The term ‘autogynephilia’ is, to put it mildly, a very controversial term within the transgender community. In fact, it’s a very controversial term in the medical community as well. Let’s start off with a short definition, cited from Wikipedia:
Autogynephilia is the term coined in 1989 by Ray Blanchard to refer to “a man’s paraphilic tendency to be sexually aroused by the thought or image of himself as a woman.”[3]
That’s quite the mouthful. And in most trans forums, any mention of the topic and you’re likely to get a mouthful of perspectives on the term. Most trans people despise the term, with very good reason. The term focuses on a person’s sexuality, essentially taking our valid gender identities and presenting it solely as a fetish. Now, to be fair, a fetish isn’t a bad thing. The problem here is that the term, when applied to transgender people, invalidates their personal experiences with their lived identities.
Though most don’t, some trans women do feel as if autogynephilia is part of their experience, especially those who are early in their transition. Due to the presence of testosterone in our bodies, it becomes very easy to take the comfort we feel from wearing the clothes of our identified gender, and sexualize it. Our entire society puts such a heavy emphasis on sex, plus often the first image a person has when they hear “transgender” is that of a crossdresser getting off from wearing panties. With this in mind, it’s no wonder those who are still exploring their gender identity learn to sexualize it! However, as the majority of these people start to understand their gender identity better, they realize that their gender identity encompasses so much more than this “fetish.”
Now, let’s look a little bit at the history of the term. As noted in the Wikipedia excerpt above, it was coined in 1989 by the sexologist Ray Blanchard. He did his work from what was then known as the Clarke Institute. It’s now the Centre for Addictions and Mental Health (CAMH). Early on, autogynephilia had two major supporters; J. Michael Bailey and Anne Lawrence. Due to their involvement, autogynephilia is often referred to derogatorily by the trans community as the “BBL theory.”
J. Michael Bailey wrote a book called The Man Who Would Be Queen in 2003. The book presented research that backed Blanchard’s theory, but was discredited in part from members of the trans community who pointed out Bailey’s poor research practices. Essentially, Bailey injected his own biases into his research, and invalidated the lived experiences of his patients by behaving as a classic gatekeeper; he required his patients to present and behave a very specific way matching his own idea of what a transsexual person is, before he would prescribe treatment to his patients.
Anne Lawrence is a trans woman who is a vocal proponent of the autogynephilia theory. She’s also a medical doctor, and has used autogynephilia to proclaim herself to be a “real transsexual,” driven by her mental illness (autogynephilia) to transition. This statement invalidates the identity of the vast array of trans people deemed by her to be “not real” because they don’t fall under this theory or Blanchard’s other theory, the “homosexual transsexual,” which he sees as simply men that are so gay, they need to be a woman to fit into society.
The CAMH is a notorious institute within the trans community; it adheres to archaic ideas of what a trans person must be in order to transition. It is led by Dr. Kenneth Zucker, another autogynephilia supporter. It’s important to note that he also supports reparative therapy for transgender children, a practice that has recently been deemed harmful by the American Psychological Association. Indeed, his critics suggest that by his use of the therapy, he is committing child abuse. Zucker is unfortunately the chair of the group reviewing the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders section of the DSM-V, a publication which is used as the primary guide for psychiatrists to diagnose mental disorders. Bailey is also a member of this group. Zucker is expected to use his position to get autogynephilia added to the DSM-V as a mental disorder.
Question: How does your experience with your gender identity relate to the autogynephilia theory?
I am going to play Devil’s Advocate with this one, to encourage discussion. (wink, nudge)
If we’re being completely honest, I think that the real difference people are looking for here is not whether or not we imagine ourselves having sex as women, but rather if having sex as women is a fetish and the sole reason for transition. These people threaten the legitimacy of true women (trans and cis), and would be considered an interloper in women’s spaces. The autogynephilia diagnosis may be a valid tool to ensure the legitimacy of trans women in the public eye. One cannot deny that cis women would feel much more at ease with having trans women in women-only spaces if they knew there was a filter in place to help make sure transitioners are really women.
The autogynephilia diagnosis certainly has the potential to be used as a gate keeping device, but if a trans person encounters a transphobic mental health professional who would use it this way, that person can always get a second opinion elsewhere. Reparative Therapy is wrong, and the fact that one of autogynephilia’s biggest proponents advocates it leads to questions of the theory’s sincerity. This is just one man, however, and the value of an autogynephilia diagnosis should not be tied indiscriminately to the practise of reparative therapy.
There you have it. Is autogynephilia a valid tool to distinguish trans women from body-modifying men with a fetish for women’s genitals? Or is it solely a gate keeping construct devised to marginalise and divide the trans community, legitimising some while invalidating others?
Just tell stupid psychs to f off.
c wrote:
Oh, how I wish it were that easy.
However, when you’re 8 years old and your parents dictate pretty much everything, including what medical care you get and from whom, that’s unfortunately not an option.
Nor is it easily seen as an option when there aren’t other options in your area. Sadly, too many trans people follow along just because they feel they have nobody else they can see instead. And the quest to get that letter, for hormones, for surgery, or whatever, is a very strong pull for trans people to stick with a therapist.
Unfortunately, some therapists abuse that. I’ve heard of people who were told by their therapist that they were the only one who could write the letter, now if only you’d jump through my hoops like a good girl…
Could we say what the DSM-V is? And why is this Bailey/Zuckery crap going into it if the APA has established that it’s harmful?
The DSM-V is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, published by the American Psychiatric Association – the fifth edition of which is scheduled for publication in 2012. There are 2 APAs that run around confusing people: the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Psychological Association. The Psychological Association has had a task force working on making psychological therapy practices a bit more trans-friendly for 2 years – there’s a press release from last August at http://www.apa.org/releases/genderC08.html. The Psychiatric Association, meanwhile, has been the one dragging its feet to get Gender Identity Disorder taken out of the DSM, but I hear by rumor (I can’t find the website now) that it WILL have been removed from the DSM-V.
I find that autogynephelia model is both fallacious and misleading.
Consider the questions:
- “In your sexual fantasies, are you usually in a cissexed female body?”
- “Do you like dressing up in sexy women’s clothing?”
Most women would answer yes to these, be they transsexed or cissexed. Yet it is only diagnosed as autogynephelia if a transsexual woman answers yes. (and not just any transsexual woman – see below)
Most women, cissexed or transsexed, would consider it a huge turn-off to be permanently stuck in the body, role and clothes of the other sex. For these women, being situated in the female and feminine is a contingent for arousal.
To put it another way….
Yes, I fantasized about sex in a female body before transition. Sometimes, I got turned on by the idea of being in a body in which I could enjoy being touched. My non-sexual fantasies also included me as female. Why? Because I am female. You’ll find that most non-transesxual girls had similar patterns in their thoughts.
And I do like to dress up in sexy clothing. Like ribbed tank-tops and neckties. And I’ll feel sexy when I perform as a drag king this weekend. But apparently this doesn’t count, because it’s not feminine.
—
Another problem with the autogynephelia model is that it is “ad hoc” – it claims to explain one set of behaviours but falls apart when you try to apply it anywhere else.
Blanchard and Bailey divide transsexuals into “homosexual” and “non-homosexual.” Ironically, “homosexual” refers to transsexual women who are and were primarily interested in men, and who have generally acted in a feminine fashion. The latter refers to the rest of us. The “homosexual” (i.e. heterosexual, feminine) transsexual women are alleged to seek transition because they assume it will make their life easier (I don’t make this up). The “non-homosexual” (i.e. bi, lesbian, queer, and/or masculine or androgynous) transsexual women are more likely to pursue transition out of alleged autogynephelia.
This model does not get applied to those of use who are other shades of queer and/or whose sexual desire changed with transition. It ignores gender-variant transsexual women (as the idea of “transvestic autogynephelia” falls apart when applied to us). It also ignores transsexual men. Which is to say that it ignores most transsexuals. Further, it is never tested on cissexuals to see whether their embodiment is genuine.
—
I think it is wise to listen to your sexual side and/or your fantasy life when examining your identity and decisions. But the Autogynephelia is a shoddy attempt to pathologize and prevent alternatives to a gender hegemony where your entire life can be predicted from a glance at baby genitals.
Hear hear! There are some great debunking examples in there, Amy. Thanks a lot. I’m confused about one thing, though. Most transsexuals are ignored by this theory since it ignores transsexual men? Everything I’ve researched indicates that there are far fewer transgender men that women. Am I missing something?
@ c: