Fetishes and Autogynephilia

That is a good quote.

Helen Joyce has a great quote from Blanchard in her book, which I think sums up why the majority of the population have no idea what drives many men to transition. People are generally kind and are taking the identity argument on face value, not realising it is concealing many men's true motivation.

'If a guy decides he's coming to work as a woman from now on, it's one thing for him to say "I'm coming to terms with the fact I've always been a woman inside" and quite another to say: "I've moved on from just masturbating in women's clothes to wearing them all the time." '

Something on a castration fetish. It's pretty dark.

So all you are doing is showing a measure of respect for a chosen name and a set of pronouns.

Respect? Why should I show 'respect' to someone who is trying to coerce me into participating in his fetish (remember what the title of this thread is, we're not discussing people who are genuinely troubled by their sex).

But if you believe there is nothing essential about gender, (which is what a lot of feminists on these boards seem to believe), then referring to the pronoun or name of choice is no cost to you - because you know it is just about a name or pronoun and is no more meaningful than that.

Read this:
fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

*risk of losing one’s job

So all you are doing is showing a measure of respect for a chosen name and a set of pronouns.

Except that the vast majority of people, including pretty much all the posters here, would have no problem with doing that. But then why are we being compelled not just to show respect but also to recite and believe the whole ideology under pain of public pile-ons, rush of losing one’s job etc.?

So many women now have said he equivalent to “I am of course respectful to trans people but I don’t really believe they are actual women”, and found themselves at the centre of a shrieking mob baying for them to be sacked etc. So it’s exceptionally disingenuous to frame this whole debate as “oh it’s all just about the respect and using the right pronouns”, because you must know damn well that it isn’t about that at all.

[quote suggestionsplease1]@picklemewalnuts

"The difference for me is that the AGP gets his frisson from all the people around him seeing him as a woman and treating him as a woman. We are cooped unwillingly to his fantasy."

What does 'treat him as a woman' even mean? I don't treat anyone / speak to anyone differently whether they're a man or a woman, it's irrelevant isn't it?

I wonder if posters are aware about 'packing'- where some lesbians & trans men choose to pack soft dildos with the intention of making a bulge obvious in public. Is this problematic in the same way?

People (any people) get frissons in all sorts of ways in public of course, not just by physical means of wearing clothes to make a certain impression but by verbal means, using language to present themselves in certain ways. I would think discourse is the main way we are capable of being co-opted into fantasies ...eg. that we are meeting the perfect partner, that the car we are test-driving will transform our lives, that the house we are being shown around is perfect for our families.[/quote]
What a fatuous comparison. If I’m test-driving a car and imagining it’s going to transform my life, that’s only happening in my head. Even if I tell other people this and want them to play along, they aren’t obliged to, and nor will I get a free car if I tell the dealership that I’ll commit suicide if they don’t hand it over without me paying. And none of that infringes on other people’s sexual boundaries.

You’re missing out that being an unwilling accessory in “validating” someone’s sexual fetish is ultimately being made to have or provide a sexual role without one’s consent. And this is demanded not just of adults, but of children too - everyone who is forced to go along with it. If I go about imagining I’m James Bond or are living in that lovely big house around the corner, not only is it not sexual, but I’m not requiring everyone else around me to participate regardless of whether they are knowing, unknowing, old enough to consent to sexual activity, whatever.

You're not conferring on them any status because you know, and truly believe that this is impossible anyway - given that any man or woman can be anything at all.

So all you are doing is showing a measure of respect for a chosen name and a set of pronouns.

I recognize gender identity matters to other people, and that's fine - that's the rich variety of life; things matter to others that we personally have no interest in whatsoever but it doesn't mean we have to stamp them out.

I'll quite happily indulge people in their interest in sharks, or double glazing or makeup - I couldn't really care less about any of these things but I recognise they are meaningful for other people. I don't have to be invested in them personally to respect others' choices.

And I don't compromise myself in the process - there is no harm to me to have a conversation on these topics. And actually with the trans people I know socially it's not a subject that has come up between us because it's just not relevant to anything we're doing. The only time I can think where it comes up is if a mutual friend were to say something like "What's doing today/?" and I would reply 'O she's / he's **...", That is literally the only time it is relevant - during a 3rd party conversation when I'm referring to them using their chosen name or pronoun. It's a complete non-issue otherwise.

If they were to come out with something like 'I feel like a woman / man because all women /men are like ' I would stop them and say something like 'Don't be stupid, no-one can say all women/ men are like this or that', but none of them would say something like that in the first place.

In real life, outside of social media, they're not going round justifying their existence, they're just getting on with living like everyone else. If some idiot challenged them about it I imagine they would have something to say, but luckily that seems to be rarer nowadays.

Interestingly I'm a member of a couple of make up groups on FB, purely to see this in action (as I'm not a massive make up fan). You'll get a photo of a woman with 30 likes and positive comments and then a photo below of a man in full pancake make up, blue eye shadow etc, almost comedic, and there will be 1000 likes and women lining up to support said man in their AGP.

Yep exactly, no one is treating that man as a woman, they're treating that man as an extra fragile man.

If I were treating a man in a dress and lippy as a woman, then I would just treat him like the dude I share my office with.

In many ways you would, but you are now expected to refer to them differently when you talk to them (or about them when they can hear you).

So 'Fred' becomes 'Felicity'. You then introduce this person to some other people with 'This is Felicity. She works with me.' Not 'This is Fred. He works with me.' You have just treated that person 'as a woman'. This is exactly the sort of validation they are looking for. And obviously, treating them as a man is seen as transphobic.

It's rather disingenuous to say you don't treat men and women differently, and then get tied up over things like "living as a woman" or what pronouns we address people as.

If there was no such thing as treating people as women socially, there would be no call to recognize trans people as the gender they identify as.

...And I would say that this process of being unduly convinced of these things and acting accordingly is usually more harmful to an individual than affirming some random person's gender identity.

@picklemewalnuts

"The difference for me is that the AGP gets his frisson from all the people around him seeing him as a woman and treating him as a woman. We are cooped unwillingly to his fantasy."

What does 'treat him as a woman' even mean? I don't treat anyone / speak to anyone differently whether they're a man or a woman, it's irrelevant isn't it?

I wonder if posters are aware about 'packing'- where some lesbians & trans men choose to pack soft dildos with the intention of making a bulge obvious in public. Is this problematic in the same way?

People (any people) get frissons in all sorts of ways in public of course, not just by physical means of wearing clothes to make a certain impression but by verbal means, using language to present themselves in certain ways. I would think discourse is the main way we are capable of being co-opted into fantasies ...eg. that we are meeting the perfect partner, that the car we are test-driving will transform our lives, that the house we are being shown around is perfect for our families.

What else might affirmation for an AGP individual be then?

Treating them as a woman, for example referring to them with the pronoun 'she' or a female name they have chosen.

Allowing them to use female-only spaces.

I'm sure you can think of loads more examples for yourself.

I can't imagine a situation where you would ever be legally obliged to utter such a statement. If someone asked you to say such a statement I would say you are certainly within your rights to refuse to say it.

What else might affirmation for an AGP individual be then?

Well for starters you have no reason to presuppose an individual's reasons for 'cross' dressing in the first place - you're not a mind reader. How can affirm, or not, something you don't know? That's simply illogical.

If there is inappropriate behaviour going on, as per exhibitionism, you do exactly the same as you would for any other individual displaying inappropriate behaviour - you call the police and give a full statement. But you can't criminalise someone before inappropriate behaviour has taken place.

who just quietly and harmlessly enjoy aspects of this in private

No. I think they are generally coercing their wives into participating in it and so it is not harmless.*

Why would you presume that? Is there any reliable data on the number of casual cross dressers who just do it in private, and what their partners think of it? Personally, I find it somewhat arousing myself, though that's partially because I'm quite attracted to a male androgynous look. I'll buy him items occasionally and occasionally request he wear them.

Obviously there are coerced wives, like with any other sexual niche/fetish, but I think a lot of people assume that there must be coercion because it doesn't appeal to them/they'd find it a turn off, rather than because of evidence.

Sexual fetishes don't belong out in public though - and cross dressing shouldn't be an exception to that. Those exposed to it should be freely consenting adults only, no exceptions.

Whilst I want to break down 'gender' as a concept, and people be able to wear anything they want, there's a world of difference with a guy wearing a skirt because he likes it, and just fancies wearing it, and one that is wearing it to involve bystanders in the fantasy of being a woman. The difference is usually material, tightness and several inches, but it's really obvious, even though on paper it doesn't seem to be 😂

[quote R0wantrees]AGP really is the elephant in the room when it comes to this issue.

'The Elephant In The Room' by Sue Donym:
grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-elephant-in-the-room[/quote]
Great article. Thanks for the link R0wantrees.

You don't mean David Thomas in the telegraph do you Turquoise? Some of that was utterly stomach turning.

I find this anonymous letter in the Guardian which might be what TurquoiseBaubles was remembering.
www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/nov/03/my-life-in-sex

AGP really is the elephant in the room when it comes to this issue.

'The Elephant In The Room' by Sue Donym:
grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-elephant-in-the-room

I'm glad we're now allowed to talk about AGP. The Times seems also to be allowing mention and discussion of it. It really is the missing piece I believe for people understanding what this movement is about.