Thanks to Stella and Sasha for showing bravery and curiosity by having me on the show. I wish we could've had more time for discussion, as it would take 3-4 hours to properly cover female AAP and male AGP with sufficient nuance. I think it's important to find out what is real about the causes of transgenderism - not only for gender-dysphoric people themselves who deserve to understand why they feel the way they do, but also on a societal level so that we can collectively settle on the optimal way of handing transgenderism.
Study them like Ray Blanchard. I've worked with a variety of men with a range of AGP. Phil's language is viable and helpful. I would want to know how many AGP men Stella has worked with in therapy. Read Anne Lawrence. Read Phil Illy! Look at every person behind the trans agenda...Jennifer Pritzker, Marci Bowers, Rachel Levine, Martine Rothblatt. Study their child sterilization fetish adding eunuch to SOC 8 and pushing no age limits, all for profit. All of Martine Rothblatt playbook as we saturated generations with queer theory. A full dismantling of dimorphic sex and all norms. I saw every different type of AGP in SanFrancisco. I ran around and was in the Tenderloin and Polk street. Who suggested these age old conditions are "socially conditioned". Yes, the CHILDREN are indoctrinated and social contagion in full throttle. These billionaire creeps are not the average individual. Please don't stereotype people and project.
I was a psych nurse. Some patients would believe they were Jesus or God. A lot of these people would get arrested for trespassing, harassment, stalking, or other crimes related to their delusions. Should everyone play into their beliefs, or should we try to mentally help them? Their beliefs would hurt themselves and other people.
The biggest issue about this self-love self-sexualisation is that it seeps out to a wider sphere - confused/autistic/depressed kids, the wives of the AGP who are condemned for not wanting to "become lesbians" or face being called bigots, detransitioners etc. Love your self and cross dress but stop screaming for "recognition" and law changes.
Exactly. We used to believe that my freedom ends where yours begins. That's why we had laws against exhibitionism, because someone might enjoy showing himself off, but he shouldn't be able to force me to see it without my consent. It should be the same with AGPs because it is a fetish. No one should be forced to participate.
I find something here mirrors exactly a wider trend in the trans phenomenon - the idea that categorizing something as disordered or a mental condition is "demonizing" or "stigmatizing" and that's why we should just call it something harmless or literally change medical definitions. And I find that idea fundamentally problematic because we are changing reality to suit the feelings of a small group of people's internalized shame and stigma. Because who still actually stigmatizes mental health issues? Especially the kind that do not harm other people? I feel like we live in the very best of times for people having empathy and compassion for people with disorders and want them to find the help they need. Instead, calling it something harmless may make some people feel better about their shame but they do not think at all about the future and how many more young people will be drawn into something that now has a nice normal name but behind which hides a really lonely, difficult existance or a lifelong series of intense drugs and surgery. Something can be not normal without it meaning someone is stigmatizing you. If a doctor tells you that you have high blood pressure, you kind of have a choice of letting that feed your shame about your body or your lack of exercise and get angry about how the doctor shamed you and now you have this stigma... or you take it as a factual definition and a way to seek the resources you need to improve on your lifestyle to get better. But even he later says girls can temporarily "have" autoheterosexuality. That is just not how you would use the idea of a sexuality, that the verbiage of a disorder or some other unwanted condition. And that's okay. Everybody in the world has some kind of unwanted condition, more or less persistent, more or less frequently. We don't need pretty words to make that more palatable, we need empathy and solutions. I don't think this researcher has any bad intent, but I keep thinking how much he is pushing his ideas and his feelings and his framework over others, while at the same time professing to only work logically. Especially when it comes to how much about life he presumes as being about sex and how deeply rooted sexual fantasies are for most people. And this is something I definitely know from my male friends on the autism spectrum - a very strong appeal to logic and science and a self-identity in that frame, and a very bad take on when they are being emotionally guided or when they are using false logic as an outlet for emotions they don't entirely seem able to feel, but are certainly projecting outward or operating under. Its a tricky condition and takes a lot of time and time with others who honestly and kindly reflect behavior back to the person to get any handle on this.
When we hear about or see a man wearing women's clothing, it's nearly always sexual, and so of course it's going to make women uncomfortable to suddenly and unexpectedly encounter a man in public, in a professional environment, who by all appesrances seems to be engaging in a fetish. Women are understandably scared of men imposing sexual things on us without our consent, and something like this would set off those alarms in many women.
it’s not sexual for gay men who are the main ones confident enough to wear women’s clothes in public what are you talking about? this is a dangerous assumption
I go along with J K Rowling's tweet: "Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like … Live your best life in peace and security...". I'd have no problem interacting with a man in a dress in a public place as long as he behaved appropriately, didn't try to follow me into the women's toilets or force me to say that he is actually a woman. Anyone you meet might be having sexual thoughts about you or any number of things - as long as he isn't acting in an inappropriately sexual way, who cares?
The way these two female professionals had to diplomatically diminish their own professional understandings just to get a man who self-diagnosed himself with a theoretical disorder to hear them. Masterful.
Yeah I really think people are missing the point. They are actual experts that have spent significant parts of their lives learning about this and experiencing this from the perspective of countless patients... Comparing that to his reading articles online is telling of his understanding of the subject. He is not where he thinks he is in the Dunning Kruger curve...
Frankly I'm sick and tired of the lack of "moral realm" in discussing all this weird, perverse sex stuff. Actually, please bring back some moral realm. We could use that right now.
Okay, but what moral standards are we using? Religious standards? If so which religion? The biggest problem I see with religious morality is there will never be any solid proof that a supernatural entity laid down xyz laws. If we're using secular morals I think that's more reasonable, as they are not based on an appeal to an unprovable invisible authority. The general secular morality is based on consent and harm. Behaviors are acceptable if all people involved are consenting and able to do so and no one is being harmed. If that's the case I think there are some Autoheterosexual behaviors that are socially acceptable in public and some that aren't.
@sz4469 - firstly, I don't know what you mean by a 'moral realm'. Secondly, you seem to have a problem with something that is neither an ethical or moral issue - I think your issue is squeamishness and what is distasteful to you. As the other commenter who replied to you, said so well - this is not a moral issue as long as there is consent between sexual partners.
@ but when his fetish is affecting everyone’s life even if arguably marginally… isn’t that worth taking into account? The problem is that the partner in question is he himself. He gets off on dressing and presenting this way - that’s the act of “intimacy” here that is normally kept behind closed doors. But he doesn’t and doesn’t want to. He is engaging in the fetishistic behavior openly in public.
Phil I think, is extremely dangerous in a very subtle, sly way. He very carefully refuses to accept that this “phenomenon” is a disorder. By normalising what essentially is a definite narcissistic trait - is simply dangerous. This behaviour should never be normalised & put on the same standing as a sexual orientation. It simply isn’t normal, positive &/or healthy. The behaviour definitely becomes an addictive behaviour that grows rapidly, when allowed to exist “in public”. It’s a negative compulsion that needs to be fought against. Yes, some will have the compulsion to such a strong level - that transsexualism is the only option. However, those with “lower compulsions” - should never be “normalised”. This refers to men! In females - it is definitely a passing phase in adolescents . To what level? Needs much more research. Phil is a man with a sexual disorder - & his view needs to be seen in this context.
You know I was despairing at some of the apologists and clearly AGPs obsessively fawning. He is a creep. His views are BS. He clear gets off by appearing in interviews wearing these clothes. That's the level of depth he has.
Thank you, you're capturing something I missed in my aversion. He is seemingly acceptable but actually radical and more focused on self-validation and self-legitimation than he is with helping people or integrating new understandings into his framework.
I'm not sure why it's important to describe it as a disorder. A significant segment of the male population is probably autogynephilic, and just keeps it to themselves, because it never manifests in any way that the outside world will notice. You only see it when an autogynephilic decides to dress up in public, as Phil does. To be clear: you can be autogynephilic, and continue to wear normal men's clothes and live a normal man life.
He is a disturbed man that is trying to justify his perversion and demands it be accepted by trying to make it seem harmless. That's predatory. He honestly shouldn't even be platformed by Genspect and Sasha and Stella at all... I think they perhaps now realize it they shouldn't have given him the stage that they did and now they are subtly trying to roll the support back.
What an interesting conversation. To my ear, it was very clearly an intelligent but troubled man who kept accidentally giving insight into his own dysfunction. He said credentialed opinions don't matter, but first sought to qualify his own false statistics by claiming that leading experts agreed. He sought to legitimise his paraphilia as a sexual orientation, but if a friend asked how my son was and I replied 'Great thanks, he's young and in love - with himself as a woman,' that friend is immediately concerned for my son's mental wellbeing. Then he said that AGP makes most people with it 'generally unhappy,' but also said he doesn't want to stigmatise it. He also said that he doesn't see himself as narcissistic, but has literally written a book full of junk statistics that will be referred to by other troubled people as legitimate, with the sole purpose of justifying his own dysfunction as a legitimate sexual orientation. He is basically very clearly and coldly describing a paraphilic and autistic experience, from a narcissistic perspective that only presents examples through the prism of his own experience. His justification for everything is that the most likely reason is... that which serves him best. And a flat explanatory tone is fine, but not if what you're 'explaining' is made up. He's like an AI who doesn't know he's an AI. Very interesting to hear the always chill Stella O'Malley push back so hard. Quite rightly.
Ok I haven’t watched yet but this almost makes me want to. I’m hesitant because every time I hear this man speak I have the exact impression you’ve just described, so I was nervous they’d be too nice, but seeing them push back does sound like fun
Perfectly summarised, couldn’t agree more. I am a therapist myself and couldn’t help feeling a deep sadness while listening to his desperate concretistic attempt to intellectualise and politicise his narcissistic disorder.
Not sure if I’m going to be able to finish this one. Thanks all for having the conversation, but Phil just seems abrasive and stuck to his view of things, which has been the case for all people I’ve ever met in this community. I think we need to look more at upbringing and attachment to explain what is going on here. These people seem unable to form healthy attachments and comfortably assimilate into normal society without needing a lot of attention and accommodations.
I'm really struggling to get through and his insane male autistic corn-addled followers are prevalent in the comments and coping so very hard. His arguments got absolutely ripped to shreds and he didn't notice cos he can't listen to a woman. He's a creep.
Wow.. Stella and Sasha. I do not think I've heard you both analyze, challenge and question the synopsis phil makes in such a clear and focused way while maintaining a psychologically critical exploration. With regards to how these ideas fit into actual health or not, I'm grateful for such a deep discussion. Adaptive or not while providing pushback, this chat allows for a broader perspective rather than accepting all into mainstream as usual, or within a narrow minded expression. This video provides for some very important pushback. Much appreciated.
A person is sexually/romantically excited by the image of an object. This image creates a feeling of shame, mental tension and sometimes also mental pain. How does making one's body more like a fantasy object with medicinal techniques improve this psychic tension?
In this instance I think the feeling of shame has motivated a biased view that others, including females whose underlying drivers are geared completely differently, share this same sexual compulsion. I don’t think they do. It’s like alcoholics who believe everyone drinks secretly and more than they admit to (they don’t). It provides more comfort to themselves but it’s really just a state of denial.
@@terrabranf0rd that’s like claiming a murderer that ends up abusing the corpse only abused it because she was already dead so why not … Occam’s razor, darling, Occam’s razor.
@@insidiousmischka no trans person even with autogyno[philia seems to have shame about it. its not shame based cummies i can actually pass and have female friends like peers lol. so would a real girl. its more eccentric and mb embarrassing
There are men in the world who say they've worked through their AGP and at least they no longer feel the need to try to change their bodies (or wear women's clothes all the time). It's not guaranteed that if a man has AGP feelings he will need to act on those for the rest of his life.
I think Phil is being disengenuous when he says he has changed the terminology just to be more simple to understand and less complex for the average person. I think he deliverately trying to shift a paraphilia into a sexuality, plain and simple. We need to clarify the difference between sexuality and fetish and not muddy the waters the way he is trying to do. He is trying to lump LGB with dosordered behaviors. This would not bode well for LGB as a group. They will face more prejudice if they are all seen as the same.
i am sympathetic to his perspective, but I have watched his content and he is very interested in lumping in AGP/AAP with homosexuality. I personally am ambivalent with whether or not AGP is comparable to conventional sexualities, nevertheless I know it is bad optics.
Read the book. He carefully does the opposite. There is a lot of nuance. I don't hear how Stella is an expert on AGP and so defensive. I agree with Ray Blanchard and Phil. The affirming model is our problem. Stella re read Blanchard. Most importantly this is a different conversation about social contagion and children introduced to hypnosis sissy porn. Two different conversations.
@Comorant12 They are not behaviorally homosexual. They are straight people who cross dress or even have sex with the same sex as apart of their fetishistic PERFORMANCE. Homosexual people are born that way and are gender nonconforming from birth, it is not comparable.
Thanks to all three of you (Sasha, Stella, and Phil) for this conversation and the way you mostly held it - calm, thoughtful, good faith and polite. I thought it very interesting. If I had been there with you, you would have found me agreeing with all three of you in different places, but also disagreeing with (or at least questioning) all three of you in different places 😊
I mostly agree. Stella and Sasha are lovely people, but I do believe they arnt as independent as Phill. Sacha believes that not fancing one man to another man is internalised homophobia. Some people are just born that way.
Phil doesn't strike me as ill-intentioned, he certainly isn't a TRA nutjob, and he is correct that credentials don't make a person an expert, but one of the things you learn in the credentialing process are the methodologies and ethics of research of a particular field of study; Stella pointed out he's lacking in his research and analysis. And Sasha talking about the labeling of these paraphilias and treating them as if they are permanent and orientations instead of phases and/or disorders a person might be going through was interesting. It made me think of the Kat Rosenfield article "Demisexuals Are Scared of Sex." In today's age of people being hypersensitive about sexuality, nobody wants to feel normal or abnormal. Normal is boring and abnormal is to be excluded, so people have to come up with medical and scientific terms (sprinkle in some Latin or Greek to make it sound official) to lend legitimacy to their proclivities, no matter if what they're into is white bread, or fetishistic. If the behavior that arouses you has an official sounding title, then that term can now be an identity, and then you don't have to feel guilty about it.
Newsflash: there is no such thing in nature as "clothing". It is 1000% a cultural phenomenon, and if someone wants to wear the clothing they feel comfortable in that is also 1000% none of your fukking business. Worry about your own clothing and stop being a boorish busybody.
I'm sorry but i think this was a very respectful discussion on the part of the hosts. He's not very logical in his portrayal of his journey, of his descriptions of his "why", and he is very all or nothing in his descriptions of frameworks and why they apply. He speaks with the certainty of an engineer talking about philosophical and psychological without understanding the humanness and the depth. He's also just SO VERY arrogant. Let's be real... Autism or not.
so we have to just defacto accept he is an expert at AGP, and recognizes AGP in others, without him explaining what the experience is? What if he is just inclined to group whatever he wants into AGP for either subconscious or more strategic reasons? Every time I've seen an interview with him he seems to have so much contempt for the interviewers asking any questions.
So many identity labels for people to obsess and pose as. They seem to get all caught up in themselves by internalizing external things. It often seems as though they're designing and building themselves to be special, rather than finding themselves to be average.
Glad to see Stella push back on Phil’s obsessive push to normalize AGP and to rename it “auto heterosexuality”. Phil also wants us to believe AGP is “innate”. Disappointing that neither of you asked Phil about his porn consumption. I’d be willing to bet it’s contributed to his obsession/addiction with his paraphilia.
Gender dysphoria is innate. Many boys will experience gender dysphoria before puberty; they play with the girls and feel like one of the girls, yet they are a hetero boy. Autogynephilia is what manifests when that same boy hits puberty is not only attracted to girls, but his own girly nature that was there before hand. Puberty says... you now want to have sex with girls, and to whatever degree you see yourself as a girl, that lust will now involve yourself as well.
I’m AGP and had cross-gender fantasies at the age of 5! It’s not uncommon at all for it to manifest before puberty. Can’t help but roll my eyes at those who think this is porn-induced.
@@andrewflanders262just because something occurs in childhood doesn’t mean it’s innate. Children are INCREDIBLY impacted by the world around them. No boy has a “girly” nature, boys just have different personalities and some of them fall more in line with stereotypes about girls
@@lovelover4408Exactly what I was thinking. It can be formed in the very early days and then classed as 'innate'. These things are learned. Quite often it's down to parental favouritism of the opposite sex.
It really does seem to me that the negative reaction to the suggestion that transmen are auto-androphilic parallels the rejection of the autogynephilic hypothesis. That is, the stigma attached to the paraphilic character of the attraction is resisted, especially when this is associated with women who are thought to be the more civilized sex?
Or maybe it just doesn’t make much sense? Men are known to have much higher rates of paraphilia than women. The idea that a man changed his identity in pursuit of a f3tish makes sense. It makes much more sense to think that women are pursuing trans identities for reasons that make more sense for women - like attempting to escape misogyny.
There is no such thing as "trans men". Lesbians are sick of Stella insulting them by going along with this idea. Just because you want it to be true, doesn't make it true. Women aren't the civilized sex, but we require civilization in order to be free. Men predate upon us. Men are over 90% of the violent offenders. You know this already. And fetishistic men are even more violent, especially sexually. Go study stats and you will see that men and women are very different sexually. Good men stay out so bad men stay out. We have a social contract with the good men to protect our spaces so we can participate in society. This aggression by male fetishists is breaking down that trust and that contract. Without it women (except elites) will be slaves.
No, girls and young women are very susceptible to transient mental illness or social contagion. I had friends and family who self-harmed during the anorexia, bulimia and cutting spikes, some eventually hospitalized. My mom had friends who were given ECT or doped on sedatives in the 50's. American girls also have very high rates of anxiety and depression, and we live in a violent patriarchal society in which men harm, exploit and degrade women for more than the reverse. So I think sexuality is a factor but I don't think it's dominant at all for girls and women.
The image here is disturbing: two women patiently, silently sitting and listening to a man that’s trying to explain away and justify his perversion. Update: The image still stands in the beginning, but I do concede Stella and Sascha do a formidable job towards the middle and the end AND challenge the ideas and conclusions Phil presents in his book. This is one of the better episodes and it was really needed after Genspect invited an "AGP" to the convention where also many victims of such "AGPs" were present or expected to be present, which is something I will never forgive (plus there's so much more that I simply cannot comment on here).
@racer5-d4e He had plenty of time to expose himself. While I appreciate he is not a man with this claiming to be a woman, he sounds very arrogant and narcissistic. I avoid these men in public and certainly should never be in women's spaces. Some behaviors should have societal shame even if not outlawed..like picking your nose in public.
Still watching. I am so, so glad you both are pushing back on him. I have been so irritated by how his conjectures and inferences have been taken as fact. Personally I think he thinks he has figured himself out and he has projected his understanding of himself onto the vast population of trans people
Exactly, it's all projection. He starts with self and projects that on to others incorporating only evidence into the worldview that corroborates his own experience.
As much as I like phil and most others in our public discussion, I always feel one big factor of his interesting work is to get rid of the word paraphilia. And I think this is wrong. You could "normalise" the prevalence of having a / this paraphilia, you can start calling it autoheterosexuality - but it's still under the umbrella of paraphilia, no matter how nonviolent.
I remember a genetics lecturer said something along the lines of everything you did today was either to prolong your survival or the survival of others in the gene pool or to facilitate sexual reproduction in the future. Depressing yet actually accurate with some nuance around storytelling and creativity but arguably that socially informs us and aids in cohesion and mental health etc. sorry if it’s reductive but we’re all gene reproduction machines and sexuality is an incredibly strong motivator, particularly in males & when it comes to something like gender it’s a particularly obvious motivator. The classification thing- obviously life is more complex than the labels we can ascribe it but this is literally how we process and transmit information, without heuristics we’d be doing endless quantum mechanics calculations on every atom and a) we’re time limited b) we’re human and don’t require this degree of detail to make predictions and understand our environment. I’m also on the spectrum but I kinda felt frustrated at how obvious points Phil was making were being misconstrued. I just wanna run away and live with the other autists.
@michmonty95 I don't think he was misconstrued. I think they, especially Stella, used rigorous scientific questioning, that's all. And that kind of questioning requires answers that are complete and well thought out. He has things thought out in his own mind but does not have the data or references to support his perspective. I think they did a really good job bringing that to light.
Phil is right in that (heterosexual) male crossdressers are autogynephilic. This is huge: were HR departments, governments, legislators etc to recognise this it would totally change the way they're bringing in norms and laws to give the trans community rights that far outweigh those of women.
if they truly understood what AGP is, it would lead to more sympathy to trans people i think. but if they only have a straw man concept of AGP, they will realize that most trans people don't fit into that, so they won't recognize that most of them are AGP
Quick question. Why does it seem the attitude "women have preferences, men have fetishes" seems to prevail in these discussions? Perhaps a look into that stigma could help?
There is some evidence that fetishes are more common in men--foot fetish, for example. The only fetish more common in women is masochism. I do think women can have fetishes (I am a woman with AAP myself) but at the very least it manifests in different ratios.
The closest I can get to what Phil is arguing is that autogynophilia should be considered a sexual orientation similar to heterosexuality and homosexuality rather than a paraphilia/fetish. Good luck with that Phil! Lol. I think he’s a nice guy but the kink is real bro.
Homosexuality was classified as a paraphilia until 1973. The difference between a sexual orientation and a paraphilia is by and large a moral and not scientific one.
@ personally, as long as he/they stay out of women’s spaces/sports etc. IDGAF. But I think legally it matters: Thus the problems now with Title IX which has been amended to give precedence to the ‘rights’ of trans women (or AGPs who, unlike a polite & basically respectful Phil, are becoming violent over any pushback against allowing them access) over and above those of natal females. I also would like to see some restraint on their public behavior when it comes to common decency: There was a news story about a grown man dressed as a little girl who was attending a public library’s children’s reading hour on his own, and who had a clearly visible full erection when he stood up to leave at the end. I think that needs to stop being tolerated. There have also been reports of AGPs who are committing crimes but who are being identified as ‘women’ thus obscuring law enforcements efforts to correctly identify & detain them (there was a report of a ‘woman’ who had ‘exposed herself’ to children and was being sought by police, and all the news alerts described this individual as a ‘woman’ when in fact it was a ‘trans woman’ - really not helpful in tracking someone who is potentially dangerous.) The nightmare potential is pretty HIGH IMO.
This has been a difficult video to watch. Im picking up on the AGP introversion, linked to the fact they think it is innate. Is this a lack of insight that is indicative of a mental health disorder? I am a desister, i 100% think trans identities are formed due to the nurture. The majority of behaviours are not sex specific, even though our cultures (gender) might say otherwise. It is the shame an individual might experience for their sex/gender non conforming behaviours that leads them to believe they are not the sex they are. There isnt enough focus on this, its just straight to 'i am the opposite sex' but the missing step prior to this is due to the othering they experience for having a natural behaviour that is deemed wrong due to sexist sterotypes
AGP is the person's innate sexuality (nature). Trans identity is formed by the environment (nurture). ROGD is explaining an environmental cause of trans identification. It does not explain the innate sexuality aspect, which is extremely important, as that is what comes first. Trans just stands for transition. It is not something you are, it is something you do. I am an AGP male that took a special interest in many female attributes very early on. It wasn't until later in my life that I learned that transition was even an option. It was at that point that I started considering it, so it may be seen as ROGD. Hope this makes sense.
You and your beliefs are in the way to a general understanding of why and how sex dysphoria develops in any children before puberty , before school age even
Here is a simple point, its really not that hard. My mother had zero maternal instinct to nurture and she was violent. On the other hand my father was kind to me. I became a tomboy as I saw him as my caregiver. I imprinted from him, not my mother. I wanted nothing to do with my mom due to the abuse. I became a tomboy and was bonded to my father as my only caregiver. This is why I didnt identify with females. I saw them as cruel and mean.......I am so glad I am not a teenager in this crazy town world.....I would have been convinced I was in the wrong body and would have been mutilated by the sick medical system in America. whew, dodged a bullet. I grew up fine as a tomboy until I could have the therapy I needed for the maternal abuse. I healed and forgave my mother and am now doing well. I would say one area to look for why this happens is maternal abuse. It does happen......a lot more than people realize. Man bad woman good is not reality
I'm no fan of officially pathologizing or medicalizing things, but that doesn't mean behaviour like this should be socially acceptable. We all, to one degree or another, control or reign in a range of animal impulses, especially when we are younger. If this guy's whole existence has to be about constant acting out of his fetish then he has to accept the misery of frustration or admit he is a lunatic. It's not up to society bear the burden.
@ what is socially acceptable changes over time, it’s not fixed. Some conservative personality types are completely inflexible about what is acceptable, almost planted in the 1950’s, while other people are like “who cares, as long as you’re not hurting any one” and a range in between.
@@strykerpass600 I wasn't saying it was fixed. It seems absurd to allow someone to play out a sexual fetish in public. Hurting others isn't simply about physical violence. Blackface doesn't hurt other physically.
I had resistance to listening to this based on Stella & Sasha’s introduction, but that in itself is what persuaded me that I had to listen! I didn’t want to be that person who is afraid of losing a cherished position to a compelling arguments. So I found Phil to be a very thoughtful & considered thinker & speaker, and he seems to come from a place of compassion. However, it is very self-focused, & I did identify some glaring category errors! The main one is his insistence that sexual fetishes & fantasies are ‘sexualities’. Both Stella & Sasha do address this but Phil didn’t really get the distinction. Human sexuality is complex for sure but the definition involves which of the two human sexes we actually prefer to have sex with. Phil conflates this with just ‘being attracted to’ something that gives you sexual feelings. It’s like saying furries & therians & people who dress as dragons want to have sex with those things. But from what I understand what this means is that they get a kick out of the dressing up AS those things. That’s a fetish, not a ‘sexuality’. The possible exception is autogynephilia, in which a man is sexually attracted to the idea of himself as a woman & possibly masturbates to his reflection in a mirror. But it’s still the ‘idea’ & an idea isn’t a sexuality. Neither is solipsistic auto-eroticism. It’s the sexual expression of fetish. It was good to hear discussion of the differences between the male & female sexual response. Men are much more sexually driven than women & their urges to cross-dress are pretty much all to do with getting sexual arousal from that activity. Women’s behaviour is not motivated by this sex urge to anything like the same degree. Their sense of wanting to be more ‘male’ is much more about trauma & the fear of being inadequate, especially in today’s hyper-visual instagram age of female ‘perfection’. They’re more usually in flight from the social behaviours expected of them whereas men are driven forwards towards something by their sex urges. The other issue I have is that there are some mean-spirited, resentful, often cruel & sometimes mentally challenged people out there in the fetish world who do cause harm to others - mainly women but also the peddlers of hormones & surgery to children. No matter how much we might want to ‘be kind’ & ‘normalise’ them & their behaviour, it’s not right to try to make us accept their them & their urge to trample on other people’s rights & well-being. The number of men with these issues is alarming enough, but the fact that they are foisting all this hyper-sexualised activity publicly on everyone is quite disturbing. It may sound melodramatic, but I keep thinking of how it was a descent into sexual fecklessness & depravity that led to the fall of the Roman Empire. Looks like we could be going the same way..
Also - Phil’s insistent opinion that men who cross dress are ipso facto AGP is not accurate. He needs to listen to Dr Az Hakeem who you both interviewed a couple of weeks ago. There is a clear distinction between autogynephilia & fetishist transvestism. Phil is possibly more likely to be the latter , as he doesn’t actually believe he is a woman & doesn’t appear to be seeking validation as one.
I keep hearing this distinction, "It's not a sexuality, it's a fetish," and I'm puzzled every time. What do people mean by 'a sexuality' and where has this phrase come from? I've never heard that term used by any sexologist. A fetish is a sexual attraction to something weird. It's under the umbrella of sexuality. It's like saying "a unicycle is not a vehicle". It's a strange kind of vehicle, sure, but it's still a device that moves you around the world, just like other vehicles. >>"the definition involves which of the two human sexes we actually prefer to have sex with" Which definition is this and where can I find it?
@@janeawdry8182 Az Hakeem's definition of autogynophilia is different from that used by sexologists, Blanchard, Bailey, Lawerence, etc. Az Hakeem's definition seems to be just his idiosyncratic definition. Surprised Stella and Sasha didn't push back on that. Fetishistic transvestism is a type of autogynephilia.
@@SchrodingersTransCat I don’t set much store by what ‘sexologists’ say. But what’s your point? It sounds like sophistry to me. Ok, so call a fetish a ‘sexuality’ if you must. Are you therefore in favour of AGP & fetishist transvestite males shoving their sex delusion into the public’s face & bullying women out of existence? Being gay or straight isn’t something most of us have to trumpet to the world all the time, but the ‘sexuality’ of fetishists is suddenly something that we must all be constantly reminded of by these fragile, narcissistic, porn-addled men. Not to mention their attempts to deny reality.
I think that if the reader thinks "I agree with A and B but not C," That's a win for the author. I don't think you should need the reader to agree with everything you say; it's enough that you give the reader some new information, and if the reader disagrees with some of it, then the conversation can continue! It sounds like a great book.
I feel like the conversations about this topic are getting sidetracked, because of people's biases. I thought the Freudian notion that every action is driven by (male) sexuality wasn't considered an accurate model for human behavior for quite some time. I really think the main driving factor behind people feeling "uncomfortable in their bodies" is neurodivergence/ASD that makes them struggle in their lives in general and in relationships with other people in particular. IMHO society needs to become a bit more understanding of people who struggle to adapt to societal norms, because of psychological differences.
Yikes. While I'm full of appreciation and respect for Stella's & Sasha's work, I'm also full of trepidation about watching this particular video!! Not sure if I can stomach it, tbh, but I shall TRY!
Wish people used "theory" properly. In science, a theory has so much evidence it is practically fact. I think as used here you mean a "hypothesis". An idea. A little evidenced thought.
Dr David Sackett, the ‘Father of Modern Evidence-Based Medicine’, in an article called The Sins of Expertness and a proposal for Redemption, wrote: ‘….It then dawned on me that experts like me commit two sins that retard the advance of science and harm the young. Firstly, adding our prestige to our opinions gives the latter far greater persuasive power than they deserve on scientific grounds alone. Whether through deference, fear, or respect, others tend not to challenge them, and progress towards the truth is impaired in the presence of an expert…”
I relate to the example y'all provided about feeling like failing at feminity. I remember feeling terrible comparing myself to these feminine ideals and feeling like I did not measure up at all. But also feeling intense discomfort if I tried. I just remember the icky icky skin crawling feeling of trying to be feminine. I remember looking at my beautiful female face full of makeup in the mirror at school and scrubbing it off on the sink and feeling better. But all I could think about was going home and changing into my "boy" clothes. I remember not eating to hope my curves would go down. weighing myself every day. And getting upset when I could not get below 130 lbs. I have no idea what it was to this day. I sit with the grey. Androphilia doesn't seem to explain it.
It's very strange to see him so sure in his beliefs when he claims to want scientific understanding. Science isn't about having the answers, it's about asking questions. Even in the scientific method, your aim is to prove yourself wrong! Seems he's made up his mind and is bending variables and data to confirm his belief. I think that naming is very important. I think names should help identify the route cause of the problem so we can find solutions, and all too often our naming conventions normalize the problems. It's like if you have a leaky roof and instead of naming it leaking roof, you name it puddle making syndrome. "You should fix your roof!" "No no, I can't, it has puddle leaking syndrome" Anyways. It seems his mind is made up. There is no relativity in his understanding, it's all black and white. He believes he has the ability to understand what is, instead of being grounded in subjectivity. Thats just my view from watching it though. It's hard to listen to because there is no growth in his opinions. They are self made or rejected and that just isn't very interesting for me, as someone who likes to learn from others and enjoys having my beliefs challenged.
1:29:07 Phil expresses a common misconception about peer review, that it is somehow about “checking the science” or otherwise validating the claims in the paper being reviewed, but that is not what happens; peer review is mainly about form and format - does it have the expected structure - abstract, hypothesis, method, results, conclusions? Does the abstract reflect a summary of the following sections? Are the investigators and their institutional associations clearly identified, and conflicts of interest (or lack thereof) noted? Are there any tables , charts, images, or other supplementary material referenced in the text, missing, incomplete, or misidentified? Are the stated methods of analysis appropriate to the type of data and sample size? Have the researchers obtained approval from the institutional review board for research involving live study subjects? Is the text formatted with a legible font and section breaks so that readers can easily locate important information? Are all the questions asked in the hypothesis answered in the conclusion? Even so, some those points may not be adequately addressed, depending on the reviewer’s availability, interest, level of sleep deprivation, etc., There’s also no mechanism for checking if reviewers are accepting or rejecting papers based on their papersonal biases, it’s all based on the honor system, and highly susceptible to various undue influences on the reviewers, and unethical researchers taking advantage by submitting fraudulent papers in bad faith
but, it's sad that even within this supposedly "heterodox" space there are so many close-minded people, and people in this comment section who think they "know everything." the reality is: we don't know the answers to most of these questions (the etiology or etiologies of gender dysphoria, the true and current statistics about transgendered individuals and detransitioners etc., what should be considered 'disordered' and what not). i'm not saying phil is correct about everything; i'm not saying stella or sasha are correct about everything, but i feel that the criticism that phil is "projecting" could also easily apply to many of the commentors; he's either correct about a claim, or incorrect. his own AGP identification plays no role in the facts. argue the facts, not the fact that he must be biased or that he's on the autism spectrum.
@@mrridikilis Are you saying there is no argument that he's biased then? Because clearly he is. And he is only speaking from his own position. He has zero empathy. He can't think about how others feel.
@@mrridikilis Yup. But I think many of the harsh comments come from people (mostly women) who are -understandably- very uncomfortable with agp's. As understandable as it is, these personal feelings distract from understanding the issue, as pointed out in the interview. I think people's feelings should be taken into consideration, but where is the line between that and the woke idea of safe spaces to protect us from hurt feelings? I also don't understand what people think is the solution. Do they actually want the way people dress to be policed? I don't know if I prefer that dystopia to the woke genderqueer dystopia to be honest.
I think Sasha is wrong on this statement, "I'm comfortable with there being random unexplained experiences." This statement is the same as, "Birds fly, we don't need to know why." Stella's follow up, "It doesn't capture the complexities of life and is reductive." is also not helpful. How can you properly diagnose someone or tell them how to behave without a reductive understanding? Otherwise its just an emotional desire. These are not counters to Phil's point. As I near the end of this, I think Sasha and Stella did a disservice to themselves. I heard a lot of, "I feel and I think" instead of, "This knowledge that I have explains specifically why we disagree with you more than a feeling." Especially since Sasha read the book, the fact she doesn't have specific studies to counter his point looks completely unprofessional. Second, you criticize him for being neutral and not moralizing. That's what YOU want to do. Phil does not. He describes the research, the facts, and the point. This just came across as people who are uncomfortable with Phils points, did not have anything specifically to say what his point was wrong, but vague responses of that were clear rationalizations of their personal discomfort. The point, "I don't think you're right that 7 out of 10 heterosexual trans men are AGP" is absurd. You don't think? Where are your facts? I expected better.
I dunno. Birds flying is ubiquitous. Hardly random. Come up with example less common than birds and less rare as AGP. Then you might be on to something. 🐿
My first thing I thought was a line from the book the Parasites by Daphne Du Maurier. She was talking about women and how men could not understand why if a woman laughs during sex that men cannot understand why a woman could have sex and also have a separate thought pass through her head at the same time and not be annoyed. Not sure why.
Interesting theme emerging as Phil talks: the way he continually pulls emotional energy AWAY from the MAIN TASK for the young man's libido, the task of building relationships OUTSIDE of the narcissistic world. Contrariwise, what's the worst thing that could happen if he put the narcissistic bog-down ON THE FRONT BURNER, emotionally? Is it possible that that frozen ice-berg of self-love . . . might melt?
A conversation that provides even more evidence that this entire area and topic is hooey with no scientific knowledge or rigour behind it. Individuals pontificating about themselves, extrapolating theories and publishing. All good fun if people didn’t take this as serious basis for medical intervention.
its exactly the opposite.It doesn't convey how brilliant Phil is and they are talking over hin and not listening. Stella is a real AGP phobe instead of wanting to dig deep. If you didn't interuprt him you could learn the depth of what he is speakng of and not minimize it as a "universal experience". His book is something everyone in our field should read and explore.
1:23:16 this reminds me a lot of OCD. The difference between recognizing you're having a mentally ill thought, and taking the OCD thought literally, and behaving magically or with fear about it.
I don't understand this allergy to labels. They definitely have utility, even just to say "hey I'm not alone. this is a thing!" In other instances Stella especially has been very quick to apply a label such as 'gay' when the experience the teen boy described is much more clearly understood as meta-attraction.
Agreed. Every therapist I meet pushes back against labels as if I'm putting myself in a box and limiting myself to those labels. Quite the contrary, actually. I seek knowledge to make decisions with and like to believe I can grow beyond limiting factors. It is important, though, to manage our expectations and recognize things that influence our behaviors. It is possible to have a measured approach to labels.
I know some of the comments were bashing Stella, but i dont think she was out of line. She got her point across very clearly and he was able to respond directly. He wrote a book with this information, and in doing so, he's opened his work up to criticism from professionals in the field. She never once attacked him personally.
Whatever your personal discomfort with the idea of AGP, you’ve got to admire Phil for his honesty. From my own experience, I have yet to meet a trans identifying individual who is not on the autism spectrum. I think this way of thinking, the need to categorise, to the ‘nth degree, even the self, is the ‘overvalued idea’ fuelling trans ideology.
There is a tremendous difference in the last 15 years. It's like 2 different populations of people. Indoctrinated neurodiverse kids vs people growing up with one of the topology of agp, that Stella forget and needs to re read. Maybe expanding on "fetish" paraphillic framework is exactly what everyone needs to learn. You have no idea how many men around you hide this.
Wow wee! You three kept me stomping along on my 5 mile dog walk this morning. Excellent, respectful and measured discussion and an acknowledgment of non- agreement without screaming. Very good. Thank you. ❤️🇬🇧❌❌
seeing a strange man in a dress signals to me he probably has issues that could be dangerous and will avoid when at all possible. Want nothing to do with them.
@aliciaochs Mmmm... I don't know. Isnt it a stereotype that a man has to wear trousers? Though, as a biological female, i hate dresses and always wear pants.🙂 Only wear dresses when it's real warm.
@@sarral2008 a man can wear what he wants. I wear a dress maybe once a year. Knowing that some men get off on wearing women's clothing makes me avoid these strange men like the plague. I don't know what that particular person's reason is. Social shame is fine, not outlawing it.
@@pythosdegothos6181 This a mental issue and many of these men are dangerous so I avoid and do not cater to calling them feminine language or interacting with them where I can absolutely avoid it. They can continue to wear their dresses in public and I will keep them at arms length.
At this point in the gender-discussion, as we prepare (Post-Biden) to move into post-peak-trans, NOTHING could be a more exciting way to spend Black Friday, then listening to Stella & Sasha having a go at Phil Illey for 1h33m. This should be juicy!
You two really got stuck into Phil. You were much more deferential when talking to Mike Bailey, Anne Lawrence and the Dutch Clinicians who have also made a great many questionable assertions in their writing.
Very interesting conversation. I liked the to and fro between Stella and Phil, particularly the discussion of credentials. I thought Phil defended his position regarding that well. I don't get the blue dress controversy - if a man doesn't behave inappropriately or transgress against women's boundaries I don't care what he wears, and aren't we supposed to be against regressive stereotypes of what is proper feminine or masculine apparel?
If a man says he is turned on by wearing sandals are you OK with him walking around wearing sandals in public? Genuine question. I can never get a proper answer.
@@robertmarshall2502 What about gay clothing fetishists? Anyone have a problem with a gay man wearing a leather jacket, because he might be turned on by it? Formal dress is also a HUGE gay fetish... so good luck to those who want to impose this "I don't want to see you wear your fetish" nonsense
Policing clothing is too much. As long as it is appropriate (no fishnets or speedos in the office) it’s okay. I used to (and still do) enjoy seeing goths and punks. Clothing is fun and shouldn’t be limited by sex. The world would be so boring if we insisted on gender-coded clothing.
Thank you Stella and Sasha for an interesting podcast. (As usual!) About that blue dress...most women have an inner dress code that determines what they wear at life's events. If you look at the photos of the women at the Colorado conference you notice that most wear attire that expresses their individuality but doesn't sexualize them or attract undue attention. They are dressed appropriately. Phil is like the woman who wears a sexy white dress to a wedding where the bride is wearing white. Yes, it's just a dress but it's also rude and narcissistic.
I really wish there was more research into the "growing out of it" phenomena, and how often that "growing out" was the result of being bullied or even physically beaten for being "different". Too many times I hear of people "growing out of it" when dug into, you find the person was badly treated, ostrasized, stigmatized, and the characteristic was one that if left alone was completely harmless.
I think you all have good points. On the one hand, life is often more complex than simplified heuristics. On the other hand, some of us who are neuro-atypical can really be helped by clearly defined lables. For a time, there can for sure be a lot of self-obsession, until one has figured onself out. Ok, so I am THIS. And THIS. So that's why I've always felt different. Great, now I can move on to focusing on relationships and trying to figure other people out as well.
There is so much to do, to untangle the insane harm being done to female people, especially the homosexual cohort, and honestly I'm sick to death of this model of males philosophizing about themselves and then copy/pasting their shit onto the female experience. The irony that EVEN IN the gender critical space males dominate is beyond frustrating. Is there ever gonna be a point where female people are allowed to articulate our own experience outside the f)&$ing male gaze?? Its so the water we swim in, we parrot this shit back due to the utter lack of knowledge of anything where we define and articulate our own experiences.
Autosexuality is clearly a narcissistic condition. Even a cursory understanding of *clinical* narcissism shows it is not excessive self love. It IS complex and is characterized by a lack of self and strong internal self hatred, even if it's buried. It has to with making other people into internal objects which is clearly structurally identical to agp.
What a male theorizers always seem to miss, is how f'n terrifying & stressful it can be to simply exist in the world as female. It is NOT some crazy mystery why female people would imagine all manner of escapes from that terrifying reality. And female sexuality is way more complex and *relationally* based. Male sexuality could be crudely reduced with relative accuracy to stuff that gets my d*ck hard. That's not how female sexuality works, and that difference emerges from evolutionary sex differences. Female people, UNLIKE males, have to fight through compulsory heterosexuality & male centric everything to find a relationship to their sexuality that isn't a male fabrication. A great number of women (vast majority?) if they ever discover their sexuality from their own view, find themselves in commitments & situations that make exploring that impossible or moot. Because again relationality for most women trumps, "boners". Honestly I find it completely predictable & enraging that this dude finds essentially "penis envy" the most likely explanation over attempts to escape from misogyny.
One common thing I have noticed interacting with AGP, is a simmering jealousy/hatred of women. A need to take women down to their level. Def getting that vibe from Phil & his ideas.
I enjoyed this episode but also found it very frustrating. I bought Phil Illy’s book and found it interesting and challenging but couldn’t finish it (partially due to the switching of pronouns). I have a very high score on the autism quotient questionnaire (online, created by Simon Baron Cohen), so I have a tendency to be very analytical and not very empathetic. I love facts and have trouble with feelings. That being said I agree with Stella and Sasha that Phil is being overly confident that ROGD boys are almost always AGP. The internet and social media (including online forums like Reddit) have radically change things. I think Dr. Harkeem has given some valuable insights pointing out that some trans males are basically asexual autistics.
I’m trying to listen with an open mind. It’s just brutal. Phil has one objective: normalize AGP. It is crazy making to listen to. Nothing about his beliefs and behavior are remotely normal.
I guess I'd ask, what's wrong with that? There are clearly people who are autogynophilic, and likely won't stop being so. Shouldn't we endeavor to understand their experience and fit it within the broader context of the *trans experience? (I'm asking honestly, not as an argument; I seek understanding)
According to your same logic, we should have pretended pedophilia doesn't exist because it's immoral. Not naming or describing a thing doesn't make it go away.
@@mrridikilisNot OP but - philias like this are linked to sx crimes. For men in particular they can become obsessive and send them into spirals. They're dangerous and negative behaviours. It's like saying we should normalize heroin addiction. The point of recognizing the existence of these things is not to find ways to just keep on doing it. Which to me seems to be the only purpose to "Phil Illy's" (derived from "philia") life in the same way as many trans identified men.
But seriously, Stella and Sasha, am I missing the episodes in which you admit that Jung covered these bases ALLLLLL throughout his life? If you're going to be advocating for therapy first before any "medicalization" (often a euphemism anyway, which I know can be the case for "therapy" too) then my god you ladies should at least be so good as to remind the general public of Jung's work and how it's underpinned the usable jargon and healing concepts within therapy for the past hundred years. I know it takes time but PLEASE, please, please delve into Jung and trust that the public is sophisticated enough (and I dare even say spiritually hungry enough) to devour the raw work of Carl Jung.
This man just gives me an icky feeling. I have tried listening a few times on channels where he has been interviewed, and I just can't. Maybe my gut feelings are just telling me that something is not right. With that fundamental unease I have at a very basic level , trying to listen to his arguments as though he is as emotionally healthy as Stella or Sasha is never going to work for me. My gut instincts are just telling me to stay away; and though I don't have to say so yes I have trans friends who do not make me feel that way. I am talking about him as an individual ; he invokes fear and repulsion in me and the idea that I am being manipulated.
Every single time I listen to him or read his comments he gives me the exact same feeling. He's a creep. He's a narcissist. This isn't entirely down to his obvious autism but he's clearly in need of professional help and choosing sociopathy over reality
@@jcimsn8464no, her gut feelings are correct and valid. People trying to gloss over how unsettling this man is are part of the problem. It’s ignoring the elephant in the room
I am very glad I watched a few podcasts with Dr. Az Hakeem (including one on his channel). Of course Dr. Hakeen would not agree with almost any of Phil's theories. I am glad the ladies gave lots of push back!
Yeah, Sasha really shines in this talk. I'm not even that fond of this channel, and in fact Sasha and Stella, some of the guests you've had on have been absolute stinkers. I don't think this guest is one of them, but I do think he needs to be challenged on the very points that Sasha in particular has brought out. I think Stella is a bit gruff and projective, particularly around the question of "categories" and "categorizing", autism and narcissism, and the guest stayed so calm in standing his ground, as ridiculous as I may think that it is. Sasha really avoided getting flustered and pointed out blind spots and inconsistencies which I feel are more constructive. Stella's lovely but maybe not always recognizing her own cultural biases.
This guy uses words than can confuse people that he knows what he’s talking about but this interview was great because it revealed that he has no clue about even the most basic definitions of the concepts he is discussing. Great job
@@lovelover4408 I don't judge ideas on the basis of my perception of somebody's character, especially when I don't know anything about the person's character but can only base my assessment on presuppositions and stereotypes. I think we have to judge a person's ideas as ideas first.
@@lovelover4408 Absolutely! And he's a red flag that needs to wave high and proud, which he does, and display the problems with this ideology to people that need to hear it straight from the horses mouth. He and a few others might bring the whole thing to an end themselves. Unintentionally, and apparently unaware.
@@jeng3609 No. He presented evidence for his claim. The hosts of this podcast claimed that it was insufficient, but he did present evidence. He certainly did not make the claim based on his intuition (which is not the same as a judgment based on evidence). In his book he cites Hirschfield from 1910, Lou Sullivan's diaries, as well as Stoller's "Splitting: A case of female masculinity" Jamison Green's "Autoandrophilia" Stekel's "Sexual Aberrations" A study from McGeoch and Ramachandran entitled "Phantom Penises in Transexuals" Stoller's "Tranvestism in Women" A study entitled: "Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-to-Male Transsexuals in Norht America" And many other sources.
A couple of thoughts struck me about how it seems that it is normal for people to fantasise and experiment wether that’s sexual or not but what is it that makes some people get stuck on a particular fantasy to the extent it takes over eg being a dragon. It would be interesting to understand how these fantasies become concretised and so understand the dangers of getting young people to self diagnose. My experience growing up was a strong desire not to understand myself but to explain myself as I wanted to be certain ‘who I am’ . There are messages like ‘just be yourself’ and ‘be your authentic self’ but how does that work when you don’t know who you are?
A boy masturbating while wearing his sisters clothes is a sign of disturbance? I dont know. I can imagine that happening quite frequently and see it as an exploration of sexual feelings that have not yet gone beyond a perception of mystery and difference.
It is the stigmatizing and or shaming of gender non conformity in boys that leads to the Fetish and I am more than sure AGP is a result of it. Now, as far as the masturbating while wearing one's sister's clothes being seen as a disturbance I think is definitely a type of stigmatizing that leads to these gender issues. I think it is REALLY annoying how girls or women are NOT tarred with this sort of shaming (though of course women are NOT treated well when it comes to sexuality for sure)
@racer5-d4e tbf, wanking while wearing your sister's clothes is beyond unhinged. If I learn my brother did this, I'd be scared of him. What else would he find arousing? To touch me? To watch me? Absolutely we have to shame this kind of behaviour, which is abusive and frightening. What's next? It's ok for dads to wank wearing their daughter's clothes? Also totally chill?
@@jmlorenzo3639 incest? OH because of who's clothing. Maybe it is just they are nice clothes having nothing to do with his sister. Ever thought that opposed to going more dark than needed?
@@balalaika852 I think it would depend on *why* he's wanking while wearing his sister's clothes. Is he doing it because they're the only female clothes he can find? Like, he would really prefer lacy lingerie from a shop or something, but he has no access to those so he's making do. He might be trying to put out of his mind the fact that they belong to his sister. It might simply not occur to him how violated it might make his sister feel if she finds out. Or is he doing it BECAUSE they're his sister's clothes? Is he getting off on thinking ABOUT his sister? Maybe even getting off on how grossed out she'll be if she finds out? That's a bit more unsettling ... This isn't just some hair-splitting irrelevant distinction. The motive for the behaviour can really matter. For instance, there are men who have an 'adult baby' fetish. They get off on dressing up and acting like babies. A lot of people, even sex researchers, look at those guys and think they must be some kind of paedophile. Auto-paedophiles, in fact--getting turned on by BEING a child. So you might assume such men are a danger to children. But when researchers actually studied it, they were surprised to find that a great many adult-baby fetishists aren't paedophilic at all. Instead, most are masochists. They're attracted to adult women. And they want to be humiliated and made to feel helpless by adult women. So their fantasy is of being a helpless baby that the adult woman can mother, scold, etc. It's not an attraction to kids, it's a very specialised masochistic scenario. That's still disturbing to a lot of people ... but those guys are, presumably, much less likely to be an actual danger to a child than you'd think.
I have to defend Phil. I love the way he is whole heartedly embracing who he is and he has no need to impose pronouns on people around him or invade women's spaces or alter his body with surgeries, etc. Phil is saying AGP is a REAL thing and that if you are conscious of it, you can avoid many harms such as children transitioning and then regretting it or men getting married who are unaware of their issues and subsequently wrecking their families by coming out as trans years later. Stella, I am disappointed that you are missing this point. Next questions to ask about AGP is very important one: What is healthy AGP vs unhealthy AGP? This is the essence of Phil's argument. I think perhaps taking a Jungian perspective (ask Lisa Marciano to comment) would be an enlightening program worth exploring. If Phil is this self aware, he is clearly not at risk of harming those around him. I did not like Stella's choice of questions or her approach of discrediting Phil by implying that his ideas are "dangerous" or his work is invalid and unsubstantiated. It's fine that Stella disagrees with Phil and other well known sexologist experts, but she was trying to unequivocally discredit his emerging ideas in a way that did not convey respect. This is what I don't appreciate. As a moderate, I agree with Phil, let's stop moralizing the issue. It didn't work to pathologize gay people and it won't work to pathologize AGPs. I thinks Phil deserves more respect here. I think his perspective should be included. This feel like suppression of ideas to me. Let Phil present his finding at the next annual Genspect conference and let him bring along some experts who share his opinion on AGP. Don't miss an important opportunity here to hear him out. Perhaps his work will help some of these young boys who are being sucked into this horrible vortex and subsequently harming their bodies(puberty blockers and surgeries that cannot be reversed). In no way do I think Phil needs to get therapy to "fix" himself. He is quite well adjusted and comfortable with his own body and his own choices. He was a courageous and bold to show up in a dress. I love his reasoning and do not agree that it is reductionistic. Look around: many autistic people are brilliant. I did not appreciate Stella attempting to discredit his important theories which are much needed right now especially in light of this growing epidemic. Phil, you are like a breath of fresh air. Please don't give up and don't let this interview throw you off. Thanks to all of you for the conversations.
I completely agree. I have never heard them speak to any other guest this way. It's really uncomfortable to listen to. There are things I disagree with Phil on, especially wrt the females, but he's done more research on this topic than any other guest they've had on and he is genuinely interested to the well-being of people with gender distress. It felt like they're angry at him for trying to humanize this experience, which considering their audience and clientele, is very concerning to me. Regarding what Stella was saying about AGP being dysfunctional. Imagine if she had said the same thing about homosexuality? "I think a union between two people of the opposite sex that can result in children and therefore a full, healthy family, should be everyone's aim. Trying to normalize same sex relationships that are genetic dead ends is dysfunctional and should be avoided whenever possible." We don't chose our sexuality! Yes, there are more and less healthy aspects of it and we should do everything in our power to prioritize the healthy aspects. But we shouldn't vilanize people who's sexuality in no way harms anyone else.
He's carrying out his paraphilia in public. That is harm. Are you OK with a man who gets off on wearing sandals spending all day wearing sandals around you? This is like justifying flashers.
In listening to the interview, i had the exact same sentiments. I considered writing a lengthy respone, but indeed, you have captured everything i wanted to say, and very eloquently at that. thank you! in a nutshell, i felt stella's criticisms and apprehension were valid, but she didn't voice her objections well. she basically was boiling his argument down to the fact that he's agp and autistic, therefore he's biased. that's patronizing and not in good faith. claims need to be refuted on the basis of the claim, NOT on the person making them.
@ and that he’s not an academic. Considering how unscientific and ideological academia is, and the fact they don’t learn critical thinking, I think it’s an advantage being an outsider. I also don’t understand what’s wrong with labels? If you can’t name something, how can you talk about it without making huge descriptions? It’s just practical, and also a relief to people who don’t have a name for their feelings or symptoms.
It is pretty clear that sexual activity in humans is not only for reproduction. There might be social bonding benefits to homosexuality. I don't know if any evolutionary biologists or anthropologists have looked into this.
Great interviewing ladies! Hit the nail on the head about the universal need for most of us to see ourselves in someone else's shoes, Growing up I remember being even angry at the world for being a woman. Men were allowed to do a lot more, I enjoyed their humour and forward attitude, and I liked some of their fashion (slacks and vests) also but never rejected my womanhood. Later on in life, I even thanked the universe I am a woman and not a man. I began to enjoy talking to women more, I love female fashion, but still don't enjoy the heightened emotion we feel at times. It seems, in some cases, the characterisation serves more as a justification for something to become legit. I don't think paraphilia legitimizes a man's claim to be a woman, instead is self-serving and narcissistic. BTW excellent example Sasha gave about 'Helena'
Thanks all three of you for this conversation. I hope you will have another at some point, we have to try and understand these issues for a lot of people's sakes, eg women who have relationships with, marry, have chikdren with agp men in particular. I think autism influences Phils way if thinking and understanding far more than id noticed before in other interviews. Not being rude, im autistic and trying to understand it in myself and others. Re " the dress" think it was inappropriate for a serious conference but think wearing it was more about Phil being autistic and not realising that possibility rather than anything sinister. 🤷
The problem with Phil is that he KNOWS he's right. Everything that comes after that.. Intelligence and science and all, is skewed by the fact that the narrative inside his head about what's true and what's AGP, is correct. I have no ill will towards him. I respect the work he's done and I appreciate him bringing light to this complicated issue. But it needs to be pointed out that HE KNOWS what's AGP and what's not from HIS research and HIS talking to others. I have this same issue of AGP. I agree with so much of what's said about it, but disagree about it's origin.. But he would just say im wrong, simply bc his work and his studies are right
Thank you very much for the interesting conversation. Categories are suitable for describing phenomena, but not for understanding the process of their formation. Do fellow psychotherapists have any thoughts on how the concept of AGP can be understood in the light of object relations theory? If you think about Kernberg's article Barriers to Falling and Remaining in Love.
@@talibotz 'Then at 31 I came across the concept of AGP...so I started reading more about AGP, though I didn't immediately identify with the category, it took many weeks of reading and particularly after reading Anne Lawrence's book'.
Too many people in this comment section confusing the clinical definition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder with the story of Narcissus. A person who is attracted to their own body does not necessarily meet the requirements for a diagnosis of NPD.
You may be misinterpreting. They're not suggesting he's a narcissist for that reason. It's because he wants to publicly behave certain way, that's particularly out of the ordinary. And Phil is perceived as not caring about anyone's feelings but his own. That can easily be perceived as narcissism.🐿
@@Knuck_KnucksWell, a lot of people here are suggesting a lot of things, and some are indeed suggesting that if one is sexually/romantically attracted to oneself, one is clinically narcissistic. I'm not sure what behaviors you're referring to, but the only thing i can think of that Phil exhibits is wearing womens' clothes in public, which I don't think is inherently narcissistic. Is there some other behavior of his that i'm not aware of?
@@balthasardenner5216 It doesn't need to be 'inherent.' There's no shortage of women who perceive Phil's foisting his paraphillia upon them, without consent, a brand of narcissism. In addition, It confuses youth and denigrates femininity as a performing art. Never-mind contributing to all the sex dysphoria madness. We all must sacrifice parts of ourselves in order to participate in society. Perception is 9/10 of reality. 🐿
@@Knuck_Knucks I don't know about narcissism or not. But I see his foisting of his sex fetish onto non-consenting women as sexual harassment abuse. Sexual assault, actually, which is what the behavior of men violating women's spaces was recognized as, not too long ago.
@racer5-d4e First off. Not my perception. #2, of course it doesn't make it right. But that doesn't matter. Lol, I don't thing about AGP that much despite living 2 doors down from one.. 3 words. Leave children alone. I suppress all kinds of personal conduct around children because I want to project an optimal pathway of living. Not only for them, but for all the adults who never really 'grow up' or suffer from arrested development. You and Phil are welcome to participate raising well adjusted ppl, or chose to celebrate yourself and 'do what you want'. Because it's all about you, right? Behavior has consequences. The choice is yours. 🐿
Many people in these comments apparently know far more about AGP than Phil, or Blanchard & Bailey (the sexologists who researched the phenomenon, and tend to agree with Phil).
I haven’t and probably won’t read the book. I have always felt that Ray Blanchard’s research around AGP takes a very simplistic/one eyed view and finds a level of correlation that validates the research- it gets an inch and takes a mile. Alot of Trans folk are looking for answers and Blanchard offers a simple frame work with a little bow on the top which is attractive if you’re looking for nice discrete answers. But there are lots of holes and when a theory needs to be bent to explain exceptions then it starts looking like religion rather than real science.
Watching Stella & Sasha trying to talk Phil out of his self-directed interests is like watching a BRAW Irish-woman trying to be the first to lift one of the 500# lifting stones. You root for them, watching them struggle . . . but, in the end, if the stone doesn't want to be lifted . . . ! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifting_stone
JUST STOP stigmatizing gender non conformity in boys. This whole trans, AGP, fetish stuff will go away if that one simple thing is done. ALL OF THIS stems from shame, and stigma!
Agree that's a big part of it. Human beings are naturally so nuanced. They really have to be conditioned to loathe themselves and sadly that conditioning starts so early.
@@cherylewers6322 Issue is, this is very very rarely discussed in discussion like is in this interview. It really should be disgussed a lot more and more examined.
He wants a "word" for AGP and AAP and so wants to tidy it up to autoheterosexuality or whatever...no need, AGP and AAP sum up the difference way better - there's no way to dress it up as anything different and keeps its sex differences. I totally agree with Stella - it's a paraphilia so keep it as such. He changed it to sexuality as he wants to hide it's self-absorption...which shows how abnormal it remains.
When people start referring to male homosexuality as 'androphilia' and female homosexuality as 'gynephilia', I will take this type of feedback more seriously
If we can rationalize auto or andro then reason has it that we can rationalize the idea of having a gender identity is false since it's not as Phill claims, a sexual orientation. Sorry. Was unedited.
As well as drawing a line where your actions or behaviour can be harmful, I think we need to consider whether behaviour patterns are making someone potentially dangerous.
Stoked for this conversation! I just paused a couple minutes in though where Stella says the more books on this topic the better (agreed) and that it's good to challenge people on their arguments (also agreed). But you recently had on Dr. Az Hakeem who posits a completely novel and unique take on this issue, divergy starkly from existing research in this field, and you didn't challenge him at all. Phil OTOH has researched this topic more widely than anyone in the conversation, drawing on over a hundred years of existing research and literature (all of which is cited in the book). He isn't even pushing a novel framework (as Hakeem was), he basically just put Blanchard into Layman's terms and suggested it applies to females as well. Okay, back to the episode.
@@phililly You added a lot on ETII in general, but it's essentially to say Blanchard was right, but it's not specific to males who wish they were female. You could be wrong, but they aren't even arguing to are, they're just rejecting categories in general.
@@elegationvain Yep, good point. Their stated opposition was grounded in a rejection of categorization. However, I find that line of argument about as convincing as when queer theorists oppose categorization in general
Ok but unlike Phil that guy made a lot of sense. He brought some helpful nuance to the discussion that actually does refer to terms that were commonly used for years, and merely explained (what everyone already knew 20 years ago) that most men who dress as women do so bc they’re getting off on it. This is very obvious
It was obvious for a long time, this guy only sounded vaguely interesting to some people, because nobody really challenged his half baked ideas. A feather tap prod was enough to dismantle his whole framework.
@@jcimsn8464 And where exactly is he so brilliant? In his rigid assertions that his sexualised narcissism is a form of sexuality? In claims that women "transition" only for sexual reasons? That other completely bonkers identities are an expression of normal sexual behaviour? Please... The man has zero understanding not only of women which he views as clothes, make-up and other things which get him off, but also he's incapable of even imagining other people might have different experiences and perspectives that he does. A conversation with him is not a debate, because he can't even defend his bizarre, completely unscientific takes- he can only repeat them as if they were cast in stone. All in all, this conversation was useful in showing how misguided and shallow his ideas are.
Dismantle his whole framework? So I guess you think Dr. Bailey is a quack? Guess we can't trust one of the ONLY psychologists willing to research ROGD then.
Phil includes women in his proposition to bolster his autogynephilic argument showing he has zero awareness of the drivers to transition women have. Clearly, he needed to have these kinds of discussion before writing his book.
I originally thought autoandrophilia didn't exist in females because that's what a couple of the leading scientists said. I changed my mind after listening to what women said about their experiences. I also found that there were published instances of women who expressed sexual interest in being manly that was analogous to what autogynephilic males described. In addition, basically every study that asks both sexes whether they've been aroused by crossdressing or fantasies of being the other sex has found that some people in both sexes report such cross-gender eroticism.
@@phililly Bullshit. You use it because it's useful in justifying your actions. But the way you describe it shows you have zero understanding of women whatsoever. But because you don't care about anyone else then this is of no consequence to you.
I was a self aware AAP female before Phil's book. Reading a book by someone who actually understands my feelings helped me to make better sense of them and to avoid the medical pathway.
Classic navel-gazing on his part. Was strenuous to listen to, especially since he wouldn't give an inch to the two therapists with vast experience on the topic.
Michael Jackson acted like a 12-year-old boy as an excuse to hang out with other young boys, just like how other PDFs find positions where they can have access to children. He was a very manipulative PDF who knew exactly how to act with his victims, their parents, and his fans. Have you ever watched Leaving Neverland? How many young boys talk on the phone for hours daily with another boy? Never. I used to be a huge MJJ fan, but after watching that documentary and old MJJ news clips, videos, etc., there's no doubt he was a PDF.
I never get a really clear idea of either of these women’s primary objections. It’s as if a nerve has been touched and then there’s a casting about for something objective to take issue with. Personally, as someone who has experienced AGP-type desires and conflicts for a lifetime, I find the simplicity of definition: attraction to a self-embodied image - very helpful to explain and make sense of personal desires and conflicts. That paraphilias are already commonly understood in these terms makes Phil’s statements and terminology in one way pretty redundant in my view, but certainly not objectionable, or even psychologically/psychotherapeutically misleading. I really don’t know what their beef is other than an objection to the word sexuality (as in ‘auto heterosexuality’) which I believe to be unnecessary and possibly confusing, as the Irish lady points out, it’s not a sexuality, it’s a paraphilia. However, being introduced to the concept of paraphilia and how it operates, is extremely useful in clarifying what’s going on internally and Helps to put aside unnecessary soul searching and anxiety when trying to understand these desires and conflicts, and so what if it’s all been done before, and Blanchard was the first to codify it all? That doesn’t mean there’s not some function and benefit to writing about it again. Someone may come across Phil’s book before they ever come across the concept of AGP. Once I understood what my desire was, in terms of what’s going on and how it functions, and accepted that this is a lifelong facet of my personality, then I’m in a position to both accept and where necessary restrain such indulgences without shame, repression or any other unhelpful coping mechanisms. Maybe they’re worried that they’ll be out of a job by virtue of the advertising of this simple explanation of autogynophilia! Maybe they want it all to be so nuanced and complicated, that only a professional such as themselves could possibly sort it out.
Everybody are affected by emotions and morals. Therfore seeking truths has to include being aware of them and to consciously use them as guidance and in different ways. Including challenge and question them.
I think Philly is explaining the male sexuality to women who don't have the same sexual experience. Autogynephilia seems like an exclusively male sexuality.
Thanks to Stella and Sasha for showing bravery and curiosity by having me on the show. I wish we could've had more time for discussion, as it would take 3-4 hours to properly cover female AAP and male AGP with sufficient nuance. I think it's important to find out what is real about the causes of transgenderism - not only for gender-dysphoric people themselves who deserve to understand why they feel the way they do, but also on a societal level so that we can collectively settle on the optimal way of handing transgenderism.
I get they feeling they think you socially acquired AGP, and that you were not born with it.
Yes thanks Phil, I agree this needs much more time and contemplation
I certainly believe AGP is socially acquired, or why does it happen when middle-aged heterosexual men get into cissy porn?
Study them like Ray Blanchard. I've worked with a variety of men with a range of AGP. Phil's language is viable and helpful.
I would want to know how many AGP men Stella has worked with in therapy. Read Anne Lawrence. Read Phil Illy! Look at every person behind the trans agenda...Jennifer Pritzker, Marci Bowers, Rachel Levine, Martine Rothblatt. Study their child sterilization fetish adding eunuch to SOC 8 and pushing no age limits, all for profit. All of Martine Rothblatt playbook as we saturated generations with queer theory. A full dismantling of dimorphic sex and all norms.
I saw every different type of AGP in SanFrancisco. I ran around and was in the Tenderloin and Polk street. Who suggested these age old conditions are "socially conditioned". Yes, the CHILDREN are indoctrinated and social contagion in full throttle.
These billionaire creeps are not the average individual. Please don't stereotype people and project.
@@dakota-sessionsstop
I was a psych nurse. Some patients would believe they were Jesus or God. A lot of these people would get arrested for trespassing, harassment, stalking, or other crimes related to their delusions.
Should everyone play into their beliefs, or should we try to mentally help them? Their beliefs would hurt themselves and other people.
The biggest issue about this self-love self-sexualisation is that it seeps out to a wider sphere - confused/autistic/depressed kids, the wives of the AGP who are condemned for not wanting to "become lesbians" or face being called bigots, detransitioners etc. Love your self and cross dress but stop screaming for "recognition" and law changes.
Exactly. We used to believe that my freedom ends where yours begins. That's why we had laws against exhibitionism, because someone might enjoy showing himself off, but he shouldn't be able to force me to see it without my consent. It should be the same with AGPs because it is a fetish. No one should be forced to participate.
I find something here mirrors exactly a wider trend in the trans phenomenon - the idea that categorizing something as disordered or a mental condition is "demonizing" or "stigmatizing" and that's why we should just call it something harmless or literally change medical definitions. And I find that idea fundamentally problematic because we are changing reality to suit the feelings of a small group of people's internalized shame and stigma. Because who still actually stigmatizes mental health issues? Especially the kind that do not harm other people? I feel like we live in the very best of times for people having empathy and compassion for people with disorders and want them to find the help they need. Instead, calling it something harmless may make some people feel better about their shame but they do not think at all about the future and how many more young people will be drawn into something that now has a nice normal name but behind which hides a really lonely, difficult existance or a lifelong series of intense drugs and surgery. Something can be not normal without it meaning someone is stigmatizing you. If a doctor tells you that you have high blood pressure, you kind of have a choice of letting that feed your shame about your body or your lack of exercise and get angry about how the doctor shamed you and now you have this stigma... or you take it as a factual definition and a way to seek the resources you need to improve on your lifestyle to get better.
But even he later says girls can temporarily "have" autoheterosexuality. That is just not how you would use the idea of a sexuality, that the verbiage of a disorder or some other unwanted condition. And that's okay. Everybody in the world has some kind of unwanted condition, more or less persistent, more or less frequently. We don't need pretty words to make that more palatable, we need empathy and solutions.
I don't think this researcher has any bad intent, but I keep thinking how much he is pushing his ideas and his feelings and his framework over others, while at the same time professing to only work logically. Especially when it comes to how much about life he presumes as being about sex and how deeply rooted sexual fantasies are for most people. And this is something I definitely know from my male friends on the autism spectrum - a very strong appeal to logic and science and a self-identity in that frame, and a very bad take on when they are being emotionally guided or when they are using false logic as an outlet for emotions they don't entirely seem able to feel, but are certainly projecting outward or operating under. Its a tricky condition and takes a lot of time and time with others who honestly and kindly reflect behavior back to the person to get any handle on this.
When we hear about or see a man wearing women's clothing, it's nearly always sexual, and so of course it's going to make women uncomfortable to suddenly and unexpectedly encounter a man in public, in a professional environment, who by all appesrances seems to be engaging in a fetish. Women are understandably scared of men imposing sexual things on us without our consent, and something like this would set off those alarms in many women.
Sounds like a phobia and more exposure will help you get over it
it’s not sexual for gay men who are the main ones confident enough to wear women’s clothes in public what are you talking about? this is a dangerous assumption
@@shiina29 100%
I go along with J K Rowling's tweet: "Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like … Live your best life in peace and security...". I'd have no problem interacting with a man in a dress in a public place as long as he behaved appropriately, didn't try to follow me into the women's toilets or force me to say that he is actually a woman. Anyone you meet might be having sexual thoughts about you or any number of things - as long as he isn't acting in an inappropriately sexual way, who cares?
@@OrwellsHousecat no thank you.
There are things I don't want to exposed to or get comfortable with because I have healthy boundaries.
The way these two female professionals had to diplomatically diminish their own professional understandings just to get a man who self-diagnosed himself with a theoretical disorder to hear them. Masterful.
They didn't rebut any of his talking points. How were they masterful?
They didn't rebut anything he said. How was this masterful?
Yeah I really think people are missing the point. They are actual experts that have spent significant parts of their lives learning about this and experiencing this from the perspective of countless patients... Comparing that to his reading articles online is telling of his understanding of the subject. He is not where he thinks he is in the Dunning Kruger curve...
You comment reads as if there is not a small army of other medical professionals who would disagree with them.@@ronomgenuff.
It is calling "appealing to the patient's narcissism" in order to lessen his defenses. This man has strong narcissistic needs so it worked!
Frankly I'm sick and tired of the lack of "moral realm" in discussing all this weird, perverse sex stuff. Actually, please bring back some moral realm. We could use that right now.
@@sz4469 oh! How dare you “moralize” in the words of paraphilic Phil. 🤣
Okay, but what moral standards are we using? Religious standards? If so which religion? The biggest problem I see with religious morality is there will never be any solid proof that a supernatural entity laid down xyz laws.
If we're using secular morals I think that's more reasonable, as they are not based on an appeal to an unprovable invisible authority. The general secular morality is based on consent and harm. Behaviors are acceptable if all people involved are consenting and able to do so and no one is being harmed. If that's the case I think there are some Autoheterosexual behaviors that are socially acceptable in public and some that aren't.
@sz4469 - firstly, I don't know what you mean by a 'moral realm'. Secondly, you seem to have a problem with something that is neither an ethical or moral issue - I think your issue is squeamishness and what is distasteful to you. As the other commenter who replied to you, said so well - this is not a moral issue as long as there is consent between sexual partners.
@ but when his fetish is affecting everyone’s life even if arguably marginally… isn’t that worth taking into account? The problem is that the partner in question is he himself. He gets off on dressing and presenting this way - that’s the act of “intimacy” here that is normally kept behind closed doors. But he doesn’t and doesn’t want to. He is engaging in the fetishistic behavior openly in public.
I don't see anything immoral about crossdressing. I don't think David Bowie's androgyny was immoral. I enjoyed the Rocky Horror Picture show.
Phil I think, is extremely dangerous in a very subtle, sly way. He very carefully refuses to accept that this “phenomenon” is a disorder. By normalising what essentially is a definite narcissistic trait - is simply dangerous. This behaviour should never be normalised & put on the same standing as a sexual orientation. It simply isn’t normal, positive &/or healthy. The behaviour definitely becomes an addictive behaviour that grows rapidly, when allowed to exist “in public”. It’s a negative compulsion that needs to be fought against. Yes, some will have the compulsion to such a strong level - that transsexualism is the only option. However, those with “lower compulsions” - should never be “normalised”. This refers to men! In females - it is definitely a passing phase in adolescents . To what level? Needs much more research. Phil is a man with a sexual disorder - & his view needs to be seen in this context.
You know I was despairing at some of the apologists and clearly AGPs obsessively fawning.
He is a creep. His views are BS. He clear gets off by appearing in interviews wearing these clothes. That's the level of depth he has.
Thank you, you're capturing something I missed in my aversion. He is seemingly acceptable but actually radical and more focused on self-validation and self-legitimation than he is with helping people or integrating new understandings into his framework.
Agree
I'm not sure why it's important to describe it as a disorder. A significant segment of the male population is probably autogynephilic, and just keeps it to themselves, because it never manifests in any way that the outside world will notice. You only see it when an autogynephilic decides to dress up in public, as Phil does. To be clear: you can be autogynephilic, and continue to wear normal men's clothes and live a normal man life.
He is a disturbed man that is trying to justify his perversion and demands it be accepted by trying to make it seem harmless. That's predatory. He honestly shouldn't even be platformed by Genspect and Sasha and Stella at all... I think they perhaps now realize it they shouldn't have given him the stage that they did and now they are subtly trying to roll the support back.
What an interesting conversation.
To my ear, it was very clearly an intelligent but troubled man who kept accidentally giving insight into his own dysfunction.
He said credentialed opinions don't matter, but first sought to qualify his own false statistics by claiming that leading experts agreed.
He sought to legitimise his paraphilia as a sexual orientation, but if a friend asked how my son was and I replied 'Great thanks, he's young and in love - with himself as a woman,' that friend is immediately concerned for my son's mental wellbeing.
Then he said that AGP makes most people with it 'generally unhappy,' but also said he doesn't want to stigmatise it.
He also said that he doesn't see himself as narcissistic, but has literally written a book full of junk statistics that will be referred to by other troubled people as legitimate, with the sole purpose of justifying his own dysfunction as a legitimate sexual orientation.
He is basically very clearly and coldly describing a paraphilic and autistic experience, from a narcissistic perspective that only presents examples through the prism of his own experience. His justification for everything is that the most likely reason is... that which serves him best.
And a flat explanatory tone is fine, but not if what you're 'explaining' is made up.
He's like an AI who doesn't know he's an AI.
Very interesting to hear the always chill Stella O'Malley push back so hard. Quite rightly.
Very apt, very very apt.
Ok I haven’t watched yet but this almost makes me want to. I’m hesitant because every time I hear this man speak I have the exact impression you’ve just described, so I was nervous they’d be too nice, but seeing them push back does sound like fun
Yes, you nailed it.
Perfectly summarised, couldn’t agree more. I am a therapist myself and couldn’t help feeling a deep sadness while listening to his desperate concretistic attempt to intellectualise and politicise his narcissistic disorder.
The questioning was incredibly biased -irrelevant of the subject matter -the person in question was called to argue his case and at sometimes on trial
Not sure if I’m going to be able to finish this one. Thanks all for having the conversation, but Phil just seems abrasive and stuck to his view of things, which has been the case for all people I’ve ever met in this community.
I think we need to look more at upbringing and attachment to explain what is going on here. These people seem unable to form healthy attachments and comfortably assimilate into normal society without needing a lot of attention and accommodations.
I'm really struggling to get through and his insane male autistic corn-addled followers are prevalent in the comments and coping so very hard.
His arguments got absolutely ripped to shreds and he didn't notice cos he can't listen to a woman.
He's a creep.
Jessica, you should look to video with Dr Az Hakeem with Stella and Sasha. All the answers are there.
@@celinede-nh9ek That was an excellent video.
You'd be wise to read his book.and listen to more interviews so you could make meaningful observations.
@@celinede-nh9ekhe doesn't hold all of the answers. Read Phil's book and Ray Blanchard.
Wow.. Stella and Sasha. I do not think I've heard you both analyze, challenge and question the synopsis phil makes in such a clear and focused way while maintaining a psychologically critical exploration. With regards to how these ideas fit into actual health or not, I'm grateful for such a deep discussion. Adaptive or not while providing pushback, this chat allows for a broader perspective rather than accepting all into mainstream as usual, or within a narrow minded expression. This video provides for some very important pushback. Much appreciated.
A person is sexually/romantically excited by the image of an object. This image creates a feeling of shame, mental tension and sometimes also mental pain. How does making one's body more like a fantasy object with medicinal techniques improve this psychic tension?
In this instance I think the feeling of shame has motivated a biased view that others, including females whose underlying drivers are geared completely differently, share this same sexual compulsion. I don’t think they do. It’s like alcoholics who believe everyone drinks secretly and more than they admit to (they don’t). It provides more comfort to themselves but it’s really just a state of denial.
what if the transition is practically unrelated from paraphilia lol
@@terrabranf0rd that’s like claiming a murderer that ends up abusing the corpse only abused it because she was already dead so why not … Occam’s razor, darling, Occam’s razor.
@@insidiousmischka no trans person even with autogyno[philia seems to have shame about it. its not shame based cummies i can actually pass and have female friends like peers lol. so would a real girl. its more eccentric and mb embarrassing
There are men in the world who say they've worked through their AGP and at least they no longer feel the need to try to change their bodies (or wear women's clothes all the time). It's not guaranteed that if a man has AGP feelings he will need to act on those for the rest of his life.
That is very true. I have personal experiance of this
I think Phil is being disengenuous when he says he has changed the terminology just to be more simple to understand and less complex for the average person. I think he deliverately trying to shift a paraphilia into a sexuality, plain and simple. We need to clarify the difference between sexuality and fetish and not muddy the waters the way he is trying to do. He is trying to lump LGB with dosordered behaviors. This would not bode well for LGB as a group. They will face more prejudice if they are all seen as the same.
i am sympathetic to his perspective, but I have watched his content and he is very interested in lumping in AGP/AAP with homosexuality. I personally am ambivalent with whether or not AGP is comparable to conventional sexualities, nevertheless I know it is bad optics.
Read the book. He carefully does the opposite. There is a lot of nuance. I don't hear how Stella is an expert on AGP and so defensive. I agree with Ray Blanchard and Phil.
The affirming model is our problem. Stella re read Blanchard.
Most importantly this is a different conversation about social contagion and children introduced to hypnosis sissy porn.
Two different conversations.
@@bbh3617 What do you mean by "lumping"? There are AGPs/AAPs who are behaviorally homosexual, thus effectively lumping themselves with it.
@Comorant12 They are not behaviorally homosexual. They are straight people who cross dress or even have sex with the same sex as apart of their fetishistic PERFORMANCE. Homosexual people are born that way and are gender nonconforming from birth, it is not comparable.
@bbh3617 please provide evidence that all homosexuality is "born this way" and that all homosexuality is related to childhood non-conformity.
Thanks to all three of you (Sasha, Stella, and Phil) for this conversation and the way you mostly held it - calm, thoughtful, good faith and polite. I thought it very interesting. If I had been there with you, you would have found me agreeing with all three of you in different places, but also disagreeing with (or at least questioning) all three of you in different places 😊
Agreed! This was an example of a conversation well done by everyone involved.
I mostly agree. Stella and Sasha are lovely people, but I do believe they arnt as independent as Phill. Sacha believes that not fancing one man to another man is internalised homophobia. Some people are just born that way.
Phil doesn't strike me as ill-intentioned, he certainly isn't a TRA nutjob, and he is correct that credentials don't make a person an expert, but one of the things you learn in the credentialing process are the methodologies and ethics of research of a particular field of study; Stella pointed out he's lacking in his research and analysis. And Sasha talking about the labeling of these paraphilias and treating them as if they are permanent and orientations instead of phases and/or disorders a person might be going through was interesting. It made me think of the Kat Rosenfield article "Demisexuals Are Scared of Sex." In today's age of people being hypersensitive about sexuality, nobody wants to feel normal or abnormal. Normal is boring and abnormal is to be excluded, so people have to come up with medical and scientific terms (sprinkle in some Latin or Greek to make it sound official) to lend legitimacy to their proclivities, no matter if what they're into is white bread, or fetishistic. If the behavior that arouses you has an official sounding title, then that term can now be an identity, and then you don't have to feel guilty about it.
Sure it's great when you get over his God complex. So sick of his bs. Wake up and smell the sht
@@dilloneliassen9622 Best comment.
No, we dont need public discussion and policy changes for peoples private fetishes.
Newsflash: there is no such thing in nature as "clothing". It is 1000% a cultural phenomenon, and if someone wants to wear the clothing they feel comfortable in that is also 1000% none of your fukking business. Worry about your own clothing and stop being a boorish busybody.
I'm sorry but i think this was a very respectful discussion on the part of the hosts. He's not very logical in his portrayal of his journey, of his descriptions of his "why", and he is very all or nothing in his descriptions of frameworks and why they apply. He speaks with the certainty of an engineer talking about philosophical and psychological without understanding the humanness and the depth. He's also just SO VERY arrogant. Let's be real... Autism or not.
But is he wrong? I didn't see this established here.
so we have to just defacto accept he is an expert at AGP, and recognizes AGP in others, without him explaining what the experience is? What if he is just inclined to group whatever he wants into AGP for either subconscious or more strategic reasons? Every time I've seen an interview with him he seems to have so much contempt for the interviewers asking any questions.
He is not confident in any responses he gives, he comes across very shady.
@@marietandyastronaut2896 I read him as thoughtful, not shady
So many identity labels for people to obsess and pose as. They seem to get all caught up in themselves by internalizing external things. It often seems as though they're designing and building themselves to be special, rather than finding themselves to be average.
I'm an average agp male. I don't think I am special.
This is why they need a full discussion they don't gate keep.
I think that's a beautiful analogy for all Humans. An unconditional attachment to the beliefs and projections of the mind.
Glad to see Stella push back on Phil’s obsessive push to normalize AGP and to rename it “auto heterosexuality”. Phil also wants us to believe AGP is “innate”.
Disappointing that neither of you asked Phil about his porn consumption. I’d be willing to bet it’s contributed to his obsession/addiction with his paraphilia.
Gender dysphoria is innate. Many boys will experience gender dysphoria before puberty; they play with the girls and feel like one of the girls, yet they are a hetero boy. Autogynephilia is what manifests when that same boy hits puberty is not only attracted to girls, but his own girly nature that was there before hand. Puberty says... you now want to have sex with girls, and to whatever degree you see yourself as a girl, that lust will now involve yourself as well.
Exactly ... they missed a lot. I do appreciate some of the push back, but there was a lot left to be desired.
I’m AGP and had cross-gender fantasies at the age of 5! It’s not uncommon at all for it to manifest before puberty. Can’t help but roll my eyes at those who think this is porn-induced.
@@andrewflanders262just because something occurs in childhood doesn’t mean it’s innate. Children are INCREDIBLY impacted by the world around them. No boy has a “girly” nature, boys just have different personalities and some of them fall more in line with stereotypes about girls
@@lovelover4408Exactly what I was thinking. It can be formed in the very early days and then classed as 'innate'. These things are learned. Quite often it's down to parental favouritism of the opposite sex.
It really does seem to me that the negative reaction to the suggestion that transmen are auto-androphilic parallels the rejection of the autogynephilic hypothesis. That is, the stigma attached to the paraphilic character of the attraction is resisted, especially when this is associated with women who are thought to be the more civilized sex?
Or maybe it just doesn’t make much sense? Men are known to have much higher rates of paraphilia than women. The idea that a man changed his identity in pursuit of a f3tish makes sense. It makes much more sense to think that women are pursuing trans identities for reasons that make more sense for women - like attempting to escape misogyny.
There is no such thing as "trans men". Lesbians are sick of Stella insulting them by going along with this idea. Just because you want it to be true, doesn't make it true.
Women aren't the civilized sex, but we require civilization in order to be free.
Men predate upon us. Men are over 90% of the violent offenders. You know this already.
And fetishistic men are even more violent, especially sexually.
Go study stats and you will see that men and women are very different sexually.
Good men stay out so bad men stay out. We have a social contract with the good men to protect our spaces so we can participate in society.
This aggression by male fetishists is breaking down that trust and that contract. Without it women (except elites) will be slaves.
*Good men stay out so bad men stand out.
No, girls and young women are very susceptible to transient mental illness or social contagion. I had friends and family who self-harmed during the anorexia, bulimia and cutting spikes, some eventually hospitalized. My mom had friends who were given ECT or doped on sedatives in the 50's. American girls also have very high rates of anxiety and depression, and we live in a violent patriarchal society in which men harm, exploit and degrade women for more than the reverse.
So I think sexuality is a factor but I don't think it's dominant at all for girls and women.
The image here is disturbing: two women patiently, silently sitting and listening to a man that’s trying to explain away and justify his perversion.
Update: The image still stands in the beginning, but I do concede Stella and Sascha do a formidable job towards the middle and the end AND challenge the ideas and conclusions Phil presents in his book.
This is one of the better episodes and it was really needed after Genspect invited an "AGP" to the convention where also many victims of such "AGPs" were present or expected to be present, which is something I will never forgive (plus there's so much more that I simply cannot comment on here).
@racer5-d4e He had plenty of time to expose himself. While I appreciate he is not a man with this claiming to be a woman, he sounds very arrogant and narcissistic. I avoid these men in public and certainly should never be in women's spaces. Some behaviors should have societal shame even if not outlawed..like picking your nose in public.
@racer5-d4e it did get better later on.
@ why?
@ why don’t you worry about your own crap and leave me alone. Go police someone else.
@racer5-d4e What you're seeing is called "integrity," you should take notes.
Still watching. I am so, so glad you both are pushing back on him. I have been so irritated by how his conjectures and inferences have been taken as fact. Personally I think he thinks he has figured himself out and he has projected his understanding of himself onto the vast population of trans people
That's a very good take on it
Exactly, it's all projection. He starts with self and projects that on to others incorporating only evidence into the worldview that corroborates his own experience.
As much as I like phil and most others in our public discussion, I always feel one big factor of his interesting work is to get rid of the word paraphilia. And I think this is wrong. You could "normalise" the prevalence of having a / this paraphilia, you can start calling it autoheterosexuality - but it's still under the umbrella of paraphilia, no matter how nonviolent.
I remember a genetics lecturer said something along the lines of everything you did today was either to prolong your survival or the survival of others in the gene pool or to facilitate sexual reproduction in the future. Depressing yet actually accurate with some nuance around storytelling and creativity but arguably that socially informs us and aids in cohesion and mental health etc. sorry if it’s reductive but we’re all gene reproduction machines and sexuality is an incredibly strong motivator, particularly in males & when it comes to something like gender it’s a particularly obvious motivator. The classification thing- obviously life is more complex than the labels we can ascribe it but this is literally how we process and transmit information, without heuristics we’d be doing endless quantum mechanics calculations on every atom and a) we’re time limited b) we’re human and don’t require this degree of detail to make predictions and understand our environment. I’m also on the spectrum but I kinda felt frustrated at how obvious points Phil was making were being misconstrued. I just wanna run away and live with the other autists.
@michmonty95 I don't think he was misconstrued. I think they, especially Stella, used rigorous scientific questioning, that's all. And that kind of questioning requires answers that are complete and well thought out. He has things thought out in his own mind but does not have the data or references to support his perspective. I think they did a really good job bringing that to light.
Phil is right in that (heterosexual) male crossdressers are autogynephilic. This is huge: were HR departments, governments, legislators etc to recognise this it would totally change the way they're bringing in norms and laws to give the trans community rights that far outweigh those of women.
if they truly understood what AGP is, it would lead to more sympathy to trans people i think. but if they only have a straw man concept of AGP, they will realize that most trans people don't fit into that, so they won't recognize that most of them are AGP
Quick question.
Why does it seem the attitude "women have preferences, men have fetishes" seems to prevail in these discussions? Perhaps a look into that stigma could help?
Because women and men are different.
@@Cladina_Green That explains nothing.
@@Cladina_Green I mean, yes, men and women are different. So does that justify this sexist double standard?
There is some evidence that fetishes are more common in men--foot fetish, for example. The only fetish more common in women is masochism. I do think women can have fetishes (I am a woman with AAP myself) but at the very least it manifests in different ratios.
The closest I can get to what Phil is arguing is that autogynophilia should be considered a sexual orientation similar to heterosexuality and homosexuality rather than a paraphilia/fetish. Good luck with that Phil! Lol. I think he’s a nice guy but the kink is real bro.
Does it actually matter though?
Homosexuality was classified as a paraphilia until 1973. The difference between a sexual orientation and a paraphilia is by and large a moral and not scientific one.
@ personally, as long as he/they stay out of women’s spaces/sports etc. IDGAF. But I think legally it matters: Thus the problems now with Title IX which has been amended to give precedence to the ‘rights’ of trans women (or AGPs who, unlike a polite & basically respectful Phil, are becoming violent over any pushback against allowing them access) over and above those of natal females. I also would like to see some restraint on their public behavior when it comes to common decency: There was a news story about a grown man dressed as a little girl who was attending a public library’s children’s reading hour on his own, and who had a clearly visible full erection when he stood up to leave at the end. I think that needs to stop being tolerated. There have also been reports of AGPs who are committing crimes but who are being identified as ‘women’ thus obscuring law enforcements efforts to correctly identify & detain them (there was a report of a ‘woman’ who had ‘exposed herself’ to children and was being sought by police, and all the news alerts described this individual as a ‘woman’ when in fact it was a ‘trans woman’ - really not helpful in tracking someone who is potentially dangerous.) The nightmare potential is pretty HIGH IMO.
@@bunnybunny3536the British forgot what Orwell tells us.
Very interesting conversation
This has been a difficult video to watch. Im picking up on the AGP introversion, linked to the fact they think it is innate. Is this a lack of insight that is indicative of a mental health disorder? I am a desister, i 100% think trans identities are formed due to the nurture. The majority of behaviours are not sex specific, even though our cultures (gender) might say otherwise. It is the shame an individual might experience for their sex/gender non conforming behaviours that leads them to believe they are not the sex they are. There isnt enough focus on this, its just straight to 'i am the opposite sex' but the missing step prior to this is due to the othering they experience for having a natural behaviour that is deemed wrong due to sexist sterotypes
AGP is the person's innate sexuality (nature). Trans identity is formed by the environment (nurture). ROGD is explaining an environmental cause of trans identification. It does not explain the innate sexuality aspect, which is extremely important, as that is what comes first. Trans just stands for transition. It is not something you are, it is something you do.
I am an AGP male that took a special interest in many female attributes very early on. It wasn't until later in my life that I learned that transition was even an option. It was at that point that I started considering it, so it may be seen as ROGD. Hope this makes sense.
That is a very good point of view on this
That’s really insightful.
Your feminist blank slate beliefs do not hold up to any science scrutiny .
You and your beliefs are in the way to a general understanding of why and how sex dysphoria develops in any children before puberty , before school age even
Here is a simple point, its really not that hard. My mother had zero maternal instinct to nurture and she was violent. On the other hand my father was kind to me. I became a tomboy as I saw him as my caregiver. I imprinted from him, not my mother. I wanted nothing to do with my mom due to the abuse. I became a tomboy and was bonded to my father as my only caregiver. This is why I didnt identify with females. I saw them as cruel and mean.......I am so glad I am not a teenager in this crazy town world.....I would have been convinced I was in the wrong body and would have been mutilated by the sick medical system in America. whew, dodged a bullet.
I grew up fine as a tomboy until I could have the therapy I needed for the maternal abuse. I healed and forgave my mother and am now doing well.
I would say one area to look for why this happens is maternal abuse. It does happen......a lot more than people realize. Man bad woman good is not reality
Hmmm…. a paraphilia isn’t a disorder in an of itself. It just denotes that it’s not typical, or in reality, socially unacceptable.
I'm no fan of officially pathologizing or medicalizing things, but that doesn't mean behaviour like this should be socially acceptable. We all, to one degree or another, control or reign in a range of animal impulses, especially when we are younger. If this guy's whole existence has to be about constant acting out of his fetish then he has to accept the misery of frustration or admit he is a lunatic. It's not up to society bear the burden.
@ what is socially acceptable changes over time, it’s not fixed. Some conservative personality types are completely inflexible about what is acceptable, almost planted in the 1950’s, while other people are like “who cares, as long as you’re not hurting any one” and a range in between.
@@strykerpass600 I wasn't saying it was fixed. It seems absurd to allow someone to play out a sexual fetish in public. Hurting others isn't simply about physical violence. Blackface doesn't hurt other physically.
I had resistance to listening to this based on Stella & Sasha’s introduction, but that in itself is what persuaded me that I had to listen! I didn’t want to be that person who is afraid of losing a cherished position to a compelling arguments.
So I found Phil to be a very thoughtful & considered thinker & speaker, and he seems to come from a place of compassion. However, it is very self-focused, & I did identify some glaring category errors!
The main one is his insistence that sexual fetishes & fantasies are ‘sexualities’. Both Stella & Sasha do address this but Phil didn’t really get the distinction. Human sexuality is complex for sure but the definition involves which of the two human sexes we actually prefer to have sex with. Phil conflates this with just ‘being attracted to’ something that gives you sexual feelings. It’s like saying furries & therians & people who dress as dragons want to have sex with those things. But from what I understand what this means is that they get a kick out of the dressing up AS those things. That’s a fetish, not a ‘sexuality’.
The possible exception is autogynephilia, in which a man is sexually attracted to the idea of himself as a woman & possibly masturbates to his reflection in a mirror. But it’s still the ‘idea’ & an idea isn’t a sexuality. Neither is solipsistic auto-eroticism. It’s the sexual expression of fetish.
It was good to hear discussion of the differences between the male & female sexual response. Men are much more sexually driven than women & their urges to cross-dress are pretty much all to do with getting sexual arousal from that activity. Women’s behaviour is not motivated by this sex urge to anything like the same degree. Their sense of wanting to be more ‘male’ is much more about trauma & the fear of being inadequate, especially in today’s hyper-visual instagram age of female ‘perfection’. They’re more usually in flight from the social behaviours expected of them whereas men are driven forwards towards something by their sex urges.
The other issue I have is that there are some mean-spirited, resentful, often cruel & sometimes mentally challenged people out there in the fetish world who do cause harm to others - mainly women but also the peddlers of hormones & surgery to children. No matter how much we might want to ‘be kind’ & ‘normalise’ them & their behaviour, it’s not right to try to make us accept their them & their urge to trample on other people’s rights & well-being. The number of men with these issues is alarming enough, but the fact that they are foisting all this hyper-sexualised activity publicly on everyone is quite disturbing.
It may sound melodramatic, but I keep thinking of how it was a descent into sexual fecklessness & depravity that led to the fall of the Roman Empire. Looks like we could be going the same way..
Also - Phil’s insistent opinion that men who cross dress are ipso facto AGP is not accurate. He needs to listen to Dr Az Hakeem who you both interviewed a couple of weeks ago. There is a clear distinction between autogynephilia & fetishist transvestism. Phil is possibly more likely to be the latter , as he doesn’t actually believe he is a woman & doesn’t appear to be seeking validation as one.
I keep hearing this distinction, "It's not a sexuality, it's a fetish," and I'm puzzled every time. What do people mean by 'a sexuality' and where has this phrase come from?
I've never heard that term used by any sexologist. A fetish is a sexual attraction to something weird. It's under the umbrella of sexuality.
It's like saying "a unicycle is not a vehicle". It's a strange kind of vehicle, sure, but it's still a device that moves you around the world, just like other vehicles.
>>"the definition involves which of the two human sexes we actually prefer to have sex with"
Which definition is this and where can I find it?
@@janeawdry8182 Az Hakeem's definition of autogynophilia is different from that used by sexologists, Blanchard, Bailey, Lawerence, etc. Az Hakeem's definition seems to be just his idiosyncratic definition. Surprised Stella and Sasha didn't push back on that.
Fetishistic transvestism is a type of autogynephilia.
@@SchrodingersTransCat I don’t set much store by what ‘sexologists’ say. But what’s your point? It sounds like sophistry to me. Ok, so call a fetish a ‘sexuality’ if you must. Are you therefore in favour of AGP & fetishist transvestite males shoving their sex delusion into the public’s face & bullying women out of existence?
Being gay or straight isn’t something most of us have to trumpet to the world all the time, but the ‘sexuality’ of fetishists is suddenly something that we must all be constantly reminded of by these fragile, narcissistic, porn-addled men. Not to mention their attempts to deny reality.
I think that if the reader thinks "I agree with A and B but not C," That's a win for the author. I don't think you should need the reader to agree with everything you say; it's enough that you give the reader some new information, and if the reader disagrees with some of it, then the conversation can continue! It sounds like a great book.
I feel like the conversations about this topic are getting sidetracked, because of people's biases. I thought the Freudian notion that every action is driven by (male) sexuality wasn't considered an accurate model for human behavior for quite some time. I really think the main driving factor behind people feeling "uncomfortable in their bodies" is neurodivergence/ASD that makes them struggle in their lives in general and in relationships with other people in particular. IMHO society needs to become a bit more understanding of people who struggle to adapt to societal norms, because of psychological differences.
labeling all ASD people as having a fetish and therefore are totally motivated by sexual desires is hardly giving understanding to the neurodiverse.
Yikes. While I'm full of appreciation and respect for Stella's & Sasha's work, I'm also full of trepidation about watching this particular video!! Not sure if I can stomach it, tbh, but I shall TRY!
Wish people used "theory" properly. In science, a theory has so much evidence it is practically fact. I think as used here you mean a "hypothesis". An idea. A little evidenced thought.
@@ytehrani3885 Thank you.
45:49 gotta hand it to Phil. He made a fine point with regards to 'credentialing'. And that point can be expanded across all disciplines... 🐿
Yep. What matters is whether particular claims are true. Not the credentials of the person making them.
@@phililly 100% correct!
Dr David Sackett, the ‘Father of Modern Evidence-Based Medicine’, in an article called The Sins of Expertness and a proposal for Redemption, wrote:
‘….It then dawned on me that experts like me commit two sins that retard the advance of science and harm the young. Firstly, adding our prestige to our opinions gives the latter far greater persuasive power than they deserve on scientific grounds alone. Whether through deference, fear, or respect, others tend not to challenge them, and progress towards the truth is impaired in the presence of an expert…”
I relate to the example y'all provided about feeling like failing at feminity. I remember feeling terrible comparing myself to these feminine ideals and feeling like I did not measure up at all. But also feeling intense discomfort if I tried. I just remember the icky icky skin crawling feeling of trying to be feminine. I remember looking at my beautiful female face full of makeup in the mirror at school and scrubbing it off on the sink and feeling better. But all I could think about was going home and changing into my "boy" clothes. I remember not eating to hope my curves would go down. weighing myself every day. And getting upset when I could not get below 130 lbs. I have no idea what it was to this day. I sit with the grey. Androphilia doesn't seem to explain it.
Phil is not saying 'all' he's saying 'some' and he's saying its an exploratory idea for women that needs more research.
It's very strange to see him so sure in his beliefs when he claims to want scientific understanding. Science isn't about having the answers, it's about asking questions. Even in the scientific method, your aim is to prove yourself wrong! Seems he's made up his mind and is bending variables and data to confirm his belief.
I think that naming is very important. I think names should help identify the route cause of the problem so we can find solutions, and all too often our naming conventions normalize the problems.
It's like if you have a leaky roof and instead of naming it leaking roof, you name it puddle making syndrome.
"You should fix your roof!"
"No no, I can't, it has puddle leaking syndrome"
Anyways.
It seems his mind is made up. There is no relativity in his understanding, it's all black and white. He believes he has the ability to understand what is, instead of being grounded in subjectivity.
Thats just my view from watching it though. It's hard to listen to because there is no growth in his opinions. They are self made or rejected and that just isn't very interesting for me, as someone who likes to learn from others and enjoys having my beliefs challenged.
1:29:07 Phil expresses a common misconception about peer review, that it is somehow about “checking the science” or otherwise validating the claims in the paper being reviewed, but that is not what happens; peer review is mainly about form and format - does it have the expected structure - abstract, hypothesis, method, results, conclusions? Does the abstract reflect a summary of the following sections? Are the investigators and their institutional associations clearly identified, and conflicts of interest (or lack thereof) noted? Are there any tables , charts, images, or other supplementary material referenced in the text, missing, incomplete, or misidentified? Are the stated methods of analysis appropriate to the type of data and sample size? Have the researchers obtained approval from the institutional review board for research involving live study subjects? Is the text formatted with a legible font and section breaks so that readers can easily locate important information? Are all the questions asked in the hypothesis answered in the conclusion?
Even so, some those points may not be adequately addressed, depending on the reviewer’s availability, interest, level of sleep deprivation, etc., There’s also no mechanism for checking if reviewers are accepting or rejecting papers based on their papersonal biases, it’s all based on the honor system, and highly susceptible to various undue influences on the reviewers, and unethical researchers taking advantage by submitting fraudulent papers in bad faith
Oooh, gonna be a fun comment section.
Phil Illy's book Autoheterosexuality is a must read!
but, it's sad that even within this supposedly "heterodox" space there are so many close-minded people, and people in this comment section who think they "know everything." the reality is: we don't know the answers to most of these questions (the etiology or etiologies of gender dysphoria, the true and current statistics about transgendered individuals and detransitioners etc., what should be considered 'disordered' and what not). i'm not saying phil is correct about everything; i'm not saying stella or sasha are correct about everything, but i feel that the criticism that phil is "projecting" could also easily apply to many of the commentors; he's either correct about a claim, or incorrect. his own AGP identification plays no role in the facts. argue the facts, not the fact that he must be biased or that he's on the autism spectrum.
@@mrridikilis Are you saying there is no argument that he's biased then? Because clearly he is. And he is only speaking from his own position. He has zero empathy. He can't think about how others feel.
@@robertmarshall2502Phil is quite empathetic.
@@mrridikilis Yup. But I think many of the harsh comments come from people (mostly women) who are -understandably- very uncomfortable with agp's. As understandable as it is, these personal feelings distract from understanding the issue, as pointed out in the interview. I think people's feelings should be taken into consideration, but where is the line between that and the woke idea of safe spaces to protect us from hurt feelings? I also don't understand what people think is the solution. Do they actually want the way people dress to be policed? I don't know if I prefer that dystopia to the woke genderqueer dystopia to be honest.
I think Sasha is wrong on this statement, "I'm comfortable with there being random unexplained experiences." This statement is the same as, "Birds fly, we don't need to know why." Stella's follow up, "It doesn't capture the complexities of life and is reductive." is also not helpful. How can you properly diagnose someone or tell them how to behave without a reductive understanding? Otherwise its just an emotional desire. These are not counters to Phil's point.
As I near the end of this, I think Sasha and Stella did a disservice to themselves. I heard a lot of, "I feel and I think" instead of, "This knowledge that I have explains specifically why we disagree with you more than a feeling." Especially since Sasha read the book, the fact she doesn't have specific studies to counter his point looks completely unprofessional. Second, you criticize him for being neutral and not moralizing. That's what YOU want to do. Phil does not. He describes the research, the facts, and the point.
This just came across as people who are uncomfortable with Phils points, did not have anything specifically to say what his point was wrong, but vague responses of that were clear rationalizations of their personal discomfort. The point, "I don't think you're right that 7 out of 10 heterosexual trans men are AGP" is absurd. You don't think? Where are your facts? I expected better.
I dunno. Birds flying is ubiquitous. Hardly random. Come up with example less common than birds and less rare as AGP. Then you might be on to something. 🐿
My first thing I thought was a line from the book the Parasites by Daphne Du Maurier. She was talking about women and how men could not understand why if a woman laughs during sex that men cannot understand why a woman could have sex and also have a separate thought pass through her head at the same time and not be annoyed. Not sure why.
Interesting theme emerging as Phil talks: the way he continually pulls emotional energy AWAY from the MAIN TASK for the young man's libido, the task of building relationships OUTSIDE of the narcissistic world.
Contrariwise, what's the worst thing that could happen if he put the narcissistic bog-down ON THE FRONT BURNER, emotionally?
Is it possible that that frozen ice-berg of self-love . . . might melt?
A conversation that provides even more evidence that this entire area and topic is hooey with no scientific knowledge or rigour behind it. Individuals pontificating about themselves, extrapolating theories and publishing. All good fun if people didn’t take this as serious basis for medical intervention.
its exactly the opposite.It doesn't convey how brilliant Phil is and they are talking over hin and not listening. Stella is a real AGP phobe instead of wanting to dig deep. If you didn't interuprt him you could learn the depth of what he is speakng of and not minimize it as a "universal experience". His book is something everyone in our field should read and explore.
@magdalenas8713 Exactly! He doesn't even seem to realize how much he's actually telling on himself.
1:23:16 this reminds me a lot of OCD. The difference between recognizing you're having a mentally ill thought, and taking the OCD thought literally, and behaving magically or with fear about it.
@@BoomerTelly Yup.
I don't understand this allergy to labels. They definitely have utility, even just to say "hey I'm not alone. this is a thing!" In other instances Stella especially has been very quick to apply a label such as 'gay' when the experience the teen boy described is much more clearly understood as meta-attraction.
Agreed. Every therapist I meet pushes back against labels as if I'm putting myself in a box and limiting myself to those labels. Quite the contrary, actually. I seek knowledge to make decisions with and like to believe I can grow beyond limiting factors. It is important, though, to manage our expectations and recognize things that influence our behaviors. It is possible to have a measured approach to labels.
I know some of the comments were bashing Stella, but i dont think she was out of line. She got her point across very clearly and he was able to respond directly. He wrote a book with this information, and in doing so, he's opened his work up to criticism from professionals in the field. She never once attacked him personally.
Whatever your personal discomfort with the idea of AGP, you’ve got to admire Phil for his honesty. From my own experience, I have yet to meet a trans identifying individual who is not on the autism spectrum. I think this way of thinking, the need to categorise, to the ‘nth degree, even the self, is the ‘overvalued idea’ fuelling trans ideology.
@@janewatson8108 no, I don't 'got to' admire this person .
I don't even like him one bit.
Yes, he is difficult to like
Phil doesn’t put forth the violent threatening rhetoric towards natal women we see with many of the TicToc trannies.
@@bunnybunny3536bit of a low bar, unfortunately.
There is a tremendous difference in the last 15 years. It's like 2 different populations of people. Indoctrinated neurodiverse kids vs people growing up with one of the topology of agp, that Stella forget and needs to re read. Maybe expanding on "fetish" paraphillic framework is exactly what everyone needs to learn. You have no idea how many men around you hide this.
Wow wee! You three kept me stomping along on my 5 mile dog walk this morning. Excellent, respectful and measured discussion and an acknowledgment of non- agreement without screaming. Very good. Thank you. ❤️🇬🇧❌❌
So a man wears a dress. I don't see any problem that. Its the behaviour that matters.
seeing a strange man in a dress signals to me he probably has issues that could be dangerous and will avoid when at all possible. Want nothing to do with them.
@aliciaochs Mmmm... I don't know. Isnt it a stereotype that a man has to wear trousers?
Though, as a biological female, i hate dresses and always wear pants.🙂 Only wear dresses when it's real warm.
@@sarral2008 a man can wear what he wants. I wear a dress maybe once a year. Knowing that some men get off on wearing women's clothing makes me avoid these strange men like the plague. I don't know what that particular person's reason is. Social shame is fine, not outlawing it.
@@aliciaochs Could you explain why? (baring the man wanting to go into feminine spaces or comptete in women's sports as women)
@@pythosdegothos6181 This a mental issue and many of these men are dangerous so I avoid and do not cater to calling them feminine language or interacting with them where I can absolutely avoid it. They can continue to wear their dresses in public and I will keep them at arms length.
At this point in the gender-discussion, as we prepare (Post-Biden) to move into post-peak-trans, NOTHING could be a more exciting way to spend Black Friday, then listening to Stella & Sasha having a go at Phil Illey for 1h33m. This should be juicy!
You two really got stuck into Phil. You were much more deferential when talking to Mike Bailey, Anne Lawrence and the Dutch Clinicians who have also made a great many questionable assertions in their writing.
Credentials
Very interesting conversation. I liked the to and fro between Stella and Phil, particularly the discussion of credentials. I thought Phil defended his position regarding that well. I don't get the blue dress controversy - if a man doesn't behave inappropriately or transgress against women's boundaries I don't care what he wears, and aren't we supposed to be against regressive stereotypes of what is proper feminine or masculine apparel?
If a man says he is turned on by wearing sandals are you OK with him walking around wearing sandals in public?
Genuine question. I can never get a proper answer.
@@robertmarshall2502yes
It’s bc it’s his f3tish gear. Nobody there consented to participate in his f3tish with him.
@@robertmarshall2502 What about gay clothing fetishists? Anyone have a problem with a gay man wearing a leather jacket, because he might be turned on by it? Formal dress is also a HUGE gay fetish... so good luck to those who want to impose this "I don't want to see you wear your fetish" nonsense
Policing clothing is too much. As long as it is appropriate (no fishnets or speedos in the office) it’s okay. I used to (and still do) enjoy seeing goths and punks. Clothing is fun and shouldn’t be limited by sex. The world would be so boring if we insisted on gender-coded clothing.
Thank you Stella and Sasha for an interesting podcast. (As usual!) About that blue dress...most women have an inner dress code that determines what they wear at life's events. If you look at the photos of the women at the Colorado conference you notice that most wear attire that expresses their individuality but doesn't sexualize them or attract undue attention. They are dressed appropriately. Phil is like the woman who wears a sexy white dress to a wedding where the bride is wearing white. Yes, it's just a dress but it's also rude and narcissistic.
I really wish there was more research into the "growing out of it" phenomena, and how often that "growing out" was the result of being bullied or even physically beaten for being "different". Too many times I hear of people "growing out of it" when dug into, you find the person was badly treated, ostrasized, stigmatized, and the characteristic was one that if left alone was completely harmless.
I think you all have good points. On the one hand, life is often more complex than simplified heuristics. On the other hand, some of us who are neuro-atypical can really be helped by clearly defined lables. For a time, there can for sure be a lot of self-obsession, until one has figured onself out. Ok, so I am THIS. And THIS. So that's why I've always felt different. Great, now I can move on to focusing on relationships and trying to figure other people out as well.
There is so much to do, to untangle the insane harm being done to female people, especially the homosexual cohort, and honestly I'm sick to death of this model of males philosophizing about themselves and then copy/pasting their shit onto the female experience.
The irony that EVEN IN the gender critical space males dominate is beyond frustrating.
Is there ever gonna be a point where female people are allowed to articulate our own experience outside the f)&$ing male gaze??
Its so the water we swim in, we parrot this shit back due to the utter lack of knowledge of anything where we define and articulate our own experiences.
Autosexuality is clearly a narcissistic condition. Even a cursory understanding of *clinical* narcissism shows it is not excessive self love. It IS complex and is characterized by a lack of self and strong internal self hatred, even if it's buried. It has to with making other people into internal objects which is clearly structurally identical to agp.
Leave to a male person to completely ignore the MANY reasons, many safety & homophobia related, that a female person would transition.
What a male theorizers always seem to miss, is how f'n terrifying & stressful it can be to simply exist in the world as female. It is NOT some crazy mystery why female people would imagine all manner of escapes from that terrifying reality. And female sexuality is way more complex and *relationally* based. Male sexuality could be crudely reduced with relative accuracy to stuff that gets my d*ck hard. That's not how female sexuality works, and that difference emerges from evolutionary sex differences. Female people, UNLIKE males, have to fight through compulsory heterosexuality & male centric everything to find a relationship to their sexuality that isn't a male fabrication. A great number of women (vast majority?) if they ever discover their sexuality from their own view, find themselves in commitments & situations that make exploring that impossible or moot. Because again relationality for most women trumps, "boners".
Honestly I find it completely predictable & enraging that this dude finds essentially "penis envy" the most likely explanation over attempts to escape from misogyny.
One common thing I have noticed interacting with AGP, is a simmering jealousy/hatred of women. A need to take women down to their level. Def getting that vibe from Phil & his ideas.
There is zero room in Phil's framework for people of either sex, to be gender nonconforming. That is lazy, narcissistic and homophobic.
I enjoyed this episode but also found it very frustrating. I bought Phil Illy’s book and found it interesting and challenging but couldn’t finish it (partially due to the switching of pronouns). I have a very high score on the autism quotient questionnaire (online, created by Simon Baron Cohen), so I have a tendency to be very analytical and not very empathetic. I love facts and have trouble with feelings. That being said I agree with Stella and Sasha that Phil is being overly confident that ROGD boys are almost always AGP. The internet and social media (including online forums like Reddit) have radically change things. I think Dr. Harkeem has given some valuable insights pointing out that some trans males are basically asexual autistics.
This was great, because there was pushback and requestioning and debate. You guys should do this with all your guests!
I’m trying to listen with an open mind. It’s just brutal. Phil has one objective: normalize AGP. It is crazy making to listen to. Nothing about his beliefs and behavior are remotely normal.
I guess I'd ask, what's wrong with that? There are clearly people who are autogynophilic, and likely won't stop being so. Shouldn't we endeavor to understand their experience and fit it within the broader context of the *trans experience? (I'm asking honestly, not as an argument; I seek understanding)
According to your same logic, we should have pretended pedophilia doesn't exist because it's immoral. Not naming or describing a thing doesn't make it go away.
@@BoomerTellyAGP already had a name and description.
People are born with it!
@@mrridikilisNot OP but - philias like this are linked to sx crimes. For men in particular they can become obsessive and send them into spirals. They're dangerous and negative behaviours.
It's like saying we should normalize heroin addiction.
The point of recognizing the existence of these things is not to find ways to just keep on doing it. Which to me seems to be the only purpose to "Phil Illy's" (derived from "philia") life in the same way as many trans identified men.
Fascinating conversation. Well done!
But seriously, Stella and Sasha, am I missing the episodes in which you admit that Jung covered these bases ALLLLLL throughout his life? If you're going to be advocating for therapy first before any "medicalization" (often a euphemism anyway, which I know can be the case for "therapy" too) then my god you ladies should at least be so good as to remind the general public of Jung's work and how it's underpinned the usable jargon and healing concepts within therapy for the past hundred years. I know it takes time but PLEASE, please, please delve into Jung and trust that the public is sophisticated enough (and I dare even say spiritually hungry enough) to devour the raw work of Carl Jung.
So cool to see you're not shying away from this subject! A necessary discussion!
This man just gives me an icky feeling. I have tried listening a few times on channels where he has been interviewed, and I just can't. Maybe my gut feelings are just telling me that something is not right. With that fundamental unease I have at a very basic level , trying to listen to his arguments as though he is as emotionally healthy as Stella or Sasha is never going to work for me. My gut instincts are just telling me to stay away; and though I don't have to say so yes I have trans friends who do not make me feel that way. I am talking about him as an individual ; he invokes fear and repulsion in me and the idea that I am being manipulated.
Every single time I listen to him or read his comments he gives me the exact same feeling.
He's a creep.
He's a narcissist.
This isn't entirely down to his obvious autism but he's clearly in need of professional help and choosing sociopathy over reality
Keep you gut feelings about Phil to yourself. Talk about a concept and save our time.
@@jcimsn8464no, her gut feelings are correct and valid. People trying to gloss over how unsettling this man is are part of the problem. It’s ignoring the elephant in the room
You Sound like cult members.
I know this is off topic but I really love your intro music. You both have beautiful voices too. Makes hard topics so much more pleasing to listen to.
I am very glad I watched a few podcasts with Dr. Az Hakeem (including one on his channel). Of course Dr. Hakeen would not agree with almost any of Phil's theories.
I am glad the ladies gave lots of push back!
Yeah, Sasha really shines in this talk. I'm not even that fond of this channel, and in fact Sasha and Stella, some of the guests you've had on have been absolute stinkers. I don't think this guest is one of them, but I do think he needs to be challenged on the very points that Sasha in particular has brought out. I think Stella is a bit gruff and projective, particularly around the question of "categories" and "categorizing", autism and narcissism, and the guest stayed so calm in standing his ground, as ridiculous as I may think that it is. Sasha really avoided getting flustered and pointed out blind spots and inconsistencies which I feel are more constructive. Stella's lovely but maybe not always recognizing her own cultural biases.
This guy uses words than can confuse people that he knows what he’s talking about but this interview was great because it revealed that he has no clue about even the most basic definitions of the concepts he is discussing. Great job
I want to defend Phil here. Whether or not he's correct in his assessment, I didn't find anything troubling or obviously wrong.
That does not speak well to your judgment of people’s character. This man is a walking red flag
@@lovelover4408 I don't judge ideas on the basis of my perception of somebody's character, especially when I don't know anything about the person's character but can only base my assessment on presuppositions and stereotypes. I think we have to judge a person's ideas as ideas first.
He put forward that 7 or 8 of 10 transitioners are AGP or AAP with no evidence, only his personal judgement. That alone is pretty troubling to me.
@@lovelover4408 Absolutely! And he's a red flag that needs to wave high and proud, which he does, and display the problems with this ideology to people that need to hear it straight from the horses mouth.
He and a few others might bring the whole thing to an end themselves. Unintentionally, and apparently unaware.
@@jeng3609 No. He presented evidence for his claim. The hosts of this podcast claimed that it was insufficient, but he did present evidence. He certainly did not make the claim based on his intuition (which is not the same as a judgment based on evidence).
In his book he cites Hirschfield from 1910, Lou Sullivan's diaries, as well as
Stoller's "Splitting: A case of female masculinity"
Jamison Green's "Autoandrophilia"
Stekel's "Sexual Aberrations"
A study from McGeoch and Ramachandran entitled "Phantom Penises in Transexuals"
Stoller's "Tranvestism in Women"
A study entitled: "Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-to-Male Transsexuals in Norht America"
And many other sources.
A couple of thoughts struck me about how it seems that it is normal for people to fantasise and experiment wether that’s sexual or not but what is it that makes some people get stuck on a particular fantasy to the extent it takes over eg being a dragon.
It would be interesting to understand how these fantasies become concretised and so understand the dangers of getting young people to self diagnose.
My experience growing up was a strong desire not to understand myself but to explain myself as I wanted to be certain ‘who I am’ . There are messages like ‘just be yourself’ and ‘be your authentic self’ but how does that work when you don’t know who you are?
A boy masturbating while wearing his sisters clothes is a sign of disturbance? I dont know. I can imagine that happening quite frequently and see it as an exploration of sexual feelings that have not yet gone beyond a perception of mystery and difference.
It is the stigmatizing and or shaming of gender non conformity in boys that leads to the Fetish and I am more than sure AGP is a result of it. Now, as far as the masturbating while wearing one's sister's clothes being seen as a disturbance I think is definitely a type of stigmatizing that leads to these gender issues. I think it is REALLY annoying how girls or women are NOT tarred with this sort of shaming (though of course women are NOT treated well when it comes to sexuality for sure)
@racer5-d4e tbf, wanking while wearing your sister's clothes is beyond unhinged. If I learn my brother did this, I'd be scared of him. What else would he find arousing? To touch me? To watch me? Absolutely we have to shame this kind of behaviour, which is abusive and frightening. What's next? It's ok for dads to wank wearing their daughter's clothes? Also totally chill?
Ehhhhhhhhhhhh no no feelings of inc3st cannot be normalized.
@@jmlorenzo3639 incest? OH because of who's clothing. Maybe it is just they are nice clothes having nothing to do with his sister. Ever thought that opposed to going more dark than needed?
@@balalaika852 I think it would depend on *why* he's wanking while wearing his sister's clothes.
Is he doing it because they're the only female clothes he can find? Like, he would really prefer lacy lingerie from a shop or something, but he has no access to those so he's making do. He might be trying to put out of his mind the fact that they belong to his sister. It might simply not occur to him how violated it might make his sister feel if she finds out.
Or is he doing it BECAUSE they're his sister's clothes? Is he getting off on thinking ABOUT his sister? Maybe even getting off on how grossed out she'll be if she finds out? That's a bit more unsettling ...
This isn't just some hair-splitting irrelevant distinction. The motive for the behaviour can really matter.
For instance, there are men who have an 'adult baby' fetish. They get off on dressing up and acting like babies. A lot of people, even sex researchers, look at those guys and think they must be some kind of paedophile. Auto-paedophiles, in fact--getting turned on by BEING a child. So you might assume such men are a danger to children.
But when researchers actually studied it, they were surprised to find that a great many adult-baby fetishists aren't paedophilic at all. Instead, most are masochists. They're attracted to adult women. And they want to be humiliated and made to feel helpless by adult women. So their fantasy is of being a helpless baby that the adult woman can mother, scold, etc. It's not an attraction to kids, it's a very specialised masochistic scenario.
That's still disturbing to a lot of people ... but those guys are, presumably, much less likely to be an actual danger to a child than you'd think.
I have to defend Phil. I love the way he is whole heartedly embracing who he is and he has no need to impose pronouns on people around him or invade women's spaces or alter his body with surgeries, etc. Phil is saying AGP is a REAL thing and that if you are conscious of it, you can avoid many harms such as children transitioning and then regretting it or men getting married who are unaware of their issues and subsequently wrecking their families by coming out as trans years later. Stella, I am disappointed that you are missing this point. Next questions to ask about AGP is very important one: What is healthy AGP vs unhealthy AGP? This is the essence of Phil's argument. I think perhaps taking a Jungian perspective (ask Lisa Marciano to comment) would be an enlightening program worth exploring. If Phil is this self aware, he is clearly not at risk of harming those around him. I did not like Stella's choice of questions or her approach of discrediting Phil by implying that his ideas are "dangerous" or his work is invalid and unsubstantiated. It's fine that Stella disagrees with Phil and other well known sexologist experts, but she was trying to unequivocally discredit his emerging ideas in a way that did not convey respect. This is what I don't appreciate. As a moderate, I agree with Phil, let's stop moralizing the issue. It didn't work to pathologize gay people and it won't work to pathologize AGPs. I thinks Phil deserves more respect here. I think his perspective should be included. This feel like suppression of ideas to me. Let Phil present his finding at the next annual Genspect conference and let him bring along some experts who share his opinion on AGP. Don't miss an important opportunity here to hear him out. Perhaps his work will help some of these young boys who are being sucked into this horrible vortex and subsequently harming their bodies(puberty blockers and surgeries that cannot be reversed). In no way do I think Phil needs to get therapy to "fix" himself. He is quite well adjusted and comfortable with his own body and his own choices. He was a courageous and bold to show up in a dress. I love his reasoning and do not agree that it is reductionistic. Look around: many autistic people are brilliant. I did not appreciate Stella attempting to discredit his important theories which are much needed right now especially in light of this growing epidemic. Phil, you are like a breath of fresh air. Please don't give up and don't let this interview throw you off. Thanks to all of you for the conversations.
Yeah it felt like he was put on the back foot. It’s hard for us if not impossible for us to understand what it’s like to have AGP or autism.
I completely agree. I have never heard them speak to any other guest this way. It's really uncomfortable to listen to. There are things I disagree with Phil on, especially wrt the females, but he's done more research on this topic than any other guest they've had on and he is genuinely interested to the well-being of people with gender distress. It felt like they're angry at him for trying to humanize this experience, which considering their audience and clientele, is very concerning to me.
Regarding what Stella was saying about AGP being dysfunctional. Imagine if she had said the same thing about homosexuality? "I think a union between two people of the opposite sex that can result in children and therefore a full, healthy family, should be everyone's aim. Trying to normalize same sex relationships that are genetic dead ends is dysfunctional and should be avoided whenever possible." We don't chose our sexuality! Yes, there are more and less healthy aspects of it and we should do everything in our power to prioritize the healthy aspects. But we shouldn't vilanize people who's sexuality in no way harms anyone else.
He's carrying out his paraphilia in public.
That is harm.
Are you OK with a man who gets off on wearing sandals spending all day wearing sandals around you?
This is like justifying flashers.
In listening to the interview, i had the exact same sentiments. I considered writing a lengthy respone, but indeed, you have captured everything i wanted to say, and very eloquently at that. thank you!
in a nutshell, i felt stella's criticisms and apprehension were valid, but she didn't voice her objections well. she basically was boiling his argument down to the fact that he's agp and autistic, therefore he's biased. that's patronizing and not in good faith. claims need to be refuted on the basis of the claim, NOT on the person making them.
@ and that he’s not an academic. Considering how unscientific and ideological academia is, and the fact they don’t learn critical thinking, I think it’s an advantage being an outsider. I also don’t understand what’s wrong with labels? If you can’t name something, how can you talk about it without making huge descriptions? It’s just practical, and also a relief to people who don’t have a name for their feelings or symptoms.
Homosexuality could be seen as "disordered" by because there is no biological outcome of the sexual relationship .This looks like a bias of Stellas's.
It is pretty clear that sexual activity in humans is not only for reproduction. There might be social bonding benefits to homosexuality. I don't know if any evolutionary biologists or anthropologists have looked into this.
@pollyparrot9447 Yes that is just one of many hypothesis but not my point.Thanks
Is heterosexuality a disorder if it involves infertile people? Or cunnilingus disordered behaviour because it doesn't lead to pregnancy?
@balalaika852 Clownish question.
Humans are a
naturally reproducing animal species, its the norm for a reason 🥱
Great interviewing ladies! Hit the nail on the head about the universal need for most of us to see ourselves in someone else's shoes, Growing up I remember being even angry at the world for being a woman. Men were allowed to do a lot more, I enjoyed their humour and forward attitude, and I liked some of their fashion (slacks and vests) also but never rejected my womanhood. Later on in life, I even thanked the universe I am a woman and not a man. I began to enjoy talking to women more, I love female fashion, but still don't enjoy the heightened emotion we feel at times. It seems, in some cases, the characterisation serves more as a justification for something to become legit. I don't think paraphilia legitimizes a man's claim to be a woman, instead is self-serving and narcissistic. BTW excellent example Sasha gave about 'Helena'
Thanks all three of you for this conversation. I hope you will have another at some point, we have to try and understand these issues for a lot of people's sakes, eg women who have relationships with, marry, have chikdren with agp men in particular. I think autism influences Phils way if thinking and understanding far more than id noticed before in other interviews. Not being rude, im autistic and trying to understand it in myself and others. Re " the dress" think it was inappropriate for a serious conference but think wearing it was more about Phil being autistic and not realising that possibility rather than anything sinister. 🤷
The problem with Phil is that he KNOWS he's right. Everything that comes after that.. Intelligence and science and all, is skewed by the fact that the narrative inside his head about what's true and what's AGP, is correct.
I have no ill will towards him. I respect the work he's done and I appreciate him bringing light to this complicated issue. But it needs to be pointed out that HE KNOWS what's AGP and what's not from HIS research and HIS talking to others.
I have this same issue of AGP. I agree with so much of what's said about it, but disagree about it's origin.. But he would just say im wrong, simply bc his work and his studies are right
Thank you very much for the interesting conversation.
Categories are suitable for describing phenomena, but not for understanding the process of their formation.
Do fellow psychotherapists have any thoughts on how the concept of AGP can be understood in the light of object relations theory? If you think about Kernberg's article Barriers to Falling and Remaining in Love.
An immutable characteristic that one apparently has to read a book to acquire. Interesting.
I guess you have listening comprehension issues
@@talibotz 'Then at 31 I came across the concept of AGP...so I started reading more about AGP, though I didn't immediately identify with the category, it took many weeks of reading and particularly after reading Anne Lawrence's book'.
@emphaticapathy he acquired the language, not the experience.
@@talibotz Born again or born this way - that is the question.
Very interesting.
“But you could have said “auto hetero phyllic”
“And that would be weird word”
😅😅 30:10
Too many people in this comment section confusing the clinical definition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder with the story of Narcissus. A person who is attracted to their own body does not necessarily meet the requirements for a diagnosis of NPD.
You may be misinterpreting. They're not suggesting he's a narcissist for that reason. It's because he wants to publicly behave certain way, that's particularly out of the ordinary. And Phil is perceived as not caring about anyone's feelings but his own. That can easily be perceived as narcissism.🐿
@@Knuck_KnucksWell, a lot of people here are suggesting a lot of things, and some are indeed suggesting that if one is sexually/romantically attracted to oneself, one is clinically narcissistic. I'm not sure what behaviors you're referring to, but the only thing i can think of that Phil exhibits is wearing womens' clothes in public, which I don't think is inherently narcissistic. Is there some other behavior of his that i'm not aware of?
@@balthasardenner5216 It doesn't need to be 'inherent.' There's no shortage of women who perceive Phil's foisting his paraphillia upon them, without consent, a brand of narcissism. In addition, It confuses youth and denigrates femininity as a performing art. Never-mind contributing to all the sex dysphoria madness. We all must sacrifice parts of ourselves in order to participate in society. Perception is 9/10 of reality. 🐿
@@Knuck_Knucks I don't know about narcissism or not. But I see his foisting of his sex fetish onto non-consenting women as sexual harassment abuse. Sexual assault, actually, which is what the behavior of men violating women's spaces was recognized as, not too long ago.
@racer5-d4e First off. Not my perception. #2, of course it doesn't make it right. But that doesn't matter. Lol, I don't thing about AGP that much despite living 2 doors down from one.. 3 words. Leave children alone. I suppress all kinds of personal conduct around children because I want to project an optimal pathway of living. Not only for them, but for all the adults who never really 'grow up' or suffer from arrested development. You and Phil are welcome to participate raising well adjusted ppl, or chose to celebrate yourself and 'do what you want'. Because it's all about you, right? Behavior has consequences. The choice is yours. 🐿
Many people in these comments apparently know far more about AGP than Phil, or Blanchard & Bailey (the sexologists who researched the phenomenon, and tend to agree with Phil).
Michael Bailey specifically said AGP is NOT narcissism.
He was wrong about that
@@patrickdalton2424 No. Narcissism is distinct.
@dakota-sessions the 2 can and do co-exist
@@patrickdalton2424 Of course they can co-exist. That does not mean that AGP is interchangeable with NPD.
@@patrickdalton2424
Where is your evidence ?
There WERE a lot of events.
Not there was a lot of events.
I haven’t and probably won’t read the book. I have always felt that Ray Blanchard’s research around AGP takes a very simplistic/one eyed view and finds a level of correlation that validates the research- it gets an inch and takes a mile. Alot of Trans folk are looking for answers and Blanchard offers a simple frame work with a little bow on the top which is attractive if you’re looking for nice discrete answers.
But there are lots of holes and when a theory needs to be bent to explain exceptions then it starts looking like religion rather than real science.
Watching Stella & Sasha trying to talk Phil out of his self-directed interests is like watching a BRAW Irish-woman trying to be the first to lift one of the 500# lifting stones.
You root for them, watching them struggle . . . but, in the end, if the stone doesn't want to be lifted . . . !
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifting_stone
I would be curious about Marie-Louise von Franz talking about the anima would have to do with this conversation.
JUST STOP stigmatizing gender non conformity in boys. This whole trans, AGP, fetish stuff will go away if that one simple thing is done. ALL OF THIS stems from shame, and stigma!
Agree that's a big part of it. Human beings are naturally so nuanced. They really have to be conditioned to loathe themselves and sadly that conditioning starts so early.
@@cherylewers6322 Issue is, this is very very rarely discussed in discussion like is in this interview. It really should be disgussed a lot more and more examined.
@@pythosdegothos6181 Agree!
He wants a "word" for AGP and AAP and so wants to tidy it up to autoheterosexuality or whatever...no need, AGP and AAP sum up the difference way better - there's no way to dress it up as anything different and keeps its sex differences.
I totally agree with Stella - it's a paraphilia so keep it as such. He changed it to sexuality as he wants to hide it's self-absorption...which shows how abnormal it remains.
When people start referring to male homosexuality as 'androphilia' and female homosexuality as 'gynephilia', I will take this type of feedback more seriously
@@phililly male homosexuality isn't love of oneself, nor is female homosexuality love of oneself whereas autogynophilia is.
If we can rationalize auto or andro then reason has it that we can rationalize the idea of having a gender identity is false since it's not as Phill claims, a sexual orientation. Sorry. Was unedited.
I would like to know about his childhood and his relationship with his mother and his father etc. tor me try to understand why he is like he is.
As well as drawing a line where your actions or behaviour can be harmful, I think we need to consider whether behaviour patterns are making someone potentially dangerous.
Stoked for this conversation! I just paused a couple minutes in though where Stella says the more books on this topic the better (agreed) and that it's good to challenge people on their arguments (also agreed). But you recently had on Dr. Az Hakeem who posits a completely novel and unique take on this issue, divergy starkly from existing research in this field, and you didn't challenge him at all. Phil OTOH has researched this topic more widely than anyone in the conversation, drawing on over a hundred years of existing research and literature (all of which is cited in the book). He isn't even pushing a novel framework (as Hakeem was), he basically just put Blanchard into Layman's terms and suggested it applies to females as well. Okay, back to the episode.
Dr. Az Hakeem is an experienced psychiatrist and sometimes the views of the treating professional and the person who has a disorder differ.
This is a good point. My framework is not really novel. It is essentially "Blanchard was right about MTFs" and "it happens in females too".
@@phililly You added a lot on ETII in general, but it's essentially to say Blanchard was right, but it's not specific to males who wish they were female. You could be wrong, but they aren't even arguing to are, they're just rejecting categories in general.
@@elegationvain Yep, good point. Their stated opposition was grounded in a rejection of categorization. However, I find that line of argument about as convincing as when queer theorists oppose categorization in general
Ok but unlike Phil that guy made a lot of sense. He brought some helpful nuance to the discussion that actually does refer to terms that were commonly used for years, and merely explained (what everyone already knew 20 years ago) that most men who dress as women do so bc they’re getting off on it. This is very obvious
It was obvious for a long time, this guy only sounded vaguely interesting to some people, because nobody really challenged his half baked ideas. A feather tap prod was enough to dismantle his whole framework.
You are completely wrong. Phil is brilliant and builds 9n sound research.
@@jcimsn8464 And where exactly is he so brilliant? In his rigid assertions that his sexualised narcissism is a form of sexuality? In claims that women "transition" only for sexual reasons? That other completely bonkers identities are an expression of normal sexual behaviour?
Please... The man has zero understanding not only of women which he views as clothes, make-up and other things which get him off, but also he's incapable of even imagining other people might have different experiences and perspectives that he does. A conversation with him is not a debate, because he can't even defend his bizarre, completely unscientific takes- he can only repeat them as if they were cast in stone.
All in all, this conversation was useful in showing how misguided and shallow his ideas are.
Exactly. I could not have said it better.
Dismantle his whole framework? So I guess you think Dr. Bailey is a quack? Guess we can't trust one of the ONLY psychologists willing to research ROGD then.
@@talibotz Last time I checked Bailey doesn't claim AGP is a sexuality. According to him it's a paraphilia- which it obviously is
Phil includes women in his proposition to bolster his autogynephilic argument showing he has zero awareness of the drivers to transition women have. Clearly, he needed to have these kinds of discussion before writing his book.
I originally thought autoandrophilia didn't exist in females because that's what a couple of the leading scientists said. I changed my mind after listening to what women said about their experiences. I also found that there were published instances of women who expressed sexual interest in being manly that was analogous to what autogynephilic males described. In addition, basically every study that asks both sexes whether they've been aroused by crossdressing or fantasies of being the other sex has found that some people in both sexes report such cross-gender eroticism.
Phil includes women in his framework because women seem to be having this experience.
@@phililly Bullshit. You use it because it's useful in justifying your actions.
But the way you describe it shows you have zero understanding of women whatsoever. But because you don't care about anyone else then this is of no consequence to you.
I was a self aware AAP female before Phil's book. Reading a book by someone who actually understands my feelings helped me to make better sense of them and to avoid the medical pathway.
Classic navel-gazing on his part. Was strenuous to listen to, especially since he wouldn't give an inch to the two therapists with vast experience on the topic.
Watch their interview with Michael Bailey.
Michael Jackson acted like a 12-year-old boy as an excuse to hang out with other young boys, just like how other PDFs find positions where they can have access to children.
He was a very manipulative PDF who knew exactly how to act with his victims, their parents, and his fans. Have you ever watched Leaving Neverland? How many young boys talk on the phone for hours daily with another boy? Never. I used to be a huge MJJ fan, but after watching that documentary and old MJJ news clips, videos, etc., there's no doubt he was a PDF.
I never get a really clear idea of either of these women’s primary objections. It’s as if a nerve has been touched and then there’s a casting about for something objective to take issue with. Personally, as someone who has experienced AGP-type desires and conflicts for a lifetime, I find the simplicity of definition: attraction to a self-embodied image - very helpful to explain and make sense of personal desires and conflicts. That paraphilias are already commonly understood in these terms makes Phil’s statements and terminology in one way pretty redundant in my view, but certainly not objectionable, or even psychologically/psychotherapeutically misleading. I really don’t know what their beef is other than an objection to the word sexuality (as in ‘auto heterosexuality’) which I believe to be unnecessary and possibly confusing, as the Irish lady points out, it’s not a sexuality, it’s a paraphilia. However, being introduced to the concept of paraphilia and how it operates, is extremely useful in clarifying what’s going on internally and Helps to put aside unnecessary soul searching and anxiety when trying to understand these desires and conflicts, and so what if it’s all been done before, and Blanchard was the first to codify it all? That doesn’t mean there’s not some function and benefit to writing about it again. Someone may come across Phil’s book before they ever come across the concept of AGP. Once I understood what my desire was, in terms of what’s going on and how it functions, and accepted that this is a lifelong facet of my personality, then I’m in a position to both accept and where necessary restrain such indulgences without shame, repression or any other unhelpful coping mechanisms. Maybe they’re worried that they’ll be out of a job by virtue of the advertising of this simple explanation of autogynophilia! Maybe they want it all to be so nuanced and complicated, that only a professional such as themselves could possibly sort it out.
Everybody are affected by emotions and morals. Therfore seeking truths has to include being aware of them and to consciously use them as guidance and in different ways. Including challenge and question them.
It's great you've had him back again.
I think Philly is explaining the male sexuality to women who don't have the same sexual experience. Autogynephilia seems like an exclusively male sexuality.