Just to go over some ground regarding the thorny subject of non-trans autogynephilia again, (AGP) I thought I’d illustrate it with this charming chappy. Let me introduce Dave Muscato. As you can see, Dave is a man, and a dapper one at that. But Dave wants us all to believe he is a woman and … Continue reading Dave Muscato: a non-trans autogynephile
The post Dave Muscato: a non-trans autogynephile appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Autogynephilia is the primary stimulus for all non-homosexual male-to-female transsexualism. The original Blanchard definition was ‘a man’s propensity to be sexually aroused by the thought or image of himself as a woman.’ Others have defined it as, ‘love of oneself as a woman’. But not all men with autogynephilia present as women. They exhibit non-trans … Continue reading Non-trans autogynephilia- a vital clue.
The post Non-trans autogynephilia- a vital clue. appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Few clinical definitions, established by obscure researchers in obscure institutions, referring to an obscure subject, can have caused more brouhaha than Ray Blanchard’s definition of autogynephilia as ‘a man’s paraphilic propensity to be sexually aroused at the thought or image of himself as a woman.’ But what does it actually mean? ‘Paraphilia is any intense … Continue reading The thought or image of oneself
The post The thought or image of oneself appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Social division into ‘men’ and ‘not men’ groups, together with a domestic matriarchy, explain why transsexual expressions in Asia differ from the West. Male to Female transsexuals are normally categorised as homosexual or nonhomosexual with regard to their birth sex. I use the term HSTS for the former. Blanchard explained the latter in terms of … Continue reading Not Men: bekis in the Philippines
The post Not Men: bekis in the Philippines appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Autogynephilia is a self-reinforcing, narcissistic sexualised self-reward system. It is stimulated by a man’s desire to be, or appear to be, a woman. It is satisfied by achieving this. Although there are other rewards, the main one is by having sex as a woman. Because it is self-reinforcing, the more often the satisfaction is achieved, … Continue reading Autogynephilia: Sex as a woman
The post Autogynephilia: Sex as a woman appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Male to Female transsexualism was classified by Ray Blanchard into 2 different types: HomoSexual Transsexual and Autogynephilic.* In the West generally, these two types have presented with different characteristics, most notable being their primary sexual orientation: HSTS are uniquely attracted to men, whereas AGPs have a complex array of sexualities. These are all based on … Continue reading Which type of transsexual?
The post Which type of transsexual? appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
The Philippines has become very important to me over the last four years. It’s now the focus of much of my life and I want to spend more time there. The winters in France are just too cold for me now. When you visit a country for longer periods, months at a time, as I … Continue reading Philippines 2016: Markets and Mountains
The post Philippines 2016: Markets and Mountains appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Brain Sex? What is that? Some sort of cyber-intercourse? No. ‘Brain sex’ is how many transsexual activists explain how their condition came about. They specifically say that, ‘Transsexualism occurs when an individual of one sex has certain sex-related structures in the brain that are typical of the opposite sex.’ In other words, according to this … Continue reading Brain Sex?
The post Brain Sex? appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Sexual transformation from boy to girl has always been hot. Enter the girly-boy: the transsexual or TS. The oldest records we have prove the early existence of TS individuals, often priestesses or shamans. Their direct descendants are in the hijra of India, the kathoey of Thailand, the bakla of the Philippines, the travestis of the … Continue reading Girly-boy beauty
The post Girly-boy beauty appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Transsexualism is high profile these days. But what actually causes it? Who are transsexuals? Since there is clearly a deal of ignorance over this, I’m going to go over the explanations again, in a short series of articles. Women trapped in men’s bodies? Many people are familiar with the idea that male -to-female (MtF) transsexuals, … Continue reading Explaining transsexualism
The post Explaining transsexualism appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
In 2009 Dr Charles Moser entered the discussion about Blanchard’s Typology of transsexualism. It is worth revisiting Moser because his mischievous intervention not only hindered the progress of the science of transsexualism, but damaged some people, while favouring others. As you may know, Blanchard separates male-to-female (MtF) transsexuals into those attracted to their own sex … Continue reading Moser’s mischievous intervention.
The post Moser’s mischievous intervention. appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
The whole of south-east Asia is remarkable for its highly visible populations of transsexual women. These are not at all the same as what you may have been used to thinking of, if you are a Westerner. They’re not like Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner. In fact, most of the publicly visible ‘transgenders’ in the West are not transsexual at all, except in a very limited sense. Scientifically they are ‘autogynephiles’ or to put that in lay terms, fetishistic transvestite men. Other than wearing women’s clothes and make-up, and maybe having cosmetic surgery, they remain what they always were — heterosexual men. Not too many straight men would find them attractive, although, to be fair, that is not their aim. (See my discussions on Ray Blanchard for more details.)
Ladyboys in Thailand and across Asia are not like that at all. They belong to a group known scientifically as ‘Blanchard HomoSexual TransSexual (HSTS)’or ‘Early Onset Androphilic Transsexual (EOT) but which I refer to as ‘true transsexual’ for simplicity — and accuracy. They are strongly attracted to men and always have been. Usually, they began having crushes on men when they were around 5-7 years old. They almost certainly were gay boys at some point in the past.
They are beautiful and very sexy. They are extremely feminine in appearance and manners. From their early teens they use female hormones, often birth control pills which are freely available without prescription, to turn themselves into staggeringly beautiful women, with the specific aim of attracting heterosexual male lovers. And the fact is that many men are powerfully attracted to them.
However, many of those men are coy about meeting transsexual women. In the West they may be put off firstly by peer pressure and the fear that they may be called ‘gay’, but also by hostility from Western transvestites. These absolutely do not want sexual interest from men, because they are heterosexual men themselves, even if they happen to be dressed up as women. So they routinely ‘shame’ men who are interested in them, which may confuse those who do not understand that there are two different types, which bear no relationship to each other at all. At the same time, true transsexuals are hard to meet in the West, since they usually find things easier if they live in ‘deep stealth’ so that nobody knows their true gender status. One way to get round this is to go abroad.
I was recently asked how things were in Pattaya, so if you’re thinking of going there to meet some TS women, the following may be useful — or at least more useful than most of the garbage you’ll find on transphobic ‘backpacker’, ‘ex-pat’, or autogynephile sites. We’re definitely trans friendly here, as long as you are the right type. I’ll do something on the other major hotspots some other time, but the general rules apply there too.
While there are huge numbers of transsexuals throughout Latin America, where they are usually called ‘travestis’, this is not an easy destination for Western men. Brazil in particular has a very violent culture and communication is hard unless you speak Portuguese. Colombia is notoriously dangerous and while Argentina is arguably less so and is certainly ‘gay-friendly’ it is a very expensive destination for Europeans, and without decent Spanish, life will be tough. As well as this, the areas where you might meet the girls you’re looking for are often downright dangerous. Outside of a few well-known holiday spots (where the police deliberately exclude transsexuals anyway,) these are destinations for the experienced traveller, rather than tourist, only. Nothing will be laid on and everything will be difficult and frustrating. Trust me.
As a result, and increasingly, the destination of choice for men, who desire to investigate further their attraction to transwomen, has become Thailand, and particularly Pattaya, along with Phuket and Bangkok, the capital. Thailand has a very well developed tourism sector, with many hotels and short-term apartments at very reasonable prices. It is easily and cheaply accessible from the West by air and does not require prior visa approval for most Westerners — you get a month automatically on entry. As well as this it is relatively inexpensive, fairly relaxed, warm, sunny, many people can speak English and there is excellent infrastructure and communications. Together, these make it popular with all types of tourists as well as more hard-core travellers.
Thailand is therefore an ideal destination for the ladyboy-attracted man who wants to find out more. ‘What happens in Thailand stays in Thailand,’ is the saying and as long as you don’t make the actual news, nobody will ever know what you get up to — although they may presume you are seeking out sex.
Action in Pattaya is constant all year round, although in the low season, Western summer, things can be a little quiet and it will be rather hotter and wetter than from November to March. Only around 10% or so of the sex workers in Pattaya are ladyboys, as transsexuals there are usually known (they all call themselves that) but they are obvious. Ordinary Thai girls, even sex workers, are nowhere near that forward, or, frankly, that gorgeous. Pattaya attracts a lot of Russian family tourists — I can only imagine what might be going on inside their heads — but they don’t get in the way.
(By the way, don’t call ladyboys ‘kathoey’. Depending on pronunciation and context, this may be offensive.)
You will see ladyboys serving in restaurants, in shops, working in hairdressing salons — I think every salon in Asia is majority LB — as well as in banks, travel agencies and such-like. Besides this, there are well-known, glamorous ladyboy cabarets. 
However, for the intending trans-attracted Lothario, that leaves plenty of choice. There are estimated, at the last figures I saw, to be as many as 1000 transsexual sex workers in Pattaya, of a total of 10,000 or so including natural girls and gay boys. These girls either work in bars or freelance on the street, while some do ‘escort services’ through websites.
Generally, contracting with bar girls is safest because they work under a person called a mamasan. This is usually an older woman or ladyboy whose job it is to manage the younger girls. The mamasan will make sure the girls behave when they are with clients (you have to behave too). So if there’s an issue, you can go see mamasan and get her to sort it.
However, you will have to pay a ‘bar fine’ to take a girl out of the bar. The logic behind this is convoluted and it’s really just the bar’s cut from her sex work. How much depends on the bar. 300 — 500 short time is reasonable, but I have heard reports that this is going up. If so, that will just put business in the hands of freelancers.
The girl will ask for 1000 — 1500 short time, although, if you appear green, she might chance for more. Don’t pay it; it’s a buyer’s market.
You will find yourself targeted by girls (of both types) so be polite but firm. In some bars, ladyboys will be extremely direct and may shock you. Expect to have your genitals in someone’s hands early on, and someone’s genitals in yours. However, don’t be rushed and if you don’t fancy a particular girl, just say so. Protocol, with bar girls, is to buy a ‘lady drink’ while discussing your plans for the evening. These are more expensive than regular drinks and she gets the excess as a tip. If you are interested in having sex with her, tell her so and move to the conclusion, otherwise she’ll think you’re not serious and may just disappear. (You have no idea how quickly a six-foot LB can either vanish or suddenly materialise right beside you until you have seen it done.)
Also, try to define what will be on the menu before you make the deal. I won’t get into too many details but, for example, if you want a post-op, ask. Same if you are only interested in a pre-op. (Most are pre-op.) The usual sign is to make a snipping gesture with index and middle fingers. There are other gestures for specific sorts of entertainment. You’ll figure it out.
Many bars have rooms, usually around 300 — 500 baht, where the fun happens, otherwise your girl will know a place where the price will be similar. It’s not really usual to go to your hotel for short-time unless it’s very close by — cuts into the sex — but it is for long-time. Short-time, by the way, should be a leisurely hour, more if she’s having fun. And these girls are not miserable sex slaves. Most of them really enjoy what they do and if a girl likes you, she’ll let you know. You will enjoy what she does too.
If you’re thinking of taking a girl back, check your hotel is girl friendly beforehand. Most are, but better to be sure. Many girls are reluctant to do long-time in the early evening (they can make more money with quickies) but at the end of the night might be quite up for it — nice hotel bed, proper shower and breakfast on you. (Well, lunch; good luck getting one of them up before 2 pm.) Expect to pay 2000 — 2500 baht depending on the time and how much of a slob you are.
Your girl might be quite pissed by the end of her working night, since part of a bar girl’s job is to get as many lady drinks purchased as possible and she has to drink them. The later you wait, partly because of this, the more likely it is that you’ll get a rate — but also the more likely that another cruiser will snaffle her. Other men will just cut in and if you haven’t made a deal, that might be it, she’s gone and all the money you spent on lady drinks goes out the window. Just make sure she’s not a total zombie when you finally get her out; but if you can contain yourself, great morning sex will be on the agenda. Remember that while these look, feel and act like beautiful women, they are motivated by a male sex drive that is just as powerful as yours is.
(Once again, do not believe the horse-manure you’ll find on autogynephilic websites. Those writers are NOT transsexual, they are transvestite men. Most have zero interest in other men. Their delusion — that they are actually women — leads them to play down their sexuality. Trust me, a true transsexual is a highly sexually motivated person; and furthermore, she has no delusions about what she actually is.)
She’ll be asked to leave her ID card at the concierge desk, most probably, and this is definitely in your interest. A good hotel will require that you accompany her to retrieve it, so she can’t make off with your new Nikon while you’re asleep. Always use the room safe for your valuables, however.
If you take a bar girl home for long time remember the bar fine meter is running till you take her back. Get confirmation on how much from mamasan BEFORE you take the girl out. Do I need to mention, you must use a condom? Well you must. This applies even if you (think you are) in a long-term relationship with a bar girl. You don’t know who else is in there. Be sensible and be safe. (Now if you have a real relationship with a girl, which you are not going to establish in a 2-week trip anyway, it’s different. But by then you’ll have more experience.)
Finally, you can meet girls online. The principal site is www.ThaiFriendly.com, which has literally thousands of girls subscribed. (Facebook is also popular but the profiles are mostly in Thai, so you may have difficulty.) Not all the girls are seeking casual paid sex, most are in fact looking for longer relationships. But there are plenty who would still be interested and it will say so on their profiles.
Do be aware though, that you are effectively asking someone you have never even seen in real life to come and stay in your hotel room for however long. Take sensible precautions and it might be smart to meet at a short-time hotel; she may also feel more comfortable with that. (Note also that the same concern applies to the girls; if she’s dating rather than just coming for paid sex, expect to be asked to meet somewhere public and don’t be surprised if she arrives with ‘a friend’ who may be a large gay man. She’s just being sensible too.)
My advice to a first-timer would be to stick to bar girls until you find your feet. But having said that, nearly all the freelancers are fine; one thing that you will find, if you do this, is that Asian TS, call them what you will, are amongst the nicest and most fun people you will ever meet. The crack is DO NOT GET DRUNK and treat them with great respect. It’s Thailand, respect is a big deal. It will also be paid back.
Then there is the question of love. It is easy to get sex in Asia without paying for it. In fact, I used to wonder why anyone would, till I discovered the old adage ‘You don’t pay the girl for sex, you pay her to leave afterwards.’ Now I will be honest, being genuinely in love with an Asian TS who really loves you too is the most wonderful, rewarding experience. There is nothing she will not do for you. The sex will be mind-bendingly good. Most ladyboys have a great sense of humour and are strong characters — they have to be. She can probably cook like an ace, and will delight in looking after you. But the payback is commitment. You have to be ready to give that.
Asia is full of stories of Westerners who have had all their savings taken by a gold-digger who is actually running a string of men. So be careful. These are lovely women but they have real needs, supporting the rest of an enormous (by Western standards) family being one of them. They see milking Western men as a legitimate career; they don’t see it as fraudulent, as any cursory check of the relevant sites will prove.
Now it’s up to you. You can just buy sex in the marketplace; or you can have casual fun, and it will cost dinner and beachwear and salon visits and so on, and maybe the buffalo got a bit sick this week. There’s probably not that much in it. Or you can get serious. But serious is really serious, and these girls will give you their hearts on a plate. If that’s not what you want, you have to tell them. You need to know what you want up front and not let passion — or for that matter alcohol — cloud your judgement. I can highly commend the experience of being in a committed relationship with an Asian TS, but it’s not for everyone. Try to be cool and if you’re only going to test the waters and find out about yourself, follow the old adage — ‘no getting lubbed up’.
Back in Pattaya, watch it on Beach Road after 1 am. Just be careful and if you feel you’re a bit tipsy, get a tuktuk or a taxi home. Don’t walk alone there if you can avoid it.
Also, you’re meant to carry your passport at all times in Thailand but this is risky; better make a colour photocopy and carry that along with your hotel reservation receipt, so if you are asked (very rare) you can politely explain it’s at the hotel. (This is one area where the Philippines is better; here, if you extend your visa, you’ll get an Alien Registration card and that is all you need to carry, leaving your passport in the room safe at all times.)
Be aware that there is a difference between Thai Royal Police and the Tourist Police. If you have trouble go to the Tourist Police FIRST. They have a cabin in Walking Street. They are generally more sympathetic and speak good English — indeed, most are ex-pats themselves. If you go to the Thai Royal Police and they reject your claims, that’s it and the Tourist Police can do nothing to help you, even if you have a legitimate grievance. It’s a ‘face’ issue.
Also, anything you agree to will be held to be a binding contract in any dispute. So mind what you say. If you are in a dispute with someone and you believe you are right, keep schtum and insist on calling the Tourist Police. (The old ‘jet-ski’ scam is still ongoing, for example. Here, an innocent is hired out a jet-ski with significant damage which may have been covered up to make it look less obvious. He takes it back and bingo, $500 USD bill for repairs, while the owner is brandishing a gun. Keep calm and get the Tourist Police. The scammers are all known to them. But if you agree to pay the damage in the heat of the moment or because you are intimidated, you’ll be held to it. Stay polite, say nothing and get the cops.)
Be very careful never to get into a violent exchange with any Thai. This applies just as much everywhere in Asia. ‘Face’ is hugely important across the region. I don’t care if you’re a 120kg 6’4″ Yankee Doodle or whatever. Apart from the fact that they might well be armed, all those little Thai guys do Muay Thai or I dunno what. Even if you do manage to get the better of one, you know something? He’s going to come back with 20 of his chums and hospitalise you if not worse. The best thing you can do, if you fuck up like this, is to get on the next plane out. They might not come today, or tomorrow, but they will come, and you will be consuming sustenance through an intravenous drip for the rest of your trip — or maybe your life. And don’t imagine that just because they look cute, ladyboys can’t defend themselves. They’re as strong as men (unsurprisingly) and will whip off a stiletto-heeled shoe and beat you round the face with it if they have to. Play bonny and play safe.
Finally, if you want all this in safety and to meet a nice group of girls in a relaxed, no-pressure environment, try Sensations Bar in Soi 21. Also, if you don’t mind staying a little out of town I can recommend Gino House. It’s quiet, clean and discreet.
Oh, and, I should warn you: once you have discovered ladyboy love you will never go back.
The post Ladyboys in Pattaya appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
A deliberately provocative video by a YouTube publicity whore calling himself ‘Hunter Avallone’ has a new storm in the latte cup of ‘transgender’ raging. While it can hardly be called ‘viral’, it certainly has stirred up the shit. It’s always sad to see the anti-science views of Catholic fundamentalists like Paul McHugh, formed in the 1960s when homosexuality was still considered a ‘disorder’, trotted out as if they were somehow still relevant, despite having been conclusively refuted by over fifty years of actual science; but that is the standard of this video. (The video above is of Bianca Friere, who is transsexual, not transgender. If you want Hunter’s tripe you’ll have to search.)
‘Transgenders’, in a Western context, are a small group of fetishistic, cross-dressing men whose ‘Gender Identity’ is fuelled by their addiction to masturbation while dressed in women’s clothing. These are our old friends, the autogynephiles, whose profile was conclusively determined by Dr Ray Blanchard. His work, despite the shrill protest of autogynephiles, remains the accepted, and increasingly confirmed, science.
However, in world terms, most people born male who become women are quite different from these men. They are socially, sexually, behaviourally and psychologically women. As women, they blend effortlessly into society. Blanchard called them ‘homosexual transsexuals’ or HSTS; I call them male to female (mtf) transsexuals.
However, they have a major problem: autogynephiles pretend to be the same, except they ‘came out’ later. This is a lie and the science — which has never been challenged — demonstrates that.
This artificial conflation is the root of many misconceptions that appear in ‘Avallone’s’ video. Instead of recognising that there are two distinct typologies and that this has been backed up by actual science — yes, the real stuff, published in proper journals — the author, doubtless in pursuit of attention by provoking a row, behaves as if mtf transsexualism and autogynephilic transgenderism were the same thing.
They absolutely are not, but the mistake made here is understandable: autogynephiles have made so much noise that the media is behaving as if they really were representative. You can’t blame a schoolboy with a nasty attitude and a severe lack of analytical ability for falling into the same trap as many senior journalists have.
Let us be clear: mtf transsexuals are uniquely attracted to men, realise they are different at a very early age and develop not into boys but girls. The primary source of their gender is their sexuality. It is really simple: they are attracted to straight men. How does a person such as they succeed in satisfying this? Become a woman.
Janet Mock is transsexual, not transgender. Read her book, Redefining Realness; her development is clearly, and openly detailed. including the period in her life when she thought she might be a gay man.
The relationship between feminine gay men and transsexuals is so close that there is interchange in the middle of the range, as can clearly be observed in Asia. Social pressure, therefore, contributes greatly to whether a person like this becomes mtf transgender or a gay man and almost all transsexuals will have lived as gay boys or men for some of their lives.
Autogynephilic transgenders are socially, sexually, behaviourally and in all other respects men, except they wear women’s clothing, because this gives them a sexual thrill. Once again, Blanchard defined this. Autogynephilia, he said, is a ‘man’s propensity to be attracted to himself in the form of a woman.’
Many children do indeed explore alternative expressions of gender; one of mine did. Most realise that their natural sexual attraction is to the opposite sex and as they grow, develop their gender in accordance with this. They grow out of it. However, in the case of transsexuals their identification as girls persists after puberty and the key, as ever, is sexuality: if they are attracted to men, they will become transsexual.
Depending on the level of social oppression, they may transition fully and live as women. In the West they usually vanish, living in deep stealth as women; in Asia they are far more open, because the cultures are more socially accepting. Where misogyny and transphobia is high, more will live as gay men and suppress their transsexualism. That this is so is supported by the number of quacks providing reparative therapy to turn young post-pubertal mtf transsexuals into gay men. This is a result which the proponents regard as ‘the best outcome’ but which is responsible for the bitterness and self-loathing that many such gay men exhibit.
All competent authorities, for example the British Institute of Psychology, now regard homosexuality and transsexualism as residing on a natural scale of sexual variation. All living things exhibit variation in all parameters, this is just one. (Actually, there are probably several such scales in operation here, but that is for another day.) So transsexualism, along with homosexuality, is a perfectly natural phenomenon. We know that they are because they appear at roughly the same rate in all human populations everywhere, and have done so since history began. The Hindu Vedas, generally agreed to be at least 3,500 years old and probably 5000, mention several different categories of transsexualism, which are still found in India today. The Sumerian ‘Hymns to Inanna’ also mention them. This is a natural part of the human condition: some boys like boys and some like girls, and of those who like boys, some are more successful as girls. If you doubt this, take a walk round downtown Bangkok or Malate in Manila any night of the week.
Autogynephilia, however, has no such pedigree. There are no references to it at all prior to the 19th century, or anywhere outside Northern Europe and North America. It does not appear to exist in Asia or South America, where transsexualism, by contrast, is obvious. This leads me to conclude that it is not a part of natural human variation at all, but instead a form of psychosis resulting from social pressures dysfunctional societies like that of the USA. Blanchard, while never suggesting an underlying cause, classified autogynephilia as a paraphilia or sexual fetish, alongside sado-masochism, necrophilia, bestiality, paedophilia and others. These also appear to have social rather than biological causes and, as has often been noted, tend to cluster. So autogynephilic transgenderists are often also sado-masochists, for example.
The video does make one important point: there are indeed, only two genders. However, what it misses is that these are not related to birth sex, which is fixed. Instead, they are linked to sexuality, which is variable. People who desire to be penetrated are women and people who desire to penetrate are men. Since gender is entirely constructed and not genetic in any way, in a culture where there was no pressure to conform to predetermined gender stereotypes, we would expect to see gender corresponding directly to sexual desire: those who seek to attract male sexual partners would appear in their culture’s expression of ‘woman’ and vice versa. And this is exactly what we do see, in such cultures.
A good example, one of a great many, would be the Bugis people of Indonesia, who have five genders: males who are men, males who are women, females who are women and females who are men, along with a fifth gender that is ‘all at once’. These last are shamans or priests. Yet underlying these five are only two: man and woman; the fifth is just ‘both at once’. One’s sexual attraction determines which one is. If you are attracted to men, you become a woman, irrespective of your birth sex. If you desire women, you become a man. There is no stigma in this, and as a result, not only is transsexualism so commonplace as to be completely unremarked, but the ridiculous proliferation of ‘gender identities’ so beloved of bunk ‘queer theory’ in the West, is totally absent. There are, in practical terms, only men and women, with two developmental pathways into each.
There is no ‘normal’. There are just scales of variation. ‘Normal’, when used in the context it is in the video, just means ‘not like me’. This is a result of the conformism that infects the society of the United States. It has nothing to do with nature and much to do with a history of slavery, genocide, fratricide and violence. It certainly has nothing to do with transsexuals.
That there are these two types — which AGPs habitually deny — was finally, conclusively confirmed in 2011. Blanchard had stated 20 years before that he believed that when the methods to carry out such testing were developed, transsexuals (his HSTS) would be found to have brains more like women and AGPs not. Two teams, one led by Rametti in Italy and the other by Savic and Arver in Sweden, carried out exactly such testing. These were well-constructed studies that used all proper safeguards, were carried out prior to hormone therapy beginning and with proper controls. Rametti screened out autogynephiles and only tested transsexuals, and Savic and Arver did the opposite.
Their conclusions were clear: transsexuals have brains similar to women’s in every tested area and AGPs brains are indistinguishable from men’s. Blanchard was vindicated and his typology confirmed: there is no correlation or underlying similarity between mtf transsexualism and autogynephilic transgenderism. They are totally different phenomena.
Unfortunately, the conflation of the two types is one reason for the underlying problems that transsexuals face, and this video is just one. Far more serious is the toll of killings and violence. At least 20 transwomen were murdered in the USA alone last year, and not one was autogynephilic. They were all transsexuals.
Transsexual women like Janet Mock, Paris Lees and Laverne Cox, who have the benefit of media attention today, must distance themselves from autogynephilic men like Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner. There is no hope for better treatment of mtf transsexuals or a reduction of violence against them, as long as they are conflated with masturbating men in dresses.
‘Hunter Avallone’s’ video, while self-serving, and the worst form of manipulation of evidence to suit a predetermined conclusion, is, a the same time, symptomatic of a broader problem: transsexuals are being erased by cross-dressing men in frocks. While it raises some good points, it is superficial and reflects the author’s lack of knowledge of the subject area. It is always a good idea to establish a proper understanding of the science before opening one’s mouth; perhaps in ten years or so, ‘Avallone’ will have gained sufficient maturity to appreciate this.
The post Hunter Avallone: Just another publicity whore. appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Bruce Jenner as a yoiung man. Was ‘Caitlyn’ already being created in his masturbation fantasies?
Autogynephilia was defined by Dr Ray Blanchard during research that led to our scientific understanding of transexxualism from the 1980s onwards. His studies focussed only on patients born male who desired Genital Reconstruction Surgery (GRS) to change their male genitalia into cosmetic facsimiles of female ones. Blanchard’s work is the definitive basis of the science on the subject of male-to-female transsexualism. It has never been scientifically challenged and indeed, more recent studies have strongly supported it. Blanchard’s work should be called the Theory of Transsexualism, in the scientific sense.
(Please note: Blanchard did not concern himself with any of the myriad, ephemeral ‘identities’ which some individuals claim to adhere to and which the ridiculous ‘Identity Politics’ {IP} pretends to support. Blanchard is a scientist and he deals in observable facts, so he studied people born male who desired GRS, since this was quantifiable.)
Dr Ray Blanchard, who scientifically explained transsexualism
He defined, in the first place, a group he referred to as ‘Homosexual Transsexual’ (HSTS) which he showed shared a common development pathway with homosexual men. I refer to those in this group as ‘transsexual’; it was what they were first known as and avoids the risk of conflation or offence. This group has been shown, by observation and many studies, to exist all over the planet, in all human populations, at about the same rate of prevalence: around 1:200 of male-born individuals. We have archaeological records that indicate they were present at least 35,000 years ago and mythological, literary and historical evidence that they have been a part of human culture since before writing began. Perhaps the most important factor that links the individuals in this group together (there are many, which we shall discuss elsewhere) is that they are uniquely sexually attracted to men, in exactly the same way as women are.
Perhaps more importantly, however, Blanchard identified another group that was presenting in significant numbers. This group he found puzzling. They were older; they were not in any way feminine or effeminate; they had extreme difficulty ‘passing’ as women; they were overwhelmingly white, with middle-class, professional backgrounds who had been successful in their careers; they were nearly always married and usually had children. Frequently these last were at the point of becoming independent. Most importantly, however, these individuals were never attracted to men, at least prior to transition. Blanchard called these ‘autogynephiles’ or AGP, a term I also use.
Two AGP men getting their dicks hard pretending to be women
This dichotomy had been observed before, since the time of Magnus Hirschfeldt, but nobody had been able to explain what was going on. Transsexuals (Blanchard HSTS) were easy to understand: they are socially, sexually, romantically and behaviourally women. It really is that simple. They may not be women in a biological sense (which they universally accept, in my experience, unlike AGPs) but in every other way, that is what they are.
AGPs were not like that and the profile was much more difficult to describe. Blanchard rightly argued that, since these individuals were sexually, socially, romantically and behaviourally men as well as being biological males, the root cause of their condition must reside in their male sexuality, since they clearly could not have a female one.
This observation, backed up by statistical surveys and questionnaires, allowed Blanchard to show that, just as the most important common factor in the transsexuals’ profile was their feminine desire for men, the most important such factor in this second group was their attraction to themselves, as women. This allowed him to formulate a testable hypothesis:
‘Autogynephilia is a man’s propensity to be attracted to himself, as a woman.’
This remains unchallenged science. AGPs, the men who suffer from this condition, are, he was able to show, in every way men, except for the locus of their sexual desire. For most people, including transsexuals, this is outside the self: we are sexually attracted to other people. AGPs are wrongly wired here: their objects of sexual attraction are themselves, but as women. Blanchard called this misdirection of sexual attraction an ‘Erotic Target Location Error’.
These men’s sexual targets must be women, because they have no attraction to other men; they are uniquely attracted to women. So in order for the AGP to be attractive to himself, he must become a woman. And this is the underlying truth of autogynephilia: it is a condition that causes men to become ‘women’ in order to enjoy sex with themselves, mainly through masturbation.
Most men with this condition remain secret fetishistic cross dressers all their lives, and a trawl of internet sites devoted to their interests will show that they are numerous in Western culture. Their visibility is directly related to social factors: the less acceptable it is for a man to wear women’s clothing, the more likely it is that they will keep their fetish a secret. So a great many go to their graves without their wives or children ever knowing the truth.
However, where it becomes acceptable for them to appear in public, the more courageous will do so, and, unsurprisingly, those who will do so first are the most aggressive and masculine. This is confirmed by observation of the ‘transgender’ autogynephilic ‘activists’: male bullies in frocks. They will then seek to ‘transition’ full time into ‘women’. They will claim to be ‘real women’ to the point of preventing actual, biological women from calling themselves so. Because they are men who lay claim to ‘women’s identity’ the first principle AGPs presume is that, in order to be a ‘real’ woman, one must have been born male. (This is a claim that no transsexual would ever make.)
Psychologically, the development of the condition follows a defined path. Either at or some time after puberty, the subject becomes sexually aroused by the thought of himself in women’s clothing or, more rarely, just by conceiving of himself, in sexual fantasy, as a woman. Typically his understanding of sex is that it is demeaning and violent towards the woman he imagines himself to be and this is why these individuals are also often sado-masochists.
Because sexual reward, here normally but not always delivered by masturbation to orgasm, usually in front of a mirror while wearing women’s clothing and make-up, is so powerful a confirming agent for behaviour, this practise leads to an intensification of the condition. Sexual reward, after all, is the basis of human bonding, but the bond being formed here is not between two separate individuals, but within the mind of a single, male individual.
This means that a second personality must be created by the subject, for him to fall in love with. Typically this appears soon after the onset of the condition, and will be given a name: frequently this is outlandish and often a misspelled, foreign name.
This second personality grows like a succubus within the mind of the subject. It will invent for itself a plausible history, in which it first appeared long before puberty. It does this because the subject is aware that transsexuals usually become aware of their difference from other boys at this age, and the AGP is seeking to colonise that identity; at the same time, it is trying to invent a plausible childhood history for itself. This is never true; autogynephilia never appears before puberty. It is a product of post-pubescent masturbatory fantasy.
We can reality-check this by examining the testimony of those around the individuals when they were pre-pubescent children. Here, the family and friends of transsexuals will have remarked the extreme femininity of the child and will have discussed it. Frequently, action will have been taken to ‘cure’ the child — usually with at best harmful results, and often disastrous ones. Suicide is not uncommon amongst this group. At school they will probably have been bullied as ‘sissies’ in an attempt to get them to conform to sexual stereotypes proposed for them by the patriarchy. Most importantly, from the first point in their lives that they began to have crushes on others, these will have been men. Their childhood family and friends will have been aware of this too.
Transsexual model Geena Rocero. This is what an mtf transsexual looks like. A woman.
AGPs show none of these. The decision of such a person to become a ‘woman’ is always a surprise to those closest to them, even their wives, who may be deeply traumatised. However, since the AGP does not really love his wife and instead loves himself, this will be of no consequence. The woman who thought he loved her will be given an ultimatum: ‘become a lesbian’ or be accused of being a ‘transphobic bigot’. Such is the profound misogyny of the AGP, that sees women only as sexual objects — like the one he has created in his own mind and is obsessed by.
The AGP’s ‘female’ personality, which was created as an object of masturbatory lust and has been reinforced by sexual gratification, often for decades, has become so powerful that it has literally overwhelmed the male personality that invented it. The poor wife of such an individual, the mother of his children, is not being forced to ‘become a lesbian’ by the man she married, but by a succubus that he invented and nourished and has now consumed him. The man she married is effectively dead, his place taken by an ersatz, false ‘woman’ who has no idea what it is to actually be a woman, or how to look or behave like one.
Autogynephilia, therefore, is a corrosive and destructive condition that ruins lives and ends marriages; it causes enormous suffering and soul-searching amongst the women married to the sufferers, who are offered no explanation other than that their (actually now dead) husband ‘was always a woman’. And this is true: the succubus now animating him was indeed a woman from the point he created it. That its entire history is imaginary is a consequence of it being an artefact of his fetishistic obsession with himself.
The classic AGP remains a man in every sense except that of appearance, even after GRS, if he elects to undergo this, which not all do. His attraction to women remains exactly the same as a hetero-normative male’s. If he remains possessed of a penis, this individual may become a serious sexual threat to women, who, as a man, he will predate upon. He will also, frequently, predate on transsexuals, whom he will relentlessly abuse.
This ‘classic’ profile accounts for some 60% or more of AGPs. However, Blanchard identified two others.
The first he termed ‘analloerotic’. Sometimes these men are misrepresented as ‘asexual;’ but this is very far from the truth. While they may not masturbate to orgasm, or indeed be able to take pleasure in their genitalia at all, their sexualised fantasy of themselves as women is their reward. The researcher Dr Charles Moser has proposed that one factor or perhaps even cause of autogynephilia is an underlying androphobia, a hatred of men and all that is masculine. This — which is again confirmed by observation and personal accounts — suggests that a possible cause of the condition is extreme repression of normal male sexuality and masturbatory practice in boyhood. After all, autogynephilia is most reported in the United States of America where, to this day, boy children’s genitalia are routinely mutilated to prevent masturbation, and the ‘dangers’ of self-pleasuring are constantly being promulgated by delusional ‘pastors’ from pulpits all over the land. Analloerotics, unable to derive sexual pleasure form their genitalia, get it from such things as using women’s toilets while dressed as women, from ‘dressing parties’, which are frequently advertised in the media targeting AGPs; knitting and other stereotypically ‘women’s’ roles and from appearing in public ‘en femme’ and not being discovered and so on. Individuals in this group are motivated to GRS because of their loathing of their own genitalia, rather than a desire to use their neo-vagina for sex.
The other group of AGPs identified by Blanchard he called ‘bisexual’ and, paradoxically, this may be the only group of true bisexual men in the West. Like the others, prior to transition, these men have no sexual interest in other men; indeed they may be strongly homophobic, as evidenced by Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner. However, once they begin hormone therapy and begin to feminise, these men desire to explore how successful they can be at being accepted as women. For them, going out in public dressed in women’s clothes is not enough. They need to actually be sexually desired by men. This, therefore is an extension of their masturbatory fantasy, in which the ‘woman’ they have created is sexually taken as a woman. Blanchard called this phenomenon ‘pseudo-homosexuality’. The individuals in this group often elect to have GRS, but not always: there are a significant number of male sex workers in the West who conform to this type and who provide sexual services to other AGPs and closeted homosexual men.
Even if they do have GRS, these men remain AGPs and their desire is quite different from that of transsexuals. Transsexuals were never sexually interested in women and their response to a man’s body is exactly the same as a woman’s. Like other women, they may see sexual and romantic success in finding partners as an affirmation of their attractiveness, but they know they are not men. The pseudo-homosexual, ‘bisexual’ AGP is simply using his male partners’ bodies in furtherance of his own sexual fantasy.
Another autogynephilic man. Are we still in any confusion here?
All of this is important because we know that AGPs are a small minority, even in the West, which is the only culture they appear in. Transsexuals are a much larger one, but AGPs predate on them and harm them. They are suppressed, their identities colonised and erased by autogynephilic men, because these men cannot stand any questioning of their claims. Just by existing, male-to-female transsexuals prove the lie of autogynephilia, so they must be silenced.
Bianca Freire, a Brazilian transsexual model. Still confused? Bianca is not autogynephilic.
Transsexuals are being killed, across the planet, at horrific rates. In Brazil, over a hundred every year are slain. In the USA, at least 18 last year alone. And every single one of them was transsexual, and most emphatically not autogynephilic. AGPs are white, middle-class men who never get into situations where they might be killed. They may be mocked and shunned but they are not at risk. Gwen Araujo, Jennifer Laude, Keisha Jenkins, thousands of others, were not AGPs. If we want to protect these women, then we have to recognise the truth: AGPs are their enemies.
So to all transsexuals I say, stop supporting men like Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner. Just stop. He is a man in a dress and not a transsexual at all. He will not shed a tear if you are killed. And to men who are attracted to, or are in relationships with transsexuals, I say this: get out of the damn closet and accept your responsibilities. Challenge the AGP orthodoxy, the lies that would erase the women we love. Let these horrific succubae, these travesties of womanhood, the AGPs, know that while we accept their right to exist, we do not accept that they may claim to be, or speak for, transsexuals, nor may they silence us with their standard ruse of ‘transphobia’. How can a man who sleeps with, who wakes with, who loves, supports, shares life with and accepts a transsexual as a woman, be transphobic? The sheer offensiveness of autogynephilics’ lies is like a stench.
It’s time for us to tell the AGPs, and all the other male bullies like them, that if you fuck with our partners, you fuck with us.
.
The post Challenging Autogynephilia appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
A transgirl performing a traditional Sinulog dance in the Philippines. Pic: Rod Fleming
Almost all credible authorities, according to GIRES in the UK, now agree that the baseline minimum for gender non-conformity as ‘at least 1%’ and this has been borne out, again according to GIRES, by recent studies in New Zealand, The Netherlands and Belgium.
Now ‘gender non-conformity’ is a broad church and by no means all of these would identify as transgender. However, research carried out by Professor Lynn Conway and also by the Williams Institute for Law, part of the UCLA, suggests about half of these are, for a prevalence of around 1:200. This is supported by census results from Malaysia, which put the incidence there — a country that is officially very hostile towards transgender — at 1:170 of male-born individuals.
This should tell us two things: transgender is innate and appears in all populations at roughly the same rate; and that as such it is a part of normal human variation.
Of these transgender populations, the vast majority are what is called by science ‘Blanchard HSTS’, ‘Early Onset Androphile’ or ‘transkids.’ These are almost always, uniquely, attracted to men. They appear as transgender very young and frequently begin dressing as girls, wearing their hair long and, in recent decades, taking feminising hormones in their early teens. They should not be confused with another, much less frequent type of MtF transgender, known as ‘autogynephiles’. These latter are fetishistic transvestite men, for whom dressing and pretending to be a woman is a sexual thrill: think Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner. (We will deal with these elsewhere; they are almost entirely restricted to white, middle-class Western men and globally are a tiny population.)
But why are MtF transgenders so obvious, and so open, outside the West?
While we were researching ‘Why Men Made God’ I spent much time in the Philippines and was lucky enough to be invited into the company of Filipino families. I was fascinated to observe the ‘two-group’ social model, which we described in the book, in full operation, and indeed I incorporated some of my observationst. This model was particularly obvious at large family gatherings. Here, the men would congregate around one or more tables — often drinking heavily — while the women and children socialised completely separately. There were never any women or children at the men’s tables. Because I am obviously a man, I was directed to the men’s group and observed from there, as the rising tide of alcohol — in the form of ‘Empi’ or Emperador brandy — rose to my gills.
This separation of two groups, however, was not to do with alcohol. As a foreigner and a guest — a person of important status in a Filipina household — I was also invited to join women’s drinking parties on several occasions and I can attest that Filipina women party just as hard as the men do.
One of the things that I did notice, in the large, mixed parties as well as in the women-only ones, was that while the men’s group was made up exclusively of adult men presenting as straight, the other group was of women, children and gays. When women socialised independently of men, there were always a number of gays or transgenders there too; they never, ever appeared in the ‘men’ group activities.
(The term ‘gay’ in Filipino culture does not mean quite what it purports to mean in the West. There, it signifies a person born male who identifies internally as a woman and who desires men romantically and sexually. The notion of the ‘egalitarian gay’ where manly manly men lust after other manly manly men, is regarded as risible throughout Asia and while there are some implantations of this Western model, they are reviled by the vast majority of gays there.)
So this leads us back to ‘what makes a woman?’ The simple answer ‘chromosomes’ will not work, since a small minority of women, who have a condition called Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, or CAIS, are actually XY karotype. Similarly, he argument ‘possession of a female reproductive system’ would cause a problem with CAIS women, who have vaginas, but none of the other female reproductive system. In any case, this explanation does not satisfactorily answer why it is that women and men are so markedly different in so many non-physical ways, such as how they socialise.
At the same time, a purely essentialist approach — it’s down to chromosomes or genitalia at birth — does not allow for what we now know to be between half to one percent of the born-male population, who are to all intents and purposes, women. These are the HSTS transgenders I referred to earlier, the transkids.
Gender itself is a construct of behaviours and expectations, almost none of which are fixed. Other than motherhood and the necessity to nurse and care for children, there is nothing that we associate with the gender construct ‘woman’ that is innately so. Other cultures, where there are more than two genders, demonstrate this too. Gender is fluid because, unlike being air skinned or blue eyed, it is a social, not a biological construct. It is a function of culture.
So ‘what makes a woman’ must be more than the possession of a vagina or XX chromosomes. Since gender is constructed and not innate, then it follows that it must be learned. And where and when is it learned? In childhood, through socialisation.
This is where the observation of social interaction in Asia becomes so important. Remember, one group contains only adult men; the other, everyone else. So there is a group of ‘men’ and a group of ‘not-men’. Gays fall into the latter group. They are never part of the ‘men’ group, because they are ‘not-men’. This is not just a function of orientation as a somewhat skewed Western perspective has it. Rather, a gay’s orientation is a function of her gender — which is, no matter what she looks like, always ‘not man’.
Blanchard demonstrated that HSTS transgenders are on a scale of variation with gay men (as they are called in the West; in Asia that would be an oxymoron). This close association, within the Asian model, means that all gays, whether transgender or not, are related and are, in social terms, part of the ‘not-men’ group: in other words, in terms of socialisation, they are women. These individuals grow up socialising with girls and woman and adopt the gender expressions that are naturally found within this group as their own.
That is why HSTS are so feminine: their childhood socialisation was within the ‘not-men’ group, within which the authority figures are all women. When the women, children and gays congregate together, separately from the ‘men’ group, at the centre of the group is the matriarch, usually a grandmother or great-grandmother, but perhaps the eldest sister or some other woman identified by a mysterious ranking system that exists within the matriarchy. Gays and transgenders grow up within this group and learn, and maintain throughout their lives, the gender construct that is their badge of membership.
‘Lola’ surveys her domain.
What Westerners may not realise, because of the vicious misogyny of the Western patriarchy, is that to remain part of the ‘not-men’ group is an honour. Boyish boys are excluded from it when they become adult, because men are inferior to women. Why are they inferior? Because they are brutish and violent and they cannot make babies. They lack the most important power of all. They can kill, but they cannot create.
While they may be sexually desired by those in the ‘not-men’ group, they are not part of it. The ‘men’ group is made up of outsiders looking in. The real action takes place in the ‘not-men’ group, presided over by the matriarch, who disposes her beneficence in the form of loving smiles and words and, frequently, gifts. She is ‘Mother Christmas’ and indeed, is an incarnation of the Goddess herself.
Gays, which group includes transgenders, have an honorary right to remain in the privileged ‘not-men’ group, because they have learned how to be women. They behave like women and this gives them the gender ‘woman'; they are tolerated within the group even though they lack the power to make life, because they do not offend those who do.
Following on from this they may adopt other behaviours consistent with being a woman: growing their hair long, wearing make-up, adopting ‘feminine’ body-language and so on. This gives them the right to remain a part of the ‘not-men’ group as they get older, and not to have to become part of the ‘men’ group. These actions symbolise a desire: to remain a ‘not-man’. This reinforces their adoption of gender roles and behaviours that they associate positively, in their culture, with women. This is why they are often so feminine and strive to be as beautiful as they can be — it is only in part to attract male partners: it is also a badge of affirmation, a sign of their membership of the honoured group, of being ‘not-men’ themselves.
When Western feminists point to socialisation as how it is that a ‘woman’ can be, they are right. What they fail to recognise is that, especially outwith the white, Anglo-Saxon, Western patriarchy, gays and transgenders share exactly the same socialisation patterns as women. Furthermore, once outside the protection of the ‘not-men’ group, gays and transgenders become targets for aggressive men. The patriarchy is very strong in Asian culture, but its compass is limited in one crucial regard; its authority does not obtain within the home or the family. So, while within that home, and the ‘not-men’ group that dominates it, gays and transgenders are generally safe, as soon as they step outside they are at risk from men who resent their very existence.
This resentment is because, by choosing not to be part of the ‘men’ group, gays and transgenders question its foundation. They are saying ‘what’s great about being a part of the ‘men’ group? I’d rather be a girl with my sisters in the ‘not-men’ group.’ That, of course, is an existential menace and the male patriarchy responds, as it always does to such challenges, with a narcissistic rage response.
This male resentment is very similar to the resentment that natal women feel everywhere. Asian gays are told in no uncertain manner that unless they join the ‘men’ group — which would mean undoing all their socialisation and changing their sexual orientation — then men will make their lives as miserable as they can — as men do to women. They are denied jobs, discriminated against and, if they can get work, obliged to accept worse terms and conditions than men would be expected to. They are insulted in the street. However it is not possible to unlearn one’s social conditioning, even if one might want to.
In the end, women, transgenders and gays are hated by the patriarchy for the very simple reason that women refuse to let men socialise with them, because they regard them as inferior.
This is the crux and it is outwith men’s power to control, something which men of course, utterly hate. That hatred is the foundation of the patriarchy, which is like a spiteful little boy’s response to being told he can’t play with the girls because he’s too rough. It is an entire social system founded on petulance, on men’s hurt feelings at being told that, no matter how much their mothers and sisters love them, they’re just not part of the club.
The ‘not-men’ group self-selects for inclusion. One is not part of the ‘men’ group by choice, but because one is put there by the ‘not-men’ group, essentially the women. This is a real power that women in these cultures — and it is seen all over the world — have over men. Gays and transgenders, in this model, are actually privileged. They have no desire to be part of the ‘men’ group. They want to remain outside it and within the group of women, children and gays. They reject manhood, masculinity and being part of the ‘men’ group. This is what men find offensive; and this offence may, when the power of women to suppress it is diminished, result in violence, even deadly violence.
Thus, in many senses, albeit not including motherhood, Asian HSTS MtF transgender have a very strong claim to be called a ‘second type of woman’ which is what they usually do refer to themselves as. They often look extremely feminine, they act like women and sound like them; but perhaps most of all, they are hated by the patriarchy in a very similar way to the way that women are hated. Gays and transgenders — they are essentially the same, with only detail differences of dress and hairstyle being different — are indeed women in terms of their gender, a social construct which they have learned from birth and through childhood.
Unfortunately, in the Western patriarchy, HSTS transgender women, who were until recently called ‘True’ transsexuals, have found their identity parasitised, colonised and erased by another group who claim to be transgender but who are in fact simply cross-dressing, sexually fetishistic men with a severe paraphilia: autogynephiles.
We shall discuss those in a future piece.
The post Why are transgenders so evident in Asia? appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner. Not the face of trans women
If you’ve been anywhere near a media outlet over the last few months you won’t ave been able to avoid noticing that transgender women are getting a lot of attention. If you have seen images of Caitlyn, formerly Bruce, Jenner, and then Paris Lees, Janet Mock, Laverne Cox or Jai Dara Latto, who was crowned Miss Transgender UK 2015, you might be forgiven for being a bit confused. You might be struggling to figure out what the connection is between an ageing sports jock who looks like a man in a dress, and a glamorous woman who looks like — a glamorous woman. If you’re at all liberal or PC, you might have just accepted that these are the same, but, you know, because time and stuff.
But you’d be dead wrong. There are two completely distinct types of transgender woman and there is no connection between them at all. The conflation that is going on is wrong and potentially lethal.
Keisha Jenkins, 22, an HSTS recently murdered. All of the trans women killed in the US (that we know of) in the recent spate were HSTS like her.
This is important because one type — which comprises the overwhelming majority of trans women in the world today — is the subject of deadly and repeated violence, while the other colludes in it. Now I will show my cards here: my girlfriend is transgender. But she’s not like Jenner. And because she is — being of the other type — a potential victim of violence, I have to stand to the wire. Political Correctness is all very well until people start dying because of it; and that is what is happening. So let me explain.
The two types of MtF transgender are called, using the terminology of the man who first described them, ending nearly a hundred years of unsuccessful attempts, ‘homosexual transsexual, or ‘HSTS’ and ‘autogynephile’ or ‘AGP’. The scientist who established this is called Dr Ray Blanchard. Prior to his work, these types were called, respectively, ‘True transsexual’ or ‘Type One’ and ‘Pseudo transsexual’ or ‘Type Two.’
For examples, Janet Mock, Kevin Balot, Laverne Cox and Paris Lees are all HSTS and Caitlyn Jenner is AGP. It is important to understand that HSTS are not homosexual men; as women they are straight, attracted to men. But they were born as male and are sexually and romantically attracted to men, which makes Blanchard’s term intelligible at least.
HSTS feel and act irrepressibly girly as children and are often remarked and bullied for being ‘sissy’ (read Laverne Cox’s comments on this for an illustration.) Most will wear girl’s clothes as children if they can, play with feminine-gendered toys and socialise better with girls than boys. (By no means all boy children who do this are trans; gender exploration is a normal part of growing up and most will switch back after a while. Some, however, will not. These are HSTS.)
In clinical terms they tend to present younger than AGPs although there is a crossover in the late teens and twenties. Janet Mock’s book ‘Redefining Realness’ is a good recent personal history of an HSTS growing up.
HSTS see their femininity in terms of their sexuality, romantic objectives and socialisation. They act like girls, they sound like girls and they look like girls. Put bluntly, they are girls. Sexually and romantically they desire a straight relationship with a straight man. Although they almost always have many gay male friends and indeed, many will have self-identified as gay at some stage, they are not interested in gay relationships at all. They are girls and completely hetero-normative girls at that.
Wherever there is a social space that these individuals can be themselves in, they will exploit it and transition. Life is just easier for an HSTS as a woman. Nobody takes them seriously as men anyway and they are useless at it. They have no hope of succeeding in the patriarchal status rat-race as men, but as women, their beauty is their ally. A good-looking HSTS like transpinay Kevin Balot (a Philippine celebrity) will have no difficulty attracting male partners and for a young woman like her, the dream may indeed come true — to find a straight man who really loves her.
Transpinay model Kevin Balot
For Kevin, being a woman is just who she is. She doesn’t have to learn it; she just is. When she was little she was a little girl and when she grew up she became a woman. That’s it. Kevin suffered a great deal as a child, like many HSTS, but she could not change herself. She is what she is. It’s not really a matter of feeling, just of being. She was always Kevin and there is only one Kevin Balot; she describes her name as the most precious thing her parents gave to her and she wears it with obvious and great pride. Being a woman is not an act for her, nor is she conflicted in her personality.
HSTS has been described for millennia and has always been more associated with matriarchal or matrifocal cultures. ( I have seen one fascinating reference to an 11th century Islamic scholar describing what might be AGP, but Islam is a patriarchy every bit as repressive as the modern Western one, so hey, no surprise; but I will pursue that.)
AGPs could not be more different. They show no femininity as children, though they may be detached and sensitive boys. They almost always succeed in masculine areas — sport (Caitlyn Jenner) academia (Julia Serrano and Lynn Conway); many join the armed forces. They usually marry and have children. Their awareness of themselves as women always appears later and never in childhood. (Their personal ‘recalled histories’ may assert childhood feelings of transgender but these are never independently verifiable and are in fact a product of their condition.)
Autogynephilia is a far more complicated profile than HSTS, in which the subject becomes consumed with the idea of self as a woman, and consequentially a desire to be a woman, along with the adoption of female characteristics and the removal of male ones. AGP, like all biological conditions, is a scale of variation, so some individuals feel the dysphoria it causes much more intensely than others. For some, dressing as women is enough; for others, surgical removal of the offending parts is the only relief. However, a majority of AGPs retain their assigned birth gender sexual normativity: they remain attracted to women.
The reason I mentioned Kevin Balot earlier is that names are a useful guide in distinguishing the types. For an HSTS, she is who she’s always been and most will just feminise their given names. Chris will become Crissy, Alan becomes Alana, Peter Petra and so on. Some, like Kevin, refuse to change at all, seeing no need. They are who they are and always have been. There is only one personality inside an HSTS’ head and that is feminine, from early childhood. (There is an exception, where HSTS working in the sex business adopt fancy names appropriate to that; but they do not usually use those names in private life, and in any case, cis men and women do this too.)
However, within the AGP profile, a second, pseudo-feminine personality develops around the fixation with self as a woman. This appears at puberty or soon after. It is quite distinct from the masculine personality that originally conceives it. As this second personality develops, it acquires a name. This is usually very different from the given name of the masculine personality — ‘Bruce’ becomes ‘Caitlyn’ for example.( For inexplicable reasons, there appears to be a tendency towards using exotic or foreign names — often misspelled.)
This second personality may become so dominant and aggressive that it overwhelms the masculine host personality and at this point — usually after years of cross-dressing, first in private, then with forays in public, to ‘cross-dressing clubs’ etc — the subject is fully consumed by the feminine personality. Then all the masculine physical characteristics of the subject’s body have to be re-aligned in concordance with it.
At the same time, the new personality has to have a history, which will be an adaptation of the truth in which feelings of ‘femininity’ were suppressed in childhood and so on. AGPs are not lying when they relate these, but they are still invented: they are a part of the second ‘feminine’ personality, which is destroying all remnant of the original masculine one. The subject is unable to know which memories are true (part of their masculine personality) and which are not.
It is at this point that a masculine (paradoxically) aggression response kicks in to counter any suggestion that the AGP’s ‘recalled history’ or feminine identity might not be real. This is frequently expressed as a narcissistic rage attack, such as has been directed at scientists and academics like J Michael Bailey, Anne Lawrence, Ray Blanchard himself, Alice Dreger (famed for her fairness and academic integrity) and anyone else who dares to challenge the assertions of AGPs.
These attacks should be seen as a defence response by the ‘feminine’ personality that has overtaken the host. In addition to personal insult and character assassination, these attacks also include the routine falsification and distortion of statistics and other evidence, and the insistence that AGPs are the only ‘true women’. This leads directly to the blatant attempt to erase HSTS trans women, who, just by existing, prove the illusory nature of the AGP personality.
AGPs, through this attempt to erase or devalue HSTS identities, in order to colonise them, are one component of the social problem that sees HSTS abused, harmed and killed. They deliberately present HSTS as a minority (which they are not) and as incapable of speaking for themselves, which is about as offensive as it gets. For an AGP, only his own personality matters; everything about him is only about him and he is focussed exclusively on the parasitic ‘feminine’ personality that is consuming him. It is narcissism gone made, with the subject totally obsessed with himself to the exclusion of everyone and everything else.
Gender dysphoria — universally accepted as the specific provocation of transgender — for an AGP is, therefore about detestation of actual physical body parts, since these symbolise the remnants of the masculine personality that has been destroyed. (Although sometimes not entirely, and this is why re-transition occurs.) Its social aspect is the relentless aggression of AGPs against anyone who questions their ‘narratives’, demands to be allowed to use women’s safe spaces and access to their bodies as well as, of course, the incessant attempt to harm HSTS.
(Incredibly, I recently saw, on an AGP’s site, the exhortation that women should just ‘stay out of spaces that [AGP MtFs] frequent.’ It is rare that I am rendered speechless, but I was that day.)
On the other hand, dysphoria for an HSTS — who does not have this internal conflict and is really a girl — is simply about social roles: a horror of having to socialise as a man and being more comfortable socialising as a woman since, in fact, that is what she is. Genital surgery for AGP is like the removal of a malignant tumour, the second personality’s final moment of triumph; for HSTS it’s more like having a boob job — it makes a more convincing woman, who can then socialise more easily as one. This is why so many AGPs do not use their neo-vaginas for sex, whereas HSTS always do: I mean what would be the point otherwise?
AGPs have no notion of what being a woman is, of course; theirs is a fantasy, possibly provoked by the repression they experienced as children. Unlike HSTS, who are in no doubt whatsoever about their feminine identity from their early lives and indeed are quite unable to prevent themselves from being girls, AGPs have to learn and, frequently, fail.
The AGP awareness of self as feminine is rather like a ‘negative shape': once you remove all the masculine parts, what is left is taken to be feminine. That this assumption could not be further from the truth is just ignored by AGPs, though it is the source of much of the conflict between them and natal women feminists.
AGP is a cultural by-product of the Western patriarchy; this is supported by the fact that in other parts of the world, it is extremely rare, to the point of ‘zero percent’ (of trans women) according to one study. Worse however, it acts for the patriarchy in erasing and silencing HSTS trans women, who are far more numerous. In this, AGPs are not alone: we shall deal with their allies in another post.
The post Jenner: not the face of trans women appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Keisha Jenkins, 22. RIP
Say Her Name. Go on. Say it. Keisha Jenkins.
According to Philadelphia Police, Keisha Jenkins, 22, was ambushed by about five men who began to pummel her moments after she exited a car around 2:30 a.m. She was then shot twice in the back and later died in a hospital. Keisha is the most recent in a wave of killings of trans women in the United States.
Keisha’s brutal death brings the total of trans women murdered in the USA — that we know of — to 21 this year. While the USA is not the most dangerous place in the world for trans women — that’s Brazil — the US has undercurrents of racism and sexism that are not apparent elsewhere and which are conspiring to make matters worse.
The underlying cause of these killings is the patriarchy’s misogynistic premise that women are worth less than men. This powers the killing of both trans women and trans men as well as rape and ‘honour’ killings of women. These phenomena are all closely related and a symptom of the patriarchy, which is not an organisation but a parasitic disease that feeds on people.
The patriarchy only needs women to supply it with sons that bear their fathers’ names; since trans women cannot do this the patriarchy encourages men to kill them. This is what causes ‘passer-by’ killings, where there appears to have been no social interaction between the victim and her killers. They just killed her because the patriarchy made them believe they should. We don’t yet know if this was what happened to Keisha and, sadly, we probably never will: the history of the investigation of the murder of trans women suggests that their killers are rarely brought to justice.
A second issue is that the patriarchy attempts to control how and with whom men have sex. (It doesn’t really care what women do in bed as long as they make babies for men and do as they are told by them.) This is because human sex is our most powerful drive. It bonds societies together, and to do so, humans are evolved, like our nearest relatives the bonobos, Pan paniscus, to be both pansexual and gender-fluid.
I cover this in Why Men Made God and blogged about it at Pansexual: the human norm.
For our two species, same-sex bonding is part of our group dynamic. It ties, through sexualised bonds of love, the groups we are evolved to live in together, and so helps the individuals in them survive. Because the same-sex sexual bonding occurs alongside opposite-sex intercourse, and these two species, left to their own devices, have a lot of sex, there is always enough reproductive sex to ensure future generations.
The patriarchy put an end to that. For it, sex had only to be about procreation and not about shared pleasure. Women, indeed, were not expected to find sex pleasant; this was ‘unbecoming’. (A view still held by Christians and Muslims; for example; clitorectomy is specifically designed to prevent women enjoying sex.) This is because the patriarchy wants its control systems, principally religions but not exclusively, to be the ‘authority’ that governs us.
It is central to the patriarchal desire for control that men stop having sex with other males, so it teaches young men that such an attraction is demeaning and forbidden or even ‘unnatural’. This allows the patriarchy, through supplying sexual partners sanctioned by its contract of ownership of women, called ‘marriage’, to control men by regulating the supply of baby-factories to ensure their lineage is preserved. To enforce this it trains them to beat, bully and kill (as we see in ISIS and elsewhere in the Islamic world) men who express willingness to have sex with other men. At very least it is tantamount to a surrender of all the man’s status.
After all, why would any man jump through the hoops the patriarchy sets just for a little bit of sex if he could do otherwise? Men being creative, that is exactly what they do, and why the patriarchy so hates that they do, and why their ex-cathedra condemnation is so vitriolic.
Since the patriarchy sees trans women as men prepared to have sex with other men, it wants them dead.
At the same time the patriarchy teaches young men that women are sexual targets and that they have a right to penetrate them. (See here: Why America is the World’s Rape Capital ) It turns sex into a competition, with the highest status going to the man who penetrates the most women. (Religious sanctions like marriage are only intended to control women; men are not bound by them but in name.) This is an utter perversion of the way humans have evolved, but the patriarchy is supported in its blatant lying by religion, politicians, and, to its great shame, the academy.
The above two factors are catastrophically dangerous for one kind of transwomen, who are the majority. These women are sexually attracted to men and probably highly desirable, as Keisha was. They frequently find themselves alone with men, in the interest of having sex.
When the man, having succeeded in the challenge the patriarchy set him and penetrated the girl, finds out she has a penis, all hell breaks loose. Because he has been taught that all possessors of penises are men, to his mind he has just had sex with a man, and his patriarchal status has been totally destroyed. An episode of narcissistic rage (which men are very prone to) occurs and he beats the girl to death. This is EXACTLY what happened to Jennifer Laude, Gwen Araujo and countless others.
Frequently these murders do not happen immediately and the killer goes off to find some male friends who will help him recover his ‘honour’ by killing her. Is this what happened to Keisha? We don’t know.
The situation is even worse than it seems, however. There are two completely different types of male-to-female transsexual. The first, which used to be called ‘true’ transsexual, is now known as ‘Blanchard HSTS’ or ‘transkid’. They realise they are girls in childhood, may go through a phase of thinking they are gay boys (when they are vulnerable to quack psychologists) and most importantly, they are sexually attracted to men. Think Janet Mock, Geena Rocero, Kevin Balot, Jamie Clayton. Keisha and at least 17 of the other trans women murdered (that we know of) in the US this year, were of this type; they probably all were. These are the overwhelming majority of trans women.
The second type used to be called ‘pseudo’ transsexual, but is now known by the more accurate name ‘Blanchard autogynephile’ or ‘AGP’. These are all the MtF ‘transsexuals’ who are not principally attracted to men. Instead they are sexually attracted to themselves, as women. (Some do become attracted to men after they transition, but that’s for another day.) Autogynephilia is popularly known as male fetishistic cross-dressing, although it is actually somewhat more complex. Think ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner.
These latter are, definitively, not women. They are men with a paraphilia, a sexual fetish. They are heterosexual and prey on women. They are the most perfect expression of the patriarchy’s contempt for women: men with fake vaginas and boob jobs, gaining admission to women’s private spaces to rape them with their minds.
Although actually a minority, in the West autogynephiles claim they are the majority, but in order to do this, they have to pretend that the overall prevalence of MtF transgender is much lower than it is. They use out-of-date, debunked and plain old deliberately falsified statistics to try to shore their claim up, and suggest that the prevalence is of the order of 1:10,000.
However the true prevalence, as demonstrated in censuses and surveys all over the world, and in the US by prestigious organisations for such as the Williams Institute for Law of the University of California, and by Professor Lynn Conway, is around 1:250 or higher. There are at least 700,000 MtF transgender people in the USA and well over 90% of them are not AGP, but HSTS. (Williams; Conway’s total is higher.)*
However, were autogynephiles to recognise the actual prevalence they would immediately lose credibility for the status they have arrogated to themselves, of being the spokesmen for all trans women. By doing this, autogynephiles encourage under-reporting and contribute to the killing of real trans women. These are white middle-class, middle-aged men with good careers and money in the bank, presuming to speak for principally of colour, poor, largely under-educated trans women.
Although it is possible that one or two of the trans women murdered in the USA today are AGP, it is most unlikely. The majority of the dead were trans women of colour and AGP is almost exclusively a phenomenon of white, middle-class males.
Racism pervades US culture in a way that no European can really understand. Racism does exist here, but it is completely different. I saw a person of colour approach the school across the road yesterday. I didn’t know him, never seen him before. In the US, what would a white person have done? Be honest. You’d have called the police or maybe just got a gun and shot him. That is what you’d have done. I assumed he was a newcomer to the village come to pick up his kid from school and guess what? So he was. Next time I see him I’ll say hi and welcome to the community.
This racism in the US fuels the conflict between AGPs and the majority HSTS. Because AGPs are actually patriarchal white men, they will not tolerate women of colour speaking for them. It is essential to them that they maintain the illusion of their numerical superiority, in order to remain the spokesmen for the ‘transgender community’.
Did you really think it was coincidence that Bruce Jenner, an admitted lifelong cross-dressing fetishist, suddenly decided, at the age of 65, to ‘come out as a woman’? Open your eyes: the high ground has been taken by trans women of colour like Laverne Cox, Janet Mock, Geena Rocero and many others. Jenner ‘came out’ to steal that limelight back for white cross-dressing men.
These people are parasitic male opportunists; ghastly succubi created by the patriarchy to feed off the identities of women while having sex with them. To them, HSTS are the enemies and they are unconcerned by their killings. This is why Jenner has been so strangely quiet on the subject.
Bad enough to be so betrayed by a competing group of transsexuals, but HSTS trans women of colour get it from another source too: gay men. The modern gay movement has banned femininity and smothered its expression. Why? Because it wants to be part of the patriarchy. Only people with a profoundly patriarchal mindset would spend so much time and effort to actually allow themselves to be bound by the patriarchy’s contract of ownership, marriage. But HSTS trans women flout that authority too. Since gay men actually see HSTS trans women as …well, gay men, they expect them to wear slacks and have pecs. When trans women refuse, gay men get nasty.
Amongst the most aggressive critics of trans women, alongside Bible-thumping preachers and others suffering from the delusion of religion, have been gay movement leaders like Jim Fourrat. The history of the gay male movement — led by squeaky white men — in the last three decades is of betraying and abusing HSTS trans women, mainly of colour, while sucking up to the patriarchy and also to AGPs — who are also white men.
Keisha Jenkins will not be the last to die. Many more will, HSTS trans women, mainly of colour. While they do, white gays and lesbians continue to congratulate themselves on at last getting their merit badges from the patriarchy and at the same time white cross-dressing men pontificate on how hard life is while getting sexually aroused at the thought of knitting, wearing frilly knickers or using women’s toilets.
I grieve for Keisha’s parents and for the loved ones of all the trans women who have been murdered. But we will not end this carnage until we see through the lies and propaganda that sustain their killing, and recognise that two of the most sinister accessories are gay men and cross-dressing fetishists. **
* The issue of prevalence and the blatant lies being promulgated by AGPs and their front organisations deserves a blog post of its own, which I will work up.
** A draft of this article was accidentally published yesterday. I have rewritten it in the light of the sad news about Keisha Jenkins.
The post Keisha Jenkins: Say Her Name appeared first on Rod Fleming's World.
Rod Fleming on Google+