Autogynephilia is a narcissistic, sexualised self-reward syndrome. It is a non-homosexual man’s compulsive desire to be, or appear to be, a woman. It is satisfied by achieving this, more or less. Although there are other rewards, the most powerful one is by having sex as a woman.
That is to say, by being penetrated, usually anally.
Because it is self-reinforcing, the more often the satisfaction is achieved, the stronger it gets. It is narcissistic because it is focussed on the male self in role as a woman. Because sexualised reward is so strong, autogynephilia is extremely powerful and quickly becomes an obsession. Sex as a woman can turbo-charge it.
I have taken the liberty of republishing in full the pages of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (APA DSM-V) which are relevant to Gender Dysphoria.
If the APA objects, I’ll take it down, but I publish this in good faith, without alteration or comment, as a public information service. I will write another post commenting. I’ll also put a link to this and to the DSM itself (which is downloadable in full as a .pdf) on my Links page.
I strongly advise anyone interested in the field of transsexualism, transvestism, gender dysphoria and related topics to thoroughly study the document below.
Note: The APA now has a programme of rolling revision to its online materials, so the specific wordings may change. This was the state as downloaded in February 2018. As a result, this is only a guide and in all cases of clinical interaction, the current version on the APA website (see link below) should be referred to.
Autogynephilia or AGP shares characteristics with Autistic Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and in particular, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder or OCD. This latter is often made fun of but in severe cases, OCD can be debilitating. One characteristic of it is that the subject knows that whatever he is doing is not rational, but is unable to stop. This is typical of AGP, although as the condition progresses, the attachment to reality may fail altogether.
Since gender is how we advertise our sexuality to others, sex, sexuality and gender are normally linked. If the sex/sexuality link is broken, gender will follow the sexuality, not the sex. This is a condition known as Sexual Inversion or transgender homosexuality. In more complete cases this will result in the individual desiring to live in accordance with his or her sexuality and required gender, rather than social norms for sex.
As far as we know, Sexual Inversion is innate. It appears early in childhood, sometimes as early as three. It is just a part of natural variation. Commonly, those who elect to live in accordance with such inverted sexuality are known as HomoSexual Transsexuals or HSTS.
We’ve spent a lot of time on this blog discussing trans women. But as yet, I’ve said very little about trans men. Essentially, just as in MtF, there are two forms. One is a homosexual form; they are in fact lesbians with a social desire to appear as men. This is consistent with their sexuality: to attract female partners, they wish to appear to be men.
FtM HSTS transsexuals are the equivalent amongst females to the MtF transsexual who is, let us state again, a person born male who is attracted to men from childhood and is naturally extremely feminine in every way — so much so that they can never be successful men and are better off transitioning. HSTS trans men are the exact opposite.
Many of you may already know that I am immersed in developing a new resource, called ‘All About HSTS’. I have been researching and writing articles for this, which will be based on a website and will have a discussion forum. We experienced a slight hiatus, as the host I was using managed to basically trash all the sites I had on it. We have now migrated elsewhere, but much repair is still to be done.
One of the most important articles on the subject of HSTS was written by Dr J Michael Bailey and the late Kiira Triea. This has been published widely on the internet and in the blogosphere, but I take the liberty of republishing it here, to widen the spread of its influence.
It’s a long article, but deeply researched and packs a huge amount of information. It was written before papers on the seminal MRI brain scans by Rametti et al and Savic and Arver were published in 2011 or, clearly, Guillamon’s 2016 review of these. It mentions the neurology that was current at the time of writing, which was largely based on post-mortem examinations of the brains of six dead transsexuals or transvestites, by Zhou et al. This research, while remaining beloved of autogynephilic transvestite activists (TRAs), was completely superseded by the later work and was, in any case, too small in scale to be generalised from.
There are many myths about relationships with trans women but they are, for a man, little different from those with cis women. Obviously, in the case of an intact trans woman there is her penis to deal with, but this amounts to something around 1% of her; the other 99% is more important.
There are subtle nuances of difference but no more than one might encounter if in a relationship with someone from a different cultural background.
I think the most damaging of the myths, regarding transwomen who retain their genitalia, is that they will want to use it in the way that a man would. Outside of sex work, this is rare; most just won’t. (I do know some who do, for pleasure and in private but they are unusual, likely well under 10%.)
Although this is often deliberately obscured, there is actually a significant amount of scientific literature on the subject of transsexualism or transgender, particularly Male-to-Feminine (Male sex, Feminine gender.) I have linked to the most important papers below and have commented on some.
Essentially, the so-called ‘Feminine Essence’ hypothesis, which is often touted by propagandists for one type of MtF, for example Julia Serano, who is actually autogynephilic, has absolutely no basis in science at all. It is an artefact of Postmodernism and Serano, in espousing the hypothesis and deliberately ignoring the actual science, betrays an underlying hostility to science that is typical of Postmodernists.
We know what causes transsexualism. Both types are firmly rooted in sex drive and sexuality.
Social division into ‘men’ and ‘not men’ groups, together with a domestic matriarchy, explains why transsexual expressions in SE Asia differ from the West.
Male to Female transsexuals are normally scientifically categorised as homosexual or nonhomosexual with regard to their birth sex. I use the term HSTS for the former. Blanchard explained the latter in terms of autogynephilia, love of oneself as a woman. These we term autogynephiles or AGPs. There is a discrepancy, between the West and Asia, however. Whereas in the West, most AGPs are older and about 60% seek relationships with women, most AGPs in Asia transition much younger and are almost exclusively attracted to men. Why is this happening?
Much has made about the differences between autogynephilic transvestites (AGP) and homosexual transsexuals (HSTS). However, most of this work remains largely clinical and as such, it fails to connect to the sympathies of the public. An exception to this of course being J. Michael Bailey’s The Man who would be Queen, an almost pop-science interpretation of the data on transsexualism. Even this, despite being a nice read, is written from the perspective of a researcher. What I am getting at, if not already obvious, is that not much is written from the perspective of HSTS women.
I am an HSTS woman, and was invited by Rod to write a piece or two based on my experiences. I don’t usually get to share these with other people, and I thought this a good opportunity. I won’t get into much about my childhood — after you’ve heard a couple of HSTS’ childhood remembrances, you’ve pretty much heard them all — but I will give some basics.
All male-to-feminine (MtF) trans are EITHER homosexual (exclusively attracted to men from childhood) or non-homosexual (not exclusively attracted to men from childhood.) The latter are commonly known as autogynephilic. This distinction is obvious and has been observed since the 19th century. It is recognised as fundamental by all serious scientists working in the field.
Homosexual Transsexuals (HSTS) exhibit a cluster of trait characteristics in addition to their sexual desire for men. They tend to be small, delicately built, light for their height, naturally feminine and neotenous. They have intense difficulty learning to be masculine, if they ever do. Non-homosexual trans exhibit no such clustering; in fact they conform to the averages for men of their ethnicity and are attracted to women.
The explanation for HSTS is easy and has never been disputed: they desire men and are feminine, so to attract men, whom they know to be attracted to femininity, they make themselves more feminine. Again none of this is true of non-homosexuals; so why on earth might it be that a man, who is not attracted to or seeking to attract men, would want to appear to be feminine?