Gender variance and camouflaging conversion therapy as care

Joanna Santos reveals how the advice and practice of Sasha Ayad of The Metaphor of Gender YouTube channel stop gender variant people from reaching an understanding of their true selves.

Guest post by Joanna Santos with Jack Molay

Recently I wrote a comment on the Metaphor of Gender YouTube channel regarding my objection to its dogmatic roots. The channel is run by Sasha Ayad. After having caught the gist of the approach, I realized the channel was about using a soft-pedaled and "kind" approach towards questioning gender variance and more specifically transitioning. 

I had looked up the author's previous appearances and discovered unsurprisingly that they subscribed to the gender critical school more broadly. More specifically they make use of  the Ray Blanchard two type taxonomy model where the variance is supposedly steeped in sexual dysfunction rather than in essence or a way of being.

The need for help

Sasha Ayad runs The Metaphor of Gender channel

Gender variant people have historically needed help from others, therapists included.  As undesirable members of society they save suffered from guilt and shame at one end of the spectrum to crippling dysphoria at the other. 

This angst has been used as confirmation of the idea that their dreams are sourced in mental illness rather than being primarily caused by the rejection from others. 

When gender variance is presented as a mental illness it is easier for gender critical "therapists" to present their "care" as a possible solution to their suffering.

Joanna's conclusion: Transgender people are who they are because nature made them possible.

Today we know very well that being trans isn't a sexually fueled mental illness, however we still need to understand how the nature of wanting to be the other sex encompasses elements of sexual energy. 

Guest post by Joanna Santos

Since all of the trans people I know trace their gender feelings to before puberty, it would be far too simplistic to try and reduce feelings of gender incongruence to sexual dysfunction. 

Blanchard reducing gender identity to misdirected sexuality

However the now infamous Ray Blanchard did his best to do so and by the late 1980's was simply dismissing testaments of early childhood gender dysphoria by his patients as lying (hardly a scientific method) so they could fit a narrative aimed at transition. 

He eventually concocted a theory that attributed that desire as either a misdirected sex drive or wanting to attract heterosexual men as partners (in the case of patients attracted to men). He called the made up disease that supposedly drove those of his patients who were attracted to women "autogynephilia."

At this point let us simply state that some forms of gender variance exist primarily for the achieving of sexual arousal, which only adds confusion to the mix. 

Blanchard debunked: Surveys show that all kinds of people experience "autogynephilia"

 

Online surveys show that gender embodiment fantasies (called "autogynephilia" and "autoandrophilia" by transphobic researchers) are common among all groups of people: transgender and non-transgender, men, women and those nonbinary.

Anyone who follows the intense anti-trans propaganda of the day, will have made note of the way the "autogynephilia" theory is used to invalidate transgender women and other gender variant people. "Gender critical" TERFs love the theory, as it allows them to present trans women as perverted predators. 

The theory has been falsified and dismissed over and over again, both by scientists and those that truly know something about being trans: transgender people. The tactic of the theory's supporters is often to confuse and obfuscate, or they double down on the analytical basis for the theory, ignoring the fact that it is this world view that has been falsified. Moreover, there is always a small detail somewhere you can use to confuse readers that do not know the topic well, or you can simply lie. 

In this post I am going to present data from several online surveys, some of them quite extensive, that have not been part of the academic discussions about the "autogynephilia" concept, but which nevertheless provide a rich amount of data about gender, gender variance and sexualities.  

They document that erotic crossdreaming (as in imagining yourself being the "other" gender relative to the one assigned at birth) are quite common in all relevant groups of people, straight and gay, women and men, transgender and those that are not trans. The fact that such fantasies are so common, destroys the credibility of the "autogynephilia" theory, which states that only male assigned people who are attracted to women can have such fantasies.

And what is truly interesting is that these surveys look at erotic crossdreaming as part of a much broader phenomenon: Embodiment fantasies in general, where people get turned on by the idea of having a body of any gender, including the one they identify as. This proves that the erotic cross-gender fantasies found in some trans women and other MTF (male to female) gender variant people represent a subcategory of a common human trait.

Women's Health Debunks Transphobic Autogynephilia Theory

"Leading Women's Magazine Finds that Many Non-transgender Women are 'Autogynephiles'! Read all about it!!!"

Well, to be fair, Korin Miller does not say a word about the  "autogynephilia" theory in the recent piece "Here's What It Means To Be Autosexual, According To Experts."

But here's the thing: The "autogynephilia" theory – which says that many trans women  are suffering from some autoerotic perversion where they are attracted to themselves as women (looooong story) – requires that cis women never get turned on by the idea of being sexy.

Because if cis women feel this way, autoerotic fantasies in trans women can be seen as a confirmation of the gender identity and not an invalidation.

Feeling sexy

Sensible people have know for a long time that many cis women may feel sexy and like what they see in the mirror. Autoeroticism is part of human nature. 

But when Dr. Charles Moser pointed out that cis women had such fantasies, the transphobes did everything they could to discredit him.

Why are trans people trans? Part 2 ( A Look at Well Known Narratives)

In part 1 of this article I explained why we need to look into what makes transgender people trans. In this part I discuss some of the most influential theories and explain why I think one of them is better than all the others.

The theories attempting to explain trans identities

 I will focus on the four of the most dominant scientific models found during the last 150 years or so:

1. The Rainbow Model
2. The Body Trap Model
3. The Psychodynamic Model
4. The Two Type Inversion Model

There is also a wide research field addressing gender roles and gender identities in the social sciences and the humanities. Gender studies have, for instance, contributed greatly to our understanding of gender variance. 

But that tradition is most often based on a given acceptance of transgender identities, and is more interested in explaining the way social systems lead to oppression based on gender. It rarely considers the interplay between biology, culture and psychology, which I suspect is the primary concern of Tailcalled, who invited me to this discussion, so I will not describe it here. 

That sort of thinking has greatly influenced my reading of the science of gender and transgender identities, though.

The Rainbow Model

The dominant model for explaining transgender identities these days is what I will call the Rainbow Model. It is a non-reductionistic model, in the sense that it does not reduce sex and gender to a simplistic biological sex binary or one single factor of origin.

Modern research has uncovered a mind-boggling complexity as regards  the development of biological sex, both as applies to the development of the body (both prenatally and after birth) and the formation of a conscious gender identity.

Why we need a new narrative for transgender sexuality and crossdreaming

I have been reading Felix Conrad's new ebook on crossdreaming and sexology. Well written, interesting and provocative, as always. This post will not be so much a review of the book as a commentary on what it covers. We agree that we need a new narrative that makes sense of the sexuality of crossdreamers and other trans people.

Felix' main point in Quantum Desire: A Sexological Analysis of Crossdreaming is that we need a new sexology for crossdreaming and transgender thinking.

We need a new model, a new narrative, a new way of thinking about sexual desire and gender variance, because right now we are far too busy reacting to the belief systems of old:

You know, the ones that sort gender variant people into categories like "effeminate gay men" and "autogynephiliacs", "real trans women" and "fetishists", people "trapped in the wrong bodies" and "sexual perverts".

We are lacking a new synthesis

The fact that we are arguing against the old is inevitable. This is how human thought evolves. To use the vocabulary of Hegel: We start out with one way of looking at the world (thesis), which is then challenged by another (antithesis) until the world moves on to a third position (synthesis).

What we are lacking is the synthesis. Felix does not provide us with that new model in the book, or at least not fully, but he gives as a pretty good idea about where we have to go.

If I understand him correctly we have to get to the point where we discuss the sexuality and sexual desires of queer and gender variant people freely and openly. We have to get to a point where we are able to make those fantasies an integrated part of transgender identities of all kinds (and I use the word transgender here as an umbrella term for all types of gender variance here).

Right now sexual fantasies of the crossdreamer kind are considered invalidating not only for transsexual women and men -- who have transitioned or who want to do so -- but also for non-transitioning transgender people (including those genderqueer, crossdressing, drag  and more).

When Real Life Gets in the Way of Transphobic Science

Gigi Gorgeous first came out as a gay man, then
as a trans woman, and now as a lesbian, falsifying
the autogynephilia theory in the process.

Two recent articles and a YouTube blog post present lives that prove the stereotypes of transphobic psychologists wrong. 

Meet Ekundayo Afolayan, Gigi Gorgeous and Kat Hamilton!

Sexology has caused a lot of suffering in queer and transgender circles.

Since the late 1980s terms like "transvestic fetishism" have been used actively to invalidate the  identities of male to female transgender people, mostly by reducing their sense of self to some kind of sexual perversion.

The clearest example is the the autogynephilia theory of Ray Blanchard, which is based on traditional gender stereotypes and a strict binary understanding of sex, sexuality and gender.

He is basically reducing sexuality, gender expression as well as gender identity in male to female trans people to a function of sexual attraction. In other words:  Who you are attracted to determines what kind of transgender person you are. And male to female transgender persons are either effeminate gay men or mentally ill straight men, according to this theory.

In real life there is no one to one relationship between sexual orientation on the one hand and masculinity and femininity on the other.

In real life there is no clear boundary between male to female transgender people who love women and those who love men, neither when it comes to appearance, behavior, desires nor when they first become aware of their gender variance.

Modern sexology often reduces the identity and
sexuality of trans and queer people to
"autoeroticism", a strategy used to invalidate
gay, lesbian and transgender people for more
than a century. (Thinkstock)

But that is exactly what the theory requires.

"Homosexual transsexuals" (this is what these researchers offensively call straight trans women who love men) are described as effeminate and sexy young transitioners, while "autogynephilic transsexuals" (i.e homosexual and bisexual trans women) are masculine, unattractive,  and "late-onset".

Actually, this binary encompasses non-transitioning transgender persons as well, including drag queens and crossdressers.

I am not going to repeat the main arguments against the theory here. You will find ample documentation here and here.

In this post I will present three recent publications made by people who all violate the borders set up by Ray Blanchard.

An introduction to the autogynephilia debate

So someone has brought up Ray Blanchard's concept of autogynephilia in a discussion of gender variance and transgender women. They are all sexual perverts, they tell you. The science proves it! 

The autogynephilia theory says that MTF crossdressers

and trans women who love women are men driven by a desire 

for their inner woman. Yepp,it is yet another attempt at 

invalidating a marginalized group by sexualizing them.

Photo: Voyagerix

Actually it doesn't. 

Here is some essential reading that will bring you up to speed on the topic of cross-gender arousal, crossdreaming and transgender identities. 

Welcome to the seedy side of sexology. Welcome to the autogynephilia debate.  

Start with my summary of the AGP controversy. 

Julia Serano, leading trans philosopher and trans activist, presents cross-gender arousal in her highly influential book Whipping Girl, which has just been published in its second edition. 

She understands crossdreaming (i.e. arousal from imagening yourself as your target sex) as an expression of a subconscious identity. Serano has written about her approach to what she calls female embodiment fantasies here. 

Serano has also commented on the claim that trans activists are denying the existence of trans-gender arousal. And here is a more academic paper by Serano: "The Case Against Autogynephilia."  

US Report Calls for Ban on Conversion Therapies for Gay, Lesbian and Transgender Youth

A short little update here on LGBT policies in the US, as it may help many of us gain some perspective on where the general consensus is right now as regards sexual diversity and gender variance.

The US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) has published a report on so-called "conversion therapies",  based on a thorough review of current research.

The expert panel was set up by SAMHSA and the American Psychological Association (APA) earlier this year, and included prominent American figures in LGBT human rights, policy, research, treatment, and advocacy.

"This groundbreaking report dispels widespread misconceptions about sexual and gender development and definitively concludes that treatments designed to change a child's sexual orientation or gender identity do not work, are devastatingly harmful to 'victims' of this type of therapy, and should not be considered appropriate mental health services," Dr. Celia B. Fisher, who served on the expert consensus panel says.

Conversion therapy does not work

Indeed, the main conclusions in the report are clear:

• "Same-gender sexual orientation (including identity, behavior, and attraction) and variations in gender identity and gender expression are a part of the normal spectrum of human diversity and do not constitute a mental disorder.
• "There is limited research on conversion therapy efforts among children and adolescents; however, none of the existing research supports the premise that mental or behavioral health interventions can alter gender identity or sexual orientation.
• "Interventions aimed at a fixed outcome, such as gender conformity or heterosexual orientation, including those aimed at changing gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation are coercive, can be harmful, and should not be part of behavioral health treatment."

Gender variance is not pathological

The message from the American Psychological Association is also clear: Being a sexual or
gender minority, or identifying as LGBTQ, is not pathological.

What Dr. Zhana Vrangalova Taught Me About Transphobia in Science

This is the story about how science can be used to persecute transgender people, and on how some seemingly well-intended LGBT-allies can contribute to transphobia.

Zhana Vrangalova
Photo by Enid Alvarez, New York Daily News

In this post I will give you the story about Dr. Zhana Vrangalova's support for the transphobic autogynephilia theory.

The Vrangalova story is interesting because it is such a clear an example of how scientific theories can be used to recruit even  the most well-meaning helpers to the oppression of trans people.

And yes, in this post I will prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the autogynephilia theory is transphobic.

Context

Those of you who do not know the ins and outs of this stagnant backwater of transgender research, may make note of the following:

1. The auogynephilia/AGP theory, created by Dr. Ray Blanchard of Toronto, says that there is a separate category of trans women who are motivated by a sexual paraphilia (perversion) that drives them towards transitioning.  They are, according to Blanchard, sexually attracted to the idea of themselves as a woman. The word is also used to describe male to female crossdressers and crossdreamers who do not transition.

2. Dr J. Michael Bailey is a supporter of Dr. Blanchard, and the author of The Man Who Would be Queen, a book that popularizes Blanchard's theory, dividing the world of trans women into two: "autogynephile transsexuals" (non-homosexual perverted men, according to Blanchard & Bailey) and homosexual transsexuals (extremely effeminate gay men).

3. Zhana Vrangalova is a sexologist; she has PhD in Developmental Psychology from Cornell and is currently an adjunct professor at the NYU Psychology department.

---

SIDEBAR This is not a blog post about the scientific value of the autogynephilia theory. This is a post about how it is used to harm MTF crossdreamers and trans women. I have elsewhere documented that  the science is bad, and that it has been thoroughly falsified by other researchers. You will find links to papers and blog posts showing this here. I have also written several blog posts on the scientific defects of the autogynephilia theory.

---

LGBT-support and autogynephilia do not mix

On June 13 Vrangalova tweeted a link to an interview the religious site Patheos had made with Bailey, adding the statement "There are 2 types of trans women".

I have been following Vrangalova since she often tweets interesting links to all things sexology. She has become an active spokesperson for the polyamorous amongst us. I also knew her as a supporter of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) rights, so her promoting Bailey in this way surprised me.

After all, the autogynephilia model is considered to be one of the most invalidating and stigmatizing theories around right now. It is routinely used by right wing religious  fundamentalists and left wing trans-exclusionary "radical" feminists to harass and invalidate trans women. It has been dismissed by transgender activists as toxic and unfounded, and has very little support among front line health professionals in the field.

The Vrangalova Dialogue

I responded in accordance with this, hoping I had been mistaken about the dear Doctor's intentions:

The Two Traditions of Thinking about Transgender

There are two major strands in modern sexology, both going back to the late 19th century. One is binary, gender conservative and interprets gender variation as mental illness; the other is liberal, trans-positive and understands sex and gender as complex continuums.

I have read a lot of transgender history. Too much, probably. This also applies to the science of transgender and the philosophy of transgender.

In her book Sex and Temperament from 1935, Margaret
Mead presented an amazing variation in gender roles
and expressions in different cultures, debunking one
and for all the idea that all masculine and feminine
behavior is inborn.
(Cover of 1950 Mentor paperback edition).

There is one important lesson I have learned from all of this: Every single original idea  had been presented before 1915.

The binary, pathologizing, tradition

100 years ago you would find it all:

The binary theory of two completely separate sexes, male and female, was already there. So was the idea that gender variations are perversions threatening society's "evolutionary fitness".

As now, many researchers argued that transgender conditions was caused by variations in the presence of hormones in the womb. This applied to sexual orientation too; many researchers had some difficulty keeping the two apart, then as now.

Others argued that it had to do with bad upbringing, blaming -- for instance -- strong mothers and weak fathers. Feminists, homosexuals and "primitive", non-white, people could also be blamed for spreading these "diseases".

Then, as now, the main fear was of the feminization of boys. Society needed strong, masculine, rational boys to fight wars, colonize the world and govern society, and because of this the emotional, feminine sissies -- gay or trans -- were a threat to the system.

(Tomboys and FTM transgender were also a problem, but did not constitute the same threat to the social order. After all, the fact that women wanted to be men made sense; the MTFs, on the other hand, had to be mad to desire the life of a woman.)

This binary tradition can be traced from Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing and his book Psychopathia Sexualis in 1886. via the Freudian psychoanalysts and John Money of the 20th century, up to the current autogynephilia theory of Ray Blanchard.

What unifies this tradition is not the explanation for what causes gender dysphoria or gender identity conflicts. The researchers will blame it on inherited degeneracy, hormones or feminist mothers, all depending on the researcher's natural inclinations and cultural context. What unites them is the need to present gender variation as something unnatural and unacceptable.

Felix Conrad Talks about Transgender Research, Crossdreaming and Beach Clubbing

Felix Conrad recently set up a new site called The Transcend Movement, focusing on crossdreaming and transgender issues.  We have talked to him about how to cope as transgender, his new ebook, his devastating dismissal of the autogynephilia theory and Brazilian supermodels.

On the beach

Trans philosopher Felix Conrad brings crossdreaming
to the beaches of the Mediterranean
(Photo: Design Pics/Tomas del Amo)

Felix, you have taken an unusual approach to crossdreamer blogging. Your site is not so much a blog, but more of a beach lounge or club for all things crossdreaming. What made you chose this form of communication?

My philosophy of design is quite simple... I look at what everyone else is doing, and then kick it in the nuts. Within reason.

We - and especially you - are in the business of online community building, so I decided to play with the idea of giving that community an imagined space... a beach club located within an ideal, coastal transgender community.

In this case I think my imagination got the better of me...but this is about cross'dreaming' after all.

I have also noted that you do not shy away from communicating crossdreamer dreams and desires in an 'in your face' kind of way. There are Brazilian super models, and more Brazilian super models, which fit well with the beach club theme, I guess, but which some might find sexist. Is this your way of opening up a discussion?

Sorry, Jack... no such lofty intentions. I have a long running obsession with Alesandra Ambrosio which both I - and my children - find completely ridiculous. So, when I claim my book will 'guaranteed turn you into a Brazilian supermodel' I'm laughing at myself.

I sometimes think there is a remarkable lack of humour in the transgender community. Being able to take yourself and life seriously, but realize that, in another sense you/it are absurd, is an immense liberation.

Femephilia and autogynephilia

In your book on crossdreaming you use the term femephilia to refer to sexual arousal at the idea of being a woman. What is the difference between this term and the term crossdreaming, as you see it?

Femephilia is a sexological term - like homosexual. It's cold. Crossdreamer is a term of popular culture - like 'gay.' It's huggable.

On Being Transgender, The Jack Molay Interview

Felix C has basically turned crossdreamer blogging into transgender chill-out clubbing.

Who is Jack Molay?
Illustration by Jorgenmac

Really, there is no other site out there quite like the Transcend Movement.

Felix and I had a talk about how to make a good pasta sauce, crossdreaming, autogynephilia, my life as transgender, bullies, Sense8 and more.

You can read it all if you click here!

All you need to know about "autogynephilia"

Here is all you need to know about Ray Blanchard's "autogynephilia" theory about transgender women and male assigned people who dream about being "the other gender".

With irregular intervals there pops up a new article discussing Ray Blanchard's "autogynephilia" theory, often written by someone who knows enough about crossdreaming to be interested, but not enough to see through the jargon of Blanchard.

Autogynephilia times two.

Photo: Dmitrii Kotin

This is a comment I wrote as a reply to Joseph Burgo's recent article on autogynephilia.

"Autogynephilia", huh?

Blanchard argues that there two separate types of transgender, both defined by the sexual orientation of the transgender person. The theory covers both male to female crossdressers and trans women, but the vocabulary refers mostly to trans women.

The first type is the "homosexual transsexual" (by which he means trans women attracted to men). These are effeminate gay men who transition in order to attract straight men, according to Blanchard.

The other is the "autogynephilic transsexual" (those who are not attracted to men). These he considers heterosexual paraphiliacs (perverts) who are sexually attracted to the image of themselves as female. Neither Blanchard nor his supporter J. Michael Bailey, recognize any of these as women.

Blinded by Science

Needless to say, the Blanchard model invalidates the identities of trans women. And from where I am standing it is also clear that the theory does not reflect the real lives of non-transsexual crossdreamers and crossdressers.

We live in a culture, however, where scientists are expected to be disinterested and objective, while the trans activists are -- for obviously reasons -- both emotionally and existentially involved in what's being said about them. This has led some to believe Blanchard (who is not transgender) knows more about transgender issues than transsexual women, crossdreamers and crossdressers.

Let me therefore make this perfectly clear: The theory has been thoroughly falsified and dismissed, also by scientists.

Here are some of the main arguments raised against it:

1. Crossdreaming is not limited to men who love women

The "autogynephiliacs" are defined by what I have called crossdreaming. Crossdreamers may get aroused by the fantasy of being their target sex. The androphilic trans women ("homosexual transsexuals" in Blanchard's misleading and offending terminology, i.e. those who are attracted to men) never experience such fantasies, according to Blanchard.

A Transgender Novel Discussing "Autogynephilia" - Imogen Binnie's Nevada

Imogen Binnie has written a novel about the lives of two male to female crossdreamers. And yes, you should read it!

Photo of Imogen Binnie byJulie Blair 

There have been novels about crossdreaming before (Ernest Hemingway's Garden of Eden comes to mind), but I have never seen one who includes a discussion of the concept of "autogynephilia" (defined as men who get aroused by the idea of being women).

Imogen Binnie's Nevada does. And it does so because it is about two male to female crossdreamers: one lesbian punk trans woman, Maria Griffith, and one MTF crossdreamer living as a  heterosexual man: James.

Raw

It is a roller-coaster ride of a book, completely unlike any trans autobiography you might have read.

The language is colorful and explicit, and Binnie does not sugarcoat the lives of transgender people. Both James and Maria are suffering from the kind of traumatic stress disorder that gender confusion can bring. They are struggling with self acceptance, and find it hard to believe and embrace the love of others.

Maria is definitely intellectualizing  in an attempt to avoid feeling the hurt.

Crossdreaming unfiltered

Unlike many trans authors Binnie does not hide the crossdreaming -- i.e. the fact that trans people, being those crossdressers, transsexuals or other gender variant persons, may get aroused by the idea of being their target sex. She faces it head on, bringing it out into the open.

What explains the difference between the two types of MTF transgender?

Part 4 of the "Gay" vs. "Straight" Crossdreamers Series.

Photo: pixtawan

The the whole idea that woman-loving male to female crossdreamers (whether they are transsexual or not) are perverts, while male bodied trans people who love men are not, rests on the premise that the two groups are fundamentally different.

In the previous posts in this series I have documented that this is not so.

I have argued that the reason the majority of androphilic (i.e. man-loving)  trans women say that they have never experienced crossdreaming -- i.e. fantasies where they get aroused by the idea of being a woman --  is because they refuse to reduce their sexual feelings to one and one factor only.

Like other women the excitement they feel from being an attractive female  is blended in with a wide variety of other factors: their attraction to their lover, the desire their lover feel for them, the affirmation given by other men and women.

They live up to the model for accepted sexual behavior in women, being a woman attracted to men. They therefore -- correctly, in my opinion -- interpret their arousal as an effect of the interaction between her as a woman and he as a man.

The main reason for androphilic transwomen transitioning when young is most likely also found here. It is easier for them to live up to the archetypal gender model of women loving men.

Autogynephilia: Bad Science Revisited

Part 3 of the "Gay" vs. "Straight" Crossdreamers Series.

In my two previous blog post I have documented that gay men and lesbian women may indeed crossdream (that is: get aroused by the idea of being the the opposite sex).

I have also  pointed out that there are trans women attracted to men out there who -- like XX women -- get excited by exploring their female sexuality.

Fixing the numbers

But if there are androphilic (man-loving) transsexual women out there who experience crossdreamer fantasies, should not researchers like Blanchard have found them?  According to his autogynephilia theory, men or trans women who love men cannot have crossdreamer fantasies.

I see diversity. Others feel an incessant need to sort people into neat piles.
Photo: Jacob Wackerhausen

Well, I have already told you about how Blanchard is capable of denying the existence of female to male crossdreamers, even if he has witnessed one first hand. 

Frans de Waal puts it this way in his fascinating book The Bonobo and the Atheist: In Search of Humanism Among the Primates.

On crossdreaming lesbians and sexy trans women

Part 2 of the "Gay" vs. "Straight" Crossdreamers Series.

In part 1 of this series  I looked at crossdreaming among transgender men who are attracted to men.

Crossdreamers fantasise about being the other sex.

The science of "autogynephilia" and related schools of thought argue that there are two types of male to female trans people, and only the ones attracted to women have crossdreaming fantasies (i.e. they get aroused by the idea of being a woman).

In this post I will take a look at female to male "homosexual" crossdreamers, before going back  trans women who love men.

What about the lesbians and trans men?

Blanchard's denial of the existence of female to male androphilic (man-loving) crossdreamers will go into history as one of the most embarrassing blunders in the history of sexology, proving once and for all that the man has absolutely no understanding of what he is talking about.

He does recognize that lesbians and trans men exist, however.  So the question is: are there female to male gynephilic -- i.e. woman loving -- crossdreamers out there (XX lesbians or trans men)?

Here is a comment added to this blog by "happy as i am":

"I'm new to this site..I recently started dating again at 59. I am a woman and lesbian..when I am sexual I completely believe I am a man.. my fantasies are me being in a male body and when I do have sex it is total visualization of me having a penis. only one partner has ever said something and she said it is like your spirit crosses over.. 

"I never thought to google it till this new relationship started up 6 weeks ago..she is very feminine and it is bringing this to the forefront in a way that made me think more about it. I believe it should be in the DSM [the American psychiatric manual] simply because I always wondered if others have these same feelings and sometimes it affects me and how I act in different sexual relationships. 

"I now want to be free to be and act sexually in sync with who I feel I am. I am more soft butch / adrogynous but male when I am having sex.. I think it would help to have therapists be aware that this exists so they can help folks understand and accept it. I am quite happy with myself as I am and have no issues with it but it is helpful to know that I am not alone with this."

When men loving men crossdream

Part 1 of the "Gay" vs. "Straight" Crossdreamers Series.

Crossdreamers get aroused by the idea of being the opposite biological sex.

Feeling sexy, AKA autogynephilia.

It was the existence of crossdreaming male bodied persons who made Dr. Ray Blanchard of Toronto develop his infamous autogynephilia theory, where he argues that (1) male to female crossdressers and transsexual women who love women are of the same kind and (2) none of them are women.

One of the fundamental tenets of the autogynephilia theory is that male bodied persons who are attracted to men (homosexual men and androphilic/man loving trans women) cannot experience crossdreaming fantasies (called "autogynephilic fantasies" by these researchers).

That is: Male bodied people attracted to men can not get aroused by the idea of being a woman -- not even if they are trans.

(I guess it is implied that the same applies to XX lesbians and XY trans men. Female bodied persons are for some bizarre reason often exempt from the pathologization of trans people.)

The main point here seems to be that it is the very arousal from imagining yourself as a man or a woman that marks you as a paraphiliac or a pervert. Gay men and women and heterosexual trans men and women are also considered mentally ill by Blanchard, but then for different reasons.

Being a sexy woman

I have always found the idea that pre-op man-loving (androphilic) trans women do not get turned on by the idea of having a female body strange. After all, how can trans women attracted to men imagine themselves having sex if not as women?

And if they do fantasize about having sex as a woman, wouldn't the very idea of being a sexy woman become arousing by association? After all, women born women experience "autogynephilia". Women's sexual fantasies are full of scenarios where their beauty makes men (and women!) desire them. And yes they get turned on by this very scenario. Read a couple of steamy romance novels, if you do not believe me.

Which leads me back to the main question: Why do not androphilic male bodied gender bending people report crossdreaming fantasies?

The story of jynx

It turns out they do. 

Here is  a comment  over at PsychForums. written by "jynx", which gives one clear example of a gay man getting excited by the idea of being a woman. I am taking the liberty of quoting some of the text here.

I am using the male pronoun as he is identifying as male in the text. He is in his early 20's now, but tells of early childhood experiments in femininity. Please note that English is not his mother tongue:

"When i was 3-4 years old, i put towel my hair. I imagined towel is my girlish hair and i was a girl. I often imitated female characters on tv. My dad reprehended me because of these things so i didn't put towel my hair anymore."

Dysphoria, Crossdreaming and the Politics of Gender

In this guest blog post Joanna Santos argues that we have lost ourselves in the politics of gender. She recommends another approach to gender variance, on based on tolerance and compassion.

By Guest Writer Joanna Santos

Lili Elbe undertook sex realignment surgery in 1930.

Gender dysphoria has likely always existed as part of the human condition but much of our understanding and interpretation of what it is gets lost in the cacophony and noise coming from all directions.

In today’s society, we have lost ourselves in the politics of gender and have forgotten to go back to the source.

Fetishists and Classic Transsexuals

On the one extreme you have fetishists who argue that their activity is sourced in their own natural psychology and have no problems agreeing with Ray Blanchard that they are engaging in a paraphilia of their own choosing.

They have no issue with admitting that they are comfortable with their fetish but at the same time insist that gender dysphoria cannot be sourced in biology and is a purely psychological construct.

On the other extreme you have the older generation so called “classic” transsexuals who argue that they alone suffer from a complete psycho sexual inversion and are true women seeking a correction which will return them to a state they should be in naturally had there not been some cruel mistake made. Anyone else is an impostor or a “man in a dress” and their worst fear is that their “womanhood” will be invalidated in the eyes of society by merely being associated with the loathsome transgender umbrella.

Harry Benjamin: Between the Extremes

The problem with both of these positions is that they ignore the people who live in between both extremes; the research by people such as Harry Benjamin as well as numerous studies and interviews involving post transition transsexuals.