qott: what can we do to destigmatize HSTS and AGP in the trans community?
>>42117272watch animation memes
>>42117272adopt better tranny typology based on reproducible hard science rather than the niche studies of a single sexologist who studied a handful of sex workers decades ago in cultural conditions that no longer exist
only HSTS are women!!!!!
>>42117272there's nothing you can do to destigmatize it. GC/TERFs strawman AGP as AGP = trooning for a fetish. many trans women believe this is basically the case and so refuse to identify with the label. And even if a TW understands what AGP actually is and understands she's an AGP, she wouldn't admit it because TERFs have turned it into a slur and u don't even want to be associated with the label. Even besides that, even if everyone had a perfect understanding of AGP trans women still wouldn't readily accept it because "I have an abnormal sexuality where I've internalized my attraction to women and it's causing gender dysphoria" is a lot less socially acceptable than muh born in the wrong body trope.>>42117334please explain your theory for why gender dysphoria develops and how it presents based on reproducible hard science. I've seen the "Identity-Defense model" but it's just as theoretical as Blanchard's typology. Also, AGP in trans women is a thing that's been proven to exist in laboratory conditions + it's obvious (how else do you explain euphoria boners?) and it also exists in cis men. The actual unfalsifiable/speculative part is whether the AGP causes the gender dysphoria or if it's the other way around
>>42117781Are terfs more ok with HSTS? I notice you haven't even really mentioned HSTS at all in your long essay it seems.
>>42117801That's because HSTS doesn't present the same issue. Most rando cishet people already think trans women are just super fags. castrated super fags in the bathroom with their wife is fine for most boomers, but female-attracted TW whose transition is a result of their underlying AGP seems a lot more threatening.Also, Blanchard doesn't do a great job explaining why HSTS even have the desire to transition in the first place in the way he does for AGPs (I don't even fully agree with the typology btw, the lines are a bit blurred between HSTS/AGP and there's variation within each group). Regardless, a male-attracted trans woman has an interest in not being referred to as a "homosexual" if she identifies as a womanat the end of the day though you can't accept HSTS without accepting AGP, and even for the husstuss they understand they're still associated with the AGPs (since they're both trans women), so they have just as much an interest in not acknowledging it. if AGP went mainstream it would blow back on the huss as well
>>42117830>Most rando cishet people already think trans women are just super fagsand they are wrong?
>>42117875Yes, the majority of trans women are heterosexual males, i.e. not fags. Trans women are like, 60% AGP these days and maybe 1/6 of that group is truly bisexual (the rest are either transbians or meta attracted to men but truly heterosexual), so at least half of trans women IMO are basically heterosexual males with AGP. This is from the reality perspectiveFrom the chud perspective the AGP stuff just sounds like cope / being a troon is very faggy no matter what, but it's still a big difference if you think the TW entering the locker room are all actual fags with no interest in women vs castrated heterosexual males with AGP
>>42117902>Yes, the majority of trans women are heterosexual malessounds like ideology, not hard dataseems like you are almost scared of acknowledging men attracted to the same sex transition
>>42117902>castrated heterosexual males with AGPBut chuds also seem to think castration = complete end to sexual function (it's not, but that's not the point), so why do they care if post-SRS trans women use female locker rooms?
>>42117911>castration doesn't diminish your sexual function it just makes you happy
>>42117830Doesn't it ultimately boil down to HSTS = lifelong severely low T and AGP = everything else?
>>42117904https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12889-023-16654-zLet's consult the chart: among transgender women, 60.5% identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, same-gender loving, or pansexual, i.e. among TW 60% were female-attracted which is actually exactly the number I said. In this version of the article (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37715161/) the figure reports that 68% of TW are attracted to cis women, sample size is n=~100 of TW I think.I can't find any other studies but I feel like this is fairly good support for my assertion that 60% of TW are female-attracted.
>>42117911>>42117915The average chud doesn't think beyond man in woman's locker room or man in woman's sports team. Among conservatives with higher-than-average knowledge of trans issues, most of them likely know from the GC propagandists that most TW don't get SRS these days>>42117940No, there's no correlation between T levels and being homosexual.
>>42117950queer tells you nothing about whether they like men or women and that's 15 whole percent of your data"same gender loving"dittosince what gay and lesbian mean to trannies are different from the rest of the world, this data is useless
>>42117950>a single small study that aligns with my ideology must be right lol
>>42117999>>4211802570% attracted to cis women in this study. find me some other studies then to refute the obvious trend I've noticed among trans women both online and irl, that it's basically 60/40 AGP/HSTS. I think surveys on some of the reddit forums support this too
>>42118099Some of those "HSTS" will only be fucking men in order to claim they're HSTS
>>42118099they don't directly ask "are you attracted to cis women, cis men, or both"that's kinda the game herewhat would it mean if a substantial proportion of trans women WERE into men?
>>42118025and since when is Blanchard's typology an "ideology" it's just a theoretical framework for understanding the psychology of trans women, whether the typology is true is irrelevant to the question of whether TW are women or if trans is "valid".What is true is that AGP is real, it's experienced by both trans women and cis men. This has been verified empirically.What Blanchard's typology claims is that a primary underlying cause of gender dysphoria is a disordered sexuality, either homosexual or hetero/bi-sexual AGP. I don't claim that AGP or homosexuality is the only underlying cause of gender dysphoria in males, there's usually lots of factors that lead someone to develop gender dysphoria.>>42118105Yes, it's meta-attraction. They're not super attracted men, but will sleep with them because it makes them feel like women.>>42118110I don't deny a substantial proportion of trans women are into men ... most trans women are bisexual in reality. There is a minority of truly only male-attracted TW, a middle portion of true bi or meta-attracted bi TW, and another chunk of only female-attracted TW. The only-male attracted ones are largely HSTS, the others are largely AGP, as a general but not strict statement.
>>42118139but when you say minority of truly only male-attracted TW you still mean like 20%whereas only 1-2% of cis amabs identify as gay at mostyou are spinning "are 10x more likely to be gay" as the opposite of what it actually means for ideological sake
>>42117950agps men reserve the right to call all other men fags then right?
AGP elegantly explains and ties together so many things this guy should get a nobel or smth
>>42118160I think probably 30-50% of trans women are genuinely attracted to males, i.e. only male-attracted or true bisexual. >only 1-2% of amabs identify as gay at mostYes, and this shows that homosexual males are more likely to develop gender dysphoria relative to the overall population. If I pick 100 homosexual males and 100 heterosexual or bisexual males, a larger number of the homosexual males are going to develop gender dysphoria. 95% of males are heterosexual, so the proportions even out. Say 1/5 homosexual males develops GD, and 1/30 heterosexual or bisexual males develop GD, in that case given 100 males (5 homosexual, 95 bisexual/heterosexual) 1 homosexual would develop GD but 3 heterosexuals would develop GD. So GD is more common in homosexual males than in hetero/bisexual males, but there are so many more non-homosexual males that it evens out to a 40/60 homosexual non-homosexual ratio among MtFs.>you are spinning ...I have no idea what you mean here.
Dysphoria about being male = AGPDysphoria about putting it in = HSTS
>>42117272quack doctor whose rejected by the rest of the scientific community on the studies regarding trans people. His entire model presents a restrictive lens in viewing trans people via sexuality when there are clearly trannies who transition and are asexual. Or the existence of FtMs not fitting in his transphobic typology.>>42117781>explain euphoria bonersWow when people finally feel comfortable in their own body (or closer to their ideal) they’re suddenly happier at the thought of enjoying sex in their preferred approach>but cis men-if they’re not dysphoric, then for them it’s specifically a cross dressing/submissive fetish.Blanchardism warps experiences that are legitimate and normal to have as a trans person, and are not something that is rooted by sexuality. The entire ideology is transphobic in nature and end goal is to delegitimize trans people by reducing them to just sexpests. Trans people actually enter a normal baseline to cis people when presenting as their preferred gender consistently after a few years. Stop engorging on obvious flawed and misinterpreted quack doctors and promoting a transphobic perspective on trans people.
