Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory
Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrences theory of transsexual behavior and taxonomy of biological males with gender identity disorder is also known as "the theory of Autogynephilia" It postulates that there are two types of transsexuals Autogynephiles and homosexual transsexuals. The difference and distinction between them is the presence or absence of
Transvestic fetishism in conjunction with gender identity disorder in the case of the Autogynephile. Only a psychological professional versed in transgender psychological issues, who agrees with this theory, after through examinations can tell the difference between the two with any real certainty.
This is an attempt to distill Blanchard's theory down to the basic
postulates used to construct the model. Understanding this theory rests on assuming as true and self-evident the following statements or postulates:
*Every male is either homosexual or heterosexual, and these labels are applied with respect to the birth sex and its associated gender identity, male. Bisexuality in males exist only as a response to homophobia. For the purpose of this theory males who are bisexual pre-transition are to be considered homosexual.
*Sexual orientation is not changed by any number of cosmetic procedures. Heterosexual transsexuals remain heterosexual, homosexual transsexuals remain homosexual. Transsexuals who appear to be bisexual due to orientation towards women prior to transition then a switch to men after transition are in fact heterosexual.
*All patients lie to present themselves in the most sympathetic light possible, whatever light they may think that is. This may mean a suspected autogynephile lying about their past to make it sound more feminine. This could also mean a suspected "homosexual transsexual" lying about their past in order to sound less "gay".
The logical conclusion of accepting these postulates is that all transsexuals transition either out of their hyper homosexuality or misdirected heterosexuality. Then the labels "homosexual transsexual" and autogynephile are applied respectively to each group.
Blanchard's origination of the theory
This theory was originated in its current form by Ray Blanchard of the
Clarke Institute in
Toronto,
Canada. Blanchard claims that the concept of the autogynephile has been known to sexology for some time. He claims that the observations of classic sexologists such as
Magnus Hirschfeld and
Kurt Freund support the concept of the autogynephile. It was in the late 70s that he first met Dr. Freund. At that time, Freund was working on a project published in 1982 called "Two Types of Cross-Gender Identity." What Freund wanted to know was whether Gender Identity Disorder was the same regardless of sexual orientation. The conclusion of Freund's research was that Gender Identity Disorder is different for
androphiles and
gynophiles. Freund's article is notable to Blanchard [
1] :"The reason that I stress this 1982 article is that in it Freund, perhaps for the first time of any author, employed a term other than "transvestism" to denote erotic arousal in association with cross-gender fantasy. His reasons for doing so are not clear in the article, and I cannot fully trust my recollections of conversations about the manuscript from 25 years ago."Blanchard explains how once he was at the
Clarke Institute he sought to determine just how many more types of transsexual there were. He describes how his strategy was to begin with many, many different groups and then reduce that number as low as made sense by combining groups which seem to have no real differences. He began by using sexual orientation, denoted with respect to the presumed male gender identity of his research subjects, as his way of categorizing male to female transsexuals. Namely, "homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, and asexual (i.e., transsexuals attracted to men, women, both, or neither, respectively." He eventually concludes that there are only two types; "homosexual transsexuals" and "autogynephilic transsexuals".
Allusion to this theory in the current DSM.
In the current
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the DSM-IV TR (third revision published in 2000), the section on gender identity disorder according to [
2] and,[
3] specifies
transvestic fetishism as a related
paraphilia. If someone is diagnosed by a professional with transvestic fetishism as well as gender dysphoria, then they have in fact been diagnosed as an autogynephile. On the other hand, if after the same examination by a psychologist one is not diagnosed with transvestic fetishism then they are probably not an autogynephile. This correspondence is implied by the simple fact that an autogynephille as described by Blanchard would have all the symptoms of transvestetic fetishism regardless of any professed sexual orientation, age or occupation.
The presence of these terms in the DSM suggest that the establishment of the psychological community has, at least in part, accepted the ideas of Blanchard. There are many psychologists who object to the pathologizing of gender identity disorder in the first place.
According to Blanchard there are only two broad categories of transsexual "homosexual transsexuals", and Autogynephiles. It has been said that the difference between the two is age and professed sexual orientation. This cannot be true because one can lie about their sexual orientation and many people do so. Generally lying to hide homosexuality i.e. being in the closet. The difference between the two really boils down to the presence or absence of transvestic fetishism.
Autogynephiles
Autogynephiles suffer from an extreme variation on
Transvestic fetishism. Basically any transsexual who also suffers from the symptoms of transvestic fetishism is an Autogynephile
In Bailey's book he describes the Autogynephile as transitioning at an average age of 45. They were typically masculine little boys and very masculine as grown men. They often were the type who was first string on the (American) football team, or green beret commando's. They have usually had long and successful careers in typically masculine occupations. Very often these women remain married to their wives who they have been married to for many years after transition.
Homosexual transsexuals
All transsexuals who are in fact free of transvestic fetishes are of this type. The vast majority of transsexuals fall into this category. Transsexuals who are strictly un attracted to female anatomy would be unable to have a fetish for having a female body or wearing the clothing of a female. Hence the emphasis placed on an exclusive homosexual pre transition sexual orientation by way of the name given to this type.
This type of transsexual regardless of their professed sexual orientation makes a socially awkward male. They may attempt to fit into society as a homosexual male but find that homosexual males are unattractive to them. They may try to fit into heterosexual society for a short time. They are never able to maintain that front long enough to have grown children or a long masculine career.
It is worth noting that this type of transsexual has been observed through all of history. They have been called primary, true, or classical transsexuals. They have been seen as the
Hijra (South Asia) of South Asia ,
Two-Spirit of Native North Americans, and the
Mukhannathun of Arab/muslim society. One case illustrates the whole phenomena of heterosexual transsexuality. The Roman Emperor
Elagabalus who was married five times but only had a lasting relationship with his slave and chariot driver who she referred to as her husband. She is thought by some to have undergone a primitive form of sexual reassignment surgery before dying, being killed by her guards or faking her death at the age of 25. [
4]
The book written by
J. Michael Bailey, "
The Man Who Would Be Queen" . [
5] for consumption by the public and introductory psychology students started a controversy in the transsexual community at large. It has also sparked more productive scholarly debate about the issue by way of the criticisms it has attracted.
The Controversy
This controversy would engulf the TS community in a civil war like state for many years The lack of figures and statistics to support the assertions made in the book is typical of a popular book written about a scientific topic. (Compare to
A Brief History of Time by
Stephen Hawking ) In the book Bailey follows a few transsexuals he knew personally and claims they illustrate Blanchards Ideas. In the book statements are made about the comparative attractiveness of homosexual transsexuals as compared to autogynephilic transsexuals. Then Anne Lawrence an admitted autogynephile who ran a popular website full of information referenced by many transsexuals published an essay where she basically claimed that most if not all transsexuals were autogynephiles. Then in response Lynn Conway started an investigation into the writing of this book as well as the publication of this book by the National Academies of science. Accusations of all sorts of misconduct on the part of Bailey were leveled. Eventually Bailey resigned from his position as head of psychology at Northwestern University.
Bailey's book spawned many arguments on Internet support groups as well as in real life support groups. The way BBL theory is presented in "The Man who would be Queen" gives the impression that one type of transsexual is somehow better than the other. This perceived value judgment (see below) played a role in the controversy. Anyone asserting they were HSTS or who had views similar to those who did was thought to be making this same judgment. The scenario would play out like this. Person A writes of the relief that they got for many years from partial or part time crossdressing and /or how they get turned on by such and such an article of clothing starting at age 13. Person B says that their transsexuality centered on hot guys and they looked and acted like a girl no matter what they were wearing. Person A says person B is lying and is really just a much more intense case of what person A has. OR Person A doubts that people like person B actually exist..... A flame war often resulted from this interaction. Such flame wars have turned once friendly supportive places into places where one type of Ts or the other begins to feel unwelcome. Which is very unfortunate for all.
Scientific Criticism
Madeline H. Wyndzen notes several possible scientific concerns psychologists do have with Blanchard's model. [
6]
*Correlational evidence is used to make causal claims. Rather than causing transsexualism, transsexuals may fantasize about being their target sex to compensate for feeling disconnected from their identities.
*No comparisons are made with control groups of typically-gendered women. Those attracted to their own sex, regardless of if they are transsexuals, may pay more attention to themselves as sexual beings.
*Correlations with sexual orientation are not sufficient to assert that there are two types of transsexuals. The evidence for two types of transsexuals may instead be correlations with sexual orientation that can also be found among non-transsexual.
*Furthermore, the distributions of sexual orientation among transsexuals do not reveal two categorically distinct groups. Wyndzen notes that a significant concern raised by the history of this theory may be that it begins by assuming there is something wrong with transsexuals This may color what is meant to be scientific account. A scientific theory might begin with the objective question, "What is transsexualism?" Instead, Wyndzen notes that Blachard asks in his research, "What kind of defect in a male's capacity for sexual learning could produce anatomic autogynephilia, transvestitism, ..." This embedded value judgment may help explain why Blachard's views have been so contentious among transsexuals. This contentiousness became more intense upon the publication of J. Michael Bailey's book (see above). Recently, Blanchard acknowledges Wyndzen's criticism of Bailey's use of the term "
autogynephilia." We need to distinguish the use of the word when it only means cross-gender fantasy" and when it carries its theoretical implications.
*
genderpsychology.org Psychology of Gender Identity Disorder and transgenderism DSM*
Gender Identity Disorder Sanctuary DSM Gender Identity Disorder*
Blanchard, "Origins of the Concept of Autogynephilia", 2004*
The TRANSSEXUAL PHENOMENON Harry Benjamin, M.D. Appendix c *
A Personal & Scientific look at a Mental Illness Model of transsexualism Wyndzen MH (2004). (
PDF)
Division 44 Newsletter, v.20(1), 3,
American Psychological Association*
The Man Who Would Be Queen ''
National Academy of Sciences press*
The Concept of Autogynephilia and the Typology of Male Gender Dysphoria by Ray Blanchard (1989)
*
Autogynephilia & Ray Blanchard's Mis-Directed Sex-Drive Model of Transsexuality by Madeline H. Wyndzen (2003)
*
Sexuality and Transsexuality: A New Introduction to Autogynephilia - Anne A. Lawrence (2000)
*
Ray Blanchard on TS Roadmap by Andrea James
*
Transkids FAQ by TransKids.us
