Making Sense of Autogynephilia Debates

As a scientist who has <a href="http://juliaserano.com/TSetiology.html" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">written extensively</a> about the field of transgender health, I am always astounded by how often Ray Blanchard’s autogynephilia theory is cited or invoked, given that it has been so resoundingly refuted in the research literature. In this essay, I will attempt to explain why so many people still find the theory compelling, despite its lack of scientific validity. Hopefully, this will be a helpful “explainer” for lay readers who don’t necessarily want to get too “into the weeds” regarding this thirty-year-old sexology theory, but want a general sense of what all the fuss is about. This essay is divided into three sections: 1) The theory (and the evidence against it) in a nutshell, 2) Trans women’s objections to the theory (on top of it being incorrect), and 3) So who still believes autogynephilia theory, and what are their rationales? A companion essay entitled <a href="https://medium.com/@juliaserano/autogynephilia-ad-hoc-hypotheses-and-handwaving-cecca4f6563d?sk=d2c06947ce29a261371fd43ed15743ff" rel="noopener">Autogynephilia, ad hoc hypotheses, and handwaving</a> is in the works (edit 4–5–20: it’s now been published, click the link to read it!); unlike this piece, that one will delve into some of the more esoteric arguments and claims made by those who still adhere to the theory. <a href="https://juliaserano.medium.com/making-sense-of-autogynephilia-debates-73d9051e88d3">Read More</a>