…The bottom line is that the behavior classified as autogynophilia is normal female behavior. Charles Moser did a small study…
(There is ‘autoandrophilia’ too, actually, but I’ve got no idea if it’s used in such transphobic ways.)
Autogynophilia has been around for decades with lots of literature perpetuating and based in rather disgusting stereotypes of trans women. Literature that refers to trans women as “he,” as “ideal for prostitution,” and “just crazy.” Literature that recommends the denial of medical care to trans women diagnosed with it.
Autoandrophilia did not exist until last year, and was only added to the DSM V in follow up revisions after facing criticism about autogynophilia being sexist in that it is a diagnosis that can only be applied to trans female/feminine people. While it is technically a diagnosis now, as far as I know there isn’t any literature about it, it doesn’t carry the weight of or further stereotypes of trans men, and I’ve never heard of a case of the diagnosis actually being used. Even if it was, I doubt it would ever be cited as justification for denial of medical care.
From all appearances, this diagnosis only exists to shield the diagnosis of autogynophilia from criticism of being biased.
The long awaited.. PRINCE AND THE PRINCESS…
My final project for my book arts class. Hope you enjoy ;o;
I LOVE this! The art is great, the story is awesome. I like that the swordfighting princess can remain a princess and still become a knight.
Yet even so, it does bother me how much gender is tied to gendered activities. My parent’s generation of feminism saw trans issues through this lense. If I wanted to be a princess, sew, and wear dresses they would have understood that and been supportive. But they saw that as the only reason to transition - to be able to do things that are denied to you by gender. From that perspective, transition is the backup plan, but the primary solution would be to dissolve gender restrictions on activities - the “solution” of telling the young princess that princes can sew and paint and wear dresses too! The thinking is that would remove the need for transition. That’s more or less what my parents did. I was allowed to play with dolls, wear pink, and do anything I wanted, and they believed there would be no reason to transition because they would support me to be a boy and do those things.
I do love this story. I appreciate that the dress wearing princess can be feminine and strong and a powerful leader. I appreciate she doesn’t just want to do princess things but to be a princess — and that’s made clear by the other princess who’s not interested in becoming a prince. I just wish there could be a story like this with a young trans girl who wants to sword fight and do archery or whatever it is that’s coded as “boy things” and still gets to become a princess. Because the more we get sweet wonderful stories about little trans girls who love dresses and little cis girls who don’t, the more I begin to wonder why gender variance seems to only ever be for cis women.
Even now, I have folks who question my gender because of my butchness. Gender variant cis (or cis-ish) women get to be tomboys, butches, bois, or masculine of center. Gender variant trans women only get to fail at femininity.
When I was first coming out as trans, I had a lot of internalized transmisogyny…
And really, that’s all I need to say about Tobi’s confusion. Tobi’s tired argument (“females dress sexy too!”) has been advanced over and over…
On the one hand… an adult female… performing for the male gaze, who “dresses up” and momentarily feels empowered knowing that in these clothes she will be sexually appealing to a man…
On the other hand, we have an adult male, who is sexually aroused by the fact that their own (male) body resembles a female body…
Tobi, you seriously can’t see how different those things are? …
Actually, no, we’re not saying “females dress sexy, too!” If you were arguing in good faith, you wouldn’t have to resort to such disingenuous reductivism.
The actual point that is made against the supposed phenomenon of autogynephlia is that according to the diagnostic criteria that is used to “prove” it exists in trans women, it also applies to the same broad swathes of cis women (or “females”, as misogynists, MRAs, and Ferengi would put it).That’s not us saying “everyone likes to feel sexy and empowered!” That’s us pointing out that if the criteria laid out by the guy who came up with this theory is accurate, then it’s about equally common in women across the board, not just trans women.
Strange how none of the proponents of the theory of autogynephilia ever actually acknowledge that.
Sorry for the drastic reduction of Snowflakeespecial’s argument folks, I don’t want to make you read through all of that unless you really want to. But as alexandaerin points out, this argument seems to be about something entirely different than what I wrote about and it relies on the disingenuous argumentative fallacy of a moving target.
When used as a tool of judgment and gatekeeping, the diagnosis of autogynophilia (or the threat of it) is used incredibly broadly. Lesbians, bisexuals, and asexuals - essentially anyone who isn’t exclusively attracted to men - are looked at suspiciously. If you don’t have a “typically feminine” job, or if you have sex before vaginoplasty, that’s another point against you. Masturbate while wearing women’s underwear and game over. (I’ve always wondered - wearing women’s underwear as opposed to what? Are you supposed to get completely naked before getting started every time? Are you supposed to wear men’s underwear?)
But as soon as this manipulative game is critiqued suddenly autogynophelia is defined incredibly strictly. We’re only talking about folks with intense obsession. It’s only about being aroused at doing what you’re not supposed to. It’s painted in increasingly upsetting contexts so as to assure us that it’s not really us being talked about but those freaks over there.
But even at the same time, anyone painted with the broad brush of autogynophelia is then shamed for association with the strict and disturbing description. When these two moving targets are contrasted, the disingenuous motives become even more clear. If this is really about an auto-erotic obsession, then why is being asexual considered as one piece of the diagnostic criteria? There’s so much shame, stigma, and gatekeeping around this. One responder to my original post said she only wears men’s underwear for fear of being seen as autogynophilic. If this strict definition is the *real* one, then proponents of autogynophilia as a diagnosis should make removing barriers to healthcare and reassuring women like her their first priority.
The problem with a moving target is that even it’s advocates begin to have difficulty keeping the two narratives separate. Just look at the above poster, take away the subjective and prejudicial use of “male” and all you’ve got is “an adult
male, who is sexually aroused by the fact that their own (male) body resembles a female body.” Even at the same time this poster claims otherwise, it seems that the emphasis on what’s being pathologized is not the auto-erotic obsession but that such an individual’s body is supposedly male. And nothing proves that more than the fact that cis women can and frequently do have the exact same “symptoms,” yet can’t be diagnosed as autogynophiles because it’s a trans women (and trans feminine spectrum) only pathology.
Let’s say, for shits and giggles, I wanted to obtain a PDF of J Michael Bailey’s horrifying opus The Man Who Would Be Queen. Where would I find such a thing?
From his website
I’ve been noticing a lot more TV shows about prisons. Orange is the New Black is a recent example that intends to be more honest and humanizing. But it’s a topic more and more shows are tackling. Even The Walking Dead spends season 3 in an abandoned prison, dealing with some of the prisoners who had been holed up there. As more and more of our population is incarcerated, it makes sense that more people would be interested in seeing depictions of what that’s like (even if it’s unrealistic).
We’ve gotten to the point now where 0.716% of the US population is currently in prison (according to the Huffington Post) - about one and a half times higher than the number that’s in the armed services (<0.5% according to the New York Times).
I’ve heard a lot on the news over the years about the dwindling number of people who know someone in the military and how that impacts the country’s ability to empathize with them as people and consider their needs when discussing foreign policy and intervention. It’s just got me wondering if the reverse is happening as more and more people know someone is incarcerated? I know these questions became a lot more serious for me after a partner spent 3 days in jail and discovering an old roommate is in prison. And while I’ve seen these questions raised in the trans community before, Chelsea Manning’s story really made it a community wide conversation. Will this begin impacting our discussions about prison policy and prisoner rights? I hope so.
Yes, it happens all the time. One of the keys to dealing with burnout I’ve discovered is to recognize the early stages of it and respond to it. Give yourself permission to step back. Sometimes I’ll just not be up to responding to a message or posting about an issue right now. Take some time off and do things completely unrelated to advocacy. Have a board game night with friends, take a hot bath, and check in about your basic needs. Are you getting enough sleep? Enough food? Enough sex (with others, yourself, etc)? Enough exercise? Are you having trouble meeting your basic needs?
Can you ask for help, or maybe make a service swap? There have been times where I’ve seen friends working so hard on a project that I decide to cook them a big pot of my cashew raisin chili. My neighbor often bakes me a pie when they see I’m struggling around all these activist projects. For some people that kind of activism feels a lot better than direct action or organizing. And if you make it a reciprocal thing, than you could even set it up long term - such as “I’ll make you dinner wednesday and you make me dinner saturday.” I even knew some folks who once a week would each cook a large batch of something and make up 7 tupperware meals then go trade so they each would have a different prepared meal each night of the week.
Burnout isn’t just working too hard, but it’s not putting enough towards yourself. Whether you reprioritize to put yourself more, or find time to just pamper yourself, or get friends/family to help give you support, make sure you’re checking in with your body and feeling out what you need. Most of all, having friends, partners, lovers, family, and community in general around who I know care about me and support the work I’m doing has been my anchor in preventing burnout.
"But what is this fetish? It is only superficially conflated with what is presumed to be "archetypal" female sexuality/behaviour (common female submissive fantasies conflated with "forced fem" fantasies). It is rather a masochistic emasculation fetish, the sexualization of emasculation anxiety/trauma.
Genuine trangender psychologies may be the condition of the sexualized anxiety, but it is at most adjunct and speculative. The main problem around this AGP discourse, is the idea that fetishism inherently illegitimates trans identity. What must be widely acknowledged is that sexuality can provide the psychological conditions for legitimate dysphoria and transgender identification.”
Yes, I agree, there’s many more questions to ask that hold more importance. Sexual arousal around “feminization” neither confirms nor disproves whether someone is cis or trans. It’s common enough among both cis and trans folks, and of course plenty of cis and trans folks don’t experience it. It makes no better a litmus test then whether you are a cat person or a dog person.
When I was first coming out as trans, I had a lot of internalized transmisogyny. I knew how negative society’s images of trans women were and I was convinced that I was somehow different. I was terrified of being seen as a man in a dress, so I just never wore dresses. In that…
Feeling ‘sexy’ (attractive) and being sexually aroused by yourself are entirely different things. One is a self-esteem/confidence booster. The other satisfies a sexual desire.
I also want to know exactly how accurate that 93% figure is because it seems way too high if they mean “I am attracted to myself sexually” and not “I feel confident/comfortable in certain fashions”
Follow the link and read the methodology. Of course its 93% of cis women in the study and thats a different thing than 93% of all cis women, but thats how studies go. It was whoever answered yes to at least one question using the autogynophilia diagnostic criteria. It’s not meant to be perfect but it’s the same criteria trans women are subjected to. Answering yes to one question is considered a red flag that typically leads to further investigation. Answering yes to enough to guarantee the diagnosis, uh I think it was 23% of cis women in the study. Just read the link if you want to double check. Googling should find you the diagnostic questions if you want exact wording.
When I was first coming out as trans, I had a lot of internalized transmisogyny…
Serious questions about this. A friend of mine…
… My friend has gone so far as to pick out a possible female name, and research hormone therapy, but he says he’s not really sure if it’s more than a sexual interest. I’m just really curious if this could be where he’s at. Anyone have thoughts?
There certainly are people who describe themselves as fitting this model, but the bigger question is what are the consequences? Is the implication that someone who sexualizes aspects of transition will be a bad candidate for transition? Typically the concern presented is that someone only wants breasts, hormones, and a female name on the brink of orgasm and will later see it as a mistake so the powers that be ought to protect them from their own decisions. This does not seem like the genuine motivation of creating this criteria once we realize that there are no similar concerns about trans men.
The reality is that many people sexualize transition because our society sexualizes transition. Many first learn about the existence of trans people through porn – that’s true for trans people as well. The entire genre of forced feminization porn is designed to allow people to experience feminization without being responsible or “blameable” for it. So I’m not surprised that some folks explore aspects of transition through the lens of sexual desire.
So if someone is trying to determine if transition is right for them, “is sexual arousal a part of how you explore thoughts of transition?” is not actually that useful. Rather than interrogate if presenting as female is real or fake, I might suggest examining the option of presenting as male – Is it good or is it tolerable (aka “fine”)? Is a more satisfying way of living or less? Would transitioning – or some variation of it – make you happy? Would you like trying hormones for a month and then revisit the question? There are too many litmus tests or attempts to make everyone fit one model. If your friend doesn’t want a vagina and would rather have a penis, well, that’s true for a lot of trans women. Hell, there’s plenty of cis women that’s true for. These litmus tests may be worth considering, but they don’t prove anything.
Besides, all these systems are designed to prevent cis people from “accidentally” transitioning at the cost of preventing trans people from being able to. When some folks use the metaphor of being “trapped in the wrong body” cis people are terrified of that. The idea of a cis person being trapped in the wrong body due to a “mistake” is considered a thousand times worse than a trans person being trapped in the wrong body due to bureaucratic restrictions. I’ve known plenty of people who began medical transition then stopped or reversed who are fine or even better for the experience. It’s not the worst thing in the world.