Autogynephilia?
Much has been made, both among the experts in clinical psychology and sexology and within trans communities, of the theory of autogynephilia -- first proposed by Ray Blanchard (1989) -- and this theory is perhaps emblematic of the short-sightedness that has until recently pervaded the professional literature on trans experience. In short, Blanchard observed that non-androphilic male-to-female transsexuals were more likely than androphilic MTFs to report sexual arousal related to cross-dressing, feminization of the body, and imagining oneself as a woman. He coined the term "autogynephilia" to describe the phenomenon of being sexually aroused by the thought or sight of oneself as a woman -- in his view a kind of sexual paraphilia -- and argued that, for nonandrophilic MTFs, autogynephilia may be a motivating factor in transitioning. Blanchard was further convinced of his androphilic-versus-autogynephilic typology by the finding that nonandrophilic MTFs reported less femininity both in childhood and as transitioned adult. Androphilic transsexuals, then, were motivated by a genuine core gender identity, whereas others were motivated by this newly discovered sexual fetish (Blanchard 1989).
Departing from the usual position of contemporary gender experts and trans advocates who have worked hard to root out the popular conception that transsexualism is a form of sexual deviance, Blanchard thus linked transsexualism directly to sexuality. Blanchard's theory was criticized by some for repathologizing transsexuals -- would autogynephilia be viewed by clinicians as an "unacceptable" motive for transition and used to block access to hormones and surgery? Blanchard's theory has been praised, however, by a few transwomen, most prominently clinical sexologist Anne Lawrence, as a welcome explanation of heretofore unspoken aspects of some transpeople's experience (Lawrence 1998). Certainly, sexuality has been inadequately addressed in research and theory on gender variance, but I tend to concur with FTM activist Jamison Green (2001) that autogynephilia may be much ado about nothing.
When asked if he thought that autoandrophilia was a factor in FTM transsexualism, he replied that it might be for some, observing that many transmen certainly envisioned themselves as men when making love even pre-transition, and derived erotic satisfaction from seeing their bodies in transition. But, asserted Jamison, these erotic experiences did not constitute the main drive to transition so much as they were characteristic of an overall sense of gender identity. He continued:
I think there are also nontrans men who also get turned on by appreciating their own masculine bodies.... Nontrans women appreciate themselves, too, and can spend plenty of time in front of the mirror doing so, and who's to say some of them don't get turned on by the idea of their own bodies? I would venture to say no one's ever studied this in nontrans women. I would also postulate that this desire could be seen as healthy. ... Those of us who have worked hard to remove the stigma from transsexualism must not deny either the power of erotic desire or the fear of it that craves it obliteration. ... If we isolate autogynephilia or autoandrophilia as occurring only in the trans world, we revictimize ourselves, perpetuating the invalidation most of us experienced for much of our lives. If we're going to talk about the combustible mixture of gender and desire, we have to recognize that it is not the exclusive province of transsexuals. (Green 2001:1-2)
While it might be expected that such theories would wane in popularity as more trans voices emerged in the literature, and as many researchers and clinicians began to discard antiquated classifications of transsexuals, Blanchard's theory has recently received a boost from the work of fellow sexologist J. Michael Bailey, whose forthcoming book, The Man Who Would Be Queen: The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism, calls Blanchard's theory a "revolutionary contribution" to sex research. (See Footnote 3) In his book, Bailey sets forth a rigid typology of MTF transsexualism.
The two types of transsexuals who begin life as males are called homosexual and autogynephilic. Once understood, these names are appropriate. Succinctly put, homosexual male-to-female transsexuals are extremely feminine gay men, and autogynephilic transsexuals are men erotically obsessed with the image of themselves as women. (Bailey forthcoming: 146)
When contacted by a transsexual woman who suggested he might be missing a type of transsexual woman whose transitions were actually motivated not by sexual drives but by a core female gender identity, he is reported to have replied that
autogynephilia is a comprehensible motivation, and so is homosexual transsexualism (out of natural femininity and the cost-benefit analysis that some men will do better on the mating market after SRS), but the other alleged category (neither homosexual nor autogynephilic) has never seemed very compelling clinically to me. (Quoted in Conway 2003)
Bailey has made even more explicit his position that the claims of some transsexual women who have read his work and believe they do not fit into his typology are either mistaken or lying. "I am not rejecting the claims (of transsexuals) for no reason," he told one reporter. "There is good scientific research that says you should believe me and not them" (Dreier & Anderson 2003). And with the imprimatur of the National Academies Press, and positive reviews from such reputable publications as Kirkus Reviews and OUT Magazine, it would seem that many people are doing just that.
3 - Unfortunately, this forthcoming publication came to my attention only 24 hours before my thesis was due, so I was not able to offer an in-depth analysis of Bailey's theory or his methods.
Next Section: Sexual Orientation