Autogynephilia: The Elephant in the Transgender Bathroom

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: luthier

Yes...and everything should be taken with a grain of salt and explored in its entirety before making a "final" decision. But at the same time, if someone yells "HES GOT A GUN", I'm grabbing my child and shielding them long before I bother to see of the person yelling is correct. I'll worry about that later.

But you know where I'm coming from.

I do but this isn't an emergency. Like I said sending your kid out of your sight anytime even in Victorian London puts your kid a risk. Thats the truth. Trans people are not the gun on your story unless you believe in tabloids.

You become the ignorant if you ignore the fact that every time the guy yells gun he is washing Windows with a sprayer.

a reply to: luthier
a reply to: Kali74

Double-teaming me, eh? Okay. That's cool. I'm frm a big family with lots of brothers and sisters so I'm used to that crap... and I put on my big girl panties today, so I can handle it -- even if I don't like it.

Autogynephilia is a "thing" and I didn't make it up, so blaming me personally for what others have studied and reported is unproductive to say the least. As I have made clear repeatedly, it is disputed in its particulars but confirmed in its basic premise. As I have also made clear repeatedly, by definition, it does not lump all transgenders/transsexuals together but makes several distinctions within a large group. As I have also made clear, much is unknown in terms of studies and data because it has not been done -- in part, I have no doubt, because of those who do not want to even acknowledge the reality and therefore do not want to study it (for both political and personal reasons).

If you don't like my sources -- for whatever reasons -- produce others, then compare and contrast. Show us all where my sources are wrong. School us all.

If you think I have misrepresented the truth about autogynephilia, explain where and how your understanding differs. School us all.

And if you just want to be rude and insulting you can do that too... and I'll ignore you.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: Indigo5

Shouldn't that be goobly-gook?

Thanks for that

a reply to: Boadicea

Don't even bother to make an intelligent point about TG's and the bathroom issue, here on ATS. I have been trying to hammer home logic on this one (or the dark side of the issue, as you point out), however people will only see/believe what they want, and out of everything you said...they will nitpick at everything, and create a smoke screen, trying to obscure logic. If you have daughter's whom you fear that could be hurt by all of this, it means nothing here. The safety of those who do not fully support this TG bathroom issue, is of no concern to these PC idiots.
All they see is that TG's should be able to do whatever the hell they want...your safety, or your children's safety, is of no concern to them, (mostly because they are young punks, brainwashed by the system, and they do not have kids of their own...so nothing to lose for them).

Trust me, I've had this discussion on here several times, that covered several pages, trying to debate the "dark side" of this issue, and then everyone started ganging up on me, because I simply would not blindly support TG's in the woman's bathroom. To mention that pedophiles are exploiting this law, as well as rapists.....will get responses such as "if they are going to rape, they will do it anyway" or "Pedophiles are going to get your children if they want them anyway", however THIS is the lack of logic that I am speaking of, as male pedo's and rapists did not have access to the women's room in the past, so comfortably. The women's bathroom was really a place of solace for women and little girls.

There has been a RECENT outbreak of men attacking women and children in the women's room after this law was passed (even the media backs that claim up). This is not coincidence...but to PC people...again, safety does NOT supersede their political brainwashing, that will ultimately end in chaos in this country, under every flag of political correctness they have so blindly supported.

It's amazing the stupid things people will support today, if the government makes them feel "smart", or like they are making a difference in the country..and make no mistake about it, they are contributing to "change" in this country...change for the worse.

TG's which make up only 0.003% of this country, should not be put at the forefront of reparations and priviledges...even before black people have gotten theirs. (just another point really).

Matthew 7:6

"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

It basically means, anything that you know is "right", in this insane world we live in today, where people are devoid of common sense and logic...don't waste you time, as they will simply gang up on you until you're outnumbered, and then your voice will not be heard. Typical PC cowards who can't debate by themselves....need their "hive mentality" backup to make their point. Some call this mentality...thugs, or gangs. That is what PC people are, and ATS is full of them now.

Daniel 7:25 (who does THIS sound like?)

"And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to "change" times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time."

Obama has video's of him bashing the Bible, Jesus and God (despite claiming he was a Christian, while campaigning for President)...and then once he was President, started supporting the Islamic faith. His very Campaign slogan (as you recall) was "CHANGE, you can believe in" - Asking you to put your faith in his plan for change, as opposed to God's.

He gave us change alright...change for the worse...just like his little PC army is trying to do with all of this TG distraction, as Obama continues to destroy our country. Most likely, Hillary...his partner in crime, will try to pick up where he left off.

But yeah...you're wasting time here. These PC idiots, will hijack your whole point, and replace it with an onslaught of idiocracy, that will drown everyone who agrees with you. (* just look at my posts on this TG stuff, and notice those who had responded to me with insane responses, and you will see "the usual suspects" parroting on your post as well.)

...Just watch.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: luthier
a reply to: Kali74

Double-teaming me, eh? Okay. That's cool. I'm frm a big family with lots of brothers and sisters so I'm used to that crap... and I put on my big girl panties today, so I can handle it -- even if I don't like it.

Autogynephilia is a "thing" and I didn't make it up, so blaming me personally for what others have studied and reported is unproductive to say the least. As I have made clear repeatedly, it is disputed in its particulars but confirmed in its basic premise. As I have also made clear repeatedly, by definition, it does not lump all transgenders/transsexuals together but makes several distinctions within a large group. As I have also made clear, much is unknown in terms of studies and data because it has not been done -- in part, I have no doubt, because of those who do not want to even acknowledge the reality and therefore do not want to study it (for both political and personal reasons).

If you don't like my sources -- for whatever reasons -- produce others, then compare and contrast. Show us all where my sources are wrong. School us all.

If you think I have misrepresented the truth about autogynephilia, explain where and how your understanding differs. School us all.

And if you just want to be rude and insulting you can do that too... and I'll ignore you.

I already did that. You failed to refute the evidence or even comment on it.

I basically did everything you said.

So it's in your court.

If by thing you mean a theory than yes.

It's also very much not the same thing you are describing.

I presented the critique which is a very hard one to get around so how do you get around it?

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: luthier
a reply to: Kali74

Autogynephilia is a "thing" and I didn't make it up, so blaming me personally for what others have studied and reported is unproductive to say the least. As I have made clear repeatedly, it is disputed in its particulars but confirmed in its basic premise. As I have also made clear repeatedly, by definition, it does not lump all transgenders/transsexuals together but makes several distinctions within a large group.

Great...So I am inventing a mental illness called Canidexophilia..where straight men are sexually aroused by the presence of small dogs wearing doggie clothing..can we ban the sale of dog clothing now? Not lumping all dog owners together here..

a reply to: luthier

I'd say that all depends on how protective of a person each of us are. But in the end, the OP posted information that individuals can research and may have brought a topic to the surface that was being hidden. That is valid and welcome in my world.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: luthier

I'd say that all depends on how protective of a person each of us are. But in the end, the OP posted information that individuals can research and may have brought a topic to the surface that was being hidden. That is valid and welcome in my world.

Well your a sensible person by the sounds of it. I am going to go out on a limb though and assume it's more confirmation bias for most.

a reply to: luthier

Works for me

a reply to: Boadicea

Autogynephilia is a "thing" and I didn't make it up, so blaming me personally for what others have studied and reported is unproductive to say the least.

No, you didn't make it up, someone else did, and you're just promoting the made up "thing" in order to demonize the trans sector of the population.

"Autogynephilia": a disputed diagnosis
"Autogynephilia" is a sex-fueled mental illness made up by Ray Blanchard.
www.tsroadmap.com...

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: luthier
a reply to: Kali74

Autogynephilia is a "thing" and I didn't make it up, so blaming me personally for what others have studied and reported is unproductive to say the least. As I have made clear repeatedly, it is disputed in its particulars but confirmed in its basic premise. As I have also made clear repeatedly, by definition, it does not lump all transgenders/transsexuals together but makes several distinctions within a large group.

Great...So I am inventing a mental illness called Canidexophilia..where straight men are sexually aroused by the presence of small dogs wearing doggie clothing..can we ban the sale of dog clothing now? Not lumping all dog owners together here..

YES!!! For the love of God please ban dogie clothing! But then again...isn't it mostly the gay/trans community that dress up their dogs and in that case, you are targeting that group by banning the dogie clothing you are discriminating against them you homophobic jerk! Now Obama is going to force you to share your clothes with the dogs or withhold your Obamacare funds.

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Thank you for the scriptures and other words of encouragement. I know there's much truth to your words... but I don't want to believe it! What can I say? I'm an idealist, and in my own silly world view, I want to believe that when we know better we will do better.

I know I don't have all the answers. I know I'm not an expert. And I figure there's much room for improvement in my efforts too! But we're all just human, and even when the spirit is willing the flesh is weak. If the best I can expect for my efforts is that it is no longer the "elephant in the transgender bathroom" and is being talked about, considered, discussed and debated, that's a good thing.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Boadicea

Autogynephilia is a "thing" and I didn't make it up, so blaming me personally for what others have studied and reported is unproductive to say the least.

No, you didn't make it up, someone else did, and you're just promoting the made up "thing" in order to demonize the trans sector of the population.

"Autogynephilia": a disputed diagnosis
"Autogynephilia" is a sex-fueled mental illness made up by Ray Blanchard.
www.tsroadmap.com...

Well your partly right. Certainly when discussing populations.

However there is some indication of Autogynefilia when drs talk with patients about fetishes.

Blanchards study was a hack job and the whole psych community knows it. His observation of the patient is less controversial.

The confusion is over who these people are, at what rate in the community and the specifics of what the fetish actually means psychologically.

a reply to: imsoconfused

I wonder what the reaction would be in Mexico or China or Saudi Arabia or Australia or any number of nations if I bought a one way plane ticket, showed up at customs and when they asked for a visa/passport, I simply stated "what do you mean, I identify as Chinese or Suadi Arabian or Australian or Mexican, so let me in".

Maybe that's the next step in the progressive and liberal agenda. Completely do away with borders and passports and let everyone who identifies as American to come in.

originally posted by: MysticPearl
a reply to: imsoconfused

I wonder what the reaction would be in Mexico or China or Saudi Arabia or Australia or any number of nations if I bought a one way plane ticket, showed up at customs and when they asked for a visa/passport, I simply stated "what do you mean, I identify as Chinese or Suadi Arabian or Australian or Mexican, so let me in".

Maybe that's the next step in the progressive and liberal agenda. Completely do away with borders and passports and let everyone who identifies as American to come in.

You don't have to identify as anyone. Just walk over the boarder.

Besides the example isn't remotely related .

a reply to: luthier

I already did that. You failed to refute the evidence or even comment on it.
I basically did everything you said.
So it's in your court.
If by thing you mean a theory than yes.
It's also very much not the same thing you are describing.
I presented the critique which is a very hard one to get around so how do you get around it?

Okay. I do want to be a good ATSer and properly tend my thread... so here's me trying... but I'm completely lost. You need to be more specific. Spell it out for me. Draw me a picture. Make me understand.

You already did what?
What did you do?
What is it if not what I described?
And what did I describe?
What critique did you present that's so hard to get around?

That's all I've got. You gotta help me out here. The ball is in your court.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: luthier

I already did that. You failed to refute the evidence or even comment on it.
I basically did everything you said.
So it's in your court.
If by thing you mean a theory than yes.
It's also very much not the same thing you are describing.
I presented the critique which is a very hard one to get around so how do you get around it?

Okay. I do want to be a good ATSer and properly tend my thread... so here's me trying... but I'm completely lost. You need to be more specific. Spell it out for me. Draw me a picture. Make me understand.

You already did what?
What did you do?
What is it if not what I described?
And what did I describe?
What critique did you present that's so hard to get around?

That's all I've got. You gotta help me out here. The ball is in your court.

Well go back and read my posts you ignored.

It's pretty easy. Don't make me do the work you failed to do.

please god make it stop

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

You think a church is a place of solace? Churches should be shut down - they are a haven for predators - and I'm not just talking about the Catholics. Organized religion's dirty little secret has been going on for YEARS.

But because this country is predominantly Protestant, more children are abused by Protestant ministers than by Catholic priests. In 1990, the Freedom from Religion Foundation issued a study on pedophilia by clergy. At that time, two clergy per week were being arrested in North America for sex crimes against children. Fifty-eight percent of them were Protestant.

religiouschildabuse.blogspot.com...

Only one attack is too many. Shut them all down.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Exactly my point. And where the massive logical fallacy is here.