blanchardian pseudoscience refuted

submitted by vintologi_eu from vintologi.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Maly_Querent 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

From the abstract:

"Conclusion Ultimately, this study found little evidence for the hypothesis that sexual behavior, sexual desire, and psychosexual experience differ substantially in gynephilic (exclusively gynephilic and bisexual) and androphilic trans women."

This doesn't disprove autogynephillia. Also, the research was conducted through a self-reporting online survey, which honestly leads to inconclusive results. Also, just because there is little evidence for the hypothesis that behavior, desire, and experience between gynophillic and androphillic tw differs, does not mean that getting turned on by thinking of oneself as a woman, is not a behavior of tw.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Also, their sample is far to small to claim statistical significance in any group but the n=26 (androphillic), but since they are comparing two other groups with LESS THAN TWENTY people in both, they are really reaching. This study says nothing apart from they need to do more research with a larger sample. It’s not refuting anything, I wish more people knew how to analyze this stuff. I am surprised they even published these results

The ONLY significant result they had was that more gynephillic trans women get off on dressing as women than any other group. That is literally the ONLY significant finding according to their results, lol.

“ Although there were differences among the groups (especially between exclusively gynephilic and androphilic trans women), of which some could be interpreted to be in line with Blanchard's theory of autogynephilia, the overall impression gained from the data of this study is that sexuality among the collective was very diverse.”

Blanchard was not just making stuff up for fun, he was observing significant differences between groups in order to understand them and treat them. It’s not helpful that he’s cast as a villian these days.

[–]Maly_Querent 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The ONLY significant result they had was that more gynephillic trans women get off on dressing as women than any other group.

That is so hilarious! Omg! Talk about not reading the material you're trying to use to disprove the opposite side. Like, can this guy put his foot any further up his ass?

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah. They probably don’t get statistics, but the conclusions were easy enough to read.

Here is a note for everyone: if it doesn’t say “statistically significant” beside it, it’s not significant, they say they noticed a “trend” in something, but not a significant trend, so it was not scientifically proven to be different in a way that matters, but it is a good area to research more.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Also, I would have liked to see a breakdown of age. It seems like the trans women who AGP the hardest are over 40 and have a wife and kids

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Your are absolutely correct about survey research. A lot of care must be taken in constructing a survey and evaluating bias in the tool itself and the sample. They are helpful but are not considered with the same weight as research with control groups and actual experiments