I’ve just been rereading Anne Lawrence, and one passage particularly struck me: the relationship between other self directed sexual behaviors and crossdreaming. Anne Lawrence uses these behaviors as proof that crossdreaming (autogynephilia) is a paraphilia and that any resulting female identification the result of said paraphilia.
We know that for every sexual preference there exists a subgroup of people who are not just attracted to the target, but attracted to the idea of themselves as the target. Thus, there is a small percentage of paedophiles who are turned on by the idea of being children, a number of plush toy fetishists who are turned on by the idea of being plush toys, and… a number of heterosexual guys who are turned on by the idea of being women etc. Clearly, this sexual desire to be the target is caused by a paraphilia; obviously a person who wants to be a plush toy can not claim that they are a plush toy trapped in a human body…such a thing is not possible…they simply have a sexual fetish for being a plush toy and that’s what motivates their desire to be a plush toy.
Crossdreamers, however, try to deny that this impeccable logic applies to them. They claim that their sexual desire to be a woman is not a paraphilia but the result of the fact that they are, in some sense, women. However, given the fact we already know there are a whole family of sexual paraphilias that involve wanting to be the thing the person is attracted to, isn’t it far more likely that the desire to be a woman in a crossdreamer is part of the same family of paraphilias? Of course it is! Therefore, we can say that it’s the sexual desire to be a woman that makes a crossdreamer want to be a woman…and not some feminine essence within him, as the prevailing transgender narrative claims.
I had to reread the passage several times. It is an extremely powerful argument for ‘autogynephiliac transsexualism’. Cross gender arousal on its own could be indicative of feminine essence, but if you then discover there’s a whole family of cross-type-arousals ranging from cross species arousal to cross generation arousal to cross object arousal (none of which are the result of being an animal/child/plushtoy trapped in a man’s body) it makes a significant case for the sexual origins of female identification in crossdreamers.
When I originally put fingers to keyboard my plan was to publish my own refutation of this argument, but I had a sudden, playful desire to throw it out to my readers. The challenge is therefore to write the best refutation you can of Anne Lawrence’s argument for autogynephilia by association with other paraphilias.
The best refutation will win the title ‘Transcend Movement Theorist Of The Year 2016’ (I admit it’s not exactly a CV game changer but…) and a six pack of Estrella Dam (there’s a star in the Estrella logo, thus the ‘star’ prize). I hope to initiate a tradition on this website where each summer we pose an extra tricky question; so now we have this year’s question you can get thinking and get writing!
All entries must be submitted under a false name. This is to avoid accusations of bias to Sandra or Jack or some other friend. Obviously…if I know your e-mail address then use a different one. You can submit either here in ‘comments,’ or on the Lefora Crosdreamers forum or the Crossdreamer reddit or to my email address firstname.lastname@example.org
Important: remember to stay on topic! We are not looking for wider arguments about autogynephilia (as we’ve done them to death.) What we want is a refutation of the specific argument outlined above. No one has satisfactorily dealt with it before (in my opinion) so it’s worth writing about.