Need to stop trying to fool myself and accept it, I have ->-bleeped-<-.

http://mytgjourney.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/need-to-stop-trying-to-fool-myself-and-accept-it-i-have-->-bleeped-<-/
5/13/11
by mytgjourney

I need to stop pretending I am transsexual. That is not to say I am not. I don't know what I am nor where this is going. I am confused as hell and the only thing that is clear to me is that I have ->-bleeped-<-. For those of you who dont know what that means it basically means someone is sexually aroused by the thought or image of themselves as a woman. Or something like that. Some people take it farther then others and dream of some odder things (ive read about people who can only masturbate to the idea of them being pregnant or lactating etc) which is fine I have no problems with that, but thats not me. I used to imagine being magically transformed into a girl and that turned me on...

    ->-bleeped-<- was one of the topics that I came across before I went on HRT.  ->-bleeped-<- did match somewhat what I was going through and was the cause of the last delay before going on HRT.  The HRT quelled the few of those symptoms I had concerning ->-bleeped-<- plus it had improved my health.  This topic, if you google " ->-bleeped-<-", has a lot of pros and cons, depending on the professor. 
  This ->-bleeped-<- theory should be looked into by looking into ourselves more and to the professionals we confide in.  This looks like a different condition than GID.  Let's be honest with ourselves. 
  Joelene

To me the ->-bleeped-<- theory is just simply bad science.

Quote from: cynthialee on May 13, 2011, 06:38:46 PM
To me the ->-bleeped-<- theory is just simply bad science.

Right now it seems.  But good theories started out with bad ideas, but with refinements and adjustments, they turn into good ones.  Remember, science never proves anything, but can disprove things.  A proper proof has no negatives, if one is found later, that theory must be eliminated or modified.
  Joelene

Quote from: Joelene9 on May 13, 2011, 06:53:53 PM
But good theories started out with bad ideas, but with refinements and adjustments, they turn into good ones.

"Hypothesis, my dear young friend, establishes itself by a cumulative process: or, to use popular language, if you make the same guess often enough it ceases to be a guess and becomes a Scientific Fact."
--C. S. Lewis

How i know i dont have ->-bleeped-<-, well, i was 5 and had these TS feelings, and they had nothing to do with sex till puberty.  I didnt even know what sex was but i associated with female role models, took on female type roles during pretend play, was uncomfortable with groups of boys but more comfortable with girls, etc... etc...

Quote from: Izumi on May 13, 2011, 08:33:40 PM
How i know i dont have ->-bleeped-<-, well, i was 5 and had these TS feelings, and they had nothing to do with sex till puberty.  I didnt even know what sex was but i associated with female role models, took on female type roles during pretend play, was uncomfortable with groups of boys but more comfortable with girls, etc... etc...

QFT!
Knowing I was female predated my sexual fantasies by a few years.....

Quote from: cynthialee on May 13, 2011, 08:47:11 PM
QFT!
Knowing I was female predated my sexual fantasies by a few years.....

Me too!

I think it's awesome that mytgjourney is looking to explore the causes and actions to find out who they are and what they need to do. If autogynephelia is something they feel they associate with or lean toward, then more power to them for discovering that. I think it's better that someone keep a completely open mind about their gender issues. I know that sometimes people jump all over autogynephelia and just seem to have this vile hatred for people that bring it up. I haven't seen that much on Susan's and hope I never do. Why would how someone else identifies make people feel so threatened? Shouldn't people be applauding others who are searching for answers? That's what I like about Susan's, there are just so many different kinds of people here that you can probably find many people who think and identify just like you do Meghan

The issue with the ->-bleeped-<- theroy is who propossed it and the mans views.
According to the theory you are either a homosexual transsexual or an ->-bleeped-<- transsexual. Anyone who doesn't agree to the classifications or insists that they are wrong and do not apply to them are presumed to be either lieing or delusional.

The ->-bleeped-<- theory presuposses that any one of us who has sexual feelings for women automatically are ->-bleeped-<-. If you don't agree you are delusional or worse a liar.

Thats why I get a little rabid when I see ->-bleeped-<- come up.

Never actually thought a post from my diary/blog would actually get redirected anywhere lol. Anyway to clarify my post...  I dont know if I technically fit under that whole category of ->-bleeped-<-. I just read a tiny little bit about it and seen some posts on other forums about it.  I am still trying to figure myself out and the one thing I do know is there are sexual feelings (which I guess i just automatically labeled ->-bleeped-<-)... with me always being the woman.  Call it a fetish or call it something  TG related I dont know.  Still trying to figure out the non sexual feelings I have concerning all this... but i know the sexual feelings are there and that is the one definite clear thing relating to this all so i made a post about it. 


Got an interesting reaction from it in general.  Alot of people have found it through search hits for ->-bleeped-<- and also from other sources. Seems like alot of people are trying to figure that all out or are interested in it heh.

Quote from: Just-Me on May 14, 2011, 04:30:46 PM
  I am still trying to figure myself out and the one thing I do know is there are sexual feelings (which I guess i just automatically labeled ->-bleeped-<-)... with me always being the woman. 

Hi Just-me,

I think most women have sexual feelings with them always being the woman too. 

Hi Just-Me and welcome!
A new and quickly growing online discussion forum is making an earnest intellectual inquiry into the nature of  ->-bleeped-<-. The forum was launched about two months ago by people who are autogynephilic for people who are autogynephilic. They call themselves Crossdreamers.
http://www.crossdreamlife.com/

-Emerald

Hi Emerald and thanks for the link. Someone has already linked me to that site before when I mentioned this and thats one of the many reasons I didnt like to say I had any ->-bleeped-<- type feelings.  When I went to the site atleast the newer posts and posters took things rather far. That is not me.  I dont have a problem with those who do but that really isnt like me lol. Again I dont really know how I identify but that site certain scared me away from ->-bleeped-<- haha.  Its not purely sexual with me btw its just thats the only clear thing i know for sure I guess.  So yeah dunno where its all leading yet haha.

I came to accept myself as a transsexual thru Holmesian.  As the great detective says "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"

Quote from: cynthialee on May 13, 2011, 06:38:46 PM
To me the ->-bleeped-<- theory is just simply bad science.

Why? Could you elaborate as what fact lead you to conclude that the sciences behind it is wrong?

Quote from: kate durcal on May 14, 2011, 09:32:40 PM
Why? Could you elaborate as what fact lead you to conclude that the sciences behind it is wrong?

I think Sara7's post relating to ->-bleeped-<- in natal women, and my posts within this thread already sum up why it is a bad theory.

Quote from: Janet Lynn on May 14, 2011, 09:25:03 PM
I came to accept myself as a transsexual thru Holmesian.  As the great detective says "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"

Unfortunately for me I have eliminated nothing really lol. Will with time though =)

I really need to stop using the word ->-bleeped-<- .  Atleast until i read what it means from the actual source and not just the meaning I have gotten from what they heard from what other TG people on another forum heard about it from some guy who actually read the article.  Think some things got lost in translation.

J Homosex. 2010 Jul;57(6):790-809.
Blanchard's  ->-bleeped-<- Theory: a critique.
Moser C.
Source

Department of Sexual Medicine, Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality, San Francisco, California, USA.
Abstract

Over the last 20 years, Ray Blanchard, Ph.D., with a variety of coauthors and collaborators, has proposed a theory that links the sexual orientation of male-to-female transsexuals with the presence or absence of  ->-bleeped-<- (erotic arousal by the thought or image of "himself" as a woman). Blanchard's  ->-bleeped-<- Theory suggests that the association between sexual orientation and  ->-bleeped-<- among male-to-female transsexuals is clinically important and the association is always (or almost always) present. Although the theory has been criticized by clinicians, researchers, and transsexuals themselves, it has not been critiqued in a peer-reviewed article previously. This article will attempt to fill that gap. Key studies on which the theory is based will be analyzed and alternative interpretations of the data presented. I conclude that although  ->-bleeped-<- exists, the theory is flawed.

See, I answered the question I post to Cynthia, LOL Monday when I am back on my office, I will get the whole paper and see if there is any meat to the bone in question.

BTW, I have never experience this ->-bleeped-<-