@ c:

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?

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.

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.

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?

c wrote:

Just tell stupid psychs to f off.

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…

Just tell stupid psychs to f off.

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?