Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Emily's Cat said:
You were rather vocal about insisting that autogynephilia is no big deal, totally just fine, and nothing for anyone to be worried about at all, and we're all just bigots for viewing it as a problem for females to be forcibly included in some male's live-action sex play.
Click to expand...
No, AGP just doesn't exist as you portray it. The weird fantasy that Blanchard cooked up is just...weird.

And as he himself said, he has no evidence, and his whole posit is a 'hunch', not science.
 
Ziggurat said:
Let me guess: this argument is based on what it means to be "listed" in the DSM.
Click to expand...
We did this at obnoxious length earlier. It is mentioned on two pages, as a specifier for a variety of transvestic disorder. That's not 'listing' anything. It is nothing more than a sexual arousal at the thought of one's self as a woman. It is not considered any kind of disorder, full stop.
 
Thermal said:
We did this at obnoxious length earlier. It is mentioned on two pages, as a specifier for a variety of transvestic disorder. That's not 'listing' anything. It is nothing more than a sexual arousal at the thought of one's self as a woman. It is not considered any kind of disorder, full stop.
Click to expand...
So it's a symptom of a disorder.
 
Thermal said:
We did this at obnoxious length earlier. It is mentioned on two pages, as a specifier for a variety of transvestic disorder. That's not 'listing' anything.
Click to expand...
Who could have guessed that this would be your objection.

Me. I could have.
Thermal said:
It is nothing more than a sexual arousal at the thought of one's self as a woman. It is not considered any kind of disorder, full stop.
Click to expand...
Is a transvestic disorder not a disorder? How does that work?
 
Ziggurat said:
Who could have guessed that this would be your objection.

Me. I could have.

Is a transvestic disorder not a disorder? How does that work?
Click to expand...
Feel free to revisit the earlier discussions. While you guys seem to relish this Groundhog Day ◊◊◊◊, I've had my fill.

Short answer is no, a specifier is not a disorder. It points to another condition's path of development, to distinguish it from others.
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
And lest the mods think this off-topic, we are still flirting with the idea of changing roles and acceptability of dress in society.
Click to expand...

Emily's Cat said:
Actually, we're talking about adult males walking around dressed like sexualized toddlers.
Click to expand...
Specifically this one....
PinkyDoll.jpg

I, for one, have no problem with transgender identified males dressing up like this. I mean, if they want to make themselves look like refugees from a travelling circus in public, who am I to argue. And as @Ziggurat rightly pointed out, it makes it much easier for people, especially mothers, to identify who to keep their children away from!
 
In the UK the discussions are moving on to how to implement the Supreme Court judgement, with a hearing about the EHRC interim guidance

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cddrjq9764yo

One thing jumps out:
Zoe Leventhal KC, representing the minister for women and equalities, argued that the guidance may have been too simplistic in suggesting that, for example, a trans woman should not use a women's toilet in a public space. She suggested that it could be judged on a case-by-case basis.
Click to expand...
which rather runs a coach and horses through the concept of single sex spaces.
 
There are some posts in the UK politics thread about a 'Walter Mitty' character who dressed like a Rear Admiral and attended a Remembrance Sunday ceremony. It looks like the principal that reality can be changed by the thoughts in someone's head, so firmly accepted on this forum that those posters who question it are forced to confine their blasphemy to this single thread which can safely be ignored by those who don't, may have exceptions after all.
 
Thermal said:
Feel free to revisit the earlier discussions. While you guys seem to relish this Groundhog Day ◊◊◊◊, I've had my fill.

Short answer is no, a specifier is not a disorder. It points to another condition's path of development, to distinguish it from others.
Click to expand...
It's not a disorder, it's a subset of a disorder. And you think that's a winning argument? No wonder you need to keep flouncing off.
 
Thermal said:
No, AGP just doesn't exist as you portray it. The weird fantasy that Blanchard cooked up is just...weird.

And as he himself said, he has no evidence, and his whole posit is a 'hunch', not science.
Click to expand...
More nonsense. He didn't say any such thing..
 
Elaedith said:
More nonsense. He didn't say any such thing..
Click to expand...
Conceded- Bailey did, in his letter to the anti-trans web page posted upthread. Makes no difference though, as Blanchard's support for his posit has been widely scoffed at, and it is not accepted by the relevant professional communities.
 
Thermal said:
Conceded- Bailey did, in his letter to the anti-trans web page posted upthread. Makes no difference though, as Blanchard's support for his posit has been widely scoffed at, and it is not accepted by the relevant professional communities.
Click to expand...
No he did not. Bailey believes that the evidence supports Blanchard's theory.
You have lied about this repeatedly.
 
Thermal said:
Conceded- Bailey did, in his letter to the anti-trans web page posted upthread. Makes no difference though, as Blanchard's support for his posit has been widely scoffed at, and it is not accepted by the relevant professional communities.
Click to expand...
Given what I've seen of the "relevant professional community", I don't think their endorsement is a useful benchmark.
 
Elaedith said:
No he did not. Bailey believes that the evidence supports Blanchard's theory.
You have lied about this repeatedly.
Click to expand...
Professor ◊◊◊◊ saw's personal beliefs are not tremendously interesting. The wider communites have soundly criticized Blanchard's methodology, and his insistence on including AGP as a disorder in the DSM was flatly denied because the professional communities do not accept the posit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom