Bisexuality & Crossdressing

[Chrissy.Sexton]

Only with another CD - and then very selectively.

[thickCDgirl]

Being treated as a female sexually by a man would be nice, if i found the right guy.

[ME2.0]

Hi Paulette. I want to welcome you to a place where you are definately NOT the oddball. This is the place where there are so many oddballs, that we are now the norm and the previously normal people are now the oddballs. You will always be accepted here. This forum serves many purposes-and one of them I've found out personally-is a support group.

Personally I don't think that people fit into the three categories of straight, bi, or gay. I think of it this way: straight is at one end zone, bi is the 50 yard line, and gay is the other end zone. Where you stand on the field is up to you. I'd say I'm somewhere around the 25 yard line towards the straight end zone. But no matter where you stand on this field, if you're a good positive person, I'd like you anyway. I tried the rational that since I crossdress I must be gay. I almost forced myself to try bi activities before I figured out (with the help of this forum) that sexuality and crossdressing aren't so intertwined for some people as they are for others.

If you are into this hobby for "sex and turn-ons", there's nothing wrong with that either. I'll admit I'd love to find myself sexy in photos, but I don't do this to have sex or masturbate (And mess up THIS skirt, you've gotta be kidding!!)

You can relax. You're normal. Everyone here is normal. We just define normal a bit differently than the neighbors.

If you love us, we'll love you

Staci

[ReineD]

Personally I don't think that people fit into the three categories of straight, bi, or gay.

Kinsey came up with a six level scale of sexual preference:

http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resou...k-hhscale.html

There is also a seventh category not included in this scale: asexualily

[Tuesday Theriot]

Both my wife and I are more or less bisexual, but neither of us could score easily on those sexual preference scales. We'd be all over the scales during different parts of our lives and even somewhat from day to day. We always believed that people's sexuality is more fluid with personal experiences and shifting interests tilting the scales in different directions.

[ReineD]

We always believed that people's sexuality is more fluid with personal experiences and shifting interests tilting the scales in different directions.

I once read (can't remember if it was a study, or someone's opinion in the field), that bisexuality can be a stepping stone to homosexuality, because homosexuality still carries a strong stigma. Even if someone is bisexual, they have a relationship/sexual preference for either males or females, and this can change over time to strongly preferring the same sex over the opposite sex.

The Kinsey scale concept would make sense for someone who travels through level 2 to level 5 or 6, say over the course of 10-20 years.

[Mistybtm]

I fall in the 3 to 4 area using the Kinsey scale, been there my whole adult life and most likely my teen years as well but never ackted apon it much back then. But i did start cross dressing when in was in my young teens.

[ArleneRaquel]

Since I went female 24/7 my Bi side had grown by leaps & bounds.

[Tuesday Theriot]

-Originally posted by ReineD-
I once read (can't remember if it was a study, or someone's opinion in the field), that bisexuality can be a stepping stone to homosexuality, because homosexuality still carries a strong stigma. Even if someone is bisexual, they have a relationship/sexual preference for either males or females, and this can change over time to strongly preferring the same sex over the opposite sex.

You know, Reine, I heard the same thing and it probably does happen. In my random, rambling belief system, I believe it happens to people that are mostly gay and going through a stage of "finding themselves."

Plus, I've also found that older bisexuals often wind up almost fully immersed in the gay lifestyle. It's a little bit more accepting and easier to navigate. Self identified straight people can make life difficult even if they claim to be completely open minded. Even simple curiosity spawns some fairly strange and often patronizing questions. Some straight folks, newly confronted by people different than they are, can seem like they have multiple personalities, changing attitudes to conform to others on the scene.

Despite living in a small, ridiculously conservative, southern town, the majority of our closest friends are bi, gay or really don't care. (Unfortunately, we know no CD's or TS's) Some may self identify as gay while dating the opposite gender. Others claim to be bi and are only intimate with their SO's. I respect the way they self identify. How they feel about themselves is really the most important consideration.That's why my wife and I believe that sexuality is fluid for all but the most intransigent.

Young boys and girls in private, single gender schools affect courtship behaviors usually reserved for the opposite gender. For instance, best girlfriends can swap jackets or rings and hold hands in the hallways. The gender isolated boys seem more likely to 'experiment' with same sex activity. Even with adults, most folks that would feel obliged to hurt you if you even suggested that they're gay will readily enter into same sex activity and even courtship rituals once they're segregated from society at large.

I'm not saying that some folks can't be 100% straight or 100% gay. I'm just trying to say that through my a priori reasoning combined with my own limited experiences, once we strip everything down to the bare essentials, those people would likely be the exceptions rather than the rule.

As for me, my general preference typically leans toward what I can't have at the time.

[Sammy777]

What I do not get is this apparent need to transpose one "taboo" subject [Bisexuality] on top of the other [CD'ing] in order to somehow justify it by saying the second [Bisexuality] is only present when the first [CD'ing] is.

In English:
What is so inherently wrong with wanting to take part in a Bisexual encounter.
Why the need to use Cross dressing as a crutch to justify it.
Is there something so wrong with wanting to take a [male] sexual partner that it can only be [mentally] done while under the guise of being thought of as a woman?

Granted there is more of a stigma regarding males being Bisexual then there is for females. Reflected in the fact that more often then not males are less willing to openly admit being Bi.

Why not just get past the BS, cut out the middle man and get straight to it.
Why dress when ultimately once the clothes come off the end result is the same as above.
Doing this seems to marginalize the act of dressing to mere role playing and costumes.

The above is in no way meant to encompass all CD'ers or Bisexual acts.

[HairyBethCD]

I once read (can't remember if it was a study, or someone's opinion in the field), that bisexuality can be a stepping stone to homosexuality, because homosexuality still carries a strong stigma. Even if someone is bisexual, they have a relationship/sexual preference for either males or females, and this can change over time to strongly preferring the same sex over the opposite sex.

I know an anecdote is <> data but in my experience, I find the opposite. As I get older, I'm less fussed about any man action. The only bi male I know who has gone the other way is because his wife is totally uninterested in sex so it's his only outlet whilst staying true (i.e. no females) to his wife.

[Shananigans]

I once read (can't remember if it was a study, or someone's opinion in the field), that bisexuality can be a stepping stone to homosexuality, because homosexuality still carries a strong stigma. Even if someone is bisexual, they have a relationship/sexual preference for either males or females, and this can change over time to strongly preferring the same sex over the opposite sex.

The Kinsey scale concept would make sense for someone who travels through level 2 to level 5 or 6, say over the course of 10-20 years.

I think this is pretty true for a lot of people. Sometimes we joke in the community that bisexual is the definition of "60/40". Meaning, you prefer sex with one gender 60% of the time and the other gender 40% of the time. (It's just a joke though, because no one can really say that this is true, but it seems like the case for a few people). It seems to fit well in Kinsey's scale. And, we would say, that depending on how your relationships go with one gender, might make you lean away from it and start dating the other more frequently.

I think over the years, I have come to pursue women more. And, found a happiness in my SO. Last night at dinner, my SO and I were talking about our gay friend and one of his "down low" encounters with one of our "straight" friends. In the middle of dinner, I put my hand up and said, "STOP! I am getting a visual and it's freaking me out!" And, because I am kind of ADHD I off-handedly examined this concept and said, "Why is it that the image of two dudes going at each other really grosses me out?" My SO kind of became a sounding board for what was going on in my head at this point. I explained that two girls having sex is attractive to me, heterosexual sex is attractive to me...but, two dudes having sex absolutely does nothing for me. I joked and said, "I think penises look pretty weird...I have never understood why guys insist on taking pictures of their junk for me. I'd be worried about this if I didn't find p*ssies to be pretty weird looking too. But, overall, women are more attractive and make up for a situation involving men." My SO was silent for a while and then said, "Sometimes, I feel like I am dating a lesbian...and, I strangely I am OK with this lol." I guess my appreciation on many levels for Cami (my SO's feminine half) adds a whole new dimension to our relationship.

But, I feel like this DEFINITELY evolved over my relationship with my SO and the lesbian relations that we have in the bedroom. I think there is a lot to be said about the evolution of sexuality theory. However, I still find men attractive and would date them. I love Ryan (my SO) and find him very attractive. Still, I find myself involved more in lesbian encounters with my SO and more comfortable in those situations.

[ReineD]

The only bi male I know who has gone the other way is because his wife is totally uninterested in sex so it's his only outlet whilst staying true (i.e. no females) to his wife.

Why would your friend believe that having sex with another man doesn't count? This is rationalization to the extreme.

[FeminineFantasy]

I am a straight CD who has never done anything with a man as a man or enfemme. I am just not attracted to men. I have to admit tho, when I am enfemme, I am totally bi-curious, but just orally. And that is as far as that goes. I wouldnt want to be a top nor a bottom. I love females!! Confuzzled!!! lol

[Marleena]

These threads come up quite often. Remember that a fantasy is just a fantasy unless acted upon.

Now, wouldn't it be great if society progressed to a point where all labels were gone. You know, no more if you do this, you are this...

Shouldn't it be if you are single and attracted to somebody of either sex and it's mutual, you just have sex? As long as it's between consenting adults who cares? I really don't care what other people do in their bedrooms it's none of my business. Hopefully we'll get to that point some day where it really doesn't matter about one's sexual preferences.

[whowhatwhen]

People like boning, people like being boned.
People like crossdressing, some people like being boned while crossdressing BI or not.

I can see where it's confusing but I suppose it's just one of those things that feels good, maybe he wants to be the girl in bed for a night.
Hopefully not TMI but I'm trying to think about Sammy's post.

[Acastina]

I agree, but it also goes beyond that. The big bugaboo right now is the "T" is LGBQT. What does being TG have to do with sexual orientation? And, CDing is under the TG umbrella...what do clothes have to do with sexual orientation?

Potentially, a lot. One rational view of the terminology is that there should basically be a capital "T" followed by lower-case "gbq". Conventional wisdom used to be that TG was a subset of gay, but now it seems that TG as an umbrella term denotes anything that transgresses cultural norms regarding sex and gender. In that view, gender identity and sexual orientation are discrete issues within the TG cluster of phenomena. Human sexuality is definitely expressed, at least in part, through clothing and other decoration such as makeup and jewelry, as well as, obviously, behavior, which in turn is also often gender-coded. Sexuality is obviously gender-related, since sex and gender are used interchangeably more often than not. In fact, the whole hetero-homo-bi concept is gender (sex) dependent, since the labels vary with the physical sex (gender) of the partners.

There are fewer and fewer TG friendly places to go, when usually they were gay bars. But, most gay men don't want to be associated as being CDs. As my gay friend said, "I'm gay. I like men. I don't like men in dresses. I don't like men with boobs. I like penis and I like a man dressed as a man." I was a little put-off by this statement and thought it was a little blunt. But, I see what he means. He doesn't want his sexual orientation associated with CDing and things CDs do...he gets enough flack for being gay.

This is bigotry, an intolerant attachment to one's own beliefs. Your friend is so centered on his identity as a gay man that he is intolerant of other variations under the umbrella. The first label is "men", and then he lists the things he doesn't like about some "men". I read his sentiments as being highly intolerant, and I'm quite familiar with their prevalence in gay communities. To each his or her own, but he is condemning out of hand the lives of people he cannot understand or accept. In short, he won't grant "to each his own" to others who aren't different from the majority in the same way that he is different. I've met a lot of gay men and women I like and respect a lot, and a lot of others I can do without, but I don't condemn any of them for being who they are just because I'm not the same.

In fact, I don't want ANY image, clothing, or action describing or attributed to my sexuality. Bisexuality pure and simple is just being attracted to both men and women. It really has nothing to do with CDing and it has no on and off switch.

No nuance here, just more projection. To many people, especially here, their sexuality IS tangled up with images, clothing, and actions. Pure and simple, that's just the way it is, and for many CDs, clothing IS an on/off switch. Look at TG-related personals ads and see how many identify as "bi-CD". It is quite common for CD/TGs to be open to anatomically homosexual contact when dressed but not otherwise, and I make no judgments about that; I am one, in fact.

The human brain is extremely complex, and it's pretty clear that our sense of gender-self and reproductive-instinct responses are ongoing mysteries of the brain and human culture that exhibit normalities and anomalies that fall into some pretty familiar categories, which we call gender identity and sexual orientation. Within those, how many shades of gray can you count?

[Shananigans]

Acastina,

I think you misunderstood my quote. When I said, "What do clothes have to do with sexual orientation?" I wasn't implying that gender was separate of sexual orientation. Obviously, genders come into play because your attraction to certain genders determines your sexuality.

Now, being TG in terms of LGB...I think implying TG with any sort of mode of sexual orientation is misleading at best. Transgender in itself is a way to describe someone's gender identity. Their sexual orientation may be influenced in ways by being TG, or it might not be influenced at all. Whatever gender identity you ascribe to, it seems the main sexualities are heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual, and pansexual. This is why gender is seen as part of sexual identity, but not inherent of it. No matter what your gender identity may be, you can fall anywhere in a line of sexual orientations.

I also see a difference in "sexuality" and "sexual orientation." I do not argue with you that clothing and jewelry can be part of someone's sexuality, but you are not selling me in what it has to do with sexual orientation.

As for my friend, I agree the statement was somewhat bigoted. But, I also see quite often on here that CDing does not automatically mean that you are gay. Many people in society still have these notions (that all CDs are gay). Just as CDs get angry that someone would automatically think they are gay, my gay friend gets mad that gay is associated with CDing (and, people expect him to act feminine).

And, I definitely don't disagree with you that many CDs have sexual orientation tied up with clothing and actions. I just finding it very interesting that it seems to be a largely a CDing phenomenon. I don't doubt for these people that there are on/off switches for them and they can say that they are straight in "male mode" and homosexual in "female mode"...wrapping up with a somewhat crooked definition of bisexuality. (lol) This is partially where I diverge in my understanding. I do not understand how some CDs have two distinct personas...the "female" is of different sexual orientation, enjoys different activities/hobbies, acts/talks in different mannerisms. I have only really seen this behavior in psych rotations (though these people were not CDs to my knowledge)...and, here. I wish there were more literature on this subject. I am sure for people that assume a completely different life when they are "en femme," it can be quite easy to create a mental on/off switch with clothes. In fact, there is an on/off switch with many things they are doing...the hobbies, the activities, the sexuality, the walk, the speech, and the sexual orientation. I will admit that this behavior completely throws me and that I do not understand it. My experiences are mainly with my SO who embraces more of his feminine side, but still acts like the person I have always known.

I think until I can understand dual personalities and the on/off switches that some CDs can create in basically every aspect of their personalities, I will never quite understand how sexuality orientation can be turned on and off. However, I fall pretty clearly as having just one personality, one sexual orientation, and basically just being one person with her own set of beliefs, hobbies, and mannerisms.

Still, I can suspend my judgements for people that fall into these "two distinct personality categories" because I do realize how complex people are, and I do not know what deeper force that is causing them to create two personality halves. If it does not cause distress for this person to switch between two different personalities, and he can function normally in society...then, it really isn't a problem. But, I would definitely say that it is a very different "shade of grey" that probably needs to be studied more thoroughly to understand why certain CDs cope with this aspect of themselves by creating a different person with different interests/values than their "male mode."

[busker]

[B][COLOR="blue"]
In English:
What is so inherently wrong with wanting to take part in a Bisexual encounter.
Why the need to use Cross dressing as a crutch to justify it.

I would say that we are socialized in many ways and that is part of it. We need permission. Rationalization for the things we do. If you want to kill people, join the army, if you want to enforce the laws, be a cop, if you want to build buildings, be an architect. If you want to do A, you HAVE to do B, especially when it comes to having a sexual encounter with your own genetic sex. (I'm generalizing to make a point) I think we (men) easily accept women hugging, kissing, going to the bathroom together ( there seems to be lots of reasons for company) and think nothing of it, but on the other hand, it could be a lot of lesbian stuff going on and we , as males, are clueless about it. Two guys going to the bathroom together. Yeah, right. Hey look at those 2 Q's.

The other point is that sex between 2 males has to be homosexual sex--dressed or not. A person can be bisexual but an encounter cannot be.

[busker]

Acastina,


But, I also see quite often on here that CDing does not automatically mean that you are gay. Many people in society still have these notions (that all CDs are gay). Just as CDs get angry that someone would automatically think they are gay, my gay friend gets mad that gay is associated with CDing (and, people expect him to act feminine).

I grew up in the 50's and 60's and that is the stereotype of gay for that period. If you saw someone with a "limp" wrist, who spoke with a lisp , who looked a bit effeminate and dressed like it, they were gay. I was not aware of crossdressing as a classification, and I think most of us that grew up in that time period probably felt we were the "freaky gay guy", rather than having some other identity. I also think for a lot of modern society, CD's will always have a problem because that is what folks think--if you crossdress -- you are gay. No ifs ands or buts.

[ReineD]

I do not understand how some CDs have two distinct personas...the "female" is of different sexual orientation,

I might be oversimplifying it, but I believe that autogynephilia is the root cause, unless a CDer is attracted to both men and women in guy mode, in which case he would simply be bi. A change in clothing would make no difference.

By autogynephilia, I mean the love of oneself as a woman, and it is not only auto-eroticism while dressed. The love and sexualization of oneself as a woman does extend to a strong desire to gain the utmost accessory, a man, in order to heighten idealized feelings of femininity. In other words, it's a fetish for the CDers who are not attracted to men in guy mode. Would a self-defined hetero autogynephile (not a bisexual) be attracted to men in guy mode even if he wanted to?

To take this one step further, it could well be that an autogynephile CDer is not AGP at all, but is rather a late onset TS in denial who is merely expressing her natural sexuality as a hetero female. But only this TS can tell us whether the attraction to her GG wife was real all these years, or if the TS had lived behind a male mask so stringent that she only thought she had been attracted to GGs. Can the denial about sexual attraction and being TS be this deep? This is what I have difficulty understanding. I don't disbelieve it, I just can't imagine being so disconnected from the self for so many years. However, I've not been raised as a male in a homophobic society.

If a TS had been male-attracted from the beginning even in guy mode, then I can hardly see that when he believed he was a male CDer, he would have fantasized about being with a GG while dressed. Therefore, this TS would not be autogynephilic, since her sexual attraction does not change based on her presentation.

As a tangent, the CDers who come to believe they are bisexual: do they say this because they are attracted to men and women no matter how they're dressed, or do they prefer to say they are bi in order to explain an attraction to men only while dressed? I should ask the question in a thread some day. Also, do they say they are bi based on desires or fantasy, or has the desire been tested and approved in the bedroom with an actual man?

Shannon, to answer your question about different personalities (not sexual attractions) while dressed, I believe that some CDers form a thick wall around their feminine selves when they are young in order to hide who they are from a cruel world. And in the process they repress aspects of their fundamental personalities that they would not fear expressing if they were not CDers, especially past the teen-age, early manhood stages. There are men who like to do many things that CDers put in the "girly" camp.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

Shannon, to answer your question about different personalities (not sexual attractions) while dressed, I believe that some CDers form a thick wall around their feminine selves when they are young in order to hide who they are from a cruel world. And in the process they repress aspects of their fundamental personalities that they would not fear expressing if they were not CDers, especially past the teen-age, early manhood stages. There are men who like to do many things that CDers put in the "girly" camp.

I actually would take this a step farther and suggest that the feminine self is itself part of that thick wall. In the case of folks who identify as crossdressers, and not so much as elsewhere down the TG spectrum, I think a lot of that repressing of their personalities is what leads to developing the "female side" of themselves. I really do believe that is why we see so many more MtF transvestites/crossdressers than we do FtM, because women have for the last century or so given themselves more freedom to do things that some might put in the "guy" camp the way CDers will put some things in the "girly" camp. I wonder if so many CDers would have ever developed the girl side of their personalities if they hadn't been worried about expressing the more "girly" sides of their personalities at a younger age, before they boxed it away.

[Shananigans]

I really do believe that is why we see so many more MtF transvestites/crossdressers than we do FtM, because women have for the last century or so given themselves more freedom to do things that some might put in the "guy" camp the way CDers will put some things in the "girly" camp. I wonder if so many CDers would have ever developed the girl side of their personalities if they hadn't been worried about expressing the more "girly" sides of their personalities at a younger age, before they boxed it away.

I just got back from dinner with my SO. When the subject of the check came around, I told my SO that I would pay since dinner/drinks were my suggestion. He kind of laughed and said, "I think the waiter just might hand you the check anyway since you kept ordering for me." I was a little confused and I said, "Oh sh*t...I guess I did order for you. I guess I also was the one who put our name on the list, but gave your name." My SO said I always do this, and he joked about me wearing the pants in the relationship. As I have said before, I am, of course, not FtM. However, I do tend to be the one who takes the lead in the relationship and am quite comfortable in my role. (I did ask my SO if it bothered him and he said he kind of liked it). It's funny that the decisions that I make and the position I play in the relationship is usually one that would be the more "masculine" side. (Even if I do not look the part). It also seems that I know quite a few women like myself. I also wonder if since my SO gets a lot of acceptance from me, his family, and his friends if it is easier for him to NOT compartmentalize. Instead, it is OK for him to integrate both his "male" and "female" sides into a whole person. Now, this is bothersome because it implies that CDs that DO compartmentalize are not "whole." Is it instead autogynephilia? I don't know.

I did find this research on the subject of autogynephilia and sexual orientation:

"The results showed that, overall, transsexuals tended to place more importance on partner’s physical attractiveness and reported higher scores on Blanchard’s Core Autogynephilia Scale than biological females. In addition, transsexuals classified as autogynephilic scored significantly higher on Attraction to Feminine Males, Core Autogynephilia, Autogynephilic Interpersonal Fantasy, Fetishism, Preference for Younger Partners, Interest in Uncommitted Sex, Importance of Partner Physical Attractiveness, and Attraction to Transgender Fiction than other transsexuals and biological females. In accordance with Blanchard’s theory, autogynephilia measures were positively correlated to Sexual Attraction to Females among transsexuals. In contrast to Blanchard’s theory, however, those transsexuals classified as autogynephilic scored higher on average on Sexual Attraction to Males than those classified as non-autogynephilic, and no transsexuals classified as autogynephilic reported asexuality."

Source: Veale, J. (2008). Sexuality of Male-to-Female Transsexuals. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 37(4), 586.

I'll do a bit more research on this subject in my spare time. I'm trying to find articles that are all still relevant (last 5 years).

[girlalex]

I'm pretty sure I'm bi as well. Ye, I also would be happy to go on a date with a man all dressed up more so than with a female, cuz then I'll have to be wearing guy clothes which i don't like very much. Guy clothes are all the same dull color and designs. Living as a male is straight up boring. Maybe that's why I'm board even when I have stuff to do lol.

[Shananigans]

Here's what got the ball rolling, btw:

"The favorite fantasies of many autogynephilic men involve the thought of themselves, as women, engaging in sexual intercourse or other erotic activities. Male patients at this gender identity clinic, for example, commonly report inserting ***** into their rectum while masturbating; this behavior is accompanied by the fantasy that their anus is a vagina." (Edited for the forum).

"Some autogynephiles fuse the idea of being a woman with their sexual attractions toward real women in sexual fantasies in which they are lesbians engaging in lesbian interactions. The erotic idea of interpersonal sexuality in the cross-gender role may also find expression in the fantasy of having intercourse, as a woman, with a man. The male partner represented in these fantasies is usually a vague, anonymous figure rather than a real person and probably has little excitatory function beyond that of completing the fantasy of vaginal intercourse in the female role."

"In this study I examine the second hypothesis suggested by Hirschfeld's (1948) observation, namely, that autogynephilia and normally directed heterosexual interest are competing drives (or behaviors or orientations). The subjects were adult male outpatients who reported histories of dressing in women's garments, of feeling like women, or both. These were selected without regard to sexual orientation, and the sample included men who reported all degrees of sexual attraction to adult women."

"The first hypothesis predicted that men who reported little interest in (real) women would also report little autogynephilia; as one would move along the continuum from subjects with low levels of heterosexual attraction toward subjects with intermediate levels, the amount of observed autogynephilia ought to increase. The second hypothesis concerned the middle-to-high range of the heterosexual interest continuum. The notion of intrinsic competition implies that high degrees of interest in the one type of sexual object preclude high degrees of interest in the other. Thus, as one would move further along the continuum from subjects with intermediate levels of heterosexual attraction to subjects with high levels, the amount of observed autogynephilia ought to reverse direction and begin to decrease again. In operational terms, the combined hypotheses imply that a plotted function to relate measures of autogynephilia and heterosexual interest would take the form of an inverted U."

Results: "As already stated, the hypothesis that autogynephilia arises in association with heterosexuality but also competes with it leads to the prediction that the highest levels of autogynephilia will be found in association with intermediate rather than high levels of heterosexual interest. Figure 1 shows that the core autogynephilia curve displayed the predicted, inverted-U shape, as did the curve for autogynephilic interpersonal fantasy. In contrast, the functions for androphilia and gender dysphoria showed a monotonic decrease, also as predicted."

Discussion: "The results of this study support the hypothesis that autogynephilia and normal heterosexual attraction are competing phenomena. It is not possible at this time to specify exactly how or when they compete; we do not know how sexual orientations, including heterosexuality, develop in the first place, let alone precisely how they interact. There are, however, some bases for speculating that autogynephilia and heterosexuality may compete in two distinct ways.

In some if not most sexual variations, a man's sexual attraction to a variant object commonly occurs at the expense of sexual interest in physically mature women. Sexual attraction to the male body is usually accompanied by sexual indifference to the female body (Freund, 1974; Van Wyk & Geist, 1984), and strong attraction to the prepubescent female physique is frequently associated with diminished interest in the mature physique (Barbaree & Marshall, 1989). Similarly, a powerful sexual attraction to such nonreproductive structures as the feet is generally associated with unresponsiveness to the vulva (see Ellis, 1936). Such trade-offs usually stabilize by adolescence, although the relative strengths of a man's heterosexual and variant tendencies may not be reflected in overt behavior until much later, because of guilt, fear, or limited opportunity. These models suggest that one type of competition between autogynephilia and heterosexual attraction primarily operates during psychosexual development, with permanent consequences for the mature man's relative responsiveness to autogynephilic versus heterosexual stimulation. I refer to this type of competition as developmental competition.

Clinical experience suggests that there may be a second type of competition observable in men who reach sexual maturity with substantial levels of both heterosexual and autogynephilic motivation. This type of competition occurs when a previous equilibrium between these erotic interests is disturbed by another sexual development, namely, romantic love. It is not rare for a heterosexual male cross-dresser or gender dysphoric to report that when he first met a woman and fell in love, his desires to cross-dress or engage in other cross-gender behaviors diminished or disappeared, sometimes for longer than a year. When, however, the intensity of passionate love resolved into the mellower comforts of married life, his desires to dress or live as a female reasserted themselves. This type of competition I characterize as dynamic competition.

In this two-component competition model, developmental competition determines an adult man's baseline levels of heterosexual and autogynephilic motivation, whereas dynamic competition—in autogynephiles who fall in love—produces local fluctuations in these levels, temporarily increasing heterosexual motivation at the expense of autogynephilic motivation.

Although this model implies that developmental and dynamic competition conjointly determine an autogynephile's behavior at any given time, it is likely that my data primarily reflect developmental competition. That is because patients usually present before they have fallen in love or after they have fallen out of it; they rarely present while they are falling in love (and losing interest in cross-gender activities). Perhaps they prefer, in that state, to forget about problems that seem to have cured themselves anyway. At any rate, patients' uniform tendency to seek help when they are not in love means that the great majority are assessed when they are at or near their baseline levels of heterosexual and autogynephilic motivation. Thus, the main finding of this study probably reflects individual differences in baseline levels—the end results of developmental competition —more than it does individual differences in current amatory status.

This investigation did not find that significantly lower levels of transvestism were reported by subjects who experienced the highest levels of heterosexual attraction. This result suggests that heterosexuality and transvestism are relatively compatible orientations. That conclusion seems to contradict Person and Ovesey's (1978) clinical observation that in transvestism “interpersonal sexuality is almost always attenuated” (p. 307). My findings for transvestism, taken together with those for autogynephilia, suggest that it may not be transvestism per se that competes with normal heterosexual attraction so much as the autogynephilia that often accompanies transvestism.

The methodology of this research was suggested by a finding from Blanchard and Hucker's (1991) large-scale study of autoerotic asphyxial fatalities. They investigated the relations among paraphilic activities carried out concurrently with self-asphyxiation. The two most common activities were bondage (the self-application of ropes or other constraints mechanically irrelevant to the asphyxial apparatus) and transvestism. The curve relating the number of constricting devices to the number of feminine garments on the corpse took the form of an inverted U. Blanchard and Hucker suggested a twofold explanation of this result: The occurrence of the one interest increases the likelihood of the other, at the same time that it competes with it for attention or expression. They conjectured that other erotic interests, when examined pairwise, might also prove to have inverted-U-shaped relations, and they cited in this connection Rooth's (1973) remark that those exhibitionists with the highest rates of exposing might be less prone to acts of sexual violence than exhibitionists with lower rates of exposing.

This study is probably the first to predict a nonmonotonic relation between psychosexual variables beforehand, and its results reinforce Blanchard and Hucker's (1991) conjecture that such relations may not be rare in sexology. These empirical findings underscore the general principle that one must examine the curves relating pairs of variables before using statistical procedures that assume linearity (e.g., correlation or correlation-based techniques). The inappropriate use of such procedures will produce misleading results in factor-analytic or other exploratory studies of variant sexuality designed to identify clusters of related paraphilias (e.g., Paitich, Langevin, Freeman, Mann, & Handy, 1977)."

Source: Blanchard, R. (1992). Nonmonotonic relation of autogynephilia and heterosexual attraction. Journal Of Abnormal Psychology, 101(2), 271-276. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.101.2.271