Science desk
< April 15	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 16

Opposition to the idea of autogynephilia

We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions, or debate. --47.155.46.15 (talk) 02:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Is there a particular reason that trans women in particular are so adamantly against the existence of autogynephilia as an actual condition? I was reading around and noticed that some of the most prominent and vocal critics of the concept are themselves trans women and thought it was interesting and possibly worth exploring. Thanks! ZoxxoZ (talk) 14:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The autogynephilia article addresses this. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 14:34, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That some particular trans women are against the idea does not mean that trans women in general are; you may be experiencing a form of confirmation bias. That said, people who are trans women may have a better informed opinion on the matter than people who aren't, and/or some may incorrectly generalise their personal experience over-widely to what is doubtless a complex mix of differing instances. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.18.208 (talk) 14:44, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me a rational explanation might be that trans women are emotionally invested in the subject and resistant to the idea that their trans identity is in fact a paraphilia which they themselves find embarrassing. It makes sense that one would seek out an explanation for oneself that puts oneself in the best light, while rejecting those that they perceive as distasteful. Effectively denial, of sorts. A very effective and coordinated denial, but a denial nonetheless. ZoxxoZ (talk) 15:15, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On what do you base the assertion that this is a coordinated denial? And why did you write, "but a denial nonetheless"? Perhaps the critics are right and this autogynephilia condition is just as bogus as the hysteria condition, in vogue as a medical diagnosis in the 19th century. The owner of Comet Ping Pong called the Pizzagate conspiracy theory "an insanely complicated, made-up, fictional lie-based story". Would you refer to this statement as "a forceful denial, but a denial nonetheless"? --Lambiam 19:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly asking for opinion and speculation. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 19:42, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"A very effective and coordinated denial..." That's absurd. HiLo48 (talk) 22:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The “effective and coordinated” part refers to having a movement to convince enough of society that gender identity is not a paraphilia. Basically, through activism to bludgeon unquestioning acceptance and denial of reality into the mainstream, and sustained to the point where one is labeled a hateful bigot for even questioning the nature of gender identity. It’s a manner of non-debate, wherein rather than refuting a theory through reasoned debate, the theory is discredited by simply applying a pejorative label. For what it’s worth, this response is understandable and well-documented in the context of denial held by large populations. ZoxxoZ (talk) 03:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could increase your credibility by telling us more about the alleged "coordination" you see. HiLo48 (talk) 03:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]