I take it everyone has heard of the putatively Earth-shattering survey about trans released this week.
Erin Reed, trans advocate, who has a gift for misleading information, wrote about it....and should be read. Oh, unsaid by her, is that the survey methodology by definition excludes desisters and detransitioners. Nevertheless, the big thing trumpeted is how few of either one there are.....and no wonder given survey parameters.
This suggested dynamic, above, seems counterintuitive. Individuals who are same-sex attracted do not reject their biological sex, in fact , the reverse, as we see many homosexual biological males openly celebrate their physical masculinity. Lesbian biological females , by definition, embrace the physical / biological femininity of a sexual partner. The larger number of those diagnosed with GD , mainly biological females, which have presented with ROGD, as a distinct comparison, vehemently reject their biological sex with the onset of the physical changes at puberty. We can reflect on the influence of social media and the internet in regards to the tsunami of ROGD presentations.
It is not difficult to understand that any , say 12 yr old biological female , confronted with the misogynistic hard core pornography, wanting to reject the thought of having males having such future sexual expectations of her, as an adult. Perhaps better to believe she might be another “ gender”, certainly not a biological female? Given the distinctive differences in the responses to one’s biological sex, in regards to ROGD and same sex attractions, for me, goes some way to explaining the influence of modern technology, the internet. Perhaps the absence of GD among our mothers and grandmothers can be understood to be related to the absence of social media and the internet?
On further reflection, given the observation that the , now majority, demographic being biological females with ROGD, if not medically “ transitioned “ , later declare to be same sex attracted, that would understandably make the impact of internet porn surely only doubly confronting when it comes to accepting or rejecting one’s biological sex.
“Perhaps the absence of GD among our mothers and grandmothers can be related to the absence of social media and the internet “….during those generation’s youth ?
"Gender dysphoria" is an early-70s diagnostic euphemism for transsexualism. It was very rare then, there's no reason to believe it's not very rare now. What we have now is an assortment of other syndromes being labeled as GD. For example, ROGD is a contradiction in terms; GD is not a "rapid onset" condition, it doesn't seem to have a defined point of onset at all. Further, it's preposterous to think one could acquire an innate condition that one first learned about on TV or the internet. Then there's "transgender," a useless umbrella that seems to cover everyone and anyone, conceivably. Different designations are needed. Perhaps "Pseudo-TS Variations" comes close to describing the set of conditions we're looking at.
I take it everyone has heard of the putatively Earth-shattering survey about trans released this week.
Erin Reed, trans advocate, who has a gift for misleading information, wrote about it....and should be read. Oh, unsaid by her, is that the survey methodology by definition excludes desisters and detransitioners. Nevertheless, the big thing trumpeted is how few of either one there are.....and no wonder given survey parameters.
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/over-90000-satisfied-responses-in
This suggested dynamic, above, seems counterintuitive. Individuals who are same-sex attracted do not reject their biological sex, in fact , the reverse, as we see many homosexual biological males openly celebrate their physical masculinity. Lesbian biological females , by definition, embrace the physical / biological femininity of a sexual partner. The larger number of those diagnosed with GD , mainly biological females, which have presented with ROGD, as a distinct comparison, vehemently reject their biological sex with the onset of the physical changes at puberty. We can reflect on the influence of social media and the internet in regards to the tsunami of ROGD presentations.
It is not difficult to understand that any , say 12 yr old biological female , confronted with the misogynistic hard core pornography, wanting to reject the thought of having males having such future sexual expectations of her, as an adult. Perhaps better to believe she might be another “ gender”, certainly not a biological female? Given the distinctive differences in the responses to one’s biological sex, in regards to ROGD and same sex attractions, for me, goes some way to explaining the influence of modern technology, the internet. Perhaps the absence of GD among our mothers and grandmothers can be understood to be related to the absence of social media and the internet?
An epidemic of social contagion where the young and vulnerable lemmings race toward the cliff clutching their smartphones.
On further reflection, given the observation that the , now majority, demographic being biological females with ROGD, if not medically “ transitioned “ , later declare to be same sex attracted, that would understandably make the impact of internet porn surely only doubly confronting when it comes to accepting or rejecting one’s biological sex.
“Perhaps the absence of GD among our mothers and grandmothers can be related to the absence of social media and the internet “….during those generation’s youth ?
Mainstream adoption of social media by teens coincides with the rise of the ROGD profile.
"Gender dysphoria" is an early-70s diagnostic euphemism for transsexualism. It was very rare then, there's no reason to believe it's not very rare now. What we have now is an assortment of other syndromes being labeled as GD. For example, ROGD is a contradiction in terms; GD is not a "rapid onset" condition, it doesn't seem to have a defined point of onset at all. Further, it's preposterous to think one could acquire an innate condition that one first learned about on TV or the internet. Then there's "transgender," a useless umbrella that seems to cover everyone and anyone, conceivably. Different designations are needed. Perhaps "Pseudo-TS Variations" comes close to describing the set of conditions we're looking at.