You've likely got a master's thesis in here! There's a lot of content, and you're clearly passionate about exploring the socioacademic frameworks and lived experiences of what we now recognize as autogynephilia. Spoiler alert, because autogynephilia wasn't coined until 1989, retroactively applying it to a subject who literally could not have identified in that way is inaccurate. That's not terrible news, though, because by recognizing the label as out-of-time-and-place you have a really great opportunity to become more precise. In other words, if we remove the word/label of autogynephilia (not forever, just for now), what terms and cultural, contextual specifics can take its place? If you can start to name those things, you stay within the appropriate era as well as uphold VP and her words as the authority and primary source of herself. Autogynephilia, of course, can always hold as a lens (and-or work as a comparison) through which to view any number of things/people--but your arguments are stronger if they can be made without retractive assignments.
If I was giving you the simple summary it would have read, "One thing that you will want to keep paying attention to work towards summarizing things in the terms of your main narrators and their frameworks, rather than solely analyze through your framework"--all to say, though, looking forward to seeing where you go with this.
5/5 for Submitted Project Outline
0/5 for Theoretical Interventions [Not submitted]
5/5 for Narrative Contributions
-1.5 missing p. #s (.5/missing #.)
re "Theoretical Interventions [Not submitted]": I think I misunderstood what was wanted here.
The Canvas assignment said "DUE WITH THE FOLLOWING FORMATTING [...]" didn't mention theoretical interventions. I did all of this at home the previous night, in accordance with how the prompt said "BY TUESDAY AT 12:30", which is the start of class; if theoretical interventions was the thing we wrote on paper after talking with our partner, then there's no way that we could have submitted it by 12:30. (Which is not to claim that my theoretical innovation suggestions were any good given my inadequate annotations, just that I don't think "not submitted" is correct.) Given that the mean score was a 7.4 (my 8.5 was above average), I'm guessing a lot of other people were confused about this, too?