Explain me this abstract in lay terms please

[Anonymous No.15612296]

The name of the paper is

>Heterosexual Men’s Visual Attention to Nude Images Depicting Cisgender Males, Cisgender Females, and Gynandromorphs

[Anonymous No.15612316]

>>15612296
Tranny here

The abstract is saying that in this study, straight dudes stared at cis women more than traps. They stared at traps more than at men, and they stared at traps with tits more than those without

[Anonymous No.15612329]

>>15612316
when was the most recent time you considered suicide? not trying to be rude, just wondering for scientific purposes. i'm interested in knowing how realistic the 41% meme is

[Anonymous No.15612336]

>>15612316
There are two studies with the same title. My bad, I mean the 2023 one

[Anonymous No.15612338]

>>15612329
The last time I considered suicide was back before I transitioned. Now that I transitioned and live a happy life and am lucky to be accepted by my family and all of my friends, I never think of suicide anymore

I'm sorry it's on your mind so much, anon.

[Anonymous No.15612341]

>>15612316

In other words, the findings of the study are completely common sense and unsurprising and therefore, like 95% percent of all studies ever undertaken, they are wastes of time which simply confirm common sense and need not have been done.

I am not dismissing scientific studies outright, just pointing out a low success rate in the value of studies themselves. The one caveat I will put to this is that, as we know, some studies do produce surprising, counter-intuitive, or useful results, but they are in the minority. This in itself would seem to suggest the value in continuing studies, despite the low success rate. As in all aspects of life, "ninety percent of anything is crap".

[Anonymous No.15612344]

>>15612336
2023 is the one I summarized

[Anonymous No.15612358]

>>15612344
It seems to cast doubt on the idea all heterosexual men have a capacity for GAMP attract. Am I correct?

> Although participants fixated onto the chests of feminine males with breasts for longer durations than those of masculine males, most of the differences between feminine males, with and without breasts, were non-significant. These results suggest that female sex-based traits play a more primary role in gynephilic men’s sexual arousal than feminine gender-based traits

Many studies have suggested heterosexual men are significantly attracted to GAMs, although less than to women. The aforementioned conclusion seems to disagree with this suggestion, no?

[Anonymous No.15612368]

>>15612358
>It seems to cast doubt on the idea all heterosexual men have a capacity for GAMP attract. Am I correct?
Not really, this study didn't hide the dick and show cis passing trannies, which yeah any guy is capable of being trapped by, this is common sense of course

[Anonymous No.15612398]

>>15612368
GAMP attraction is attraction to a feminized body with a penis, so of course they didn't hide the dick, otherwise they wouldn't be able to measure GAMP attraction. A 100% feminine looking shemale with a pseudo VAGINA would look like a woman and would be casted as gynephilic stimuli, attraction to such tranny would be normal heterosexual although the result of an illusion. The study suggests vaginas are important to normal heterosexual men since the results indicate genitals are more important than gendered stuff (ie, clothing, hairstyle, mannerisms, etc) and even waist-to-hip ratio

[Anonymous No.15612413]

While I was trying to understand if they showed futa porn, traps or trannies, this made me chuckle
>Three participants were excluded from the final analyses, as their patterns of subjective arousal indicated that they were either androphilic or bisexual.
>FUCK OFF FAGGOT, STOP STARING AT THE GUY

[Anonymous No.15612418]

>>15612398
If the result is correct, this would be fascinating, since it implies human males have developed sophisticated mechanisms of sexual recognition and attraction over time. The question would then be, why so many males lack such mechanism? The numbers of men with paraphilias, especially gynandromorphophilia, are very high. If, in turn, the study is incorrect and all gynephilic men are capable of GAMP attraction, then it suggests all men can become attracted to shemales if they exist in an environment that feeds such capacity

[Anonymous No.15612433]

>>15612418
they can regenerate a load in like what an hour? there is no harm in taking a 1% chance fucking the slightly masculine looking chick in the ass and it ends up being like an intersex chick with a huge clit instead or something

plus, being so primed to fuck that theyll fuck traps means theyre also more likely to try harder to fuck cis women, so it doesnt harm them evolutionarily

if anything, not wanting to fuck traps indicates low test and lower mating success

[Anonymous No.15612457]

>>15612433
The results indicate men's sexual mechanism is so sophisticated that even when confronted with highly feminized males, who pretty much look like women but still retain a penis, they still aren't attracted to them or at least not as attracted as they are to women. It indicates men are programmed to seek vaginas. Obviously this is much more reproductively beneficial than "fucking every feminine person", since it drives them to directly fuck women instead of wasting reproductive opportunities with feminine and/or feminized males

[Anonymous No.15612469]

>>15612338
so you think the 41% meme is false?
>I'm sorry it's on your mind so much, anon.
no need to try and make it into an emotional issue, just interested in if memes are true or not. do you ever wonder about what your friends and family as about you behind your back?

[Anonymous No.15612482]

>>15612413
Found it, they include examples in the supplemental material.
I don't want to upload NSFW stuff to a blue board, so I just describe their examples in my own words
>Figure 1. Gynandromorph.
Very passing woman with a huge dick. Feminine hips, round, silicone-looking tits, typical "shemale". The dick looks like 25cm and thick. Not a cute girlcock, but a monster. Ok, enough about her cock.
>Figure 2. Feminine andromorph.
Face and hair might be passing in the right light, but the rest of the picture is just a twink. Less feminine than people like f1nnster. It's just a guy's body.
>Figure 3. Feminine gynomorph.
Just a woman.
>Figure 4. Masculine andromorph.
Just a dude. Significantly more muscular than figure 2 though.

So, maybe the description helps understand what the people were looking at.

[Anonymous No.15612486]

>>15612482
The study says nothing about the shemales dick size. Stop projecting your fetish. They very likely included pics of shemales with various dick sizes

[Anonymous No.15612487]

>>15612338
Sorry sodomite, the only reason why your family and "friends" play pretend is because they don't want you to blow your brains out in the hopes that they'll get their son and past friend back before he became an aids spreading faggot, after you eventually rope yourself your family will scrub literally everything about you after you became a faggot in the hopes that noone will remember that they had a mentally ill pederast in their bloodline

[Anonymous No.15612492]

>>15612486
I'm describing what they published, not what I think they did.

[Anonymous No.15612498]

>>15612487
I'm sorry you're so obsessed, but can you maybe take it to /b/? Without you it would be a really interesting thread that manages to look at a publication instead of ideology for once.

[Anonymous No.15612500]

>>15612492
>>Figure 1. Gynandromorph.
>Very passing woman with a huge dick.

No. A gynandromorph is simply a woman-looking man with a dick. It doesn't mean it necessarily has a huge dick, as you said. I'm pretty sure they included GAMP stimuli of various dick sizes to accurately measure men's GAMP potential. Attraction to shemales with small penises is still GAMP

[Anonymous No.15612509]

>>15612500
I'm describing the image. You can't tell me "no" and add some definition. This is what they publish in the supplemental materials. I didn't choose the size of that person's dick, it is what it is. And I think it matters when interpreting the study, because as you say, just the definition of the word doesn't say anything, yet they chose someone with a monster cock.
>I'm pretty sure they included
That's another approach and not the one I chose. You are describing what you think they did. What they maybe should have done, what they maybe actually did. I'm describing what we know they did. They write "data on request", so someone could just write them and get all the pictures if we decide that dick size matters.

[Anonymous No.15612513]

>>15612509
They say they included 11 pictures for each category of stimuli. You're describing only one

[Anonymous No.15612517]

>>15612482
Based on that, the translation of
>Subjective arousal to feminine females was highest, followed by subjective arousal to feminine males with breasts, feminine males without breasts, and masculine males. However, subjective arousal to feminine males without breasts and to masculine males did not differ significantly.
Would be
> women > traps > twinks >= ottermode

>The patterning of visual attention to images of females was unique, in that participants were equally likely to attend first to the face, chest or genitals.
This one is interesting. They were looking at the pussy more than any person's dick. While for the guys I understand it, their look didn't directly go to the "out-of-place cock".

[Anonymous No.15612519]

>>15612513
They only published one. I cannot describe what they didn't publish.

[Anonymous No.15612555]

>>15612498
I don't care about publications involving fags

[Anonymous No.15612560]

>>15612555
Fags were excluded:
>>15612413

[Anonymous No.15612562]

>>15612338
>>15612498
>As you can see, cutting off my balls and larping as something i'm not worked perfectly, chud

[Anonymous No.15612584]

>>15612560
But not fag stimuli

[Anonymous No.15612586]

>>15612469
>so you think the 41% meme is false?
>no need to try and make it into an emotional issue, just interested in if memes are true or not. do you ever wonder about what your friends and family as about you behind your back?
lots of trans people face severe social oppression, sometimes being kicked out of their families, attacked, raped, murdered, etc. there's no surprise they have an abnormally high suicide rate, 41% is clearly not accurate tho

what people think behind my back is their business, I may wish I had a pussy, but I'm not a pussy. I think things behind their back. they are influenced by society as anyone is. I used to think bad things about trannies. before I realized I am one myself.

[Anonymous No.15612590]

>>15612487
>Sorry sodomite, the only reason why your family and "friends" play pretend is because they don't want you to blow your brains out in the hopes that they'll get their son and past friend back before he became an aids spreading faggot, after you eventually rope yourself your family will scrub literally everything about you after you became a faggot in the hopes that noone will remember that they had a mentally ill pederast in their bloodline
I only date women, retard. So I'm not a "sodomite".

>>15612562
>>As you can see, cutting off my balls and larping as something i'm not worked perfectly, chud
most trannies don't actually get any surgery

if your memes are out of touch with reality they dont land well

[Anonymous No.15612593]

>>15612482
Where in the study are the links provided for the images? I can't seem to find them.

[Anonymous No.15612632]

>>15612590
>I only date women, retard. So I'm not a "sodomite".
Sounds kinda gay, coming from a woman, ngl.

[Anonymous No.15612637]

>>15612632
You will never be a woman

[Anonymous No.15612645]

>>15612593
It's in the bottom, under
>Supplementary Information
>Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
>Supplementary file1 (DOCX 874 kb)

[Anonymous No.15612648]

>>15612637
Nor do I want to be one.

[Anonymous No.15612650]

>>15612341
I don’t think it’s a waste of time. It’s good to know common sense stuff for sure

[Anonymous No.15612659]

>>15612341
If you never do studies where "common sense" tells you the answer, you will never find surprising or unexpected results.

[Anonymous No.15612702]

>>15612590
>I only date women
Trannies aren't women

[Anonymous No.15612948]

>>15612702
im a tranny i date cis women

i dont care if im a woman or not, im a tranny bitch

this isnt reddit

[Anonymous No.15613366]

>>15612948
>being on 4channel
>dating no actual people
Nice try, larper.

[Anonymous No.15613445]

>>15612341
so long as those 95% of studies are privately funded and just some dudes wasting their money thats fine with me

[Anonymous No.15613450]

>>15612948
What kind of women can you pull? Genuinely curious if hot women go for trannies.

[Anonymous No.15613457]

>>15612418
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2jhyembjow&ab_channel=Prof.EdwardDutton%3ATheJollyHeretic

[Anonymous No.15613484]

>>15612645
scihub no work post links

[Anonymous No.15613489]

>>15612341
>>15612659
There's another reason to do these "common sense" studies, it allows you to have results you can compare and reference later.

[Anonymous No.15613510]

>>15613450
No, they're pretty much always landwhales who have shaved rainbow coloured hair, you know, your typical dysfunctional faggot redditor/tumblrite

[Anonymous No.15613519]

>>15612316
In other words, you will never be a woman.

[Anonymous No.15613547]

>>15613484
4channel thinks that springer links are spam. Also, I don't think you have access if you don't have access to the paper itself. That's why I described it.

[Anonymous No.15614236]

>>15613510
why bother when they look like that?

[Anonymous No.15615603]

>>15613450
other replier >>15613510 isn't me

I date really cute women, I've never actually met a tumblerite dyed hair person irl

[Anonymous No.15615739]

>>15612296
Didn't read. I see that flag, I get the urge to kill.

[Anonymous No.15615896]

So what exactly causes GAMP (shemale) attraction? It seems to be linked with autogynephilia

[Anonymous No.15615974]

>>15612418
>If, in turn, the study is incorrect and all gynephilic men are capable of GAMP attraction, then it suggests all men can become attracted to shemales if they exist in an environment that feeds such capacity

I don't think we're hardwired to be attracted to the vision of a vagina, for most of human history it was hidden by a bush anyway. Attraction doesn't need to be perfect: being aroused by tits, curves, ass and a young looking face was enough to have high reproductive success. It's not like there were shemales walking around in ancestral times that men could waste their time cooming into, so there was no need to differentiate them with actual women.

So it wouldn't be surprising that all men could grow up to be attracted to female looking humans even if they have a penis, if they grew up in an environment that promoted them. I believe attraction to genitals, which most people consider ugly, is mostly by association.

[Anonymous No.15616036]

>>15613457
I'm just hoping that one day we can edit our genes or connect our brain to a machine so we can fix the degenerate mess that the human brain is, especially when it comes to sex

[Anonymous No.15616797]

>>15612469
apparently the suicide rate drops if they have friends and family that support them