Can you give me an example of a testable prediction that isn’t something we already know? Or an example from the past where ETLE made a falsifiable prediction that was either proved or disproved by empirical research?
It’s easy to fit a theory to existing data. That doesn’t mean the theory is true or useful.
I mean, I transitioned MtF at 31 and I’m posting on LessWrong. I’m not beating the allegations. lol. I called myself an AGP in my [substack linkpost](https://quinoam.substack.com/p/why-i-transitioned-a-response) because it’s funny. I have no problem doing so.
Also, I can honestly say that I transitioned because my health was falling apart, I had a lot of repressed psychological desires to act and be more feminine, a lot of dysphoria over my body, and most important, taking estradiol dramatically improved my happiness and cognitive function.
The person I was at the start of transition—he was more sexually gratified staying as a man.
Some MtFs do find AGP relatable and that doesn’t bother me. But Blanchard/Bailey et al appear, to me, needlessly cruel, and deliberately inflammatory. That doesn’t mean the theory is false. But circumstantially their behavior looks detrimental to truth-seeking.
So the predictive power of the theory better be really good for me to want to spend time on it.
I find the Gender Mosaic theory (cf Daphna Joel) to be the most plausible, but I see it as a Sex Mosaic where there are male-typical and female-typical neural wirings for different brain regions. It’s very high-dimensional and the sex of each region can vary independently and (mostly) continuously based on the prenatal hormone wash. This easily explains the vast phenotypic variation in gendered behavior, and why it seems like we have every different possible combination of person.
The reason we don’t see “male” or “female” brains with neuroimaging is that the vast majority of these regions are for general cognition (neocortex), where prenatal estrogen/androgen signaling does influence structure but not in ways that have any effect on subconscious sex. I expect the brain regions / wiring patterns that cause dysphoria are small. If we knew the connectomes for a bunch of trans people, I predict we could find them. The imaging tools we have now are extremely rudimentary.
All of this can coexist with ETLE, but again, as far as I know, ETLE doesn’t have any mechanistic basis in neuroscience. So it’s very uninteresting to me. If Blanchard actually predicted furries, then please link me to the source for that. What is surprising about furries is not the bestiality of it all (humans have been having sex with animals since the dawn of domestication), but the anthropomorphic cartoon aesthetic.
Can you give me an example of a testable prediction that isn’t something we already know? Or an example from the past where ETLE made a falsifiable prediction that was either proved or disproved by empirical research?
Was Blanchard aware of furries when he did his research? That might count.
Though I’m puzzled by why it is necessary to come up with something new.
It’s easy to fit a theory to existing data. That doesn’t mean the theory is true or useful.
I mean, I transitioned MtF at 31 and I’m posting on LessWrong. I’m not beating the allegations. lol. I called myself an AGP in my [substack linkpost](https://quinoam.substack.com/p/why-i-transitioned-a-response) because it’s funny. I have no problem doing so.
Also, I can honestly say that I transitioned because my health was falling apart, I had a lot of repressed psychological desires to act and be more feminine, a lot of dysphoria over my body, and most important, taking estradiol dramatically improved my happiness and cognitive function.
The person I was at the start of transition—he was more sexually gratified staying as a man.
Some MtFs do find AGP relatable and that doesn’t bother me. But Blanchard/Bailey et al appear, to me, needlessly cruel, and deliberately inflammatory. That doesn’t mean the theory is false. But circumstantially their behavior looks detrimental to truth-seeking.
So the predictive power of the theory better be really good for me to want to spend time on it.
I find the Gender Mosaic theory (cf Daphna Joel) to be the most plausible, but I see it as a Sex Mosaic where there are male-typical and female-typical neural wirings for different brain regions. It’s very high-dimensional and the sex of each region can vary independently and (mostly) continuously based on the prenatal hormone wash. This easily explains the vast phenotypic variation in gendered behavior, and why it seems like we have every different possible combination of person.
The reason we don’t see “male” or “female” brains with neuroimaging is that the vast majority of these regions are for general cognition (neocortex), where prenatal estrogen/androgen signaling does influence structure but not in ways that have any effect on subconscious sex. I expect the brain regions / wiring patterns that cause dysphoria are small. If we knew the connectomes for a bunch of trans people, I predict we could find them. The imaging tools we have now are extremely rudimentary.
All of this can coexist with ETLE, but again, as far as I know, ETLE doesn’t have any mechanistic basis in neuroscience. So it’s very uninteresting to me. If Blanchard actually predicted furries, then please link me to the source for that. What is surprising about furries is not the bestiality of it all (humans have been having sex with animals since the dawn of domestication), but the anthropomorphic cartoon aesthetic.