>"Once I finally did accept my sexuality, which didn’t occur until after transition in my mid thirties, I found even more turmoil with the notion that I wasn't gay, but instead had an erotic target location error and my attraction to men wasn’t real. I cannot understate just how disjointing this revelation was, as well as disturbing. Imagine, spending years struggling to accept yourself, only to have to start all over again."
The reaction you had here—of realizing that your attraction to men originates in meta-attraction rather than conventional attraction, and having your identity destabilized once again by this revelation—is a recurring pattern I've seen. You're definitely not the only one. However, thinking of it as "my attraction to men isn't real" is often not a helpful way of framing it for the people who experience same-sex attraction due to meta-attraction. It can create a lot of inner emotional turmoil in someone over whether they genuinely love their romantic partner and whether it's morally acceptable for them to have same-sex relationships.
My take: if you are same-sex attracted, it matters less whether this attraction is conventional or meta in nature, and moreso whether you treat your same-sex partner with love and respect. Do you treat him well, and does he want to be in a relationship with you? This matters more than the theoretical explanation for where your same-sex attraction comes from.
I guess I am one of the few to accept that my trans inclination is autogynphelia. I thought accepting it as a sexual motivation would be a bad thing but I found, ironically the opposite to be true because in conclusion I was a man with a fetish rather than a woman trapped in a man's body. A man with a fetish is not unusual. Being ruled by the fetish would be a problem, certainly. But like anything else, know the time, the place, and don't mistake a sexual fantasy with reality.
I think I'm probably the minority in this view point though.
Your experience, intelligence, wit, curation of facts, connections within trans and detrans communities, and willingness to treat others with respect has made your voice stand out. You have presented me with more food for thought today and sparked some agreement and disagreement. I will have to think and come back to read again as I digest this. It’s also enlightening reading the comments.
Too many folks are pushing for a simple identification of a root cause to be addressed. People are not systems that can be duplicated even in the same household with the same parents. If only we could all be debugged. Our code and dependencies are just too complex.
"I’m equally frustrated at older gay people, who claim they would have adopted a trans identity if they were growing up today."
I'm an older gay person and so is my husband. Neither of us would dream of saying we would adopt a trans identity were we growing up today. I think I'm correct in saying that none of our gay friends would either. I can think of few things more nightmarish than killing or disowning the parts of me that make me a man. It is entirely possible that some older gay men somewhere wish they had transitioned, but I've never encountered one nor can I understand what would motivate them to say that.
Me too. I found the typologies confusing at first, and i dont think we should live and die by them. There are gay people who transition, and there are very soft men like us who do so too. Part of the issue is our desire to categorise and put complex feelings into neat boxes. It works sometimes, but its not always useful.
I may be way off base with this but it feels like the concept of AGP and the language around it has been changed, broadened, and expanded so much that it's approaching the wide-net definition of "gender dysphoria" that can mean almost whatever you want it to mean. I would not be surprised to see many of the same factors of social contagion and over diagnosis affect the concept of AGP because of these ever changing and vaguer but more encompassing definitions. Yes, social contagion usually affects teen girls and young women, but it also can affect men (for example, Havana Syndrome and WWI shell shock) and ALL people are vulnerable to latching onto explanations that don't really fit to explain their distress.
I find it disconcerting how many similarities there are between the way AGP/auto/meta sexuality is being ever-expanded and pushed using many of the same tactics used by activists for gender dysphoria/affirmation/transition: the ever expanding and changing definitions and inclusion criteria (such as Ray Alex Williams proposing on Twitter that men who are particular and meticulous fall under under the "AGP phenotype"), the denial of ROGD (some going so far as to say much or even most ROGD in teen girls is really autosexuality), the conflation with autism, telling people they must accept they're actually AGP (it feels like "egg cracking"), the bold proclamations with no real data or quality research behind them. I'm not denying some form of AGP exists. And I'm not in any place to say who does or does not have it. But I'm bothered by just how similar these tactics and ideas are and how many people on the gender-skeptical side are so quick to embrace this without noticing the similarities and asking more questions. I may be wrong but I can't help but get a very uneasy feeling we're repeating the same mistakes that got us into this mess to start with.
>"Once I finally did accept my sexuality, which didn’t occur until after transition in my mid thirties, I found even more turmoil with the notion that I wasn't gay, but instead had an erotic target location error and my attraction to men wasn’t real. I cannot understate just how disjointing this revelation was, as well as disturbing. Imagine, spending years struggling to accept yourself, only to have to start all over again."
The reaction you had here—of realizing that your attraction to men originates in meta-attraction rather than conventional attraction, and having your identity destabilized once again by this revelation—is a recurring pattern I've seen. You're definitely not the only one. However, thinking of it as "my attraction to men isn't real" is often not a helpful way of framing it for the people who experience same-sex attraction due to meta-attraction. It can create a lot of inner emotional turmoil in someone over whether they genuinely love their romantic partner and whether it's morally acceptable for them to have same-sex relationships.
My take: if you are same-sex attracted, it matters less whether this attraction is conventional or meta in nature, and moreso whether you treat your same-sex partner with love and respect. Do you treat him well, and does he want to be in a relationship with you? This matters more than the theoretical explanation for where your same-sex attraction comes from.
I guess I am one of the few to accept that my trans inclination is autogynphelia. I thought accepting it as a sexual motivation would be a bad thing but I found, ironically the opposite to be true because in conclusion I was a man with a fetish rather than a woman trapped in a man's body. A man with a fetish is not unusual. Being ruled by the fetish would be a problem, certainly. But like anything else, know the time, the place, and don't mistake a sexual fantasy with reality.
I think I'm probably the minority in this view point though.
After the chats I've had, I don't think you are. Thanks for sharing :)
Your experience, intelligence, wit, curation of facts, connections within trans and detrans communities, and willingness to treat others with respect has made your voice stand out. You have presented me with more food for thought today and sparked some agreement and disagreement. I will have to think and come back to read again as I digest this. It’s also enlightening reading the comments.
Too many folks are pushing for a simple identification of a root cause to be addressed. People are not systems that can be duplicated even in the same household with the same parents. If only we could all be debugged. Our code and dependencies are just too complex.
Exactly!
Kol hakavod. I know this isn't easy to talk about. This was really excellent and I can't wait to read the rest of the series.
Thank you <3
Thank you!!
Thank you for doing this. I will be following this.
Brilliant, Ritchie!! Keep doing you. Sending Love from Southwestern, US <3
Excellent post.
"I’m equally frustrated at older gay people, who claim they would have adopted a trans identity if they were growing up today."
I'm an older gay person and so is my husband. Neither of us would dream of saying we would adopt a trans identity were we growing up today. I think I'm correct in saying that none of our gay friends would either. I can think of few things more nightmarish than killing or disowning the parts of me that make me a man. It is entirely possible that some older gay men somewhere wish they had transitioned, but I've never encountered one nor can I understand what would motivate them to say that.
Only gay people think modern internet porno could be benign. Opposite sexes were a mystery for a million years. Porn is terrorism.
Me too. I found the typologies confusing at first, and i dont think we should live and die by them. There are gay people who transition, and there are very soft men like us who do so too. Part of the issue is our desire to categorise and put complex feelings into neat boxes. It works sometimes, but its not always useful.
I may be way off base with this but it feels like the concept of AGP and the language around it has been changed, broadened, and expanded so much that it's approaching the wide-net definition of "gender dysphoria" that can mean almost whatever you want it to mean. I would not be surprised to see many of the same factors of social contagion and over diagnosis affect the concept of AGP because of these ever changing and vaguer but more encompassing definitions. Yes, social contagion usually affects teen girls and young women, but it also can affect men (for example, Havana Syndrome and WWI shell shock) and ALL people are vulnerable to latching onto explanations that don't really fit to explain their distress.
I find it disconcerting how many similarities there are between the way AGP/auto/meta sexuality is being ever-expanded and pushed using many of the same tactics used by activists for gender dysphoria/affirmation/transition: the ever expanding and changing definitions and inclusion criteria (such as Ray Alex Williams proposing on Twitter that men who are particular and meticulous fall under under the "AGP phenotype"), the denial of ROGD (some going so far as to say much or even most ROGD in teen girls is really autosexuality), the conflation with autism, telling people they must accept they're actually AGP (it feels like "egg cracking"), the bold proclamations with no real data or quality research behind them. I'm not denying some form of AGP exists. And I'm not in any place to say who does or does not have it. But I'm bothered by just how similar these tactics and ideas are and how many people on the gender-skeptical side are so quick to embrace this without noticing the similarities and asking more questions. I may be wrong but I can't help but get a very uneasy feeling we're repeating the same mistakes that got us into this mess to start with.