Isn’t AGP also what every woman experiences when they get dressed up & feel good about themselves?

[Theboredpanda]

I have no agenda here. I’ve always just been interested in exploring other perspectives of debates…although I’m sure this particular thought will get flamed on here and end up very one-sided indeed 🤣
I don’t believe every trans woman has AGP, but I believe a significant proportion do. And I’ve always considered that proportion to be creepy, I feel anger at the fact these men get to walk around, at least in some circles, socially accepted as women, just so they can satisfy a sexual fetish. However, I was thinking about how I feel as a woman who’s comfortable and happy about being a woman when I get dressed up in my favourite sexy outfit and put on some makeup. It makes me feel sexy. Not sexually aroused but I do feel sexy. Is that vastly different to what a trans woman feels like when they get dressed up and look (at least in their eyes) like a woman? Could it be that it’s either not AGP and we all feel sexy when we know we look good as the gender we are or want to be…or everyone’s a bit AGP when they think they look sexy because they therefore feel sexy? Or is this a totally unoriginal thought that’s already been troped out by TRAs and actually there is a huge difference??

Why would men wear female stuff to become male sex objects? I like men dressed like men, just sexily. Men dressed like women is the anttihesis of a male sex object to me. Who would those men be male sex objects for, except maybe other men like them?

It is more like a location error regarding the target of their attraction. Instead of it facing outwards (towards an external stimulus, whether that be a woman's body, shoes or a traffic cone - thanks to Az Hakeem for mentioning that one), the location error turns the target of their lust towards themself.

I have read that some have proposed that AGP should be classed as a sexuality. So, you would have heterosexual (attracted to members of the opposite sex), homosexual (attracted to members of the same sex) and AGP/AAP (attracted to yourself).

Men can be attracted to the aforementioned traffic cones. Nothing is safe.

That is interesting. Not sure how to fit a wombat into a teapot though. They are rather large.

But again, AGP is defined as a male paraphilia, and requires the man to pretend to be something he isn't. And again, with AGP, no one else is involved.

The young woman is aroused because her boyfriend is aroused, or at least he will be when he sees her. She's thinking about his desire being for her. Two people are involved.

Oooh - big teapot required!

It's an odd one claiming that the longer you live the less you know about sex !!

Yes, very strange. But the young like to disparage the old, and women on the cusp of middle age do it so frequently, probably because of their fear of becoming old themselves.
I can honestly say I’ve personally had far better sexual relationships after the age of fifty than before it.

Datun

"See one of the TRAs upthread who said they want to be fucked like a woman because being fucked is what a woman is."

So, that's basically what I've been saying. And I don't disagree that in the eyes of society - comprising many men, but also many women - being fucked is what a woman is (for). Men perpetuate that, and many women internalise it. TRAs are just refracting the cultural misogyny from a different angle.

Still not AGP.

No agenda. Definitely not.

My thoughts also. If we're looking at the concept of men as objectified sex objects in society, my mind jumped to sitting in a cinema filled with women who were cheering and whooping during a screening of Magic Mike. Quite why they'd need to be wearing fishnets or other typically female accoutrements to be considered sex objects, I'm not sure.

I'm also fairly sure that men who are not AGP wouldn't be having a wank of the sight of their own bodies.

It's not true that no one else is involved with AGP. Men with those feelings often wear their "sexy" feminine-coded clothes out of the house because they want to feel others are desiring them/wanting to fuck them, which is very similar to what a lot of women feel.

And they often play that role/wear those clothes with their sexual partners (male or female), because, delusionally or not, they feel they are thus desirable.

Of course it isn't exactly the same, but I think there is definitely common ground. But it's considered ok and expected for women to perform the role we've been conditioned into, whereas for men it's a violation of the norm and goes completely against their expected role (and therein lies a lot of the thrill).

As seen in the quotes by AGP's upthread, it's less about being desired but a humilation or sissy fetish to be treated as they think women should be treated. Chu himself summed his view of the definition of femaleness to be 'barest essentials are an open mouth, an expectant arsehole, blank, blank eyes".

It's deeply misogynistic and views women as nothing more than objects to be used. AGP's get off on this idea.

Paraphilias cluster.

AGP often goes hand in hand with a humiliation fetish.

The most degrading thing that a man can be is -apparently- a woman. I, unfortunately, know enough about sissy porn and forced feminisation fetish to think that you fundamentally don't understand APG, its drivers and the co-morbidities (in terms of the other fetishes that go along with it).

It is an exclusively male thing by its very definition. Trying to shoehorn women into it with your perceived 'similarities' is making a basic error.

As I said in an earlier post on this thread - look at autoandrophilia.

ETA- cross-posted with Waitwhat.

Maybe because you're a (presumably) conventional heterosexual woman, with conventional expectations of men, and not a man.

You could go as far as to say that the whole system of gender itself constitutes a sort of fetish: a lot of heterosexual people's attraction seems to be contingent on conformity to gender norms, as much or more than it is to good-looking bodies of the opposite sex. We "perform" gender in large part to attract others, who are conditioned to respond to it.

I think a lot of men (probably including a lot of men who could not be called AGPs) wish that a more... aggressive and physical sexual appetite for them existed among women - the kind that exists among men. Many men have expressed a wish that they were gay for this reason; I expect most would be a lot more sexually fulfilled that way. Alas.

To answer your question: I can definitely be and have been attracted to men who wear feminine-coded clothes. I've dated a couple. But then I'm both bisexual and very unconventional, which probably both play a part.

Oooh, I'm getting the popcorn....

Me too!

And me!

Bisexual! Unconventional! What larks.

Seeth is quite right, though. There is nothing more ick-giving than a man dressed as his idea of a sexy woman.

This may contribute to many AGP ending up in 'Transbian' relationships.

Card-carrying larks, no less!

(I'm a bi-attracted transman...)

You're missing my point.

If such a thing as a male sex object existed, then presumably it would be to please the people attracted to men, yes? I'm one of those people. Yet, it would turn me right off if those men were dressed in female clothes. So it would fail miserably as an attempt at creating a male sex object as far as I'm concerned.

But dress those same men in sexy male clothes, and now we're talking!

We "perform" gender in large part to attract others, who are conditioned to respond to it.

I don't. I perform the male gender to be in adequation with myself. Whether other people find me attractive is irrelevant.

When someone refers to themselves as.'unconventional', it just makes me think of the mustachioed, craft beer swilling, bicycle clip and suspender wearing, man bunning, painfully self aware 'unconventional' types from 2016.

Bet there's a typewriter kicking about somewhere.

Anyway, this feels a bit like arguing with a wall (or several), so I'm ducking out.

Of course autogynaephilia can only be experienced by men; it's in the name. That doesn't mean there isn't common ground with gynaephilia, manifested in the objectification of women in society, including self-objectification, and gender norms and roles for women. Perhaps some bisexual women can understand: how wanting to have and wanting to be the female sex symbol could coexist.

I feel like I'm essentially agreeing with some posters on the sexism and reductivism inherent in these trends (submission, humiliation, dehumanisation, etc.), but from a slightly different angle, so they don't appear to see it.

And I don't need to "look at" autoandrophilia; I've experienced it myself (mostly over that, fortunately).

Anyway, I'm sure everyone will continue to have a great discussion agreeing with each other...

When I was a teenager, I sometimes liked to try on different outfits and look at myself in the mirror. There was nothing sexual about it though. I have never been turned on by my own reflection and I have never dressed up in order to pleasure myself. I have never pleasured myself in women's toilets, either. Just no. Therefore, I don't consider myself to be an autogynephile.

Nice ad hominems. 👌Just extremely rude, really.

And yet I got pounced on earlier for describing some posters as "closed off"...