As so many of you must know by now, for the past year I have been romantically attached to Sam Villasencio, also known as Samantha Nicole Mendez. It’s not always been the easiest of relationships but we found, through our adversities, the real strength of our love. I know that proposing was the right thing to do but I put it off for a few months even after my mind was made up. There were many reasons for this, not all good, but not all bad either. But in the end I realised that it was something I wanted to do and that my motives were sound.
Although I am not really superstitious I wanted the most propitious circumstances. After all, this is Asia and Sam is Two-Spirited, with much power in the unseen world. So I wanted to give her a ring and do it properly.
So on St Valentines’s Day, we had a party for some friends and then I got on my knees and asked her. She said ‘yes’. Fortunately.
We don’t know quite when or how the actual marriage ceremony will take place. Sam’s a Catholic, I’m Church of Scotland — and perhaps more to the point, she’s a transwoman. I will keep you all posted but meantime keep an eye on my YouTube Channel
Transition desire, which is Gender Dysphoria if the condition becomes clinical, is defined into four separate types: male homosexual, female homosexual, male nonhomosexual and female nonhomosexual.
Homosexual transition desire
The stimulus for the homosexual form appears to be, on a significant amount of evidence, a form of Sexual Inversion caused by anomalies in the hormone (principally testosterone) delivery system to the developing baby in utero.
This causes numerous effects including more or less marked shifts towards opposite-sex characteristics in a range of areas, including body morphology but also, crucially, sexuality, such that males have female sexuality and females have male sexuality.
Sexual inverts, or, in males, ‘feminine homosexuals’ — along with a range of much less polite vernacular terms — make up a class of homosexuals which have been identified, for over 100 years, as having characteristics of the opposite sex.
I’ve just been reading over a group of papers on this, with one typical being Zucker 1993 ‘Physical Attractiveness of Boys with Gender Identity Disorder’. That is by no means the most recent, with numerous studies by a swathe of researchers making the same findings, along with 2D:4D finger length ratios and other measurable parameters.
The observed facts are that male sexual inverts are naturally feminine (and female ones are masculine.) This was first noted, in the modern era, by Karl Ulrichs, was written about in depth by Havelock Ellis and has NEVER been refuted. It remains the scientific consensus.
Homosexual transsexuals exactly fit the profile of ‘sexual inversion’ as defined over a hundred years ago by Karl Heinrich Ulrichs (1825-1895)
‘The truth of the invert was inside rather than on the surface; thus a male invert was “really” a woman, and should be allowed to express a female gender, and a female invert was “really” a man, and should be allowed to dress and live as one. Inversion also referred to the ways in which such bodies inverted the laws of nature, which supposedly decreed that male bodies should desire female sexual partners instead of male ones, and vice versa. The theory of sexual inversion maintained conventional categories of sexuality and gender and did not allow one to be divided from the other. Inversion meant that a man’s homosexual desires, effeminacy, or both did not challenge masculine gender or heterosexual sexual norms; rather, a perfectly normal heterosexual woman with a feminine gender was trapped inside him, yearning to come out.’ (Encyclopedia.com)
Later, the English sexology pioneer H Havelock Ellis wrote:
‘(Congenital sexual inversion) is sexual instinct turned by inborn constitutional abnormality towards persons of the same sex.'(My emphasis).
(Ellis uses the term ‘congenital’ which remains unproven. It is clear that what he is talking about is innate and must result from biological factors occurring either in the womb or shortly after birth; but we do not know whether the trigger for whatever these might be is congenital, that is, a result of a specific gene mutation. However, the condition is innate and not acquired. I prefer to use the term ‘innate’.)
Ellis’ massive study of human sexuality, Studies in the Psychology of Sex, which is downloadable via this page HERE, contains a whole volume on sexual inversion, and he defines this as above on the first page. Note that both Ulrichs and Ellis agreed that this sexual inversion was innate. It was inborn and not a matter of choice.
Observation in the Philippines casts light on an interesting group of Autogynephiles in the West. One of these, who is public, is called Candice ‘Kay Brown’ Elliott.
Kay Brown maintains a website discussing the scientific consensus about trans and has even written a book about it. She has been claiming for decades that she is HSTS and loses no opportunity, in her writing, to support this claim. However even cursory examination of her body morphology and career indicates that this diagnosis would be unlikely.
A more plausible explanation would be that Kay Brown is Autogynephilic, but that within her family, middle-class and liberal, her feminisation was accepted because she explained it as a consequence of homosexuality. Ever since then, Brown has maintained this facade, marrying a man and becoming ‘mother’ to his children. In other words, while their motivations are definitely different, it is not always easy to tell between HSTS and AGP.
I have met significantly more than a few Asian Autogynephiles (AGPs) and their profile is quite clear.
They tend to have their first ‘feelings’ at around the age of 15-16 and begin HRT, usually in the form of contraceptive pills, very soon after that. While late-transitioning AGPs do exist, they are rare. A good recent example would be Ian King, a racing driver and son of a wealthy ‘Fil-Am’ family. He is from an elevated social class.
This individual fits the Western profile of AGP exactly, but that appears to be related to his social class. This is interesting, because a similar social divide is found between masculine presenting homosexual males, macho gays locally or the New Gay Man, and the traditional highly feminised type. Here again, the former tends to be rare and found only in higher social strata, while the latter is both much more common and more associated with lower social class.
The ‘nature versus nurture’ debate has been central to the discussion of sexuality for over two hundred years. In brief, the nature school believes that human behaviour is largely inherited, while nurturists believe it is the result of experiences in childhood, particularly in our interactions with our parents and siblings.
This argument, ostensibly over sexuality, spreads out into other areas of thought. So let’s examine it.
The nature school is sometimes called ‘Essentialist’. It is fundamental to the Biblical concept of Original Sin, which insists that we are not sinners by choice or because of our background, but because we are human. Our nature is that of sinner and Christ came to absolve us of this. That it why is possible for a newborn infant to be a sinner, in the eyes of Christians, even if she has done nothing other than suck her mother’s tit; sin is innate to being human. However, human nature, so hated by the Constructionists, is not seen as a flaw by the nature school but rather the source of our strength. It is what binds us together and makes us human, for better or worse.
Nurturism is sometimes called the ‘blank slate’ or tabula rasa. It was present in the thinking of Rousseau, an eighteenth-century philosopher whose thinking gave rise to many of the social movements we know today. In many ways it is a natural development of the idea of individual autonomy, which informed the cultural revolution of the era and gave us the Enlightenment. Nothing is written and we are all able to shape every detail of our lives independently of the past. Today it is commonly known as ‘Constructionism’.
Many of you may already know that I am immersed in developing a new resource, called ‘All About HSTS’. I have been researching and writing articles for this, which will be based on a website and will have a discussion forum. We experienced a slight hiatus, as the host I was using managed to basically trash all the sites I had on it. We have now migrated elsewhere, but much repair is still to be done.
One of the most important articles on the subject of HSTS was written by Dr J Michael Bailey and the late Kiira Triea. This has been published widely on the internet and in the blogosphere, but I take the liberty of republishing it here, to widen the spread of its influence.
It’s a long article, but deeply researched and packs a huge amount of information. It was written before papers on the seminal MRI brain scans by Rametti et al and Savic and Arver were published in 2011 or, clearly, Guillamon’s 2016 review of these. It mentions the neurology that was current at the time of writing, which was largely based on post-mortem examinations of the brains of six dead transsexuals or transvestites, by Zhou et al. This research, while remaining beloved of autogynephilic transvestite activists (TRAs), was completely superseded by the later work and was, in any case, too small in scale to be generalised from.
Guest Author Amanda Grimes discusses trans activism and the risks it may present for young people.
This article is a collection of my own thoughts and opinions, formed from my experience as a transsexual woman who transitioned over 30 years ago. In that time I have experienced life, as a woman, with few, if any, knowing about my past. I am married to a man and have had a long and very successful professional career. I transitioned at a time when the world was not quite the fluffy accepting place it appears to be today and in reality while laws have changed, society, especially the behaviours of the genders within it is not really that different now than it was then.
There currently is what seems to be an inexorable move towards the acceptance of “Transgender” people within Western societies. So much so that there is almost an air of hysteria around the condition, which seems almost cult like in some quarters, and has led to the blind acceptance of anyone who presents the slightest non-conformity with their traditional gender role as being transgender. Continue reading “Trans activism can be harmful”
Gender Identity Disorder (GID) and Gender Dysphoria (GD) are the same thing. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of Mental Disorders, prepared by the American Psychiatric Association, the terms GID and GD apply to the same condition, depending on which edition of the DSM you look in.
Up to the fourth edition, DSM4, the condition appears as Gender Identity Disorder and in DSM5 it appears as Gender Dysphoria . There is a note in DSM5, which confirms that the name was changed to Gender Dysphoria because the word “Disorder” was seen as having negative connotations and was stigmatising to people suffering from it, not because it was no longer considered a mental disorder — as most trans-activists will tell you. GD still appears in the DSM5.