Skip to main content

Blanchard and the androphilics who support him

I find it a bit surprising when I see some androphilic transsexuals espouse the work of Ray Blanchard. One only needs to read the work carefully to understand that they are not doing themselves any favors by doing so. I suspect that they like the part about gynephilics being attracted to their own image and conveniently ignore the rest.

But just read this statement from Blanchard acolyte and CAMH sexologist James Cantor:

“Autogynephilic transsexuals tend to transition later in life (typically in their 30s or 40s), are externally unremarkable in childhood, are attracted to females, and having a more mixed adjustment after transition. Autogynephilia is extremely controversial within the transsexual community, because of the unfortunate myth that only androphilic transsexuals are "true" transsexuals, while the autogynephilic ones are just wannabes”

I have seen Blanchard’s work being defended by androphilics and they have tended to focus on what they want to hear. They consider themselves to be ‘’true’’ transsexuals and the rest are perverted men. But this is not exactly what Blanchard and his followers believe.

Anne Lawrence, a self-identifying autogynephilic transsexual and Blanchard defender, states in her writing that autogynephilic transsexualism is just as valid as ‘’homosexual transsexualism’’. Its just another typology.

In her 2004 article entitled ‘’Autogynephilia: A paraphilic model of Gender Identity Disorder" Lawrence even wrote something very honest and truthful:

“Nevertheless, it remains possible that cross-gender wishes might sometimes precede autogynephilic arousal by many years. This suggests the possibility that autogynephilia might sometimes be an effect rather than a cause of gender dysphoria. Since there is no accepted theory that explains how any erotic preference develops, one can only speculate about how gender dysphoria might lead to autogynephilia”

Of course she gives credence to the term Autogynephilia but you could just as easily just replace it with the term cross gender arousal. The point is that we don’t know where the arousal comes from but it most certainly could be the product of a gender dysphoria that is already present.

In later writings Lawrence seems to deviate from this earnest questioning and much of her time is spent trying to present Blanchard’s work in more palatable ways for gynephilics who rightfully and vehemently reject it if for no other reason than it's not science.


Sexologist James Cantor

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

the pseudoscience behind gender dysphoria

The real science as to what causes gender dysphoria still awaits.

Harry Benjamin was on to something except he didn’t have the scientific evidence to back up his suspicions hence, like a true scientist, he negated to draw conclusions. His hunch, based on treating so many patients over his lifetime, was that one is born with a predisposition to be gender dysphoric.

However, with inconclusive brain scans and no DNA marker (as of yet) we are left with believing the word of people who need help and only want to lead happy and productive lives.

The best we have been able to muster since Benjamin's death in 1986 was to amass statistics on who gets a boner imagining themselves as a woman which is in equal parts pathetic and disappointing. For this is not really science at all but is instead playing with interview data that doesn't point to anything definitive or conclusive. I have dealt with this problem at great length in my blog.

The whole thing started with Kurt Freund's obses…

looking past cross gender arousal

Jack’s latest Crossdreamers post got me thinking about cross gender arousal and how it could be avoided; also whether it even matters. This with particular focus on the inability to relate of someone on the outside looking in.

You see, sexuality is a very complicated thing to begin with and when you then add gender identity ambiguity it becomes a recipe to really confuse someone.

So imagine that you are a little boy who identifies as a girl but then along comes puberty and short circuits everything by having the sex you identify with also be the sex you are attracted to. For in essence this is what happens to all all male to female gender dysphoric trans persons who are attracted to women.

So I ask myself: can I imagine a scenario where this inherent contradiction would not produce sexual confusion? The answer is that I cannot.

I am in the unique position, like many of you, to have experienced an early identification with the feminine become sexualized later on. This brought confusion…

understanding the erotic component

I have written about crossed wires before in two separate posts. The idea is that one cannot pass through puberty and the development of sexual feelings for females and not have your pre-existing gender dysphoria be impacted through your psychosexual development. The hormone responsible for your libido is testosterone which is present in much stronger concentration in males and is why gynephilics are most likely to experience erotic overtones as the conflict between romantic external feelings and their pull towards the feminine become permanently intertwined.

Because I came from a deeply religious family where sex was not discussed much at all, I grew up with little access to information and was very much ignorant of matters relating to the subject. With no firsthand experience in intercourse until I married I was then faced with the reality that my ability to perform sexually had been deeply impacted by my dysphoric feelings. This began years of turmoil and self-deprecating thoughts …