(21-11-2011, 02:16 AM)chrissie Wrote: For a long time, many clinicians, have considered oestrogen,as diagnostic of transsexualism; react well, TS, react badly TV. From Pansey-Mae's post and so much of what she has written, she clearly belongs to the latter group.
It was long thought that we were exposed to oestrogen, rather than androgens at some point, in the womb. The latest research, suggests that we have a gene sequence, that makes us very receptive to oestrogen. in the womb. No wonder we react well to it! I get quite panicky, at the thoght of being without.
As to time scales, I can't pinpoint it, but I can recall being, in an elevated mood, about 3 weeks after starting PM.
It certainly seems to be that way for me, but I wonder.... most things in humans appear to be on a continuum. Isn't it conceivable that there could be an intermediate exposure to androgen, ie not quite enough to be male, too much to be female, that might leave the brain in a "halfway state", such that the result is androgynous?
That might account for such people experiencing very mild effects from PM (e.g. Pansy-Mae) who only need to express their femininity by dressing? (and growing breasts of course).
Just a theory...
B.x
PS
like you, I get panicky at the thought of being without PM. I wondered yesterday if this is the kind of experience that "Born again" Christians feel....
I must say, living for today is a state of mind I never want to lose...
I used to worry about the longer term future, the medium term future, and the day after tomorrow. Now I only worry about the EU banning the sale of PM for spurious reasons of health but really to support big pharma. -
Don't worry, I'm not starting a rumour!