Lead

Mar 14 17 3:34 AM

Tags : :

There is no autogynephilia in women, Blanchard says. In one way he is right. The whole theory is so wrong, wrong, wrong. On the other hand, as Charles Moser pointed out: cis women do often express joy of being who they are, loving themselves as women. And that is a good thing.

I found this series over at Cassandra Summer's Crossdreamed blog. It's priceless!

 image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

 
Quote    Reply   

#1 [url]

Mar 14 17 5:37 AM

Also women do not crossdream about being other woman, mostly because cross- prefix here is wrong. Proof: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-couch/201701/between-friends-sexuality-in-womens-friendships

But connected to the arousal by "femininity" is the idea of identification. Many women look at other women and feel a bond that is both physical and emotional. “It’s like I was imagining what it’s like to be in her body,” said the young woman who liked watching Emma Stone in La La Land. “I didn’t want to have sex with her. I wanted to be her.” 

Well said!

image

Quote    Reply   

#2 [url]

Mar 14 17 1:24 PM

Also women do not crossdream about being other woman, mostly because cross- prefix here is wrong


That's right, and let us leave it at that. I am definitely not going to start calling them cis-dreamers :)

Charles Moser's point is still valid, though, and your quote is gold!

Quote    Reply   

#4 [url]

Mar 14 17 2:37 PM

Rubbercripple. It makes no sense to you because the word "autogynephilia" was a poor invention for the behavior it attempts to describe. People are aroused by the thought of themselves as appearing attractive to others. That goes for males and females, and it has nothing to do orientation. I have seen people of both sexes view themselves in the mirror and get a look of arousal from it. They are imagining themselves turning on another individual. That happens all the time in the CIS world. With transgender people, this gets twisted because they need to imagine themselves in a body they weren't born into to make this work. What you constantly are not getting in these discussions is direction of causality here.

Quote    Reply   

#5 [url]

Mar 14 17 2:57 PM

April: Exactly! "they need to imagine themselves in a body they weren't born into to make this work." Women are not doing this when imagining themselves as another woman are they? Also, there is no "cis" world, it's just the world, we're all part of it. So, what do I call a man ( me for example ) imagining I am another man? Autoandrophilia? It makes no sense.

Quote    Reply   

#6 [url]

Mar 14 17 3:37 PM

Rubbercripple, I am not sure I actually understood your post. I have this feeling that you are always trying to imply more than you actually say. Basking in one's own physical appeal, whether that is real or imagined, can be a turn on for everybody. That is simply an element of the human condition. If I was born with no legs. I would probably imagine what is like to have them, and even possibly feel some of the joy associated with dreaming about that. Those born with souls misaligned with their biological sex have a very similar situation.

Quote    Reply   

#7 [url]

Mar 14 17 4:53 PM

rubbercripple wrote:
April: Exactly! "they need to imagine themselves in a body they weren't born into to make this work." Women are not doing this when imagining themselves as another woman are they? Also, there is no "cis" world, it's just the world, we're all part of it. So, what do I call a man ( me for example ) imagining I am another man? Autoandrophilia? It makes no sense.

Well yeah they are.  

And yes, that would be autoandrophilia.  I posted a more blatant example in the safe room of exactly this very phenomena:

http://crossdreamlife.lefora.com/topic/693/AutoANDROphilia-in-a-nonhomosexual-cisMale

Personally, I think that it is possible that almost everyone has some degree of both autoandrophilia and autogynephilia.  Some people have it to a stronger degree than others.  To some it is a casual interest that comes and goes, and to others it is a preferred fantasy.  For a small few it is our exclusive source of erotic emotion.  

I just think transgender people are far more likely, due to our circumstances, to develop these automonosexual natures.

Also, as an asexual crossdreamer, I want to point out that autogynephillia/autoandrophillia are both HORRIBLY termed and defined words evern when trying to describe us crossdreamers.  They etymologically mean Self woman/man love  and put together mean to love oneself as a man/woman.  Offically they mean to be sexually attracted to oneself as a woman/man.  Either way, it implies a degree of narcissism (in the classical sense.)

But, this is not what I experience at all.  If we were to use the above definitions then the ideal situation for every crossdreamer here would be to remain male and to have an opposite sex clone of themselves as a partner.  Yet, how many people on this board have expressed such a desire?  None that I know of.

Further, as an asexual, I don't desire to have sex with ANYONE.  Male or female.  Opposite sex clone or not.  For me, thinking of MYSELF as a female is pleasurable and arousing.  But, there is still no desire to have sex with anyone, nor is there romantic feelings either.  Its like a person who gets aroused by leather.  They are not interested in having sex with leather or want to have a romantic relationship with leather...they just find the feeling/thought of it arousing.  

Quote    Reply   

#8 [url]

Mar 14 17 8:32 PM

And I might add, without having to add to the confusion I hope, that we who are aroused by "leeatherrrrr" (to quote Frank Zappa) and similar tight fitting, light reflecting material, it's not the inanimate object, it's leather being worn by somebody, ourselves and others, preferably in a situation that is also heavy in 'leather' atmosphere. smiley: wink

Now, did I add to this conversation or not? Not sure. I lost track.

Kisses,
Monique

"We live only to discover beauty. All else is a form of waiting."

- Khalil Gibran


If I cannot be a feminine traditional woman, what's the point of being a woman?

- Me

Last Edited By: Monique Mar 14 17 8:38 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#9 [url]

Mar 15 17 2:40 AM

Monique wrote:
And I might add, without having to add to the confusion I hope, that we who are aroused by "leeatherrrrr" (to quote Frank Zappa) and similar tight fitting, light reflecting material, it's not the inanimate object, it's leather being worn by somebody, ourselves and others, preferably in a situation that is also heavy in 'leather' atmosphere. smiley: wink

Now, did I add to this conversation or not? Not sure. I lost track.

Kisses,
Monique
So did I.  But I am always Lost.  Seems like a good point to post a semi-related video though!





Quote    Reply   

#12 [url]

Mar 15 17 4:02 PM

rubbercripple wrote:
April:
Being born without legs and wondering what its like to have them has nothing to do with autogynephilia.

Rubbercripple, Why are you really here? You have asked a lot of questions, and several of us have tried to explain our experiences using words you might understand. But it's clear that your questions are all rhetorical, and your mind is made up before we respond. You challenge us with repeated innuendos, but you never counter our arguments with any backup. What is the point of all this? What's the end game here?

Quote    Reply   

#13 [url]

Mar 15 17 11:07 PM

Exactly, April. rubbercripple's claims of being a friend of transgender people sounds more and more meaningless by the day.

Let me try this one more time.

Rubbercripple, you have yourself provided the answer to your question regarding the similarities between the autoerotic aspect of the sexuality of trans women and the autoerotic aspect of the sexuality of cis women:

April: Exactly! "they need to imagine themselves in a body they weren't born into to make this work."

Please meditate on that one.

Both trans and non-transgender women (which means the same as  offending "cis" word, but may not annoy you in the same way) may get aroused by the idea of being a sexy, attractive, woman. This is natural. This is healthy. This is a way of preparing yourself for a sexual life out there with other people. It is not narcissistic. It is not pathological. It simply is what it is.

Pre-transitioning transgender women do not have a body that is compatible with such fantasies or feelings. So they imagine themselves having a female body. Then they get aroused by the fantasy of being a sexy woman. Same thing. Different context. Not pathological. Not a disease.

Now, Barbara adds another dimension to this, quoting a woman who get aroused by the idea of being another sexy woman, which brings trans and non-transgender sexuality even closer. The thing is: Role playing and "what if" dream scenarios is a natural part of any person's sexuality. So please stop supporting an ideology whose main aim is to exclude trans women from our common humanity!

I am going to post this video one more time. It is a humorous take on "feeling sexy" among gay men. Same thing again, although this one takes it to the extreme.




 

Quote    Reply   

#14 [url]

Mar 16 17 3:41 AM

Jack: April was talking about trans people having to imagine themselves in the opposite body for things to work...I didn't write it I quoted it. We are talking about natal females being aroused at the thought of being women or as some people are claiming they experience autogynephilia; this does not make sense to me as they are already women. Transwomen or men who may get aroused at the thought of being female are showing autogynephilia.

Quote    Reply   

#15 [url]

Mar 16 17 3:49 AM

I'm not here to abuse anyone I'm not here to force any ideas I'm here because there are similarities between crossdreaming and autogynephilia I find the subject fascinating, it's that simple.

Quote    Reply   

#16 [url]

Mar 16 17 7:06 AM

rubbercripple wrote:
Lost: I'd like to read your post but I can't get into the safe room at the moment :(
I will PM you my OP.  I don't want to post it here, because it refers to a post in another forum, and although that was a public forum, I don't think it would be ethical to post it here where it can be found here via a simple google search.

rubbercripple wrote:
 April was talking about trans people having to imagine themselves in the opposite body for things to work...I didn't write it I quoted it. We are talking about natal females being aroused at the thought of being women or as some people are claiming they experience autogynephilia; this does not make sense to me as they are already women. Transwomen or men who may get aroused at the thought of being female are showing autogynephilia.
With regards to what I bolded and underlined...so are transwomen.  This is the problem, you don't consider transwomen as women.  Most transwomen consider themselves women, as do I. 

If they are women, then they are engaging in a behavior all other women engage in.  Which makes sense because they are women.  You are putting in an arbitrary difference for the express purpose of saying they are different.

Being either a MAAB/FAAB (male/female assigned at birth) is not a part of the definition of any type of automonosexuality. If we were to add MAAB to the definition of autogynephilia then what you have just done is turn every transwoman who ever engaged in perfectly normal female behavior into nothing more than a fetish.  

It would be like saying that every mammal that meows is a cat....except for mammal that meow named Max.  That would be creating an arbritary reason to exclude all cats named Max, from being classified as cats.  You have created an unwinnable criteria where Max the cat can never prove he is a cat.

You have literally moved the goal post so that there is no way for transwomen to win. That isn't very fair, and the reason you are getting such a bad reaction.

Last Edited By: Lost247365 Mar 16 17 9:39 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#17 [url]

Mar 16 17 9:21 AM

Lost, Thanks for succinctly articulating the key disconnect here.

Rubbercripple, it’s clear to many of us that you don’t buy into the gender theory that dominates the therapist community. You have focused on the arousal aspect of our journeys without acknowledging the larger gender identity issue as the root cause. Several of us have patiently tried to explain that the order of things here is not as you imply in your questions or innuendos. Cross dreaming exists as a mechanism for reconciling gender identity issues, and not the other way around as Blanchard’s half baked theory attempts to suggest. We have repeatedly explained that, both by supplying an intellectual framework and through personal narratives, but it’s beginning to feel a lot like that movie “Groundhog Day” in our dialogues. We keep ending up in the exact same place like none of what we have said has even registered with you.

Quote    Reply   

#18 [url]

Mar 16 17 1:37 PM

Lost: Thank you very much I would like to read it, very kind :) I understand my views on transwomen (and transmen for that matter) are offensive to some. I honestly think people living how they feel is the best way to live and I agree, it gets like groundhog day when I start posting. We should all just have a beer or something :)

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help