Some people see things slightly oversimplistic... Such as that there are only women and men and nothing else or in between. Or that there are only homosexuals and heterosexuals and nothing else or in between. True, most people reflect a little deeper and allow for some individuality and variation in such schemes, unfortunately others do not, in particular some who declare themselves 'experts' in the realm of transsexuality. The application of the resulting theories which are (likely due do their very simplistic nature, widely circulated and unfortunately even accepted) highly destructive to many transsexual individuals (in my opinion to a great majority of transsexuals).
One such example is the term and underlying theory of autogynephilia. On the topic we can find the following in Wikipedia [15-Apr-2010, 17:15, including respective active links, highlight added by the author]: Blanchard coined the term "autogynephilia" (ill formed, because Greek γυνη actually has a stem γυναικ-[12][13]) to describe men with an erotic desire to be women and provided evidence that the previously described types of gender dysphoria in biological males were actually all variants of only two types: homosexual gender dysphoria and non-homosexual gender dysphoria. Wikipedia also notes: Within the transsexual community, there has been much controversy surrounding Blanchard's ideas.
 

Typically such oversimplifications of the world are of little interest to me, however if such theories are repeatedly widely circulated, as recently in the May/June 2010 issue of  Scientific American Mind [referred henceforth as 1], I suddenly find my own life interpreted like this by a fair number of people.
It is sad that reputable scientific magazines would publish something like this. From my perspective such theories represent nothing else but the worst kind of sexist, homophobic and transphobic pseudo-science in the service of furthering discrimination and deliberate misinterpretation of the issues and the needs of a great majority of transsexuals.
I have no doubt that a person suffering from autogynephilia could conceivably exist, somewhere. After all, there are mentally ill people who fly airplanes into skyscrapers, there could even conceivably exist mentally ill psychologists or medical doctors, somewhere. However, I find it sad that Scientific American writes Blanchard's theory of autogynephilia rubs many transsexuals the wrong way [1] - without ever feeling the need to investigate just why this could be or asking themselves the question if what they print might just be a form of hate-propaganda.

 

But before we can have a look at the actual contents a word on the demeaning nomenclature the people who stand behind the BBL-theory feel appropriate to use (along with a majority of turn-of-the-19th-century sexologists) is necessary.
Apparently both Blanchard as well as Anne Lawrence (along with other proponents of this theory) are not willing to accept that gender is partly or exclusively a mental capacity. Furthermore, they are not willing to accept that an individual who sees herself as and is anatomically, socially and legally female actually is a woman as long as they dig-up knowledge that this individual has had some kind of genital surgery in her life (please note: Not every surgery counts! If the MtF genital surgery is done as a forced intervention with no consent of the individual, then a majority of the BBL-proponents would consider such an individual equivalent to a biological female, no matter if he/she feels male or female!). This, in my opinion, is an extraordinarily absurd statement for a medical doctor or a psychologist to make! Lawrence herself is both a medical doctor as well as a transsexual, I truly think she ought to know better! If she insists to think of herself as a surgically altered guy dressed-up in women's clothes then that's just fine with me, however she ought to acknowledge that this is HER self-identification and everybody else is at liberty to interpret their own lives differently!

It is my opinion that anybody who abuses the privileges or powers any office or position instils (be it legally, medically, ethically or simply physically) to inflict something like this onto other people proves, by intent or by doing so, that he or she is not fit to hold such a position or office and cannot be trusted with such privileges or powers and consequently should be relieved of any and all such privileges or powers.

But however this may be, if she describes two persons who are legally, socially and anatomically female engaging in sexual activities, she will describe this as homosexual as long as both individuals have been identified  female at birth, if however one is a post-op transsexual the BBL-theorists will call this heterosexual sexual activity even though it clearly is physically as well as emotionally, socially, legally and intimately of a homosexual nature and any implied "heterosexual activities" are in fact anatomically impossible! [The case that both partners in a relationship could be post-op MtF transsexuals is simply declared impossible by the BBL-theory - another truly amazing feat:: Predicting that no two MtF transsexuals will ever be attracted towards one another, EVER!]

This is not just completely absurd because it "feels wrong" but also because it
- misrepresents our intentions and our self-perception as well as our self-experience or physical activities
- has nothing whatsoever to do with the kind of sexual activities actually do take place (or actually are anatomically possible)
- has nothing to do with how this is legally perceived or interpreted
- operates on the premise that a certain motivation for genital reassignment always comes with a certain sexual orientation, a claim I find extraordinarily far-fetched given the range of both
- has nothing to do with how this is socially perceived or interpreted

Furthermore her scheme only holds true if she absolutely knows whether people involved in a relationship have had genital gender-alignment surgery or not - because solely based on that fact will she (presumably even retroactively if she gets knowledge of the fact only later) change her interpretation of our entire lives! In fact her scheme leads to such inconsistencies as if an MtF transsexual is engaged in sexual activities with a male and if that male knows nothing about the past of the transsexual then Lawrence insists that this is a HOMOSEXUAL activity FOR THE TRANSSEXUAL WHILE AT THE SAME TIME IT IS A HETEROSEXUAL ACTIVITY FOR HER PARTNER!!! I doubt that sexology has ever come stranger and more disturbed than this!!!

But no matter any potential logical shortcomings of labelling people like this, deliberately designating homosexuals heterosexual and heterosexuals homosexual clearly must be interpreted as an intentional and wilful insult and as a degradation and devaluation of our intimate activities as well as of our self-identifications! In the given context it also unnecessarily complicates understanding as well as commenting on theories because clearly if Lawrence can't agree with pretty much the rest of the planet on who is a homosexual and who is a heterosexual then this may cause significant problems...

 

In the above mentioned Scientific American article Lawrence is quoted to have "recently improved" Blanchard's theory, so let's now have a look at this recently improved theory - and compare it to "the real life experience" - or maybe just to some common sense:

[1] Lawrence bases her theory on the similarities she has noticed among the heterosexual [common language homosexual] MtF transsexuals in her Seattle clinic. Most are quite masculine in appearance and have led successful lives as men, usually in male-dominated professions such as engineering, business or computer science; often they are married and have several children. Curiously, many have autistic-like traits: they seem more interested in "things" than in other people and have a background of poor social relationships. And almost invariably, Lawrence points out, they have a history of sexual arousal by cross-dressing.

 

Mental Health Truth (quote) Real Life Experience or Just a little Common Sense
[1] most [homosexual transsexuals] are quite masculine in appearance
[a] Hormonal masculinization and feminization doesn't simply stop after puberty, this goes on throughout life! Therefore the older one is when seeking treatment (or when treatment is finally granted) the more masculine an MtF transsexual will on average be! Homosexual transsexuals typically seek treatment a little later in life simply because it is more difficult to come-out transsexual and homosexual simultaneously than it is to come-out transsexual but in spite of previous expectations not homosexual. (see Systemic Note below)
[b] For most people maturity tends to increase with age. When one is young and playful, one most likely primarily seeks social acceptance (to be accepted by peers). For a transsexual this means to look and behave socially acceptable, in other words a young MtF transsexual would want to look feminine! Over time this tends to become less important because one establishes a social life in spite of all the problems transsexuality poses. The focus then shifts on personal acceptance. This likely means that with increasing age appearances become less important while one's intimacy becomes more so!
[c] Self-assuredness also tends to increase with age, therefore older transsexuals can get away with looking more male and still pass perfectly female - if you believe in yourself then others will do so also!
[d] When one is older one tends to have more respect for one's own life. This also means that potential problems with surgery get taken more seriously, consequentially one is less likely to accept these solely for cosmetic reasons. (In addition with advanced age new potential problems will arise, solely based on age). This would turn the focus away from such procedures as facial surgery or breast augmentation. Genital surgery however solves an organic problem, not a cosmetic one and therefore is not significantly affected by this.
[e] Human beings tend to become visually more diverse when they age. This widens the socially allowable range for being accepted as either male or female. This "wider social acceptance" means that less feminization is necessary to achieve this!
The earlier one is allowed to start, the better the visual as well as the emotional result. However as long as many psychiatrists deny the mere existence of homosexual transsexuals (MtF's who are attracted to females and FtM's who are attracted to males)  - which used to be treatment standard as well as the expectation in the literature until about the 1980/90-es - the older the average homosexual transsexual who actually does get treatment will be! It's simply a fact of not being able to get permission for treatment! "We are not in the business of manufacturing homosexuals" some homosexual transsexuals are told, and then shown the door. If an individual needs treatment desperately, then she will have to lie about our sexual orientation - and consequentially the psychiatrist would assign her to the other category! It's a therapist's self-reenforcement at it's best! As long as this continues, homosexual transsexual will be, on average, older - and therefore more masculine!
[1] have led successful lives as men, usually in male-dominated professions such as engineering, business or computer science
[f] Being self-employed is one of the most efficient ways to get out of the "gender game" in professional life. That many seek this over the years is simply a logical consequence of being a closeted transsexual for an extended time. The causality is "transsexuals do better self employed because there is less control, this gives us more room for self-expression and more freedom", not the other way 'round! (As in "seeking a male-dominated profession").
[g] Transition costs a lot of money. The psychiatrist alone (for the permit to go to surgery) may easily cost $10,000 or more, medical practitioners: kindly refer to your own fee-schedule! Therefore it simply helps to be successful at what one does professionally because this generally leads to better remuneration and therefore the ability to actually pay that psychiatrist! [Just to give some idea: My own transition has cost in excess of $100,000 - and I had no "feminization surgery" and no expenses for psychiatry as I never went there]. People who don't have the money won't be seen by mental-health practitioners for it and consequentially won't make the (trans-) statistics!
[h] Software engineering was the one interesting, highly intellectual, well paying job where I could get away with no compliance to male power-behaviour and -dressing. Also, because it was new back when I did simply enjoyed the academic freedom that came with being in a brand-new field!
[i] My work is in communications-technology. Communication is something that is typically assigned to the female half of the population... So my job-selection could simply be interpreted as a means to get what I need in a male environment, in a way that is accepted by society. In other words, it is a coping strategy
The causality here is that the high fees many of us have to pay to mental-health practitioners and the fact that in many places pretty much nothing is paid for by insurance (if one has any) either in regard to mental-health or to surgery pretty much mandates us to either have rich relatives who pay for our needs or to have a well-paying job. This typically selects for either intelligent and/or good looks as well as independent and resourceful individuals. Generally such individuals have successful lives and if they transition later [see above] this means that they have had a successful professional career also. This of course has nothing whatsoever to do with the the fact that an individual happens to be transsexual, the causality is the other way 'round: Only if the individual has had that successful life will she be seen by the psychiatrist because otherwise she will either be dead by suicide or not be able to afford this and consequentially suffer in silence!
A second systemic flaw is that "success in life" is generally measured by how wealthy, well known or influential an individual is. This scale heavily favours male-dominated activities because it simply is not applicable to more female dominated daily activities such as providing homecare, being a homemaker or even salaried positions like being a daycare-worker, a midwife or a kindergarten teacher. These "male-successful careers" are not only far better paid, but even if one is the most extraordinarily successful homemaker or kindergarten-teacher one still is just that, one doesn't get promoted to being a kindergarten-general or a homemaker-CEO... Therefore it is simply logical that people who are seen as being "successful individuals" will work in male-dominated professions, after all if one works in a female one then one doesn't get to be called 'successful' at all! And once again, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the person being transsexual or not!
There is one aspect I don't want to leave out, however it is much rather a personal insight than a general truth: I too wanted to look good, nothing but. That was at age 17, and maybe still at age 25. By the time I was 45 I simply had given-up on looking good - I was too old for that now!
[1] often they are married
[j] This is one of these tautologies far too many mental-health experts and medical professionals seem to want to blame on transsexuals! In reality, the fact is very, very simple: In a world where we have - at the exclusion of a handful of countries - heterosexual only marriage, transsexuals who are heterosexual after genital alignment surgery do not marry before because pre-op they are not legally allowed to marry the people they are attracted to! On the other hand transsexuals who are homosexual after genital alignment do marry the people they're attracted to because, pre-op, they are legally entitled to do so!
[k] Homosexual transsexuals, on average, seek treatment a little later in life. Statistically being married or having been married very simply increases with age...
I have more than a bit of a problem with behavioural scientists who declare me a sexual pervert because I locate my erotic attraction in a partner who is about the same age as I am, with whom I have a long-term relationship of mutual love and understanding and with whom I have biological children? I mean, honestly, just what's suddenly so darn pathological about that?
Furthermore I would venture the thought that any mental-health practitioner should seek therapeutic support immediately if he/she starts to blame the fact of heterosexual-only-marriage on transsexuals or if he/she takes our marital status as a diagnostic criteria for medical treatment.
[1] have several children
[l] The older people are, the more likely it it is that they have or have had children. This is particularly true in the age-bracket of 15-40. After that the probability of having grandchildren will increase... It's simply a fact of life!
[m] It is one of the more female things in life to want to raise and care for children and if they can be our own, why not?
[n] It must have escaped these scientists that wanting to have children is one of the most potent biological motivators there is, particularly for women. And no, it doesn't always have to be about sex...
The probability of having biological children increases with (1) having a sexual partner and (2) with age. I have already outlined these in [j] and [k]. However the most important aspect seems to have completely escaped some behavioural scientists: For people to have biological children the two partners need to have complementary sets of reproductive organs! For transsexuals this is only ever possible when the individual identifies either homosexual or bisexual (unless both partners were transsexual)!
[1] curiously, many have autistic-like traits: they seem more interested in "things" than in other people 
[o] Males are often more interested in 'things' rather than in people. This is in part related to social upbringing but it also correlates with hormonal states. It was my personal experience that socializing simply does get a lot easier when on estrogen as compared to being on testosterone. It is likely that the longer one has been on testosterone (and has been socially seen as a male), the more 'damage' this has done to an MtF transsexual, even socially.
[p] Driving that sports-car may more likely be related to wanting to socially fit-in rather than reflect a love of cars, just to give an example.
[q] Our poor socialization (which objectively likely isn't poor at all within the male framework but only within the female one) does not relate to not being interested in people nor does it reflect an inability to relate. It does however reflect an inability to relate on the emotional level we feel would be appropriate for us. In general women do relate to each other more emotionally than men do. It is this form of relationship we miss, not "relationships in general", many experience "male relationships" as superficial. This doesn't mean that a male would have the same impression of it, but a transsexual female does! And once again, the older one is, the more time one had to notice this, to identify the root-cause of it and to clearly express the problem at hand!
Autism is characterized by impaired social interaction and communication and often by restricted, repetitive behaviour. I find it unconscionable that a medical professional would publicly put our (self-assessed) social lives into the spectrum of autism in the form of a medical blanket-diagnosis, particularly after having previously acknowledged that we tend to be professionals, business-people or engineers, occupations which (1) clearly require interpersonal communication skills on a high level (2) would not lend themselves to people with restricted behavioural abilities and (3) demand extensive imagination and resourcefulness, all of which would clearly exclude people with autism or autism spectrum disorders or even "autistic-like traits" - whatever that means anyway!
[1] they have a history of sexual arousal by cross-dressing
[r] Crossdressing is, for most transsexuals, a means to express their identity in a meaningful way. Of course right from the start the behaviour is only labelled 'cross'-dressing because mental-health practitioners force their gender-interpretation onto us (i.e. seeing a transwoman as a male, therefore wearing female clothes is labelled 'crossdressing') while they ignore OUR OWN INTERPRETATION OF IT (i.e. seeing a transwoman as a woman, therefore WEARING FEMALE CLOTHES IS NORMAL)!
[s] Particularly on male testosterone levels one gets sexually aroused very easily and it doesn't matter if one is dressed as female or male. As it is obvious that a transsexual would 'cross-dress' in a positive atmosphere and not in a frightening one it is logical to assume that times of sexual pleasure and times of crossdressing overlap very easily. 
[t] I personally do not have a history of sexual arousal from crossdressing, however the people I know who do this seem to take great pleasure and relief from it. So why should this be bad or of any interest whatsoever to a therapist? Or is having fun and enjoying life suddenly something wrong and worthy of therapy?
In order to being allowed surgery (in particular genital surgery, but in some places even for hormonal treatment) we have to live visibly female while being biologically male for a minimum of one year. Lawrence herself co-signs the protocol that requires this of us. From my perspective it is very unfair if she throws this behaviour at us as if it were something negative when she herself mandates this onto us (never mind if we want it or not!) before she's ever willing to allow us medical treatment!
As to that part of "sexual arousal"? As mentioned before, I did not get sexual arousal from 'crossdressing', however I did at times get sexually aroused while being dressed female. At these testosterone levels frequent sexual arousal is normal, after all, the FDA lists testosterone treatment for both males and females as a treatment for low sex-drive and why would it do something different if it is home-made? Testosterone levels in biological males typically peaks in early adulthood (sexual activity also often does), it would therefore be normal that people who seek treatment later in life had more sexual experiences and tried more diverse activities (including crossdressing) than people who start suppressing testosterone by late puberty or in very early adulthood. Once again, the more time one had to 'experiment', the more variety in experimentation there will be. There's nothing dramatically revealing about that, really...
Lawrence herself supports a protocol that denies us access to genital surgery if we do not publicly "cross-dress' for a minimum of one year (practically it is longer). This is highly demeaning and degrading to people who do not wish this either because they (1) do not see a need to live "the other gender- role" or (2) because they would prefer to have the surgery first and only then live appropriately to their gender, never wearing "gender inappropriate clothes" or "pretend another gender than they physically are".
Systemic Note: If one denotes the sexual orientation of transsexuals in a reasonable way (not based on chromosomes but rather on self- and social interpretation), then it becomes obvious that homosexual transsexuals (MtF's who are attracted to women) need to come-out to the world not only as transsexuals but also, likely very unexpectedly, as homosexuals. On the other hand heterosexual transsexuals (MtF's who are attracted to males) need to come out to the world as transsexuals but, unlike potentially previously suspected, not homosexual. If one understands the set-up like this, then it is clear that it is much easier to tell the world that "no, I'm not homosexual as everybody may have thought, I'm really transsexual instead" rather than that "yes, I am transsexual, and by the way this will also make me a homosexual"!

In addition it is possible (as Lawrence notes herself) that a male who is attracted to males may transition to female in order to "not having to admit his homosexuality". I surmise that her note on this makes precious little sense if either the transsexual herself or the world at large would after transition deem her a homosexual as Lawrence does??? After all, such a transsexual is doing this precisely to avoid being deemed a homosexual!
On the other hand it appears exceedingly absurd to suspect that a single male would transition to female in order to tell the world that his attraction to women should be seen as heterosexual...

 

[1] In a 2007 article in Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, Lawrence writes that the heterosexual [common language: homosexual] MtF transsexuals she has seen "typically want to undergo sex reassignment surgery as quickly as possible and want their new genitals to resemble as closely as possible the female genitals they love and idealize. After surgery, these transsexuals are not only relieved to be rid of their male genitals but are delighted with their female-appearing genitals and are often eager to display them to other people (e.g., at transgender support group meetings)."
In contrast, homosexual
[common language: heterosexual] MtF transsexuals - those attracted to men - do not idealize Female genitalia and "often seem indifferent or ambivalent about undergoing sex reassignment surgery,"

 

Mental Health Truth (1) Real Life Experience or Just a little Common Sense
[1] typically want to undergo sex reassignment surgery as quickly as possible
[u] If one is married or has a sexual partner then sexual functionality tends to become more important than it is for people who don't have a partner or are still experimenting with their sexuality!
[v] Try to imagine the following scenario: You need a hip-replacement, but the doctor tells you that as you are very young for this surgery and therefore it might be better to wait a couple of years and use physiotherapy and pain-killers instead. Because hip-replacements won't likely last as long as you live, so unless you want to do this several times (and potentially end in a wheel-chair when you're old and another one is no longer possible) then live with it and delay, delay, delay... Now you're 30 years older, this really is debilitating, hurtful and an agony. Could you imagine that you then want this right now?
[w] Very rudely put? If two anatomical males have sex then it is normal for them to deal with their penises. If however two lesbians have sex then, honestly, a penis tends to get in the way!
If one is 40 or 50, maybe a successful professional, business-person, engineer or computer-scientist, then one reacts differently to people who say that we can't get what we medically need - mostly because we are used to (and paid for) normal thinking, to solve problems (not to create these), many of us are in fact paid to make the impossible possible - yesterday and every day!
Then mental- health practitioners like Anne Lawrence tell us that it is not good for our children to be exposed to "gender variant" parents (some mental-health practitioners used to routinely mandate our separation from our children for this very reason). Of course at the same time it is people like Lawrence herself who mandate that we have to do this for a minimum of one year! We analyze the problem and find that we have every motivation to keep this short, not the least based on Lawrence's OWN theories! Only afterwards we find ourselves accused - by Lawrence herself - of doing precisely this! I suppose we just can't make it right for her, however we behave?
[1] want their new genitals to resemble as closely as possible the female genitals
[x] I want natural looking and functioning genitals. I want these to work and I don't want to be stared at in a change-room. Is there something wrong about this???
[y] When one's older, one is more likely to have the financial means (see [g]) to choose. Who's to blame us if we look for quality if we can?
Would you want reconstructive surgery, say after an accident, that leaves you not at all close to looking human???
[1] the female genitals they love and idealize
[z] OK. That one I simply can't relate to. I find my female genitals normal - and that's that. Yes, I would have said that I were infatuated with these if this would have been the price I had to pay to get that permit for my medical treatment. I would have found such compliance demeaning and degrading, hurtful and abusive, but I would have complied... I would have deemed this typical for medical practice when it comes to trans-treatment, the doctor has all the power and the patient has to slavishly submit. But I would have done this, I would have closed my eyes and said it! I would have lied to stay alive! Because if the choice is to repeat their lies or to be killed by a refusal or delay of medical treatment, then I would have repeated their lies! After all, at age 40+ we usually know how the game works and we understand what people like Lawrence want...
[1] these transsexuals are not only relieved to be rid of their male genitals but are delighted with their female-appearing genitals
[!] I find the description "female-appearing genitals" offending! Not only does neither my partner nor I myself perceive these as such but they are in fact as real as a reconstructed face after an accident! In any case no sane therapist would ever confront an accident-victim after reconstructive surgery with a phrase like "congratulations to your human-appearing face"... Or, if you'd like another example: I would very much like to know if Ms. Lawrence would publicly designate an enlarged penis (or a reconstructed penis after an accident) as "male appearing" or as just plain male, enlarged breasts as "female appearing" or simply as female, or in fact if she would designate a woman who had a hysterectomy as "female-appearing"???
[#] It is true, after having been denied medical services for over 30 years, waking-up after that surgery was some kind of a relief! Mostly it was relief that I no longer had to comply to being allowed this and yes, we associate the relief to be free of mental-health bullying very closely with these "new genitals"...
On a more general note I do not understand how mental treatment or mental-health in general should work IF THE SELF-IDENTIFICATION OF THE PATIENT COUNTS FOR NOTHING WHILE THE TREATING DOCTOR OR PSYCHOLOGIST IMPOSES ONE AT HIS DISCRETION AND RULES AS A DICTATOR! After all I naively expected that my SELF-identification should be something that comes from me and not something that gets assigned to me by a self-appointed expert...
If the very first things that are not accepted at mental therapy are the self-expression and the self-identification of the patient (as shown in such statements as declaring myself heterosexual instead of homosexual, thinking of myself as a transsexual male instead of as a woman or denoting my genitals as female-appearing instead of female) then I truly don't know why these people are actually interested in treating us - except maybe to make money and to have a platform to exhibit themselves? After all, with so much openness, trust, consideration, acceptance and understanding, how could we ever expect a positive, helpful and healing environment there? Or should we possibly look into more sinister motivations? 
[1] are often eager to display them to other people
[*] Knowing people who frequent nude-beaches, I clearly find that individuals in their 30-es or 40-es get more comfortable to appear in front of others unclothed than younger people.
[+] I believe this comment will be completely misunderstood when stated like this. Typically it has been my experience that transsexuals will show their genitals to other transsexuals, not to just anybody!
Other transsexuals have shown me the result of their post-op genitals in various stages of healing after surgery and although I have never done this I would consider doing this too, given appropriate circumstances. This is not "showing-off", it is mutual support on the road to surgery and recovery. To see the "live result" is just better than to see any number of pictures a surgeon might present in his office! Would you, if you were to decide on a surgeon for a facelift or a reconstructive facial surgery like to speak to people who have had this very surgery provided by this very specialist? Would you like to ask questions about care, recovery, the outcome, any issues? Or would you base your decision solely on photographs and hearsay?
Systemic Note: If "these heterosexual MtF transsexuals" Lawrence sees are typically delighted with "their new genitals", why does Lawrence support and mandate a "standard of care" which (a) imply that they suffer from a mental illness [mental illness is supposed to be a condition that "severely impairs" an individual, not one that benefits the individual], (b) inflict years of waiting times until these people are allowed to be happy (c) mandates her own services [or the services of another medical professional in the field] onto these people BEFORE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO GET WHAT THEY THEMSELVES ALREADY KNOW TO NEED AND WHAT LAWRENCE KNOWS WILL 'DELIGHT' THEM?
 
At age 30, 40 or even older we want our treatment expediently and efficiently. More than anything else this is a reflection of determination and of having thought this through thoroughly long before we seek a therapist to obtain permission for it.
Once again I would like to remind the reader of the fact that we are "accused to have lived successful male lives as professionals, businesspeople or engineers". This means that we are used to analyze problems, get to the bottom of things and to not start something we haven't thoroughly thought through. We would not have these "successful lives" if we would not be used to make such decisions and to usually make the right ones!

Our own analysis of the problem and the absurd solution we are pressured into will quickly lead us to the conclusion that these mental-health professional are utterly useless gatekeepers, that they are profiteers of our potentially desperate situation, that they work with little or no insight, less understanding and no acceptance at all!

That we want to get this behind ourselves as quickly as possible is, in my opinion, a sign of mental strength and stability, an expression of a correct interpretation and an appropriate reaction to the problem at hand - WHICH IN THIS CONTEXT IS NO LONGER WHO WE ARE OR WHAT WE NEED BUT RATHER HOW TO GET WHAT WE NEED WHILE TAKING AS LITTLE DAMAGE AS POSSIBLE ON THE WAY THERE!

In a mental set-up like this one compliance and pretending is the most efficient way to get through it as a patient! That so many of us do this isn't proof of our being archetypes of what these practitioners expect, it is proof of our intelligence, of our ability to adapt and to comply, it is in fact proof that we are pretty much the exact opposite of what they describe and think we are!

It is also proof of the sorry state our professional treatment is in!

 

I do not think that any medical/mental-health practitioner has the right to enforce social standards (i.e. withholding of services, non-consensual aesthetic procedures, forced mental treatment without a court-order,... to enforce social, sexual or other behaviour of their preference). IF THEY DO SO ANYWAY IT IS MY OPINION THAT THEY COMMIT A CRIME.

In this regard being a medical/mental-health practitioner is similar to many other professions where people are instilled with special rights: Such rights come with certain expectations! Nobody can be lawmaker, judge, jury, enforcer, profiteer and henchman at the same time - this is why we have the separation of powers. It is high time that medical practitioners recognize this to be true in their field also and that they start to limit their actions accordingly!

 

I could write a lot more about these issues, all with the same result. But I can't do this here. Both Lawrence as well as Scientific American put highly restrictive copyrights on published works, I am therefore limited to the "fair use" clause US laws permit: I am allowed to quote 600 words, but not more!
I understand that such legal restrictions are necessary when it comes to works of art, however when it comes to science I do not understand that the same restrictions would be meaningful. This, to me, simply looks as if the scientists in question hide behind copyright-laws and use these to limit the criticism any author can voice in a single publication!

In the name of scientific progress I urge the scientific community (including the medical community) to publish their research, papers and lectures either in the public domain or under a creative commons license. I furthermore urge the scientific community to make any scientific publications available to the public without limitation of access (i.e. on the internet) after one year of first publication.

True knowledge does not fear being seen or criticized, it builds on it!