Well, there are some interesting studies out there, and I think there is something to feminine physical traits in mtf who possess the more typical female higher ratio. However, that in and of itself does not really mean a great deal as there are plenty of feminine looking men who are perfectly happy as the men they happen to be. Then there are the men who have ratios that are lower and more typical to what is considered a more masculine looking male, who are gender dysphoric. Now this is all a theory, as the numbers in all studies and the groups for control are still leaving a great deal to be desired.
One, were the physical features of the male and female control groups a good cross section of various looks of non-gender dysphoric members of their birth sex? Meaning, were the builds equally represented? As one could hypothesis that the ratios only apply to physical features even without knowing this. There are studies that suggest that dysphoria is caused by hormone differences in first and third trimesters. The lower T in the third, after the normal (for males) higher T in the first leading to male genitalia. The finger ratio, if I understand most studies correctly, talks 13th week which plum lands us in the second trimester, smack dab in the middle of when... AGAIN IN THEORY... genitalia in the first tri, and bstc in the third are most influenced by hormones.
Thus in what I hope is logical thinking leads to the following thoughts;
1. If T levels are sufficiently high enough to create genitalia that are male, but for whatever reasons (stress to the mother, medication influence, biological abnormality, or simply chance along with other possibilities I have not thought of at the moment) lead to a reduction in T in the second tri the finger ratio would potentially indicate a correlation. Assuming the T level stay at the same lower levels or dip even lower going into the third trimester.
2. If T levels are sufficiently high enough to create genitalia that are male, and dip but not enough or at all, then 2d:4d ratio goes unaffected, yet for whatever reasons (as previously mentioned) T levels drop enough or even dramatically in that third trimester so that the bstc region (and possibly others, or something yet unknown, or not at all and this is all hocus pocus which is possible I guess) did not align the brain with the body or god forbid the all telling 2d:4d which SEEMS to have taken on a more meaningful role than sex organs for some.
Those here who really sound like they are beating themselves up for no good reason, as even if you (or me) are fetishistic (which I doubt most are exclusively so, and what is fetishistic anyways? Plenty of straight people if not all have them, so is dysphoria for whatever perceived reason even possible due to a fetish exclusively? Or isn't for that matter?) Blanchard and Lawerence especially make great arguments that transsexuality is still a very REAL issue for you (even if they assume way too much and that everyone is lying about themselves unknowingly, which sound more like convenience for their theory than plausible as most struggle mightily before getting to a point of actual transition). Then beyond that, why couldn't or wouldn't someone with the standard ratio fall into the second scenario I pose?
What I am getting at here is what I see 2d:4d having the possibility of PROVING here is one thing and one thing only. The variations of people, straight, gay, transexual, pansexual, asexual, and everything else inbetween each and outside and beyond sets it so that we all are indeed different in our bodies and minds. Those of us crossing into the gray areas if we are seeing male as black and female as white or vice a versa can not be pinpointed.
So I do see some interesting things in 2d:4d, but in no way do I see it as proving or disproving a biological correlation with gender dysphoria, but it does suggest an influence to at least a physical degree if only minor. It does little to validate whether someone is transsexual BECAUSE of the next possibility...
3. Insufficient T to produce male genitalia in the first trimester. Then increases, again for whatever unknown reason to a degree to affect 2d:4d ratios in the second trimester. Only to see the levels reduce again or increase again to produce either male or female typical brain structure (so far as I know bstc is the only known one and is also not proven, only theory as it is also not properly disproven).
Rendering the 2d:4d ratio moot, especially when you consider the final possibility and the one leading to the 2d:4d ratio of men who are happy men with a female typical ratio. Which I think could possibly show additional female typical physical traits, yet be happy as manly men, or gay men, but men none the less.
In the end, I feel no one needs to defend why they feel and think the way we do. I did not even touch on those that are gender fluid, and HOW would that work if 2d:4d ratio meant more than just another random development in the infinite possible differences between you and me and that person, and that one, and on and on.
Again, the CRUX of the dilemma we all face is that we are feeling (strongly) for whatever reason we are in the wrong BODY, and from what I know the fingers are part of the body... TYPICALLY.
So one could even make an argument, though I think a terrible one, that those with male genitalia but female 2d:4d ratios have a physical development issue and are NOT really transsexual! All they should be asking society to do is accept their fingers for the lengths that they are, or to allow them to saw them off to fit what ratio they identify this. Though I do not know a single manly man with a female 2d:4d ratio who is asking for either of these concessions.... Then again I do not know any transsexuals asking to saw their fingers off too.
But damn it, if that is what it takes to start to pass I may lead the charge!!! Plus, how much better of a "finger pointer" would I appear to be with a high 2d:4d ratio? Bleeping AWESOME I say! LOL
All kidding aside, I think we all do each other a great disservice sometimes when we try to put too much credence in a theory that I think makes us feel better about our own situations. This is entirely natural to want to do, but I really have not seen much use of it in any practical way.
Then again, I fail all litmus tests from a physical stand point, and even social stand point. I admit I could have fetishistic desires, but then I can make a damn good argument of how they developed out of frustration if anything, assuming that they are even fetishistic (I guess what I am getting at as I think I masterbate too much about being with a man as the female I believe I am. Am I nuts? Autogynephilic and just lying that I am interested in men? Am I transsexual, today, tomorrow, ever? All to be determined as I continue with baby steps through therapy, self improvement, and growth of my self awareness via doing my best not to apply social norms to my gender, sexuality, and birth sex WHICH I should have done before starting a family during puberty when I has just started to question my sexuality (gender had already popped up but I wrote it off as I am crazy per parental suggestion.) OH birth sex and 2d:4d ratio was already set in stone by then, THANK GOD!!! lol
Honesty, I love you all, and marvel at how amazing some of you look! At how amazing some of you present yourselves! And at something each and one of you has and that is a thirst for self awareness and more.
Sincerely,
Your misfit friend, Toni
