All you need to know about autogynephilia

Some (relatively) easy to read articles on the autogynephilia theory of Ray Blanchard.

The autogynephilia theory has been debunked by both science and the lived lives of real transgender people.  However, since this "theory" fits well with the prejudices of transphobes and homophobes world wide, it is still referred to, in the dark backwaters of social media, and increasingly also elsewhere.

The autogynephilia theory – which argues that trans women who love women are straight men who are in love with their inner female – might easily confirm the internalized homophobia and transphobia of transgender people. Because of this I have had to spend a lot of time debating and deconstructing the theory.

Blanchard's theory is really traditional transphobia masquerading as science. However, since it is presented as science, this give the model much more power than it deserves. It is really bad science.

It is important to note that Blanchard is in no way a disinterested observer of gender identity. He is actively helping TERFs (trans-exclusionary radical feminists) and right wing extremists by writing for the web sites and taking part in their podcasts and videos. This tells us that his real motives are based on bigotry and not a desire to help trans and queer people.

If you, for some reason, find "autogynephilia" or "AGP" mentioned in the transgender debate, here's what you need to know about this and similar beliefs:

The autogynephilia theory explained and dissected

• All you need to know about "autogynephilia"
• "I feel pretty!" (On the "Autogynephilic" Woman and More)
• The Autogynephilia Theory Debunked by New German Study
• New Study Dismisses the Autogynephilia Approach to Transgender
• Julia Serano gives us the perfect antidote to transphobic pseudoscience
• New research shows that gender variance does not follow sexual orientation
• On Moser's critique of Blanchard's autogynephilia theory
• Kourtney Kardashian on "Autogynephilia" in Non-transgender Women
• On women who have sexual fantasies about being men
• The Pseudo-Science of Autogynephilia
• Women's Health Debunks Transphobic Autogynephilia Theory
• What the sexual fantasies of non-transgender people tell us about the dreams of those who are trans
• More than one third of non-transgender people have had crossgender dreams and fantasies
• What Transphobic Norwegian Doctors can Teach Us about the Diversity of Transgender People

On using "autogynephilia" as a transphobic tool of oppression and invalidation:

• What Dr. Zhana Vrangalova Taught Me About Transphobia in Science
• Blanchard and the DSM-V, redefining paraphilia
• Science and Transphobia: Ray Blanchard is Now Assisting White Supremacists. Why?
• Ray Blanchard lied when including autoandrophilia in the DSM-5 proposal
• Ray Blanchard and the Missing Trans Men (The DSM-5)
• The word "paraphilia" does indeed mean "sexual perversion". Don't let the transphobes whitewash their transphobia.
• A Short History of the Roots of Transphobic Science
• How radical feminists are using the autogynephilia theory to persecute trangender people

• For articles on AGP by others, see this list!

What Judith Butler Said about TERFs

Here are the censored paragraphs from Guardian's interview with feminist philosopher Judith Butler:

Gleeson: “It seems that some within feminist movements are becoming sympathetic to these far-right campaigns. This year's furore around Wi Spa in Los Angeles saw an online outrage by transphobes followed by bloody protests organised by the Proud Boys. Can we expect this alliance to continue?”

Butler: “It is very appalling and sometimes quite frightening to see how trans-exclusionary feminists have allied with rightwing attacks on gender. The anti-gender ideology movement is not opposing a specific account of gender, but seeking to eradicate "gender" as a concept or discourse, a field of study, an approach to social power.

Sometimes they claim that if “sex” alone has scientific standing, but other times they appeal to divine mandates for masculine domination and difference. They don't seem to mind contradicting themselves.

The Terfs (trans exclusionary radical feminists) and the so-called gender critical writers have also rejected the important work in feminist philosophy of science showing how culture and nature interact (such as Karen Barad, Donna Haraway, EM Hammonds or Anne Fausto-Sterling) in favor of a regressive and spurious form of biological essentialism. So they will not be part of the coalition that seeks to fight the anti-gender movement.

The anti-gender ideology is one of the dominant strains of fascism in our times. So the Terfs will not be part of the contemporary struggle against fascism, one that requires a coalition guided by struggles against racism, nationalism, xenophobia and carceral violence, one that is mindful of the high rates of femicide throughout the world, which include high rates of attacks on trans and gender queer people.

The anti-gender movement circulates a spectre of "gender" as a force of destruction, but they never actually read any works in gender studies. Quick and fearful conclusions take the place of considered judgments. Yes, some work on gender is difficult and not everyone can read it, so we have to do better in reaching a broader public.

As important as it is, however, to make complex concepts available to a popular audience, it is equally important to encourage intellectual inquiry as part of public life. Unfortunately we are living in anti-intellectual times, and neo-fascism is becoming more normalized.”

See: Feminist philosopher Judith Butler goes up against anti-trans and anti-gender feminists and conservatives

The word "paraphilia" does indeed mean "sexual perversion". Don't let the transphobes whitewash their transphobia.

In some of the online "autogynephilia" debates I come across Blanchard-supporters who tell me that "paraphilia" is a benign term that simply means "unusual". The implicit message is that calling a trans woman "paraphilic" cannot be stigmatizing, as it is an innocent descriptive term. They are wrong.

For those who are unfamiliar with these terms: "autogynephilia" is a term made up by Ray Blanchard, a transphobilc psychologist, who have spent much of his time helping anti-trans activists, arguing that trans women who are attracted to women are suffering from a "paraphilia".

Many of his supporters, some of whom are trans folks who have internalized the transphobia of their society, try desperately to picture him in a more positive view, to the point where they even try to turn into a friend of trans people.

He is not, as I have documented in the article Science and Transphobia: Ray Blanchard is Now Assisting White Supremacists. Why?

Blanchard has never presented "autogynephilia" as anything else but a sexual perversion. And given that his "autogynephilia" is a "paraphilia", his message is, and has always been that gynephilic and bisexual trans women are sexual perverts. It cannot get much more stigmatizing than that.

Here's what he said in an interview with the conservative site National Review:

Kearns: I’m really interested in your work on “paraphilia.” What is the difference between “paraphilia” and, say, a “disorder” or an even older term perhaps, a “perversion”?

Blanchard: Yeah sure, “perversion” was an older label for what’s now called paraphilia. Correct.

Kearns: And is the only difference a linguistic one where the morally loaded connotations of the word are removed? Or is there a substantive difference?

Blanchard: I don’t think there is any substantive difference. I mean the word “pervert” had become part of the lay vocabulary and was routinely used as an insult or as a derogatory comment whether seriously or in jest. Everybody knew the word pervert, had a vague idea of what it meant, and knew that it was something bad. So, the word paraphilia was substituted because it had a nice medical sound to it, and it had not and still has not entered the popular vocabulary as an insult.

Can We Trust Science in the Transgender Debate?

Bigoted science has caused tremendous suffering, here represented with a still form the movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. But does this mean that all science is bad?

In my article on the sexologist Ray Blanchard and his embrace of transphobic TERFs and white supremacists, I have made the argument that science, throughout history, has been used by racists, misogynists, homophobes and transphobes to  harass and invalidate marginalized groups. Does this mean that we cannot trust science?

The answer to this question is both yes and no. The fact that something is written in a science paper published in a peer reviewed journal does not make its message true. Ray Blanchard has presented his transphobic theories in such journals.

But then again most recent peer reviewed papers on this topic criticizes his model, and these days the great majority of papers addressing gender variance and gender incongruence are affirming the identities of trans people. Most of these researchers want to help.

Science is a process

Here's the problem: Too many people have a too simplistic understanding of the scientific process. They do not grasp that it is a process. It is a process where ideas and findings are presented and discussed in the scientific community, and where the goal is that this collective process shall end up in some kind of consensus or – at least – clarify what the disagreements are all about.

So, over time, the idea is this community may end up with a clearer understanding of what is really going on.  This means that one single peer review article says something is true, does not prove that it is so. However, if a large number of studies, performed by different scientists at different locations, end up with similar results, the chances are that they are on to something.

How to Stop Transphobic Bullies

This is a sidebar to the post What Drives Transphobia over at crossdreamers.com.

A blogger over at tumblr asked me:

What can you do to stop transphobic
bullies? (Illustration photo: Photodisc)

What is the best way to teach others that alienating a transgender person is wrong? How should I, even as just one person...how can I make a difference?

I answered: 

Humanize transgender people!

Make the others see and feel that they are real people, just like them. This may require some kind of contextualizing: “How would you feel if you were harassed for identifying with your own assigned gender?”

If you know the person, it might help to bring up areas where they have been harassed for other things, just to remind them of how it feels to be excluded.

These kinds of arguments won’t work with the truly militant transphobes, but then again, it is not your job to convince everyone.

You can reduce the damage they do in your community, though. If one of the extremists brings up anti-trans propaganda, you may, in a calm and constructive manner, present some reasonable facts. The extremist won’t be convinced, but the other listeners may.

This requires that you have facts at hand, of course, so you would have to read up on the latest research and discussions. Much of this is available online. To give you one example:

Extremist: “Trans women are perverted men who want to molest women in public bathrooms.”

You: “I have heard of no cases where trans persons have harassed trans women in a public bath room. I am not saying that this cannot happen, as there are bad seeds among all groups of people, but if it ever does happen, it is extremely rare. Trans people, like other people, go to the bath room to relieve themselves.

“I have heard of many instances of straight non-transgender men harassing women in such places, however, not to speak of all the trans women who have been sexually assaulted and beaten up in mens’ bathrooms. Remember also that you by banning trans women from women’s bathrooms, will force trans men to use women’s bath rooms. Is that truly what you want?”

The point is to make everyone see how unreasonable they are.

Remember that transphobes will argue that anything bad a trans person does can be explained by them being transgender. Anything bad a non-transgender person does will be explained by special circumstances, unique to that person,. That is: Unless they belong to some other marginalized group. African-American criminals are criminals because they are black. White, rich, criminals are criminals because they are unfortunate, mad, had a bad childhood or whatever.

It helps to unmask the hypocrisy in arguing this way.

Please add comments to this post: What Drives Transphobia?