I classify similarly but use an older terminology (which Ray dislikes.) Homosexual transsexuals I call True transsexuals or just transsexuals, while non-homosexuals I call transvestites even if they do not cross-dress for sexual pleasure or at least, do not admit to it. So in my newer writing they are either transsexual or transvestite, although in older work this might not always be so. We live and learn.
Transsexual and transvestites have different characteristics, most notable being their primary sexual orientation: transsexuals are uniquely attracted to men; they are natively homosexual from early childhood, often showing cross-gender behaviours and desires as young as age three.
Transvestites display a complex array of arousal models but are always heterosexual. In fact they could be called ‘hyper-heterosexual’, so strong is their desire for femininity. The detail variations are all based on the ‘flavour’ of their autogynephilia, which Blanchard defined as ‘a man’s propensity to be aroused at the thought of himself as a woman’.
We should be aware that ‘arousal’ doesn’t just mean in the sense of becoming sexually excited, though that is a prominent characteristic of transvestites in the West. In fact there appear to be romantic and existential components to autogynephilia, which is a subtle and complex mental condition. This has led some writers, for example Dr Alice Dreger, to suggest a definition of ‘amour de soi en femme’ — being in love with oneself as a woman. I would put that slightly differently: being in love with the idea of oneself as a woman.
Transvestites always remain transvestites even if they do not physically dress in women’s clothes. In fact, the ‘dressing’ in many cases is entirely mental, it all happens in the sexual fantasy world that transvestites live in. This fantasy, in extreme cases, can lead to a complete detachment from reality.
Sex is a social bargain, formed by Evolution. Men agree to behave in certain ways in order to have access to it. Women, who need fathers for their children, are prepared to give that access, as long as men behave in certain approved manners.
However, men’s need for sex is in their need to orgasm, as women have so often pointed out. If they can do that without women, then much of the need to bargain with them vanishes. This is because, while Evolution requires that we reproduce, for men, this is largely felt as a desire to have a lot of orgasms by penetration. Men do not have the visceral connection between the act of sex and the arrival of a baby that women do. For men, babies really could be delivered by the storks.
This unquestionably leads men to have a somewhat cavalier attitude towards sex — they’ll take it wherever they can get it — but it has also caused women to bolster the social bargain that keeps their behaviour moderate. Principally, this was through marriage, an arrangement whereby a woman only has sex with one man. In this way, he knows whom his own children are, something he otherwise could not. So the bargain becomes sexual exclusivity in exchange for heredity.
Women always think in terms of power. When they decorate a home they are showing their power within their space. When they outlaw masculinity and masculine behaviour, they are exercising power.
Men think in terms of targets and things rather than power. That is why a man gets irritated when his wife interferes with his prized model collection. It’s also why men ‘objectify’ women. Men objectify everything, there is no need to feel it’s special treatment.
Men, innately, seek to achieve targets and to acquire things as measures of status with which they can persuade women to give up what they want, which is sex. Women see their power over that sex as the means by which they can control the individual man they might be partnered with, but also the broader society.