Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Fetishes and Autogynephilia

310 replies

Alonelonelylonersbadidea · 10/08/2021 21:28

I just thought it was worthwhile having a talk about this and we should try not to make 'sweeping negative generalisations', so in the spirit of positivity about fetishes generally, I don't actually have an issue with them if they don't impinge on anyone else. In fact I probably have fetishes of my own. Probably ones which don't fit with my feminist principles. Will maybe come back to that later.
What is the official feminist line on fetishes such as autogynephilia in terms of 'gender'? Is it possible to be 'each to their own' without being negative about cross dressers?

OP posts:
LadyFuHao · 11/08/2021 01:20

OP, regarding changing some feminist opinions, there is typically a strong belief amongst them of 'No True Scotsman'.

I doubt you can appeal to those individuals on this basis.

Alonelonelylonersbadidea · 11/08/2021 05:12

@R0wantrees thanks so much for that info and those links. I'm going to watch today.

My very violent ex was (and is I assume) a TIM. At the start of our relationship it was just the 'normal' DV which soon moves into sexual DV and when I think about it now, which to be fair I try very hard not to, I can't help but feel that he hates my very sex. It was appalling abuse.
He's a TIM
I would think he is an AGP also but wouldn't his response to my body not be one of such anger/revulsion then? Or was he just jealous?
In which case is it still AGP?

One PP asks about people with experience of AGP, long after my relationship I was quite the TWAW drone. I then had (more?) experience with AGP and realised I was trying to process my pain by having people like that in my life. And that they were just using me as some sexual aid (trying to validate their personae).

OP posts:
GNCQ · 11/08/2021 05:36

I would think he is an AGP also but wouldn't his response to my body not be one of such anger/revulsion then? Or was he just jealous?
In which case is it still AGP?

No AGPs aren't revolted by the female body. On the contrary. They want to have it.

GNCQ · 11/08/2021 05:41

Sorry I think I actually misread your questions.
The abuse you experienced probably has a lot to do with the individual you were involved with and might not apply to all AGP males as a whole.

GNCQ · 11/08/2021 05:43

You've really been through a lot. As they say it makes you stronger!

OnlyTheLangOfTheTitberg · 11/08/2021 06:09

I think that more than one of the women on the transwidows threads have described their exes displaying resentment, jealousy and/or petulance over the fact their partners had, effortlessly, the thing they desired to have for themselves above all else: womanhood, a female body. So it’s not hard to see how in a man with AGP and a large dose of common or garden misogyny, this could manifest itself into DV, in a “if I can’t have it then neither should you” rage.

Alonelonelylonersbadidea · 11/08/2021 06:31

Thanks @GNCQ and I think you're right it has a lot to do with the person that he is (I can't say she)!

I do wonder, trying to put my experience aside, whether if AGP individuals just kept their proclivities in private, people would be bothered.
There is probably a vent diagram representing TW and AGP with a grey area in between OR is that our bigotry?

OP posts:
Alonelonelylonersbadidea · 11/08/2021 06:32

Venn!!

OP posts:
ChoosandChipsandSealingWax · 11/08/2021 06:40

Thank you for the thread and links. As ever, it is most illuminating what we are not allowed to say…

Flowers for those of you who have suffered.

GNCQ · 11/08/2021 06:41

Oh gosh the Venn diagram idea is definitely not allowed on here. Thread will simply go. Thus must not be spoken about.

Have you joined the transwidows thread?
Have you contacted transwidowsvoices.org ?

JustcameoutGC · 11/08/2021 06:54

This thread has been so illuminating. Every day is a learning day on mumsnet!

picklemewalnuts · 11/08/2021 07:35

I'm really struggling with expressing myself- I've written and rewritten the below several times. I'm still not sure it says what I intend!

With regard to transvestites conducting their fetish on an unconsenting public, strangely I have less discomfort with this than other manifestations of 'crossing behaviour'.

I can accept someone cross dressing if it is honest. I don't care what someone wears, if they want to wear unconventional clothes, so be it. It becomes unacceptable when I am expected to perform as well.

Back in the day there were lots of strikingly presented groups- punks, goths- all appeared outlandish. I was happy to perhaps take a second look to process an unexpected outfit/hairstyle/piercing/tattoo, then accept and move on (Nothing seems that striking anymore).
I'd be equally happy to accept cross dressers in the same way.

I am not happy to be expected to role play that they are women, not in public, not in private, not in toilets/medical facilities etc.

OhHolyJesus · 11/08/2021 07:47

Some interesting videos here:

Young man discuses his autogynephilia

State Media clip with Ray Blanchard

Long interview with Blanchard

Being married to an AGP

Being male and having an AGP father

Being female with an AGP father

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 11/08/2021 08:00

Yes, I’ve worked with a male with autogynaephilia who very clearly brought his kinks to work. I did not enjoy it.

I should be able to work without worrying about encountering inappropriate and sexual behavior in the women’s toilets

thinkingaboutLangCleg · 11/08/2021 08:06

Clara, is it ok to say that, having been sexually assaulted by men in the past, my fear and anxiety around around TW in single-sex spaces is because they are male, regardless of what they call themselves? And that therefore I find TW more dangerous than other males, because other men are less likely to enter a single-sex space?

If not, please delete this comment, not the thread. Thank you.

thinkingaboutLangCleg · 11/08/2021 08:16

My point was that seeing a man acting out a sexual fetish — cross-dressing or any other — in public is intimidating to me.

picklemewalnuts · 11/08/2021 08:34

Absolutely, @thinkingaboutLangCleg

IvyTwines2 · 11/08/2021 09:40

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

Clara, is it ok to say that, having been sexually assaulted by men in the past, my fear and anxiety around around TW in single-sex spaces is because they are male, regardless of what they call themselves? And that therefore I find TW more dangerous than other males, because other men are less likely to enter a single-sex space?

If not, please delete this comment, not the thread. Thank you.

I feel the same way: there's a Catch 22 which is that if a male genuinely 'thought like a woman' they would understand how intimidating and triggering it is for many woman to be in a small, enclosed, out of the way room with a taller, stronger, male-bodied stranger. Though I'll add that the male-presenting, 'average' heterosexual males who nevertheless choose to use the 'cubicles only' toilets rather than 'cubicles and urinals' when a venue has made their toilets all mixed sex are more disturbing to me: there isn't even the excuse that they're scared to use the other facility.
Fefefe · 11/08/2021 10:14

Putting my head above the line here but i kinda have experience here. In my personal dating life i was a dominatrix. I just enjoyed the whole sissiyfication thing. I would only date men who were into it. I didnt have any negative experinces as such but through time i just couldn't deal with seeing men who acted like the very worse stereotypes of what they they thought women were like. Being around a man who wants to be called every degrading name we hate, who act like the most sexually submissive women does leave you convinced that it isn't just a leave at the door thing, i mean how can you think all that and not think women are like that and by default let that show through how you treat women?

I didn't want to be adding to that.

I think having crossdressers under the trans umbrella and potentially then meaning sharing womens spaces is mental, frankly.

Not enough space to share my whole thoughts and experiences but that's my gut feeling.

Im settled down now and have a wee 7 month girl and i want better for her. Whilst i dont think in theory crossdressing is harmful i have seen the underlying current and i hate the thought of my wee girl growing up with those attitudes around her.

Im definitely not vanilla in any sense of the word but i do now see what really is projected when a man plays as a woman.

R0wantrees · 11/08/2021 10:23

I think having crossdressers under the trans umbrella and potentially then meaning sharing womens spaces is mental, frankly.

Women Speak Scotland
June 23, 2021
'The Trans Umbrella Is Older Than You Think'
(extract)
"Press For Change is the organisation that is pretty much solely responsible for the Gender Recognition Act being passed in 2004. They championed the use of the term ‘trans’ precisely because it made no distinction between ‘transsexual’ and ‘transvestite’. Christine Burns:

‘Until human rights campaigners like us came along, talking about umbrella concepts, this diverse community had got along with a relatively stable lexicon for many years. There were ‘transvestites’ and ‘transsexuals’ – TVs and TS’s in the community shorthand – and that was more or less the only language you needed to know for more than a generation since Harry Benjamin had coined the latter term in his book ‘The Transsexual Phenomenon’ in 1966.

‘Our successes as a campaign were grounded in progress made for people who fitted the clinical definition of transsexual. At the heart of this was a tacit understanding that people in positions of power might be persuaded to change laws for people with some kind of clinically underwritten status – something they couldn’t help being. This is why ‘Transsexualism – The Medical Viewpoint’ was seen as strategically important and why all the key court cases had rehearsed the developing scientific understanding of a basis for us being born or developing this way. It was also why the government would expect to include a medical definition of ‘transsexual’ in the forthcoming employment protections they planned to consult upon.

‘We knew in our hearts at that time that policymakers and judges weren’t yet sophisticated enough in their understanding to contemplate rights for people whose difference appeared self-identified or impermanent or maybe even optional. That didn’t mean we weren’t going to try where possible. There was a valid freedom of expression case to be made for people to be able to present in whatever way they wish. But we were also pragmatists, careful not to frighten the horses at this early stage. (Note, however, that in the Equality Act 2010 – which replaced the Sex Discrimination Act – the requirement for having been medically diagnosed was finally removed).

‘I cannot recall exactly how we reached a consensus inside Press for Change. It wasn’t written down in email correspondence – it arose in telephone or face to face conversations, including the long calls I was now having with Claire McNab on Sunday afternoons before setting off for another hotel. Somehow or other, however, we arrived at a consensus that if we maybe all used the word ‘trans’ as an umbrella term – and words like ‘transsexual’ only when we needed to be more specific’ then maybe some of that would catch on gradually.

‘And so that is what we did. From there on, without fanfare, my essays and our web content discreetly began to use this language. Claire took the opportunity during the move of the PFC website to revise the existing content in the same way.

‘In the weeks and months ahead people would sometimes ask what the word meant or why we were using it. Then we would explain the rationale and suggest why we thought it was important. The change was gradual. In fact it took years for the word to begin sounding familiar and to hear it in other people’s language. In 2002 when we were consulting over government press releases to announce the forthcoming Gender Recognition Bill, the officials still weren’t convinced that enough people understood the new word to use it. Yet today most people seem to embrace the word naturally – when they are not simply calling themselves men or women.’

(From Christine Burns: Pressing Matters Vol. 1)

Throughout the history of trans rights campaigning there has never been a time when transsexuals and transvestites were not working together, involved in the same groups, pursuing the same aims, or at least intertwining their aims in mutually beneficial ways. All that happened in the mid 2010’s is that they started being open about this and stopped pretending it was all about rights for a tiny number of transsexuals." (continues)

womenspeakscotland.com/2021/06/23/the-trans-umbrella-is-older-than-you-think/

IvyTwines2 · 11/08/2021 10:30

I wonder if the nomination of the Torrey Peters book for the Women's Prize had the opposite effect from that intended? It was mentioned everywhere for a while and I saw people hailing the nomination as wonderful and progressive, and then I think people must have actually read it, and some of Peters' other writing around sissy culture and forced-femme, and the penny dropped. I think lumping all these different types of person under the one short word 'trans' is not at all helpful to those whose situation is very different to that of the sissy-porn or anime-addicted types.

GNCQ · 11/08/2021 10:37

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

PermanentTemporary · 11/08/2021 10:45

Fetishes are the flaw in pure gender critical thinking (mine included) which says that men wearing women's clothes shouldn't matter at all and that clothes shouldn't be coded m/f. It doesn't take account of what is going on around someone's choice to present unconventionally from a gender point of view. The strength of the different strands of wanting to appear outside convention, and performing an escape from your own life, and getting something sexual from your own appearance, and whether you want someone else to be involved/notice that, and the circumstances which you want that to occur in, seem to really vary. Grayson Perry for example seems to have a strong strand of being outside convention and of performing. But he's also referred to his 'sexy, fetishy thing' of cross dressing.

I believe that if there were no clothes coded masculine or feminine at all, it wouldn't make much difference to women's status in society. I also don't think it would happen. I think about Wild Swans, where the Communist Party mandated identical clothes for men and women, and women stayed up at night crafting the tiniest differences in their clothes in order to signal their femininity. In all this, the staus of women was genuinely better than in previous revolutionary China, but that wasn't saying bloody much, nor were women truly equal.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/08/2021 10:54

Not enough space to share my whole thoughts and experiences but that's my gut feeling.

That was a really interesting perspective, thank you.

R0wantrees · 11/08/2021 11:18

Fetishes are the flaw in pure gender critical thinking (mine included) which says that men wearing women's clothes shouldn't matter at all and that clothes shouldn't be coded m/f. It doesn't take account of what is going on around someone's choice to present unconventionally from a gender point of view.

These Chains That Have No Name: Interview with Trans Widows Voices
by By Donovan Cleckley -March 31 for Women Are Human.

(extract)
DC In the past, I have pointed readers toward the stories of trans widows, both those seen at Trans Widows’ Voices and elsewhere, such as Christine Benvenuto’s 2012 book Sex Changes. But one characteristic I have noticed, though, even strikingly exhibited among women, is denialism. And it tends to manifest in multiple layers. First and foremost, one denies that any man would do what these men do in the private sphere to women around them. It resembles the denialism toward domestic violence more generally. One might assume that a man would only identify as a woman from love, as a man would only marry a woman for love.

TWV We are all, men and women alike, guilty at one time or another of denying the evidence before our own eyes, because it does not fit in with what we have previously believed – or because it enables us to reinforce an aspect of our beliefs or personality that is important to us. For example, I have just spent a disturbing weekend watching the recent Woody Allen documentary and asking myself why I ignored for so long what was in plain sight. But it was because it concerned a man whose work I admired.

I encountered an interesting example of denialism recently among gender-critical feminists in the UK. There was a story in the newspapers here about a man who worked in a supermarket and how he had obtained the agreement of his employers to wear a skirt – that is, the female uniform, rather than the trousers customary for male employees. He said that he doesn’t think that he is a woman; he just finds women’s clothes more comfortable.

Gender-critical feminists believe that gender nonconformity is perfectly acceptable, and that, if more people were accepted when they showed nonconformity with sex-role stereotypes, there would be no need for people to feel that they have to transition. These feminists believe that the problem is not in what you wear; it is in the idea that what you wear can change your sex.

Unfortunately, in this instance, the desire of many feminists to show that they are accepting of gender-nonconforming behavior entirely overrode their usual ability to think critically. They took the man’s claims entirely at face value, and, for a couple of days, gender-critical social media was full of women saying “Good on him!,” “We need more of this!,” etc.

What they failed to notice was that the man in question, if you applied a modicum of critical thought to the article, was very plainly autogynephilic and had been given a license to exercise his fetish at work. Aside from wearing a skirt, if you actually looked at the images of him, he was wearing women’s shoes, stockings/tights, and a padded bra. Further, he described a typical pattern of escalating boundary-breaching behavior – and that he had high heels, makeup, and wigs at home. Also, he described, in his own words, ‘borrowing’ clothes from girlfriends. He was duping everybody around him about his motivation.

Some of the women supportively sharing the article became very defensive when challenged, even when challenged by women who had their own experience of living with this kind of behavior and who they would usually support. The only bright side of the whole sorry incident, is that it convinced me that those women who look down on us for not leaving sooner, and who say they would have left at the first sign of that sort of behaviour, are actually just as gullible as we were, if not more so.

We all want others to think that we are not bigots, but it behooves us all to think about when our performance of not being bigoted toward crossdressing men becomes actively bigoted against women." (continues)
www.womenarehuman.com/these-chains-that-have-no-name-interview-with-trans-widows-voices/

Swipe left for the next trending thread