1/

It’s often claimed that “The Concept of Autogynephilia and the Typology of Male Gender Dysphoria” by @BlanchardPhD has been debunked.

I thought it would be interesting to see, at a basic level, how the concept and typology compares to the DSM-5.

A. The definition of AGP.

2/

B. Transvestism is often accompanied by AGP.

C. The presence of AGP in transvestism increases the likelihood of [developing] Gender Dysphoria.
3/

D. Gender Dysphoria (GD) in natal males is categorized as either early-onset or late-onset.
4/

E. Natal males with early-onset GD are almost always androphilic. The majority of natal males with late-onset GD are gynephilic; additionally, they frequently [have histories of] engaging in transvestic behavior with sexual excitement.
5/

F. In many cases of natal males with late-onset GD, transvestic behavior with sexual excitement is a precursor to their GD.
6/

Observation 1:
There appears to be a strong correlation between the “early-onset GD” group in the DSM-5 and the “homosexual transsexual” (HSTS) group in the Blanchard typology.
7/

Observation 2:
There appears to be a strong correlation between the “late-onset GD” group in the DSM-5 and the “nonhomosexual transsexual” (autogynephilic/AGP) group in the Blanchard typology.
8/

Observation 3:
The DSM-5 categorizes its GD groups based on age of onset, while the Blanchard typology categorizes its groups
based on sexual orientation.
9/

Although this creates room for incongruence between the DSM-5 groups and the Blanchard typology groups, it also demonstrates a strong resemblance, given that the DSM-5 indicates such a strong relationship between age of GD onset and sexual orientation.
10/

Observation 4:
The DSM-5 draws a clear link between transvestic AGP and the late-onset GD group.

The other subtypes of AGP (anatomic, behavioral and physiologic) aren’t really covered, but it seems plausible that they are similarly linked to the late-onset GD group.
11/

Summary:
There is a strong resemblance between the DSM-5 and the Blanchard typology. One would not expect to see such a strong resemblance if the Blanchard typology had truly been debunked.

On a final note:

More from Society

I’ll address every nonsense argument and lie used to defend the suicidal gender ideology Thats in vogue today:

3:45 - “So what if you don’t have gametes?”

It’s called a birth defect. You’re still male or female.


~5:00 *nonsense trying to say the sexes of seahorses could be swapped coz male carry the eggs*

male doesn’t produce eggs, he produces the sperm. He’s still the male. If I impregnated a chick then carried the amniotic sac in a backpack ‘til the baby was done I’ll still be male🤦‍♂️

5:10 - we could say there’s 4 sexes of fruit fly cause there’s 3 producers of different sized sperm

No. They’re still producing sperm. They’re males. This is idiotic. Is this whole video like this? (Probably. 99% likely. Abandon hope.)

~6:10 - hermaphroditism and sequential hermaphroditism exists therefore....

No. Some animals being hermaphrodites, which is meaningless w/o the existence of binary sex to contrast it to, still doesn’t make gender ideology or transgenderism valid.

Intersex ≠ transgenderism 🙄

6:20 - bilateral gynandromorphism is a disorder in some species (not in humans). Has nothing to do w/ “gender” or transgenderism.

Ova-testes in humans are also a disorder, usually found in those w/ the karyotype disorders that you ppl also try to appropriate (extra X’s/Y’s).

You May Also Like