Originally posted 2021-01-07 14:43:41.
Autogynephilia (AGP) was defined by Dr Ray Blanchard as ‘A man’s propensity to be aroused at the thought or image of himself as a woman’. This has been held up as one of two causes of male transsexualism, the other being homosexuality. But what is it and what actually causes it? Is it actually different from homosexuality?
The key to this lies in first understanding that autogynephilia is just an expression of gynephilia, attraction to femininity. All forms of attraction to femininity are driven by gynephilia. Secondly and perhaps less obviously, all forms of male transition desire are caused by it. The complication arises in that this attraction is reflexive; it is auto-erotic. I’ll explain this.
Further, so-called ‘Gender Dysphoria’ insofar as it represents a more or less debilitating desire to perform feminine gender by a male, is also just autogynephilia. It has no separate existence. However, as above, all forms of male transition desire are expressions of autogynephilia because the crux is performance: autogynephilia is the desire to perform femininity. Therefore, to find a cause for male transition desire, we must find the cause of gynephilia.
This appears to have been glossed over by Blanchard who was after all both a psychologist and a psychometrist. He doesn’t seem to have considered a physiological cause. Nevertheless, an underlying cause must be found, in order to understand this phenomenon. So what is that cause?
Testosterone
It’s testosterone. Studies have now shown that attraction to femininity increases with testosterone levels. For example,
(Our) findings suggest that changes in testosterone levels contribute to the strength of men’s reported attraction to femininity in women’s faces and complement previous findings showing that testosterone modulates men’s interest in sexual stimuli.1
This is only one example of this finding. To rephrase, men’s attraction to femininity or gynephilia is governed by the level of testosterone in their blood. While this study focused on faces, the same finding applies to other feminine attractors, like morphology, hair and so on. Men are not conditioned or socialised to find these sexually arousing, it is innate and the cause is physiological — testosterone.
There are a couple of useful fact-checks we can use to confirm this. The first is that adolescent boys have more or less no sexual attraction to femininity prior to puberty, but at that point, this spikes, exactly in line with their testosterone. This has been identified many times.
Testosterone plays a central role in an adolescent boy’s attraction to girls by dramatically spiking during puberty, which directly activates the brain systems responsible for sexual desire, social motivation, and romantic attraction. During adolescence, a boy’s testes produce roughly 20 times the amount of testosterone compared to his pre-pubertal levels. This massive hormonal shift alters both his physical body and his psychological drive toward the opposite sex.2
As is so often the case, there is a problem with the nomenclature in use here, because male attraction is not initially to sex, but to gender. This is easily proven because female transsexuals, often called ‘transmen’ are completely repulsive to men, while male transsexuals, ladyboys, baklas, kathoeys, travestis etc like those below, are the opposite. Gender is promissory; it acts like marketing — and what you see is not necessarily what you get.
An interesting support comes from Prof J Michael Bailey’s book The Man Who Would be Queen, wherein he describes treating a man with such extreme autogynephilia that he could not make love to his wife. Bailey prescribed Lupron, an anti-androgen, which resulted in an almost complete suppression of the gynephilic and thus the autogynephilic desire; unfortunately the patient developed severe erectile dysfunction, which Bailey treated with Viagra.
That has logical consequences. The first is that if gynephilia is a product of testosterone, then that should apply to everyone. And this is where Blanchard gets the torpedo because, except in exceptional cases, everyone has testosterone. The level varies throughout life and females have much less, 10-20% of the average male, but they still have it. Again, many studies have confirmed that females do indeed experience gynephilia; which means, contrary to Blanchard, they can experience autogynephilia (although they might be coy about it.)
If testosterone is the cause of gynephilia and we all have testosterone, that would mean that everyone could feel gynephilia, even if they deny it. So the question becomes ‘why do some experience a form of auto-erotic gynephilia which reflexively focusses on the self, rather than on others?’ However, this is a simpler question to resolve once we accept that everyone, females included, is to some extent gynephilic, because everyone has testosterone at some level. That means that everyone can experience autogynephilia under the right circumstances.
The question then becomes, what are those circumstances? Is there a mechanism through which gynephilic arousal can become autogynephilic? What causes that flip? Or can they exist in parallel? Another question is can a person be both homosexual and autogynephilic?
Autogynephilia — the erotic desire to perform femininity.
Autogynephilia had four recognised forms, according to Blanchard; transvestic, anatomical, physiological and behavioural. Later Drs. Bailey and Lawrence added another, interpersonal. To further complicate the issue, all of these may occur individually or in combination. However, this is less of a problem than it might seem, if we accept that autogynephilia is an erotic desire to perform femininity. This would refocus Blanchard’s claim onto a performance of sexuality. It should be obvious that all of the above ‘forms’ are in fact just slightly different versions of the same thing, the desire to perform femininity. This might be expressed as, respectively, through appearance, through desiring to have female body parts, through desiring to have female bodily functions such as menstruation, through behaving in a feminine (actually pseudo-feminine) manner and finally by playing feminine social roles. All of these can be turned into performance and are.
Blanchard is now presented with a serious problem, since the above classes conspicuously ignore transsexuals, that is, as Dr James Cantor put it ‘fully formed homosexuals.’3 It is not at all clear why homosexuals are seen as different from the others, for they too, famously, perform femininity, despite the efforts of some to hide this. Male homosexual femininity may have become unfashionable in the West, but elsewhere it is in rude health. It is in any case hard to see how a male can adopt the female sexual role, that is the submissive one, without ‘performing as a female.’4
Notwithstanding, all of these facilitate some sense of ‘performing femininity,’ although this is a male’s idea of it or as I wrote in The Warm Pink Jelly Express Train, a man’s idea of what being the perfect woman is — because all the types hitherto mentioned, including homosexuals, are males. This explains why many who perform pseudo-femininity can seem so jarringly out of tune.
In addition, according to Blanchard, autogynephilia manifests three sexual orientations: gynephilic (heterosexual, attracted to femininity), analloerotic (having no sexual relations at all with others) or pseudo-bisexual, (pursuing sex with men but only when in role as a woman). This last case was the one that first rang alarm bells for me, because where the individual lives full-time as a girl, she may not be attracted to girls and only pursue relations with men, but would still be considered pseudo-bisexual in Blanchard, despite being homosexual by his own measures. That makes no sense.
To explain this through a comparison, in Blanchard the other main provocation for males to wish to appear to be feminine is homosexuality. This is because gender is primarily the means by which we select Erotic Targets or more simply, mates. If one wishes to seduce masculine men, one makes oneself as feminine as possible, since opposites attract. Now this link has been denied by modern Western ‘gays’ whom I call the New Gay Men, who posit a ‘like with like’ model based on Platonic thinking and supported by some misguided thinkers like Alfred Kinsey. However this model only applies, if it does at all, in parts of Western culture and nowhere else on Earth or in human history. It is a form of narcissistic auto-eroticism related to autogynephilia but here the performance is of masculinity; autoandrophilia.
So, leaving that anomaly aside, the desire to seduce masculine males will lead one to desire to perform femininity, whether one is male or female oneself. In other words transsexual homosexuals, that is those who live as girls, are just doing what other girls do, in the same circumstances. It is simple and clear: they perform femininity in order to attract masculine (never ‘gay’) men. And why is that? Because ‘gay men’ do not pursue girls and so, if one’s intention is to affirm one’s own girliness, relations with them would be pointless. In fact homosexuals of all types, including transsexuals, pursue the biggest, toughest, most masculine men they can.
Consider Chikay, above, from the Philippines. She was a perfectly normal little boy until she came home from school one day, age 13 and found a pair of her sister’s panties on the bed. She told me she put them on and ‘It was like an explosion. I’d never felt anything like it. I became a girl there and then.’ She went on to explain that every day after that, even at school where she had to wear a boy’s uniform, she would wear girls’ panties and as soon as she finished school she completed her performance of femininity.
It appears that this event was closely aligned with the onset of Chikay’s puberty. She is sexually attracted to men and rejects liaisons with females; indeed, like many baklas, (a Filipino word for a gay) she has never had sex with a girl and expresses horror at the thought; she is if you like, vaginophobic. She is beautiful, feminine and passing, if a little tall at around five foot five. She is elegant and graceful; her manner is not forced but natural; her skin is completely smooth and clear, despite the fact that she no longer takes hormones. All of these are typical of the transsexual type of homosexual. Because of girls like Chikay, of whom there are many, it does appear that the Blanchard Taxonomy must be only part of the picture.
What else could cause the difference between the typical Western fetishistic transvestite, who is not in the least feminine and completely unconvincing as a woman, and this other type, found across the world, who are feminine and often so completely convincing as girls that they are mistaken for them by Asian women?
Socialisation and autogynephilia
Having studied this for well over a decade, the only plausible reason I have found is socialisation. To explain, there is significant homophobia in the West. Little boys are conditioned by parents and peers into believing that being a homosexual is wrong and they may suffer for it. (I am aware that this has somewhat changed in the last decade but the people we’re talking about are all older.) At the same time, sex-atypical boys are isolated. In southeast Asia, although fathers might be violent in their rejection, in the main they are sanguine, especially if the son in question is not the eldest. And they have an ace: Kabaklaan.
As a result, boys who are sexually atypical in the West, are likely to suppress or repress it, keeping it a secret. They are conditioned by the culture they grow up in to ‘act like boys’ and later, men. They do not learn how to perform femininity and are punished if they do; instead they are coerced into performing masculinity at all times.
On the other hand in Southeast Asia, they will be identified when they are still young and propelled by parents, peers and others, towards the other ‘baby gays’ who will probably hang around the volleyball court, wearing hair as long as they dare and shorts several years too small. In Luzon in the Philippines, this group is called Kabaklaan, ‘the way of the bakla.’ This is like a parallel school where they will learn how to perform femininity.
This understanding of the importance of socialisation in shaping the adult behaviour of people like Chikay on the one hand and the typical Western transvestite on the other, helps greatly in teasing out the differences.
These lead to a surprising degree of variation in presentation. This is more pronounced in the West, again because of adolescent socialisation. Ladyboys do not in general, seek to conceal practices like masturbation or self-penetration using dildos; they almost certainly will ‘behave like girls’ or in other words perform femininity and they will use cosmetics, hormones and silicone injections to shape their bodies.
‘That would be the most affirming thing I could possibly do, but I can’t.’
The Western fetishistic transvestite has no such advantages, yet he is tortured. On one hand he feels compelled to perform a version of femininity, but on the other he is desperate not to be seen as homosexual. He is likely to be isolated as an adolescent, unless he completely suppresses his impulse to be feminine. Because of the Western hostility towards male femininity, he may attempt to perform a ‘maxxed out’ version of masculinity. If he marries, his wife will be beautiful. At the same time, he suppresses any desire he may have to submit sexually to men. One said to me ‘That would be the most affirming thing I could possibly do, but I can’t.’ He is not a dissolute so if he has children he will try to support them and may conceal his autogynephilia for decades. Quite understandably he will be, at the end of this, like an over-wound spring. The only relief comes from ‘letting the girl within out’ yet to do this in public is to court disaster.; so he does it only at night and frequents locales where he is not known.
Most people would assume that all autogynephilic males are transvestic, or that they desire to transition, but this is far from the truth. A significant number either have no such desire or succeed in suppressing it. They obtain gratification in other ways; the crucial element is always the performance of femininity. For example, one might present as a man but desire to be penetrated. In this way he experiences what he thinks is ‘sex as a woman,’ being the recipient in sex.
There are other practices that play much the same role, like wearing women’s underwear, sanitary pads, feminine products and so on, or even just indulging in what he regards as feminine activities. Blanchard recorded some as getting sexual relief from knitting, for example. Others simply surround themselves with women and avoid the company of men.
The cause of male transition desire being testosterone, we need to answer one final question: why is autogynephilia auto-erotic? Homosexuality is easy because in this, femininity is performed for others. Transsexuals in this are no different from girls, they perform femininity as an affirmation of themselves and to attract men.
Until quite recently I was confused by this because there seemed no equivalent to the classic fetishistic transvestite in the Philippines, where I live. And then, thanks to Dr Neil Garcia, I discovered the silahis. These are locally considered ‘bisexual’; they are men who dress as women in secret and pleasure themselves. They are often middle-aged and married with children. This confirmed for me that what I was looking at was indeed a global phenomenon but more; I realised the essential link between performative transition desire, which is a conceptual auto-eroticism and a physical form, which most would recognise as masturbation.
Masturbation
Do you recall the beautiful Chikay, above? She told me that at the instant of her epiphany she had an overwhelming desire to release sexually, something that had never happened to her before. She immediately went to the toilet and masturbated, again her first and ever since, had done so daily. This was certainly the onset of her puberty. Numerous other ladyboys and transsexuals have told me more or less the same. While I accept that it may not be causation, that there is a correlation between masturbation and autogynephilia would be hard to deny.
In fact it appears to be the specific trigger for all forms of autogynephilia in males; that is, the desire to perform femininity. This is a problem in the West where masturbation, which is a perfectly normal and healthy practice, has been relentlessly suppressed and those who practise it shamed. Lest you doubt me, consider the elevated rates of completely unnecessary male genital mutilation (circumcision) performed in the USA. This is not being done for religious reasons or as some sort of ‘rite of passage’ but because in the 19th century it was believed that circumcision would prevent masturbation. It doesn’t, but it does have deleterious side effects.
It appears likely that one of these has been to suppress autogynephilia in young males. If a male has no access to pornography or similar stimulant, he is forced to use his imagination — in other words to have sex with himself, in order to masturbate successfully. Because of the relentless shaming of boys for doing this they hide their behaviour. They become furtive and untrusting. They internalise and create their own, inner erotic stimulus. This can become so powerful that it becomes the dominant sexual release sought.
Indeed, as I have described elsewhere, this masturbatory focus may become so dominant that it becomes a second persona, which I call the autogynephilic artefact. The individual will likely give it a ‘feminine’ name and refer to it, always, by feminine pronouns. This may become so extreme that the individual castigates others who refuse to accommodate this. Those who are or become androphilic are less affected by this because their own erotic targets are masculine men, who appreciate their femininity — though they might conceal that from their ‘bros’.
Because the cause is testosterone, which stimulates arousal to femininity, this masturbatory focus or substitute erotic target must be feminine. What is a boy to do in such a circumstance? He becomes, in his mind, his own erotic target. That is autogynephilia and again because it is provoked by testosterone, it is experienced by both submissive, androphilic boys and dominant, gynephilic ones. Moreover, it is also experienced by females, because they too have testosterone. This explains why some do report feelings of autogynephilia — it’s their testosterone at work.
Gynephilic boys make themselves, in imagination, into desirable girls, while androphilic boys do the exact same thing, but are able to perform femininity to a greater extent, because of another factor: adult men experience masculinity-revulsion or androphobia, which might well prevent them from submitting sexually to a man. This appears to become more pronounced with age so that a male who begins having submissive sex with men in adolescence, and enjoys it, might never experience androphobia to any great extent, as long as she is fully invested in her female character. Those who wait, for societal reasons, far longer, can rarely accommodate this.
Where social condemnation is reduced, they may completely adopt a pseudo-female persona, in order to actually pursue men for sex — which is powerfully affirmative for them. Success in that pursuit is the crowning laurel of their performance of femininity and once this reward has been experienced, it will always be desired.
That explains, by the way, Lawrence’s error in thinking that autogynephilia was ‘rare or non-existent in southeast Asia.’ Nearly all ladyboys or equivalents do pursue sex with men, in which they will perform the submissive role, but the stimulation for them to do so is autogynephilia, powered by testosterone. It is the diametrical opposite of Lawrence’s claim; all ladyboys are in fact autogynephilic and sex with men is affirmative. Blanchard too is debunked for his assertion of some essential and underlying difference between his ‘homosexual’ and ‘non-homosexual’ types. In fact the homosexual type is simply another form that autogynephilia can take. It’s just another way to perform femininity.
((I am aware that in the West there is a problem of nomenclature such that big masculine men who partner cute feminine males are often considered ‘gay’; they’re not homosexuals, they’re just being men.))
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0018506X08002298 [↩]
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3955709/ [↩]
- Cantor also said that homosexuals were ‘partially formed transsexuals.’ We agree. [↩]
- This confusion might come from the post-Kinseyan classification of all males who have sex with other males as ‘homosexual’ without considering whether the person is the dominant penetrator or the submissive penetrated. This approach is nonsensical. [↩]