tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post9138719490923508147..comments2024-02-25T22:43:04.662-08:00Comments on Crossdreamers: I have had enough of the extremistsSally Molayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02015510914816971645noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-24442105625895639022012-08-27T11:39:23.764-07:002012-08-27T11:39:23.764-07:00@AQV
Thanks for discovering my cut and paste erro...@AQV<br /><br />Thanks for discovering my cut and paste error. The omission of the last word from the paragraph doesn't change the meaning.Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-76326547016384693432012-08-26T12:10:00.628-07:002012-08-26T12:10:00.628-07:00Your RIGHT Lindsay. I have never formally introdu...Your RIGHT Lindsay. I have never formally introduced myself. Until I am invited to again comment here by Jack, out host, I will politely decline.<br /><br />FINALLY, since you, just like any man who has been challenged by a woman, cannot let this go and seem obsessively compelled to continue tue bait me by posting outright distortions I will leave you with this simple fact.<br /><br />Please note that EVERYTHING that I referenced from Benjamin's work is accurate and is without any agenda driven editing. I will admit to CORRECTING your HIGHLY EDITED QUOTE by re-inserting the word "woman", which you so carefully OMITTED".<br /><br />Your MIS-quote: "He lives only for the day when his "female soul" is no longer being outraged by his male body, when he can function as a".<br /><br />My "edited", IE CORRECTED, quote:<br />"He lives only for the day when his "female soul" is no longer being outraged by his male body, when he can function as a W O M A N". (Emphasis mine).<br /><br />So WHO exactly, "has been trying to change Dr. Benjiman's meaning by taking his statements out of context and by extrapolating conclusions that he never made?<br /><br />A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-89949970714299754672012-08-26T08:26:57.626-07:002012-08-26T08:26:57.626-07:00@AQV
"Therefore I will no longer respond to ...@AQV<br /><br />"Therefore I will no longer respond to your desperate attempts to "interpret" Dr.Benjamin's work to fit your particular proclivities and needs. His works stands on its own merit. Neither your POV, nor mine has any merit beyond our own personal opinions based on our own personal experiences."<br /><br />Dr. Benjamins work is quite clear and not open to interpretation. AQV has been trying to change Dr. Benjiman's meaning by taking his statements out of context and by extrapolating conclusions that he never made. If you haven't read his paper, I strongly urge you to so you can draw your own conclusions:<br /><br />http://tgmeds.org.uk/downs/phenomenon.pdf<br /><br />"Your efforts to demonize me by accusing me of doing those things which you yourself are guilty of, (like referring to your fellow crossdreamers as perverts and freaks, and accusing others of doing the same), serve only to highlight your own insecurity and failure to come to terms with whatever gender demons haunt you."<br /><br />I hope my fellow crossdreamers know that I have never thought of us as perverts and freaks, this is just one of AQV's tactics to try to fracture us. I will actively stand up to people who do try to pin those labels on us. I am an ardent support of the crossdreamer cause. I believe that we are normal people. AQV has never told us what she stood for.Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-70496943677993486662012-08-25T17:37:33.608-07:002012-08-25T17:37:33.608-07:00Lindsay. As you well know, Jack has requested tha...Lindsay. As you well know, Jack has requested that I no longer comment here on his blog. <br /><br />Therefore I will no longer respond to your desperate attempts to "interpret" Dr.Benjamin's work to fit your particular proclivities and needs. His works stands on its own merit. Neither your POV, nor mine has any merit beyond our own personal opinions based on our own personal experiences.<br /><br />Your efforts to demonize me by accusing me of doing those things which you yourself are guilty of, (like referring to your fellow crossdreamers as perverts and freaks, and accusing others of doing the same), serve only to highlight your own insecurity and failure to come to terms with whatever gender demons haunt you.<br /><br />Your fellow readers deserve better and should not be afraid to explore other alternatives to the ones offered by those who blame society for not accepting or buying into their particular brand of "gender theory".<br /><br />To those few readers here who are genuinely struggling to come to terms with who you are, my advice to you is to follow not only your heart, but your BRAIN. Seek other counsel. Get a second opinion.<br /><br />Be well, all of you.<br />A Quiet Voice A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-8469118891559933092012-08-25T11:42:58.080-07:002012-08-25T11:42:58.080-07:00@AQV
I like the way you carefully re-edited Dr. B...@AQV<br /><br />I like the way you carefully re-edited Dr. Benjamin's quote to serve your needs. By changing the order and leaving out the most critical part you attempted to change the meaning. But even in your edited version you can still see that Dr. Benjamin was not setting up the categories as absolutes. Here's the part you edited out:<br /><br />"It must be emphasized again that the remaining six types are not and never can be sharply separated."<br /><br />I can see why you edited it out. The meaning of this is crystal clear. Each category is not an absolute. It is a point on a sliding scale with no breaks. A continuum. Do you think that each group is an absolute? With maybe just a few outliers? Again Dr Benjamin is clear "are not and never can be sharply divided". Dr. Benjamin had interviewed hundreds and maybe thousands of TG's and classified each one. When he graphed the data he saw a line. He doesn't show his graphs but as a scientists I understand what he is saying. It was either straight, with or without a slope, or a curve. He did not see a graph with 6 blips clustered about the categories.<br /><br />Another clue that he didn't see 6 clusters of data is that he seems fairly unconcerned with the number of groups. He started with 3 and later expanded it to 6. He had students who came up with groups of 5 and of 7.Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-48588008665808102172012-08-24T23:55:58.135-07:002012-08-24T23:55:58.135-07:00Excellent observation. Dr. Benjamin further refin...Excellent observation. Dr. Benjamin further refined his three goups into 6 "sub-types, I-VI".<br /><br />"The clinical pictures are approximations, schematized and idealized, so that Type I, Type II, and Type III would belong to the original Group 1. Type IV would be Group 2 and Types V and VI would equal Group 3, as the accompanying Table 2 shows." ~Harry Benjamin<br /> <br /> N.B. "...the TV and TS who may look for himself among the types will find his own picture usually in between two recorded categories, his principal characteristics listed in both adjoining columns."<br /><br />Is this what you trying to use this to dispute my assertion that he did NOT intend, "that it be blended and blurred so that those at one end could claim kinship with those at the other."??? ~AQV A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-73144380524428055152012-08-24T23:37:31.064-07:002012-08-24T23:37:31.064-07:00Thank you for making my point.
Group 1: "Fir...Thank you for making my point.<br /><br />Group 1: "First there are those who merely want to "dress," go out "dressed," and to be accepted as women. They want to be allowed to do so. Their clash is with society and the law. Most of them feel, live, and work as men and lead normal, heterosexual lives, often as husbands and fathers"<br /><br />In Benjamin's subsequent publication this group included Type I-III Transvestites.<br /><br />Group 2: "It could be interpreted as an intermediate stage between transvestism and transsexualism. These patients may waver in their emotions between the two. They need more than merely "dressing" to appease their psychological sex with its commanding and demanding female component. They want to experience some physical changes, bringing their bodies closer to that of the female, although they do shy away from surgery and the alteration of their genitalia. Such a desire, however, can play a part in their fantasies and daydreams. Like those of Group 1, for them the penis is still an organ of pleasure, in most cases for masturbation only."<br /><br />These were later dscribe as Type IV<br /><br />Group 3: "...which constitutes fully developed transsexualism. The transsexual shows a much greater degree of sex [9] and gender role disorientation and a much deeper emotional disturbance. To him, his sex organs are sources of disgust and hate. So are his male body forms, hair distribution, masculine habits, male dress, and male sexuality. He lives only for the day when his "female soul" is no longer being outraged by his male body, when he can function as a woman"<br /><br />Included in Group 3 were your Type V an VI "true/high intensity transsexuals.<br /><br />Again thank you for helping me clarify Dr. Benjamin's seminal work.<br />A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-60984655371649630902012-08-24T22:36:01.903-07:002012-08-24T22:36:01.903-07:00Here's some more misinformation from AQV:
AQV...Here's some more misinformation from AQV:<br /><br />AQV said<br /><br />"Dr. Benjamn never spoke of a "continuum". In fact he further separated his six types into three distinct groups. Have a look at pg. 19. It might help.<br />http://tgmeds.org.uk/downs/phenomenon.pdf"<br /><br />She references a book written by Dr. Benjamin that clearly disputes this (see my above post quoting the paragraph on page 15). It seems that all she has done is look at the chart and not read the supporting text.<br /><br />Dr. Benjamin does not use the word continuum, but what he describes clearly is:<br /><br />"It must be emphasized again that the remaining six types are not and never can be sharply separated. The clinical pictures are approximations, schematized and idealized, so that the TV and TS who may look for himself among the types will find his own picture usually in between two recorded categories, his principal characteristics listed in both adjoining columns."<br /><br />She makes it sound like he further broke up the table into three groups. But the text reveals that the 3 groups came first and the 6 groups are a further refinement based on Kinsey's heterosexual/homosexual scale. So the 3 groups were not an attempt to segregate the groups.<br /><br />From Dr. Benjamin's book, page 13:<br /><br />"In previous medical publications, I have divided all transvestites into three groups according to the clinical picture they presented. First there are those who merely want to "dress," go out "dressed," and to be accepted as women. They want to be allowed to do so. Their clash is with society and the law. Most of them feel, live, and work as men and lead normal, heterosexual lives, often as husbands and fathers.<br /><br />Group 2 constitutes a more severe stage of an emotional disturbance. It could be interpreted as an intermediate stage between transvestism and transsexualism. These patients may waver in their emotions between the two. They need more than merely "dressing" to appease their psychological sex with its commanding and demanding female component. They want to experience some physical changes, bringing their bodies closer to that of the female, although they do shy away from surgery and the alteration of their genitalia. Such a desire, however, can play a part in their fantasies and daydreams. Like those of Group 1, for them the penis is still an organ of pleasure, in most cases for masturbation only. They crave some degree of gynecomastia (breast development) with the help of hormone medication, which affords them an enormous emotional relief. Psychotherapy is indicated but the patients frequently refuse it or fail to benefit from it. Their clash is not only with society and the law, but also with the medical profession. Relatively few doctors are familiar with their problems; most doctors do not know what to do for them except to reject them as patients or to send them to psychiatrists as "Mental cases."<br /><br />This clash with society, the law, and the medical profession is still more pronounced and tragic in Group 3, which constitutes fully developed transsexualism. The transsexual shows a much greater degree of sex [9] and gender role disorientation and a much deeper emotional disturbance. To him, his sex organs are sources of disgust and hate. So are his male body forms, hair distribution, masculine habits, male dress, and male sexuality. He lives only for the day when his "female soul" is no longer being outraged by his male body, when he can function as a"<br /><br />As these 3 groups were defined before the "6 types" Dr. Benjamin's comments that they "never can be sharply separated" obviously still apply.Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-68240366143131320422012-08-23T18:13:56.692-07:002012-08-23T18:13:56.692-07:00Glad to be of assistance. :-)Glad to be of assistance. :-)A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-69858598616149056872012-08-23T14:27:26.913-07:002012-08-23T14:27:26.913-07:00AQV
Thanks for the link it's very enlightenin...AQV<br /><br />Thanks for the link it's very enlightening! I suggest everyone read at least thru the first 30 pages or so:<br /><br />http://tgmeds.org.uk/downs/phenomenon.pdf<br /><br />Particularly enlightening is the explanation of the table on page 19 that I found on page 15 which I quote:<br /><br />"The Sex Orientation Scale (S.O.S.) likewise lists seven categories or types (not necessarily stages), the zero, however, separately, as it would apply to any person of normal sex and gender orientation for whom ideas of "dressing" or sex change are completely foreign and definitely unpleasant, whether that person is hetero-, bi-, or homosexual. It must be emphasized again that the remaining six types are not and never can be sharply separated. The clinical pictures are approximations, schematized and idealized, so that the TV and TS who may look for himself among the types will find his own picture usually in between two recorded categories, his principal characteristics listed in both adjoining columns. Type I, Type II, and Type III would belong to the original Group 1. Type IV would be Group 2 and Types V and VI would equal Group 3, as the accompanying Table 2 shows."<br /><br />I leave it to the readers to come to their own conclusions. It's pretty self explanatory.<br />Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-62137358411683689082012-08-23T09:38:57.402-07:002012-08-23T09:38:57.402-07:00@A. Quiet Voice
A sexual fetish is something that...@A. Quiet Voice<br /><br />A sexual fetish is something that arouses oneself sexually. A sexual paraphilia is something that arouses one sexually and also causes distress to the individual or harm to others.A.Gottesmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07544001333924424176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-57152806248475596482012-08-23T08:51:43.919-07:002012-08-23T08:51:43.919-07:00No, Lindsay. It seems that it is you who have a p...No, Lindsay. It seems that it is you who have a phobia for your fellows which you clearly regard as perverts and from whom you are desperately trying to separate yourself from. To me it seems that it is you who, "want(s) to have a "special" break between categories 5 and 6 so you will not be associated with the perverts in lower categories. That's the only explanation I can come up with." ~Lindsay<br /><br />On the other hand I have clearly acnowleged that 'blurryness.<br /><br />"...we get that Benjamin never intented that his "Types I-VI" be used as an absolute." ~AQV<br />I agree. Benjamin clearly stated that there existed 'blurry' areas between the Types. There was no sharp line of demarcation.<br /><br />Dr. Benjamn never spoke of a "continuum". In fact he further separated his six types into three distinct groups. Have a look at pg. 19. It might help.<br />http://tgmeds.org.uk/downs/phenomenon.pdf<br /><br />Speaking of help, could someone please explain the differnce between a sexual fetish and a sexual paraphilia as there seems to be much argument over that distinction.<br /><br />Oh and BTW do most readers know that you still continue to beat your dog. Please do not, or deny that you don't hate dogs or even own one. It is common knowledge that you do.<br /><br />Sorry. I could not resist.A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-57643369562505239252012-08-23T07:44:42.954-07:002012-08-23T07:44:42.954-07:00@AQV
"Yes Jack, we get that Benjamin never i...@AQV<br /><br />"Yes Jack, we get that Benjamin never intented that his "Types I-VI" be used as an absolute. <br /><br />Nor did he intended that it be blended and blurred so that those at one end could claim kinship with those at the other."<br /><br />Again you skirt the issue with your convoluted double speak.<br /><br />Benjamin is saying that his categories are a continuum. But for some reason you want to have a "special" break between categories 5 and 6 so you will not be associated with the perverts in lower categories. That's the only explanation I can come up with for your statement.<br /><br />Not being absolute means there has to be blurring between the categories. There are going to be some type 5.5's and 4.7's. You ARE distantly related to the 1.0's whether you like it or not.<br /><br />Oh, and most readers here know I'm not making false accusations about the insults that you pelt us with both as AQV and anonymous. We can only take so much abuse.Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-73316491241691498752012-08-23T05:18:57.710-07:002012-08-23T05:18:57.710-07:00@Raju Mahanta
Crossdreaming looks to be intrinsic...@Raju Mahanta<br /><br />Crossdreaming looks to be intrinsically sexually fetishistic in the position sense of the word. All sexual desire is phenomenologically fetishistic. I have been sexually aroused by the traumatic humiliating thought of being thought of as feminine from as early as 4-5 years of age. I do not believe that we are born with a substantial degree of gender, but that we are gendered through socialization.A.Gottesmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07544001333924424176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-25187625409208284322012-08-22T18:30:39.817-07:002012-08-22T18:30:39.817-07:00I have expended a fair amount of effort in bringin...I have expended a fair amount of effort in bringing to light some of the many factual inaccuracies cleverly obscured in Jack's manipulation of the language.<br /><br />Why is it that you Lindsay find that so discomforting that youust insert yourself in a fairly civil discussion and attack the messenger, who frankly has done little more than question Jack's construct.<br /><br />On the other hand you Lindsay, are attempting to make this personal. You have resorted to false accusations, ("You seem to have 10 or 20 derogatory terms for us"), and demonizations, ("I can't say anything with out insulting us or implying terrible things about us".) None of this is true and not only you, but the readers of this blog know that.<br /><br />Why is that? Why are you so hateful towards people who hold different values than you?<br /><br />Ignoring your unseemly and distasteful rallying cry to violate my privacy and ferret out my identity, (why would you want to do that? to harm me?)...let us rather focus on my two statements that you quoted.<br /><br />"...we get that Benjamin never intented that his "Types I-VI" be used as an absolute." ~AQV<br /><br />I agree. Benjamin clearly stated that there existed 'blurry' areas between the Types. There was no sharp line of demarcation.<br /><br />"Nor did he intended that it be blended and blurred so that those at one end could claim kinship with those at the other." ~AQV<br /><br />This is also a true statement with which I also agree. Benjamin defined his six "Types" in an attempt to distinguish and differentiate between fetishistic transvestites, (type I) and those suffering from a full blown psycho-sexual disconnect, (type VI).<br /><br />How am I to understand your accusation that, I want it both ways"? I dd not write Benjamin's book. Harry Benjamin wrote the book.<br /><br />I am not maligning anybody. I am not the one using such terms as "pervert" or "freaks". Nor have I labeled anybody as, "mere fetishists". <br /><br />I will leave those esoterical, phenomenological and post-structuralist arguements to you experts.A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-43867386045075749992012-08-22T12:36:32.328-07:002012-08-22T12:36:32.328-07:00@A QuietVoice,
People like you will go to any exte...@A QuietVoice,<br />People like you will go to any extent in wanting to malign as well as invalidate our claims of being women or something in between, by labelling our kinds as mere fetishists. <br />You have totally ignored my above post earlier where I said that sexual arousal does not necessarily mean a fetish. It simply is an enhanced form of mental arousal, which due to the intense testosterone may just excite or stimulate the sex organs leading to what we call 'sexual arousal'.<br />Most crossdreamers have had intense feminine feelings at age 9-10, even before their sex drives started.<br />Now, since I am myself a strong believer in the gender non-binary system wherein, we have more than two genders, I don't believe in the rigid idea that every "crossdreamer" necessarily has to be 100% female. There are many ways of being female and male at the same time. If we say a total transsexual woman is 90% female and 10% male,there is no reason why a 60% female person in a male body cannot exist.<br />Infact, more often that not, it does and any rational unbiased person willing to look through false social facades can very well see the truth.<br />Not just that, diversity is a rile rather than any exception and so there is no need to put people into rigid boxes either.Jack may experience one type of transgenderism, I another type and you another. Let us unite in diversity rather than deliberately creating factions which will only serve to reinforce the stigmas already prevalent in society due to researchers like Blanchard who are well set to malign and deny our true nature.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08255775056077045870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-54637988188830937832012-08-22T12:03:10.865-07:002012-08-22T12:03:10.865-07:00AQV said:
"You see jack. You cannot have it ...AQV said:<br /><br />"You see jack. You cannot have it both ways and expect anybody with an open functioning mind and more than half a brain to buy into your particular brand paraphilias, pandering to those who share them."<br /><br />Here's a quote from one of your previous posts:<br /><br />"Yes Jack, we get that Benjamin never intented that his "Types I-VI" be used as an absolute. <br /><br />Nor did he intended that it be blended and blurred so that those at one end could claim kinship with those at the other."<br /><br />You seem to want it both ways too. It's a continuum when you want it to be. But when it goes against your case it suddenly isn't. You seem to be the expert of talking out of both sides of your mouth. You criticize Jack for wanting it both ways when in fact he is just presenting a balanced case. I think you're the one with the agenda. We would be fascinated to hear about it. <br /><br />This community needs to start actively exploring who "A.Quiet Voice" is and what her motivations are. She doesn't seem interested in opening up on who she is, so until she does, she has provided us with a wealth of interesting stuff we can use to fill in the details. It seems her main intention is to shut this community down.Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06742298653334993493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-25762789765185355972012-08-22T09:02:11.524-07:002012-08-22T09:02:11.524-07:00Jack claims that..."This is the main reason g...Jack claims that..."This is the main reason gynephilic crossdreamers are considered perverts, while androphilic transgender people are not. The gynephilic crossdreamers do not fit the common understanding that "normal women" should be attracted to men." ~Jack<br /><br />Let's translate, shall we? <br /><br />This the main reason gynephilic crossdreamers, (women loving/heterosexual MEN, who dream of having female bodies), are considered perverts, while androphilic, (men loving) transgender people, (men??? men AND women???, crossdressers??? Those who present in a gender opposite from that normally expected from those with their sex assigned at birth??? Fetishists??? Gender Queers???)...are not. <br /><br />Ignoring the subtle change of population from straight men to a convenientlyUNDEFINED, "transgender"/all-inclusive/ill-defined/ambiguous, collection of people...We are now assumed to have accepted your conclusion that yes, of course, this MUST be the only conclusion and your logic is sound, when clearly it is based on false and fraudulently presented premises.<br /><br />You see, my assessment of your theorizing as 'convoluted' is base on how you try to control the language by mixing and confusing terms and ideas. The above is just one example of many that I could glean from your ramblings.<br /><br />"I am not saying that all MTF crossdreamers and crossdressers are transsexual women, but many are gender dysphoric, and many of them are truly women" ~Jack<br /><br />You see! There you go again! You spent your entire comment obstensibly claiming that not, "all MTF crossdreamers and crossdressers are transsexual women," BUT..."... many of them are truly women" ~Jack<br /><br />You see jack. You cannot have it both ways and expect anybody with an open functioning mind and more than half a brain to buy into your particular brand paraphilias, pandering to those who share them.<br /><br />Just saying...A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-38847007493478374612012-08-22T01:10:46.135-07:002012-08-22T01:10:46.135-07:00@A Quiet Voice
"Oh! Now I understand why you...@A Quiet Voice<br /><br />"Oh! Now I understand why you refer to normal heterosexual women as 'androphylic', or 'non-gynophilic'."<br /><br />I use words like "androphilic" and "gynephilic" in order to help my readers understand the sexual orientation of the various people I write about. <br /><br />The reason for using these words is the confusion caused by researchers like Blanchard who call androphilic transsexual women "homosexual transsexuals", in spite of them being clearly heterosexual. <br /><br />To avoid this confusion I follow the practice the more tolerant researchers, who use terms like "androphilic". I often add terms like "man-loving", "sexually oriented towards men" to explain this to new readers.<br /><br />I think the reason you find my blog so "convoluted" is that I have come to realize that the interaction between nature and culture <i>is</i> "convoluted". <br /><br />Much of the suffering found in transgender circles is cause by us not recognizing this fact. <br /><br />People are forced to play the role of someone that is not really them. This also applies to transsexual women, who are expected to act like "real men", even when they are not men.<br /><br />I do not believe in a simple spectrum with hyperfeminine women on the one side and hypermasculine men on the other and androgynous gender queers in the middle. <br /><br />Most MTF crossdreamers do not fit into such a spectrum, mainly because they are sexually oriented towards women (they are "gynephilic"). <br /><br />This is the main reason gynephilic crossdreamers are considered perverts, while androphilic transgender people are not. The gynephilic crossdreamers do not fit the common understanding that "normal women" should be attracted to men. <br /><br />The traditional image of the perfect transsexual woman remains the androphilic one. Admittedly, Blanchard think of them as "effeminate gay men", but he does not consider them perverts or "paraphiliacs". <br /><br />Transsexual women are often denied SRS if they admit to being "lesbian", and I believe this is because in the mind of most people "lesbians" are masculine or "butch". <br /><br />A male bodied person who says that she is a woman, but admits to loving women must therefore be masculine and therefore a man -- a pervert.<br /><br />This discrimination against gynephilic MTFs also applies to non-transsexual transgender people, including MTF crossdreamers and crossdressers. <br /><br />These male bodied persons have done their best to fit in as men, mainly because they want to find a woman to love, and most women want a regular guy, and not a man that has a female self. <br /><br />Since they have worked so hard to be men, they do not have all the tacit knowledge required to pass as a woman. Moreover, their bodies betray them, and they are therefore ridiculed for being masculine perverts.<br /><br />When they also admit to being crossdreamers (being sexually aroused by the idea of having sex as a woman) their fate is sealed. Real women apparently do not dream about have sex as a woman (go figure!).<br /><br />I am not saying that all MTF crossdreamers and crossdressers are transsexual women, but many are gender dysphoric, and many of them are truly women. Putting them in a box labelled "pervert" or "fetishist" or "paraphiliac" is a crime in my book.<br /><br /><br />Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-75034827883009476812012-08-21T19:17:37.292-07:002012-08-21T19:17:37.292-07:00Oh! Now I understand why you refer to normal heter...Oh! Now I understand why you refer to normal heterosexual women as "androphylic", or "non-gynophilic".<br /><br />No wonder everybody is so confused. Your convoluted command of this arcane language makes it sound like I have a "phylia", or a fetish for my husband because I am aroused by him.<br /><br />Why not use simple English to make your point? What is your point by the way? Is it that tire old meme, that because crossdressers have brains and their "philias", (feelings), are chemically/biologically based, (as are ALL thoughts and feelings), that by gummit! WE ARE ALL THE SAME!!!!!<br /><br />Why not be honest and say that you feel really weird about feeling so weird and you will claim ANY legitimate explanation no matter how much you have to "bend" the language.<br /><br />But hey! Go for it. Can you give it to me in a nut shell? You know like in a couple of paragraphs? can you do it without insulting me and accusing me of "hate speech"?<br /><br />Please note that I disparage your ideas, not you. I have not painted you as a TV, CD, or TG? he truth is, your blog is so convoluted, I have no idea where you lie on that infamous "gender/rainbow spectrum"<br />A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-1989152966702688842012-08-21T00:13:59.726-07:002012-08-21T00:13:59.726-07:00@A Quiet Voice
"I am confused here. I was un...@A Quiet Voice<br /><br />"I am confused here. I was under the impression that folks here are stalwart supporters of the B/B-L 'autogynophilia' theory."<br /><br />Ah, that explains a lot of your comments.<br /><br />No, I am not in any way a supporter of Blanchard. The reason you find the word "autogynephilia" in the heading is because this is the first word crossdreamers come across when they search the net. I would like them to find this blog and get an alternative view of crossdreaming. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.crossdreamers.com/2010/07/on-mosers-critique-of-blanchards.html" rel="nofollow">My review of Charles Moser's critique of autogynephilia</a> captures much of what I feel about this extremely offending concept. <br /><br />I'd better change the heading.<br />Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-27905645159745853232012-08-20T18:05:58.194-07:002012-08-20T18:05:58.194-07:00I am confused here. I was under the impression th...I am confused here. I was under the impression that folks here are stalwart supporters of the B/B-L "autogynophilia" theory.<br /><br />"Crossdreaming and Autogynephilia<br />I am Jack Molay and I am a man dreaming about having a female body. For crossdreamers (also known as "autogynephiliacs" and "autoandrophiliacs") and crossdressers, the need to understand what it is all about is imperative. This is a place where they can explore their "inner woman" or their "inner man"."A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-51433129837698333752012-08-20T06:55:43.310-07:002012-08-20T06:55:43.310-07:00"It is interesting to see that Blanchard'..."It is interesting to see that Blanchard's supporter Bailey, tried to explain away masculine gay men by arguing that they had suppressed their own femininity. He is not willing to make the same argument for gynephilic transsexual women, simpy because it does not fit the stereotypes of this particular science community. It is truly a mess!"<br /><br />This is what stuns me totally. He has brazenly claimed we are just men who have some perverted fantasies. Something like, instead of fancying the woman outside, we have started liking a woman inside. I find such explanations totally bullshit because such claims can only be valid when the stereotype of masculine men being attracted to women is true universally,ie., attraction to women is a masculine quality in humans.<br />The existence of both masculine gay men and feminine lesbian women totally shatters this stereotype. So, if masculine cis-men can be into men exclusively and feminine cis-women can be into women exclusively, why can't the same thing happen to transsexual women and men?<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08255775056077045870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-22478940851402023252012-08-19T23:55:10.104-07:002012-08-19T23:55:10.104-07:00@Raju
Thank for your comment and links to some ve...@Raju<br /><br />Thank for your comment and links to some very interesting discussions.<br /><br />It is fascinating to see how even professionals mix up sexual orientation with sex identity, using the heterosexual couple as the norm.<br /><br />Blanchard & Co have now accepted that being gay is OK, but now try desperately to fit all transsexuals into the new dichotomy. <br /><br />Because of this androphilic transsexual women are OK (simply because they are considered effeminate submissive gay men), while gynephilic transsexual women are not (as gynephilic men they have to be masculine and dominant). In order to make this work, Blanchard has to ignore masculine gay men and feminine lesbian women.<br /><br />It is interesting to see that Blanchard's supporter Bailey, tried to explain away masculine gay men by arguing that they had suppressed their own femininity. He is not willing to make the same argument for gynephilic transsexual women, simpy because it does not fit the stereotypes of this particular science community. It is truly a mess!Jack Molayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03629363646482611722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2472400923228993687.post-48037390837992165692012-08-19T14:00:07.339-07:002012-08-19T14:00:07.339-07:00In addition, rather than adhere to the principles ...In addition, rather than adhere to the principles of Occam's Razor, (parsimony, economy or succinctness of thought), as can be found here...<br />http://ts-si.org/component/content/article/18754...<br />our host Jack allows himself to be derailed, (intentionally perhaps) by engaging such archane post-structuralist, semiotic and even phenomenological debates. A. Quiet Voicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06419464386447411790noreply@blogger.com