i think that it can tell us many things that we are not aware of and in this way i kind of agree with Freud,but their is plenty that i disagree with.I am quite sure that crossdreaming whatever it is, is something that is a journey and each one of has are own obstacles and lessons. I think that there are good points of both Freud and Jung, but body can get it all. Its the same way with the different schools of psychology each one is good and has good ideas, but they also miss things as well.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-54763407840009864142012-04-14T17:41:05.065-07:002012-04-14T17:41:05.065-07:00"You seem to be guilty of demonizing me for h..."You seem to be guilty of demonizing me for having a contrary perspective to that which you are cherishing."<br /><br />You would be surprised indeed. You haven't a contrary perspective to mine. In fact, I agree with you more than you think. I am not fond of explaining/justifying my points of view to strangers, but yes, I agree with you more than I do with Jack. <br /><br />Let me elaborate: I disagree with the idea of a "transgender condition" and an inner woman/man. On the other hand, like you, I do believe we should pay attention on that mechanism of fetishization. <br /><br />I admit when i first read our theorizing i didn't take it seriously bc of the mention of traumas as the cause of the imprinting and your total unability to explain properly your theorizing regarding ftm crossdreamers. <br /><br />However, as the time went by, I have been checking real life cases and my own experience through ur perspective and adding my own insights and i realized you have a really, really brilliant point there and i changed my mind.<br /><br />My point: What disturbs me is not your theorizing, but the way you dismiss other points of view that are different than yours, the blunt and unpolite way you criticize the great job Jack does here. He has very good points too, (and i still think it is wrong you dismiss a biological basis but this is not the reason i have a combative attitude with u...) <br /><br />I don't think it is nice to read u saying "u shoulnd't focus on Jung because i want u to focus on D&G". This is the blunt attitude disturbs me from u and why i am blunt with u. <br /><br />Jack has done a great job here, even if we disagree with him. He has done a lot for us, he has brilliant insights and extremely interesting posts everytime. This awesome blog is the reason why many of us r aware we r crossdreamers. On the other hand, what have u done for us? You have brilliant theories, which could be enormously useful for us in this process of understanding crossdreaming, but all you do is dropping some blunt critism and traces of ideas. I think is needed more than this to fight Jack's work.<br /><br /><br />And, unlike others here, I am not impressed by the obscure way you elaborate ur theorizing. I myself am used to scientific readings such as quantum physics, endocrinology, and pharmacology. I find your way of writing has the fashion of social science, certainly elaborated, but not that "dark" to the extent it is impossible to understand. But, perhaps, you should make it simpler for those who are asking u for. :)<br /><br />The only one reason i did't accept ur theorizing from the 1st minute is bc i am a freethinker and i am not accepting something as a pure dogma just bc it seems to make sense at a first glance. <br /><br />Greetings,<br />Ariadna<br /><br />p.s: I am eager to go deeper into Jung, but i am interested in Deleuze too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-55183679785011756962012-04-14T17:39:49.896-07:002012-04-14T17:39:49.896-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-81627634882950843502012-04-14T17:34:51.924-07:002012-04-14T17:34:51.924-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-47794333293593005342012-04-13T11:00:07.150-07:002012-04-13T11:00:07.150-07:00@wxhluyp:
When I have the time to deconstruct you...@wxhluyp:<br /><br />When I have the time to deconstruct your comments I usually agree with them. The thing is that when I first read them they might as well be in a foreign language. You seemed to be well versed in the terminology, where most of us aren't. If you would take the time and thought to simplify your concepts into something that is easily understandable we might all be on your side. Jack does a great job of this. Maybe he has a post planned on your ideas (D&G??) already. Jung may just be his jumping off point to more modern concepts.Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-89315608753998218442012-04-12T18:16:16.707-07:002012-04-12T18:16:16.707-07:00"The only biological aspect left for these th..."The only biological aspect left for these thinkers is some kind of undifferentiated psychological drive or desire."<br /><br />-These "drives" are incommensurable to the semiotic. D&G's "desire" is not reducible to a pre-given image that is awaiting interpretation, it is the productive relationship between structures. It must be taken into account that the biological and the semiotic evolved along a relationship of incommensurability. Where the form of which the semiotic/culture takes, relates to the biological indirectly and forms distant, grand abstractions. And the improvisation of biological mutation evolves along historic cultural memes. There is much cultural baggage to put aside in order to get an impression of the biological improvised forces which for the most part are a reaction to problems the semiotic/cultural pose. The problem I see is that you are positing extremely anthropomorphic notions, where there should be distant and very "inhuman" abstractly improvised biological influences.<br /><br />"because i tend to dismiss anything is against my own points of view, even if it is true science."<br /><br />-I am not being dismissive for its own sake. You seem to be guilty of demonizing me for having a contrary perspective to that which you are cherishing. Perhaps you should supplement Jung with some D&G.<br /><br />A scientific apprehension of crossdreaming? No, because the best science can do is apprehend the mechanism for fetishization, but not the form of which fetishism takes.<br /><br />Science? There hasn't been a genuine conflicting article to my perspective. If so I would be ready to subsume it. "True" Science?-naive scientismwxhluyphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17997134183477787458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-25164387832856646292012-04-11T09:14:12.737-07:002012-04-11T09:14:12.737-07:00"It would have been a lot more help to the co..."It would have been a lot more help to the community if you just focused on D&G instead."<br /><br />Translation: "Jack, I would like for you to do your blog according to my own taste, not yours. You know? I don't like Jung and he is not interesting for me, because i tend to dismiss anything is against my own points of view, even if it is true science."<br /><br />Jack, Jung is awesome and many people here, including me, are very interested in this kind of approach. I think a multi-disciplinary and objective approach (without any personal preference) is the key to understand crossdreaming. So dismissing Jung or any other would be a big mistake. <br /><br />Great job, Jack... as usual!<br />Greetings,<br /><br />AriAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-67450983814541962612012-04-11T08:39:52.184-07:002012-04-11T08:39:52.184-07:00"D&G would criticize the extent of attrib..."D&G would criticize the extent of attributions to the biological. It is these attributions that one should interrogate by means of D&G's method, in order to show that which cannot be attributed. "<br /><br />The methods used by D&G, Butler and other "post-structuralists" are based on a way of thinking that already presupposed that the biological basis cannot affect the semiotic content of the psyche. <br /><br />The only biological aspect left for these thinkers is some kind of undifferentiated psychological drive or desire. <br /><br />Now, if this is your starting point, you cannot use the theory to determine whether instincts can influence the sex identity, as the answer is already given in the theoretical framework itself. <br /><br />In other words: This way of thinking leads to a kind of intellectual lock-in that makes it impossible to analyse the interaction between mind and body.Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-25273262640735748212012-04-11T08:30:20.957-07:002012-04-11T08:30:20.957-07:00D&G: DOLCE AND GABBANA!
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL.....D&G: DOLCE AND GABBANA!<br /><br />LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL...!!!!!!!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-70827021754330819322012-04-11T03:38:15.751-07:002012-04-11T03:38:15.751-07:00D&G would criticize the extent of attributions...D&G would criticize the extent of attributions to the biological. It is these attributions that one should interrogate by means of D&G's method, in order to show that which cannot be attributed. <br /><br />You might be interested in Manuel de Landa's notion of the attractor, as opposed to archetypeswxhluyphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17997134183477787458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-1885761179123531432012-04-11T02:06:10.733-07:002012-04-11T02:06:10.733-07:00Dolce of course !Dolce of course !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-64169461217407425572012-04-11T02:05:41.860-07:002012-04-11T02:05:41.860-07:00Thisis not Golce and Gabana ?
Shocking !Thisis not Golce and Gabana ?<br /><br />Shocking !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-25613395700787018442012-04-10T23:28:28.861-07:002012-04-10T23:28:28.861-07:00@Anonymous
Thank you for the link (to an article ...@Anonymous<br /><br />Thank you for the link (to an article about homophobia as self-phobia."<br /><br />It seems to me that these researchers are on to something important: The difference between homosexual and heterosexual is not as strict as most researchers want us to believe. I believe this is what Kinsey tried to tell us back in the fifties.<br /><br />Given the strong stigma attached to same sex relationships between men in modern Western cultures, men who feel some same-sex attraction may overcompensate and become homophobic. <br /><br />We also find homophobic tendencies among some transgender, as they are not able to reconcile their feelings with what their parents and their friends tell them.<br /><br />This paper certainly demonstrates the power of the unconscious mind.Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-3616253531974252922012-04-10T23:22:56.889-07:002012-04-10T23:22:56.889-07:00@wxhlup
"It would have been a lot more help ...@wxhlup<br /><br />"It would have been a lot more help to the community if you just focused on D&G instead. This would be the GENUINE place one would find liberation, instead of re-affirming many of the same old false presuppositions."<br /><br />I think you will find that I treat Jung and any other thinker in a very critical manner. You will also be suprised to see how much Deleuze has in common with Jung (and, of course, Reich, which had a great influence on him and Guattari).<br /><br />Jung, like D&G found the mono-manic focus on the Oedipus complex suffocating, and he actually goes further than D&G in undermining its significance.<br /><br />But by all means, there are also important differences, and the reason I am focusing on Jung this time, is that he has a theory that takes the biological basis more seriously than D&G.<br /><br />It seems to me that we agree on most things regarding crossdreaming, but when it comes to biology we do go different ways. I find that stimulating.<br /><br />By the way, let me again thank you for drawing my attention to Butler and Deleuze. I am learning a lot from them, and will use them more actively i the analysis of the socio-cultural context of crossdreaming.Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-63393175673583107042012-04-10T16:33:21.244-07:002012-04-10T16:33:21.244-07:00http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=4040
Ra...http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=4040<br /><br />Rad this !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-20995802201778851902012-04-10T11:21:25.791-07:002012-04-10T11:21:25.791-07:00It would have been a lot more help to the communit...It would have been a lot more help to the community if you just focused on D&G instead. This would be the GENUINE place one would find liberation, instead of re-affirming many of the same old false presuppositions.<br /><br />"The people we meet in the discussions taking place on this blog, are at least partly aware or conscious of their transgender side. But I cannot help thinking about all them that have managed to repress it all."<br /><br />-This doesn't represent me, and I hope others don't think it represents the crossdreaming community as a whole. I simply am innocently aroused by a variant of feminine-flavoured masochism.wxhluyphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17997134183477787458noreply@blogger.com