Comment on Freud
fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 months agoAutogynephilia is an outdated, thoroughly debunked term btw. Find some reading below:
en.wikipedia.org/…/Blanchard's_transsexualism_typ…
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20582803/
www.tandfonline.com/doi/…/15532739.2010.514223
journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/…/0038026120934690
…medium.com/making-sense-of-autogynephilia-debate…
thepinknews.com/…/five-lies-terfs-tell-about-the-…
…medium.com/making-sense-of-autogynephilia-debate…
medium.com/…/why-are-trans-women-penalized-for-bo…
genderanalysis.net/…/alice-dreger-autogynephilia-…
crossdreamers.com/…/the-autogynephilia-theory-deb…
archive.is/fw208
barsoap@lemm.ee 5 months ago
It’s quite clear by now that it has practically nothing to do with gender incongruence, i.e. trans folks, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist as a paraphilia. That is, just because Blanchard got his theory wrong based on incomplete data and probably a good dose of being born into certain social construct doesn’t mean that no cis men get aroused at the thought of them as a woman. It is, as the study in the comment you replied to shows, actually quite common.
Gotta distinguish between the phenomenon auto[gyno/andro]philia (exists), Blanchard’s interpretation wrt. trans folks, (falsified), and TERFs (hateful anti-science assclowns). Otherwise we’d be kink shaming.