So if a trans woman is into men, she's a 100% trutrans, but if she's into women she's a total AGP, right?
So please explain a trans bisexual/pansexual? How does this work?
Also: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19591032
>>5432656
agp is a meme
chasers are buttmad when trans women don't wanna fuck them
only conclusion is that if you aren't interested in a fat neckbeard with a trap fetish you must be soft in the head
Well um, I think AGP would describe me well because most of my sexual fantasies involve me being forcibly feminized into a submissive, little cumslut who "real men" would never take seriously.
Wearing skirts, dresses and panties give me a huge boner and I'd love it if a man forced me to wear those for him every single day. I also fetishize anal sex and I want to try riding a guy's cock because I want him to take all of my masculinity away from me. There was also a time where I used to get off of transformation sequences, where a man would be transformed into a pretty girl against his will and adopt "female" mannerisms as well.
Basically, whenever I become aroused, I feel a "need" to feminize myself. There's nothing really feminine about me but this fetish could give 2 fucks about reality apparently.
It's all not that complicated folks.
It's a bit complicated, but not that much.
AGP doesn't actually exist and is bullshit made up by Blanchard. It has been discredited as a theory by the medical community.
It's just a meme on /lgbt/. Being bi or lesbian as a MTF is a perfectly valid orientation and does not mean you're not actually trans.
>>5433367
Wha....? AGP describes me to a T. It definately exists and it's the only thing that offered me a more logical approach to transitioning.
>>5432656
>So please explain a trans bisexual/pansexual? How does this work?
still agp. for bisexuals, men become a prop in their sexual fantasies to enhance their feelings of being feminine. only straight trans women are truly trans.
>>5433380
care to explain the study's findings then ?
>>5433384
the study is shit
females by definition cannot be autogynephiles because they are not male
the study questions were designed in such a way to get the answer the biased researcher for looking for because he trying to discredit blanchard
>>5433382
Have you ever heard of a woman fapping to transformation scenes of men changing into women? How about fapping to budding boobs? What about getting an erection when sitting with your legs crossed? Yeah, no. Also, please don't spout that "because they were born male, so it turned sexual shit". Did you know that Blanchard recommended transition for AGPs as well?
>>5433395
>clinging to le memes
>>5433391
then how come not all women were counted as AGP
any science to back up your claims ?
for example "straight = impossible to be agp" contradicts Blanchard "sometimes people with agp can be drawn to men to enhance their idea of femininity in a heterosexual way" (or something to this extend)
also please point out the questions that were leading in your opinion please
thanks
>>5433359
Pretty much what I think, and decently expressed. Saved.
>>5433406
Blanchard clearly didn't get it all right but he does see the general gost of what it's like to be AGP. I was one of those men who was drawn to other men to feel more feminine, except I realized that my attraction to them was almost bullshit. I didn't want to kiss them. I didn't want to love them. Men's bodies do almost nothing for me. I just wanted to take their cock. Looks really didn't come into play unless they were obese.
>>5433450
I don't see what you are trying to say ?
you getting together with a man to feel more feminine kinda agrees with Blanchard
>>5433411
>Saved
mfw desu
Note that this is, assuming I've represented their position fairly/acceptably, the position a gender-critical radical feminist would take.
(I'm trying to work against the radfem-phobia around here a bit.)
>>5433705
Based on my readings of TERFs, that actually is a position a gender critical feminists would NOT take. They think that transitioning is always wrong because it implies that people can have the minds of the opposite sex, which is contrary to their view that everyones' brain is the same.
They would say it's OK to like dresses as a man, but if you transition you're appropriating their gender or something.
>>5433450
Blanchard's entire experimental basis is a clinic that rejected patients who didn't fit his narratives, a local trans community that taught each other the lies needed to go through his bullshit, and it was pointed out already at the dsm committee in a paper by Cohen-Kettenis that it hasn't been possible to reproduce his claims even in places that believed in Blanchard's paradigms.
>>5433744
>They would say it's OK to like dresses as a man
And then they would laugh at a crossdresser and call it womanface anyway. TERFs don't want an androgynous society.
>>5433754
Oh yeah, of course. They're nutcases.
>>5432656
Sexual arousal from presenting as the opposite sex=AGP
That's it, the list stops there, the orientation being linked to AGP is just a meme to bully other trans
>>5433450
Lol you sound like a faggot in denial trying to use a fetish to justify why you're such a massive closet case. This is why agp sounds pants on head retarded. There are almost no true tranny gynephiles. Most are repressed slutty faggots. The crossdressing fetish is just incidental.
>>5433744
>>5433754
>>5433767
Do you have any major examples of such people? Like, websites run by them, news articles written by them, speeches held by them, etc.
I sorta follow Feminist Current, SocImages, Feministing, etc. and the most anti-trans thing I heard was "some people just turn out gender non-conforming, we shouldn't force them to think they must be trans".
>>5433812
Closet case? I live the lifestyle guy and boy do I enjoy sucking cocks from time to time, especially all dressed up. When I first read about AGP, there was no denying that it described me to a T and that transitioning was likely inevitable, so I went ahead with it. AGP isn't just a "fetish" to me, calling it a fetish in my case would be just plain dumb. AGP is a very large chunk of my sexual orientation.
>>5433866
Feministing has been mostly pro trans for the past 10-15 years so it's not exactly common for them.
I'm still grrrr about feminist current cozying up with terfs. The hardcore terfs are shit like 4thwavenow or Dirt
>>5433866
r/gendercritical
Or just google "gender critical", they call themselves that because they think "TERF" is a slur. Kinda like how racists don't like being called racists but will call themselves "race realists" sometimes.
i don't understand autogynephilia, but i see nothing wrong with it. i don't think it and being trans need to be mutually exclusive. what i don't understand is the idea that it alone can drive one to transition.
why would you transition over a sexual interest? wouldn't you keep it private? isn't this what crossdressing is, or related fantasy and masturbation? who in their right mind anticipates an easy life as a woman, when the very drugs you use to transition would easily help you control any apparently sexually motivated behaviour somehow forcing you to do this, or at least keep it more private so you don't have to go through such a farce of a life; you could give it up, have friends, family, employment, supports back... it just doesn't make sense.
maybe you can be autogynephilic, maybe your living as a heterosexual man for whatever length of time can give you a fucked up image in your mind of what a woman is--i still don't know how that could be the driving force behind your transition. how is it worth it? how does autogynephilia in and of itself make one unhappy as a man? you aren't sexually aroused 24/7; even if you were to compare it to a relationship which also isn't sex 24/7, people in relationships are still their own individual people, it doesn't become who they are.
>>5433391
Autogynephilia by definition does not imply maleness, just a positive reaction towards seeing oneself as a woman.
>>5434041
>why would you transition over a sexual interest?
Believe me, fetishes can drive people to do pretty extreme things.
>>5433892
>4thwavenow
Well, there's some good stuff there. If one diagnoses a 4 year-old girl as a trans-male because she prefers to play with "boys' toys" and doesn't like to wear a dress, that's really fucking stupid.
I also see people in the comments and such who seem entirely close-minded to trans issues though. I won't defend those.
What's Dirt?
>>5433969
>r/gendercritical
Again, lots of very important points being made there. Some of the stories in "peak trans" are fucking insane, as in, really show how creepy and respectless SOME transfolks can be.
I'm really frustrated right now because I can't just pick a side here. Both sides have very important problems.
I guess I'll just have to settle back to where I was (>>5433359) and risk getting hate from both sides when they think I "belong to the other side."
>>5434041
>why would you transition over a sexual interest? wouldn't you keep it private?
Some people are really passionate about what they're into. Hence BDSM and Swinging being called "lifestyles".
Also to some people, the idea of changing sexes isn't seen as extreme. It's seen as a neat feature of the body, a bonus.
>>5434107
If you voiced your opinions, except with no mention of radfem/gender critical, I think most trans on here would agree.
It's just that there's a huge stigma around it, rooted in the movement history (the TS empire / increasing the bad kind of gatekeeping, mostly), and some actions of its present members (the outing-to-employers kinda schtick).
Good to know some are now OK with transfolk but I can't shake the impression, that there are some people in these circles that hate me on a fundamental level. Which make me uneasy -- even though from what you've posted, I adhere to these views.
So basically I think you have to decide if it's worthwhile to try to save the label, maybe at the expense of actually convincing people.
though t.b.h. you would get less answers, cause it's perfect bait material...
>>5434218
>cause it's perfect bait material
Well I think it's very important that people understand that radical feminism is not hostile against anyone unless they are somehow hostile against women.
BTW some of the most famous radfems have always had a lot of support for transfolks. Pic related.
What if i'm turned on by myself anyway?
I used to jerk it to my own dick pics. I just look even more gorgeous dressed up.
>>5434229
>does [not achieve] natural developpement [because] extremely adverse social foces
>community built on androgynous identity will mean the end of transexuality as we know it
>as roles dissapear, transexuality will disappear [...] (pls give next page)
Seems not compatible with what you've said here >>5433359
If it's not a gender role/social thing, it will not dissapear.
>>5434255
As far as I understand there's some substantive evidence for biologically rooted body dysmorphia. Assuming it's true, I suppose Dworkin simply didn't have that information. It could also be that it's not true, but so far I have no reason to disbelieve it.
>>5434287
>I suppose Dworkin simply didn't have that information
By the way, the screencapped book is from the 70s.
I wonder what Dworkin would have said about transsexuality today...
>>5433359
What if it's things lie facial and body hair, and body shape that bothers you? Does that count as anatomy?
>>5433376
AGP most likely does exist, but it's not linked to orientation like Blanchard claimed.
>>5433391
>females by definition cannot be autogynephiles because they are not male
That's circular reasoning. Besides, if Blanchard really is right, then gender dysphoria doesn't actually exist - he said that straight mtfs are basically just hypersexual gay men that want to fuck straight guys.
>>5434107
>Some of the stories in "peak trans" are fucking insane, as in, really show how creepy and respectless SOME transfolks can be.
Every group has a few bad eggs though. You can't judge on individual incidents whether a group is good or bad, but that's exactly what some TERFs seem to do. They share horror stories about individual tranny freaks and use that as an excuse for why trans people as a group shouldn't be given antidiscrimination laws and/or seen as the gender they identify as or whatever.
>>5434371
>What if it's things lie facial and body hair, and body shape that bothers you? Does that count as anatomy?
Not an expert. I guess?
>Every group has a few bad eggs though. You can't judge on individual incidents whether a group is good or bad, but that's exactly what some TERFs seem to do. They share horror stories about individual tranny freaks and use that as an excuse for why trans people as a group shouldn't be given antidiscrimination laws and/or seen as the gender they identify as or whatever.
Well I don't think it's a popular opinion among radfems in general, but as you say, "some TERFs", and I can see that so point taken.
>>5434107
>What's Dirt?
dirtywhiteboi67
