I don't hear that, although I think I know the comments that you are referring to. What I hear is that the very demanding people, unwilling to compromise, who insist on occupying women's spaces and roles, are dominated by autogynephiles.
That's not the same thing.
Are the comments correct? Are the autogynephiles really driving that bus? I wouldn't say it has been proven, but the evidence for it is significantly greater than zero.
I disagree.
The reason I say that is that none of the people in question have been diagnosed as AGP. The armchair diagnoses are based on two things: sexual attraction to females and aggression.
The first is, at best, questionable given the variety of sexual attractions in the non-trans community. It only works if you link gender identity and sexual attraction in a stronger manner than you link sex and sexual attraction.
The second is just crap. There are aggressive women. Lots of them. Hell, the whole Karen meme illustrates that. I once had an employee who would get pissed off and call me up and cuss me out. She was female. (Actually, she was my my favorite employee. She's retired now. And she would call back a few minutes later and apologize.)
While, on average, men may be more aggressive than women, pretending that it is even close to a uniquely male trait is denying reality. It is no longer notable when a woman speaks up for herself or insistently pushes her opinions. At least not in the professional and social world I live in.
Back to my point. None of the people in the news stories have been tested for AGP. The evidence that these people have AGP is speculation based on behavioral stereotypes.
And I believe one poster in particular has posited that most trans-women are AGP males.
Because? Once again, I've read the same comments, and some of them have not been expressed very articulately, but I think I would take something different from the arguments. Arguments about motivation....why, because, in order,...are rarely straightforward. Human motivation is often confused and complicated, and individuals are not even always aware of their own motivation. Therefore, it's hard to say that trans athletes compete as women in order to satisfy AGP. Their actual motivations may be much more complicated than that. However, if someone was both AGP and athletic, competing as a woman would definitely be something that really feeds that fantasy.
AGP is a paraphilia for seeing oneself as a woman, particularly in a sexual situation.
It is not a paraphilia for dominating women. (Such a thing exists, but it's different from AGP.)
Thise fantasies are not evidence of AGP. They're the definition of AGP.
A non-AGP dysphoric male envisions a certain kind of sex or a certain kind of partner. An AGP male envisions himself as a woman, and that is the fantasy. If the fantasy is particularly strong, it creates dysphoria.
Blanchard, who invented the term, describes the difference in detail here:
https://quillette.com/2019/11/06/what-is-autogynephilia-an-interview-with-dr-ray-blanchard/
(ETA: If you don't want to read the whole interview, find the term "Moser" in the text. That section describes the difference between AGP and other things that could be mistaken for AGP.)
The existence of AGP should not be controversial. It clearly exists, and I was the one (I don't think I was the only one) who brought up the argument. Where there could be some controversy is to what extent AGP contributes to a desire to live as a woman and/or medically transition.
The difference between what you are describing for non-AGP males is that the focus of the fantasy is the sex, or the partner. It is possible that whatever they want to do requires a female body, so that might be incorporated into the fantasy. For AGP, the fantasy IS the body, or the identity. Being the woman is the key element.
My overarching point here, is that I think Blanchard has things backward.
I think AGP is a logical
symptom of dysphoria/trans-ness rathere than the
cause.
And I think it's perfectly logical that a dysphoric person envisioning themselves in a matching body is going to feel aroused. Because the fantasy of having said body would include having a body that would be capable of experiencing sexuality in the way they believe they are meant to experience sexuality.
I hate to take examples from fiction, but I'm reminded of a scene in the first book of the Thomas Covenant series. (High fantasy series I read in junior high.) The main character is a leper who has lost his sexual function due to his leprosy. In the story he is transferred to a magical realm and is suddenly healed. Having his vitality suddenly restored, he rapes the girl who is with him. (Which is out of character for him otherwise.)
I know that's an ugly scene from fiction and you are wondering: "WTH does this have to do with the topic?" My point is that I think what Doinaldson illustrates in that scene is the psychological response to gaining "correct" psychological function. Not that it would trigger assault or anything so dramatic. Just that gaining that function in and of itself is arousing.
The arousal you describe can also be attributed to envisioning themselves in a body where, like Covenant, they have gained the sexual function that was previously absent.
But what do governing bodies do? How do they govern? They write laws. This isn't criminal or civil legislation, but it's rules for who may participate in the private activity overseen by the government body. So, saying "allow judgement by the governing body", is just saying who writes the rule.
Unless you are saying that the rule ought to be, "In cases of biological males who wish to compete as females, they may petition the Eligibility Committee who will make the determination." Well, if you don't provide guidance, in the form of criteria, to the Eligibility Committee, I would foresee constant controversy over their judgement. I don't see it as workable.
Yes. There will always be controversy. I don't see controversy as necessarily bad.
In the legal system, we have people called judges. They hand down the sentences. The law doesn't say: This crime gets one year and that one two. Judges hand down sentences, within guidelines, taking into account the context and information from the trial. Or they give probation or some similar punishment. In short, they judge.
I see no reason why a sports league cannot be allowed to judge as well. If they can make a list of criteria to consider, that's great. But I don't think you can really make a model where you plug in all the variables and you get an answer. Such a formula is why my former neighbor, who worked at the restaurant owned by her grandparents, who also bought her a house and provided a company car got so much in food stamps she couldn't spend it all and offered to buy our groceries too. There was no judgment portion of the law that allowed for accounting for free housing and transportation by family members who didn't live in the same house.
Judgment, in my opinion works better. But I agree, it's hard to put into law.
