The podcast…
The video…
Yes, autogynephilia is real.
It’s a thing.
It exists.
But acknowledging its existence doesn’t mean we rush off to award Raymond Blanchard a Nobel Prize or treat the concept as the final word on the phenomenon (and certainly not on gender identity and transition.)
Understanding AGP requires context, caution, and nuance—hence the Three Laws of Autogynephilia:
The Three Laws of Autogynephilia
LAW 1:
Just because the sexuality described by the term “autogynephilia” exists doesn’t mean it’s the best or most appropriate label to use.
My mate Trevor might argue that Welsh people should be called “sheep sha**ers,” but most would (rightfully) quibble with his term. Even if he Latinizes it to amatores ovium, it doesn’t suddenly make the label acceptable.

The term “autogynephilia” may align with conventions for naming sexual preferences, but this doesn’t make it immune to critique or misuse.
Some might consider this argument reductio ad absurdum—since loving sheep and loving oneself as a woman are separated by significant moral, legal, and psychological gulfs. However, the point stands: if the term becomes a weapon to label all trans people as “perverts” or “deviants,” it transitions from descriptive to harmful.
LAW 2:
Just because autogynephilia exists doesn’t mean all transgender people are autogynephiliacs, nor does it mean AGP is present in everyone who experiences cross-gender arousal.
Acknowledging its reality is not a “gotcha” moment against the trans community.

Why?
Because while AGP undeniably exists, assuming all transgender people are the same is a fundamental misunderstanding. Even Blanchard, who introduced the concept, proposed multiple categories of trans individuals. In reality, the diversity within the trans community is far greater, ranging from “trenders” to “transmedicalists” and everything in between.
AGPers represent a subset—not a majority—of MtF trans women.
LAW 3:
Even if you could definitively prove someone transitioning is an autogynephiliac, you cannot definitively say their primary motivation for transitioning is sexual.
Sex plays a role in many life decisions—just as it does in marriage, or even the Trojan War. But the complete, life-altering, and often financially ruinous experience of transitioning is highly unlikely to be driven primarily by sexual motives.
Yes, sexuality may contribute, but reducing someone’s transition to this single factor is neither clinically, legally, nor morally defensible.
Moreover, since most transgender individuals are not autogynephiliacs, how would we even identify those who are? Would we resort to invasive “porn history investigations”? Such efforts would almost certainly devolve into a chaotic and damaging witch hunt.

Conclusion
Autogynephilia is real and demonstrable because…
- First-Hand Accounts: Many individuals openly describe themselves as autogynephiliacs. Anecdotal evidence abounds in books like Anne Lawrence’s and on platforms like YouTube.
- Cultural Evidence: The vast array of AGP-related pornography clearly points to the existence of this orientation. Such material wouldn’t exist without demand.
- Analogous Phenomena: The broader spectrum of autosexual impulses across orientations shows that self-directed attraction is a real and recognized phenomenon, extending logically to AGP.
- Distinction from Transgender Identity: While some argue cross-gender arousal stems from a suppressed transgender identity, this theory fails when considering individuals with AGP who neither desire to transition nor identify as transgender.
However, the existence of the phenomenon doesn’t mandate the use of a specific linguistic label. The term “autogynephilia” has become loaded and often misused. For this reason, it must always be contextualized and constrained by the Three Laws of Autogynephilia to prevent harm and misunderstanding.
Further reading
Argument against
Argument against AGP existing is led by people like Contrapoints
Julia Serrano is also an avid anti Blanchardite and her best work on the subject (in my opinion very unconvincing) is considered this paper.
Jack Molay has a site almost entirely dedicated to debunking AGP
Argument for
The powerhouse on this argument is undoubtedly Anne Lawrence. If you read her book and then still believe autogynephilia doesn’t exist then you need to seek treatment for pathological denial.
This is an example of a newer generation of material where the case isn’t so much argued it’s just assumed to be true. These tend to come from more conservative and politically motivated sources.
Both sides
Here’s an example of how people in the public enter the debate.
Why can’t we talk about autogynephilia?
byu/Tdabs19 inExplainBothSides
FAQs
What’s the difference between transvestsm and AGP?
Why should trans people need to stop freaking out about autogynephilisa?
Should AGP be taught in sex-ed classes?
That’s all for now…
What are your thoughts on the Three Laws of Autogynephilia? Join the conversation in the comments below!