Skip to main content

the death of Autogynephilia

Autogynephilia never really existed so it cannot be killed. It wasn't something you could measure under a microscope the way a germ could be yet it tried to ascribe an exclusively sexual motive to some transitions without conclusive proof thus failing the litmus test for science.

What does exist of course is cross gender arousal which is a meeting of dysphoria with a burgeoning sexual identity. It causes confusion until the feelings can be sifted through and a way forward can be found; each path unique. What I have concluded is that those of us who transition do so in spite of this arousal and not because of it. The Blanchard two type model of transsexualism is also severely suspect and, the more I research this subject, the more exceptions I find leading me to think there was academic wishful thinking involved coupled with a predisposition to marginalize.

Caryn, who has offered her very perceptive commentary here before, is only one more example of someone who breaks this simplistic model along with the small but prominent sampling I featured in one of my posts. To be more specific, she was a young transitioner who wasn't clearly identifiable as being either gynephilic or androphilic.

For those still unsure, I suggest that you reflect on all of the evidence like a forensic examiner and note the missing data which prevents any form of firm conclusion that AGP was ever correct. As for myself I am beyond 100% certain that this theory was in reality a house of cards; which makes me very glad for this was my last piece of the puzzle that once past, would greatly clarify my thinking on the nature of dysphoria.


  1. I get the impression that Blanchard and his ilk operate within the same paradigm of some radical feminists. They presume that there is no such thing as a feminine identity in anyone, at least not naturally or legitimately. There are simply bodies, all of whose consciousness are basically the same, but for social experience. Bodies can have sexual compulsions, but, philosophically, a gender essence or core is just not a thing. So, it doesn't matter to them how much we protest that our experiences are different from those the impute upon us.

    I think we at least have ample evidence that there is a correlation between mind and matter And I implore anyone who doubts this proposition to drink a bottle of vodka. The human neural system might be too complex for the mind it generates to pinpoint each precise physiological correlate for each mode of consciousness, but something in our bodies correlates with our identity, even if it interacts with our culture or environment to settle into its mold. That a body can generate a gender identity is not an idea we have to strain and struggle to reach, though its detractors cling to its null hypothesis like dogma.

    As transgender people, we don't need to respond in kind. We can consider their model of mind openly, and without fear of what it would mean for us if it were true. (It wouldn't necessarily mean anything normatively.) We need only point out that any paradigm of our subjectivity that simply rejects any self reporting that contradicts it as a lie is hardly a scientific framework.

  2. "There are simply bodies, all of whose consciousness are basically the same, but for social experience. Bodies can have sexual compulsions, but, philosophically, a gender essence or core is just not a thing" - I think that you are correct in this assumption and is why many conservatives will always argue along biological lines exclusively. The problem for me was formulating something as fact when there was lacking evidence which only makes you disingenuous. It is why I respect agnostics more than atheists because at least the former acknowledges that there is doubt.

    1. So there is no confusion, that assumption is theirs - the Blanchardites and some radical Feminists - not mine. I disagree. I think there likely is a correlation between states of mind and arrangement of matter. It's just so complex that it's difficult to pinpoint what's happening neuro-physiologically in a human body/mind. The science of doing so is in its infancy.

      Also, I happen to be an atheist myself, though I might understand the term differently from you. I do not see evidence that there is a god. This, I do not have a belief in a god. But I could always be wrong. About anything. It would not comport with the spirit of science not to admit that much. I'm always open to new evidence and arguments. But I don't think agnostic quite describes me, as to me it implies that I have no basis to make a judgment call one way or the other.

    2. Caryn my response to you was not clear. Yes I know that this is their statement and the science is indeed in its infancy and that the relationship between the human body, consciousness and what happens in the human brain is so complex that it is very difficult to write full proof prescriptions as to how things are supposed to work. The anomalies we see every day in nature speak to that very complexity.

    3. "We need only point out that any paradigm of our subjectivity that simply rejects any self reporting that contradicts it as a lie is hardly a scientific framework...." very well stated!


Post a comment

Popular posts from this blog

my last post

This will be my last blog post.

When I wrote recently that this blog had another seven years of life in it I was trying to convince myself that it was true. It was in fact a little bit of self delusion.

With almost 3,000 posts to date I have accomplished what I set out to do which was to heal myself and in the process share some of the struggle I had been through with others on the chance they might find some value in my words. After seven years of writing, my life still isn't perfect; no one's is. But I have discovered a path forward completely free of the trappings which society would have had me adopt so I could fit in.

Over the last 25 years of my life I have turned over every stone I could find while exploring this topic and in the process realized that we haven't even begun to scratch the surface of this deeply complex subject. What I have ultimately learned is that my instincts have more value than what someone who isn't gender dysphoric writes about me. We are …


While this blog is most definitely over, I wanted to explain that part of the reason is that it was getting in the way of writing my next book called "Notes, Essays and Short Stories from the North" which will combine philosophy, trans issues, my observations on life, some short fiction and things that have happened to me over my life and continue to (both trans related and not).

When it is complete I will post the news here and will be happy to send you a free copy upon request in either PDF or eBook format. All I ask is that you provide me with some feedback once you're done reading it.

I'm only in the early stages so it will be a while.

Be well all of you....

sample pages...

love of self

If you feel you are doing something wrong it shows. Your demeanor, body language and facial expression all conspire to betray you.

You are a clandestine "man in a dress"; you know it and everyone else can too. Your cover has been blown. I've been there and it's frustrating. The source goes back to your self image and the notion that you are somehow a freak of nature; and perhaps you are but what of it? the only way out is to embrace yourself fully and unconditionally. I don't mean to suggest that you are perfect but just that you were created this way and you need not seek forgiveness for it. You are a creation of God.

Misinterpreted religion is a big culprit in all this. These negative images of yourself came from reinforcement of stereotypes by ignorant people interpreting what is right and moral by their own barometer. You simply ingested the message and bought it as the gospel truth. Self confidence and critical thinking is the way out of your dilemma. It can…