Hypothesis: Do Gynandromorphophiles (Chasers) Over-perceive Sexual Interest From MTF Transsexuals?
Ask any straight woman how many times straight men have misperceived, or other “over-perceived” sexual interest from them when they were merely being friendly. There is a documented bias in heterosexual male perceptions of women’s interest in them. Interestingly, this may have come from evolutionary history, as Haselton explains,
“Mammalian males and females faced different selection pressures during their evolution. According to Trivers theory of parental investment, the sex with a greater obligatory investment in reproduction, typically the female, should evolve to be choosy in selecting a mate. The sex with lower obligatory investment, typically the male, should evolve to be less choosy and to be highly competitive for access to members of the high investing sex. — The logic of parental investment theory suggests that for males the fitness costs of missed sexual opportunities will often be greater than the costs of some lost time or effort wasted on unsuccessful courtship. Within a given population, males who miss reproductive opportunities with some regularity will be out-reproduced by males who do not. This is not true for most females. The reproductive variance among females, including human females, is typically far more constrained because of limits imposed by the time and energetic costs of gestation and offspring care (Trivers, 1972). At any point in time, females may receive low to non-existent marginal reproductive benefits of additional mating opportunities because of current pregnancy, lactational amenorrhea, or because they have ready access to another fertile mate (Symons, 1979). Although courtship effort is costly for males, in the currency of differential reproduction these costs will often pale in comparison to the costs of missed mating opportunities.”
The is over-perception bias does NOT occur in straight women. Regardless of whether the phenomenon is an evolved one or a result of socialization in a patriarchal society, the differential bias is constant across different societies, leading to stronger weight to in-born cognitive processes being sexually dimorphic. Again, from Hazelton,
“Experimental evidence suggests that human males may indeed possess this bias. In laboratory experiments, photographic and video stimuli experiments, and minimal experiments using written scenarios or brief descriptions of dating cues, researchers have compared men’s perceptions of women’s sexual intent with women’s perceptions of women’s sexual intent. Men’s estimates of women’s sexual intent are consistently higher than are women’s. This pattern holds when men’s perceptions are compared to women’s perceptions of their own sexual intent and when compared to women’s perceptions of third-party women’s intent. When women’s interpretations of men’s behavior have been examined, there has been little evidence of bias.”
This phenomenon in gynephilic men led to the question, does this phenomena exist in homosexual or bisexual men and women? A very recent paper by Moran explored this, as stated in their abstract,
“Research on perceptions of sexual interest has documented the tendency for men to overperceive sexual interest (i.e., to perceive a social signal as indicating more sexual intent than the actor intended). However, this work has almost exclusively focused upon these dynamics among heterosexual individuals. Thus, the current set of studies aimed to understand how perceptions of sexual interest manifest among lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) women and men. In Study 1 (N = 85), LGB women and men nominated behaviors that signal sexual intent. Using an act nomination approach, LGB women and men tended to nominate behaviors similar to those nominated by heterosexual women and men. In Study 2 (N = 43), gay men reported acts that were representative of their own and other gay men’s sexual interest. Consistent with previous work—by comparing perceived self-reported versus others’ sexual intent when engaging in specific behaviors—we found no evidence for a sexual overperception bias in gay men, albeit in a small field study. In Study 3 (N = 307), using a gender-by-sexual orientation design, heterosexual and LGB women and men reported previous experiences in which their friendliness was sexually misperceived. Bisexual women were less likely than other groups to report their friendliness being misinterpreted as sexual by other bisexual women and/or lesbians.”
This result suggests that this phenomenon of over-perception bias is only to be found in gynephilic males. This in turn leads me to posit a new hypothesis, that gynandromorphophilic males (chasers), who we also know from research are also gynephilic, also exhibit this over perception bias when interacting with transwomen. It is important to know that gynephilic and (pseudo) bisexual transwomen are both autogynephilic and gynandromorphophilic. As such, they also have exhibit this over-perception bias. I would invite sexologists to explore this hypothesis, to test it experimentally and using natural events surveys.
For myself, I strongly believe this hypothesis will have experimental support. In the mean time, I will share some anecdotes and community observations to support my personal belief. In the “Further Reading” section below, I link to essays in which I experienced such. It may not be science, but it may help to explore the phenomenon in the wild, so to speak.
In one documented example, two very well known transwomen exhibited this phenomenon. Andrea James, in her effort to smear Dr. Anne Lawrence, recounted on her website, in vilifying tones, an event during the time when they had been on friendly terms, in which Dr. Lawrence over-perceived James’s putative interest in having sex with her. There were no negative repercussions to the error, but James attempted to paint Lawrence in a negative light.
In addition to over-perceiving sexual interest directed towards oneself, the research above showed that gynephilic males also over-perceived sexual interest by women when observing interactions with other men. I strongly believe that this has operated in my own life, with silly consequences where people falsely believed that Dr. Joy Shaffer, my college roommate and political ally, and I were lovers, when we never were, and have promoted this false belief in the transsexual community for years.
Further Reading:
The Love That Can’t Pronounce Its Name
Cognitive Dissonance and Vector Transform Miscalculations in Transgender Tensor Space
References:
Abbey, A. (1982). Sex differences in attributions for friendly behavior: Do males misperceive females’ friendliness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(5), 830–838. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.5.830
Martie G. Haselton, “The sexual overperception bias: Evidence of a systematic bias in men from a survey of naturally occurring events”, Journal of Research in Personality, Volume 37, Issue 1, (2003),
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00529-9
Bendixen, M. (2014). Evidence of Systematic Bias in Sexual Over- and Underperception of Naturally Occurring Events: A Direct Replication of Hazelton in a more Gender-Equal Culture. Evolutionary Psychology, 12(5), 1004-1021. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491401200510
Moran, J.B., Airington, Z., McGee, E. et al. (Mis)Perceiving Sexual Intent: A Mixed-Method Approach Investigating Sexual Overperception Across Diverse Sexual Identities. Arch Sex Behav 53, 511–524 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02748-7
Men And Women Walk Differently: The Challenge For Transsexuals
Decades ago, when I was just turned 13 years old in the summer of 1970, the Kinks put out a new hit song, “Lola”. It was a revelation for me. It told me that not only was I not alone in the world, but that there were men who would find me attractive and love me. I loved the song and turned up the volume on my pocket transistor radio every time it played. One of the verses is, “Well, I’m not dumb but I can’t understand, Why she walked like a woman but talked like a man. Oh my Lola.” The song referred to the well known tendency of homosexual transsexuals (HSTS) to have a naturally feminine gait.
This brings us to the current essay regarding sexually dimorphic walking gaits and the ability of observers to identify the sex of the walker from that gait. Scientists have been studying this in the late 1960s with some interesting results. In order to study this phenomena in isolation from other gendered cues, they used video of people walking where the only objects visible were reflective tape adhering to dark clothing at the joints, etc.
It creates an array of white dots that represent the human body in schematic form. Interestingly, observers can still perceive this as a person walking as though on a treadmill towards them. The perception of the walker’s sex from this very limited information is gathered and analyzed statically. Averaging the responses, the observers can tell the sex better than random (50%) at 66%. However, asking the observers how confident they were in their judgments yields a positive correlation in which those perceptions that they were confident about were more correct, with accuracies of 90%. This suggests that not only is walking gait sexually dimorphic overall, but that there is also a range of gaits between walkers, where some more pronounced than others. Interestingly, using machine learning algorithms, the overall accuracy was in the range of 85%. This supports the observation that walking gaits are indeed sexually dimorphic.
There were still questions, of course, about what was being used to judge the sex of the walker. Were they getting some cues from structural differences that the reflective tape dots captured? (Hip to Shoulder Width Ratio?) If not, what in particular about the gate was the strong gendered cue? To answer that, artificial walkers, computer simulations of the white dots, were created from the motion analysis, in which the structural cues could be manipulated separately from movement cues. From this they discovered that structural cues had some effect, but was swamped out, over-ridden by the movement cues. This is both good news and bad news for transsexuals. Good for HSTS, bad for AGPs.
So what motion cues lead to sex attribution? Interestingly, cultural references got it right. Masculine men “swagger” and even “lurch”, move their shoulders and with it their heads from side to side while feminine women hold their shoulders and heads nearly constant while their hips may sway from side to side while also tipping the angle of their hips. Because their heads do not move side to side very much, they will appear only to bob up an down instead. In both homophobic and camp representations of feminine gay men, they “swish” and “sashay” along as they walk. This last is NOT a performance, but a natural product of a feminized brain.
However, runway fashion models accentuate this sexually dimorphic gait when modeling designer clothing by wearing very high heals and carefully stepping counter to their stride, actually crossing over each foot, to cancel any side to side motion of their shoulders and head while simultaneously increasing the hip sway and tip.
Similarly, for MTF HSTS vs. AGPs, their is a natural difference in their gaits, one in which HSTS appear feminine and AGPs appear masculine. Before social transition, this causes HSTS to be recognized as gender atypical and in many cases, targeted by homophobic bullies. Post social transition, this very gait helps them pass as female. While for AGPs, post-social transition, their walking gait adds one more masculine signifier that leads to them to be “clocked”.
As a reminder, sex attribution is biased toward male by about five to one. It takes five feminine attributes to counter each and every masculine one. And for individuals who are clued into the existence of transgender people, it may be even higher. AGPs can learn to mimic a feminine gait, but it takes effort and practice… and coaching. Most never do in my experience.
Further Reading:
References:
Mather George, Murdoch L., “Gender discrimination in biological motion displays based on dynamic cues” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B.258273–279 (1994) http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1994.0173
Viswadeep Sarangi, Adar Pelah, William Edward Hahn, Elan Barenholtz, “Neural and Neuromimetic Perception: A Comparative Study of Gender Classification from Human Gait” in Journal of Perceptual Imaging, (2020), pp 010402-1 – 010402-11, https://doi.org/10.2352/J.Percept.Imaging.2020.3.1.010402
Sarangi V, Pelah A, Hahn WE, Barenholtz E. “Gender Perception From Gait: A Comparison Between Biological, Biomimetic and Non-biomimetic Learning Paradigms.” Front Hum Neurosci. 2020 Aug 27;14:320. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00320. PMID: 33117137; PMCID: PMC7493679.
Kozlowski, L.T., Cutting, J.E. “Recognizing the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display.” Perception & Psychophysics 21, 575–580 (1977). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198740
Comments Off on Men And Women Walk Differently: The Challenge For Transsexuals
Studies of Transsexual Twins Tells a Twisted Tale
As has been previously discussed in my essays, there is a very high consanguinity of transsexuality, autogynephilia, and homosexuality. That is to say, that they “run in families”, but not the same families. If autogynephilic gender dysphoria tends to run in a family, homosexuality and homosexual transsexuality will not occur in that same family. While in families with homosexual transsexuals (HSTS), it is likely that other members will be homosexual, with or without gender dysphoria, and the likelihood that such family members will be gender dysphoric is greatly increased. For example, if one natal male member of a family had gender dysphoria and transitioned to live as female, the likelihood that another would also do so was one in 150. This is far higher than random odds of one in 10,000 in the general population.
Most of the studies that demonstrated these effects were in full siblings or parent/child relationships and thus have roughly 50% shared alleles (genes). But what of twins?
Twins come in two types, monozygotic and heterozygotic (“identical” and “fraternal”). Being both transsexuals and members of a twin are rare. But two studies managed to find some. But in an amazing twist, they had VERY different results. Yet those differing results agree in essence with the Two Type Taxonomy.
The earlier study, published in 2013 found that in monozygotic twins, that concordance for transsexuality in natal males was 33%. That is, one third of monozygotic natal male twins where one of them was transsexual, the other was as well. The concordance in natal females was 23%, roughly in in four. This is powerful evidence that transsexuality has genetic and/or in utero environmental causative factors.
The recent study, published in 2022 failed to find any monozygotic twins that were concordant for transsexuality. But the twist is that it found a number of heterozygotic twins that were concordant for transsexuality, but all of them, ALL OF THEM, were opposite natal sex twins. There is an even more interesting point about these twins in that the median age of diagnoses was 31 years old, with a standard deviation of 14 years. Further, the age difference between the twin’s diagnoses was only 3 years. While the researchers didn’t tell us their sexual orientation, we can use the age of diagnoses as a proxy for their etilogical type. Knowing that no MTF HSTS ever transitions after age 25 and that the median age of autogynephilic MTF transsexual transition is one the order of ~35 years, we can say with very high confidence that the majority of these MTF transsexuals are autogynephilic.
Given that in previous research looking at the consanguinity of transsexuality that the two types are rarely, if ever, found in the same family, what does this say about the likely etiology of the natal female co-twin? Would it be likely that they both have an underlying Erotic Target Identity Inversion? That the natal female co-twins are the mirror image of the autogynephilic natal males, being autoandrophilic?
Obviously, I’m saying that they are.
Further Reading:
Male Androphilia Runs in Families
References:
Milton Diamond diamond@hawaii.edu (2013) Transsexuality Among Twins: Identity Concordance, Transition, Rearing, and Orientation, International Journal of Transgenderism, 14:1, 24-38, DOI: 10.1080/15532739.2013.750222
Karamanis G, Karalexi M, White R, Frisell T, Isaksson J, Skalkidou A, Papadopoulos FC. Gender dysphoria in twins: a register-based population study. Sci Rep. 2022 Aug 4;12(1):13439. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-17749-0. PMID: 35927439; PMCID: PMC9352732.
Comments Off on Studies of Transsexual Twins Tells a Twisted Tale
Puberty Blockers Do NOT Make Transsexual Teens Inorgasmic As Adults
For a number of years now, transphobic propagandists have been pushing an unsupported statement that many of us knew must be a lie that transkids who were treated with puberty suppression protocols, “puberty blockers”, would be inorgasmic as adults, especially for Male-To-Female transsexuals after sex reassignment surgery. This was usually couched in terms of the medications not allowing a “natural puberty” which was presumed to be necessary for sexual functioning as an adult.
However, those of us with a greater background in biology and psychology were more than skeptical of such an assertion. First, historically, for example, in the 19th Century, puberty occurred much later and yet, those individuals didn’t have problems as adults. Second, there are all the many thousands of non transsexual children who for decades have been treated with these very same medications who are now adults who do NOT report such problems. How could it be that transsexuals would be any different?
Now we have DATA to directly refute these assertions.
But first, lets review some data in natal females as a comparison group. In the Najafabody study, ~25% of the women experienced such difficulty. In another,
“The findings of the 1994 National Social and Health Life Survey provide the most comprehensive description of orgasmic experience in a nonclinical, representative sample of women. Twenty-four percent of female subjects reported they had experienced a lack of orgasm for at least several months or more in the previous year.”
Thus, we see that it is common for women to have difficulties experiencing orgasm. Should we expect it to be any better or worse for transwomen?
Looking at the results for MTF transsexuals who had bee treated with puberty suppression, similar numbers were found,
“37 transwomen that received gender affirmative treatment, consisting of puberty suppression, cross-sex hormones and vaginoplasty, were included. Of all transwomen, 76% was able to reach an orgasm after vaginoplasty. Of the transwomen that were treated with puberty blockers early in puberty, 81% was able to experience an orgasm postsurgery. When looking at the ability to reach an orgasm after vaginoplasty, we found that there was no difference (p=0,278) between those that were treated with puberty blockers in early versus those that were treated in late puberty. Of the transwomen who did not experience an orgasm before surgery, 75% was able to reach one after. Approximately half to three quarters of the transwoman experienced sexual difficulties when having sexual intercourse.
Both transwomen treated with early and late puberty suppression are equally able to experience an orgasm after vaginoplasty. Likewise, it is not necessary to experience desire, arousal or orgasms presurgery to be able to experience these postsurgery. The majority of transwomen sometimes experience some difficulties in their sex life, but this is not dependent on the puberty stage they started blockers in.”
The results are in; Puberty Blockers do NOT cause transsexuals to be inorgasmic as adult, no matter whether the suppression began early or late. This is one propaganda lie that has been totally demolished.
Further Reading:
References:
Najafabady MT, Salmani Z, Abedi P. Prevalence and related factors for anorgasmia among reproductive aged women in Hesarak, Iran. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011;66(1):83-6. doi: 10.1590/s1807-59322011000100015
Laumann, EO, Paik, A., & Rosen, RC (1999). Sexual dysfunction in the United States: prevalence and predictors. Journal of the American Medical Asssociation, 281, 537-544.
Michael RT, Gagnon JH, Lauman EO, Kolata G: Sex in America: A Definitive Survey, pp 123 – 126. Boston, Little Brown, 1994
van der Meulen Isabelle, van der Miesen Anna, Hannema Sabine, de Vries Annelou, (198) THE EFFECT OF PUBERTY SUPPRESSION ON SEXUAL FUNCTIONING IN TRANSWOMEN AFTER GENDER AFFIRMATIVE SURGERY, The Journal of Sexual Medicine, Volume 20, Issue Supplement_4, July 2023, qdad062.090, https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdad062.090
Comments Off on Puberty Blockers Do NOT Make Transsexual Teens Inorgasmic As Adults
On The Etiology of Homosexual Transsexuality
The question of what causes transsexuality has long been a question that sexologists and transsexuals have been asking. We know some things, but the answers only invite new questions. First, we know that there are two totally unrelated taxons of MTF transsexuals, One is autogynephilic and the other is “HomoSexual TransSexual” (HSTS). But what causes this homosexual type? Why aren’t they just simply gay men?
Part of the answer appears to many to be cultural, that some cultures are more comfortable with homosexuality when it remains largely gender typical, or at least pretends to be, and other cultures are more comfortable with gender atypical presentation, fitting in as members of the opposite sex or at least an adjacent appearing category (e.g. fa’afafine in Samoa). However, in every culture BOTH presentations co-exist, even if one is more visible than the other. So, why?
A similar dichotomy appears to be true for gynephilic females, that some cultures accept masculine individuals as being men, or at least adjacent to men while others prefer that such females take on more gender typical presentations. But, again, in all cultures, both exist side by side, even if one is more visible than the other.
We are learning that androphilia in males is NOT unitary, that there are several distinct etiologies, developmental pathways leading to it. We are also learning that these different etiologies, while all leading to androphilia, do NOT all lead to the same level of gender atypicality or sexual interests. In the gay male culture, this has long been recognized, if often in an uncomfortable manner. There are labels for the anal sexual roles that may be taken, of “tops” vs. “bottoms” and those who are more ambiguous as “versatiles”, while others eschew either as “sides”. We have studies that show that bottoms are much more gender atypical than tops, in multiple dimensions, from childhood behavior to partner physiognomy preferences.
Along with etiological differences, there are bio-physical and bio-demographic differences between tops and bottoms. As I have written before, HSTS share these with bottoms, in nearly all respects.
So lets review the factors that are believed to be associated with male androphilia; excess left handedness, lower testosterone exposure in utero and /or perinatally, higher testosterone exposure in utero, fraternal birth order (FBOE), familiality, and unknown factors. Then we can explore which are likely to be involved in leading to HSTS outcome.
First, we know that HSTS show higher numbers of older brothers than gay men, on average.
Further, we know that only bottoms show this effect. But here’s a twist. Only RIGHT handed androphilic males shows this effect. Left handed androphilic males don’t. But wait, gay males show an excess of left handedness. But HSTS do NOT show this same excess of left handedness. What ever causes the excess of left handedness is NOT one of the possible etiologies for HSTS. Some researchers have suggested that this excess in gay men is caused by high testosterone exposure in utero. I would venture to suggest that this is one of the likely etiologies for tops, but not bottoms. Tops being masculine in behavior and appearance, the classic “straight looking, straight acting” gay man.
If tops are likely to be associated with high testosterone, are bottoms associated with low testosterone in utero. The data from 2D:4D measurements strongly support that hypothesis. The statistical difference between the tops and bottoms was d=0.63 for their right hands. Compare this to the difference between control men and women (from another study) at d=0.76. Thus the difference is nearly as large as that between men and women. This is a dramatic result! A similar result is found when measuring HSTS (recall that some AGPs falsely claim to be androphilic, reducing the signal strength). When we compare HSTS to male controls we get d= 0.25 for the left and d= 0.45 for the right. When we compare HSTS to female controls we get d= -0.27 for the left and d= -0.32 on the right. This shows that HSTS transwomen are roughly halfway between the controls, and if anything a bit closer to the female controls.
The next question is whether familiality is associated with HSTS. The answer is a resounding yes. We know this because in research of Muxe, both types, HSTS and conventional gay men, show such familiiality. In Samoa, the same was found for fa’afafine (feminine presenting androphilic males). HSTS in Western nations show the same effect.
Next, is there an additive effect of the various prime causes? Is there a requirement for multiple factors to produce an androphilic male?
Shown above is the result of a Latent Class Analysis that shows a four factor model was the best fit to the data for gay men. Note that Profile 1 is all the individuals who do NOT have a strong association with any of three factors that Swift-Gallant, et al, examined. Something else, not measured was likely the etiology (e.g. low testosterone exposure or other unknown factor). As one would expect from the fact that HSTS have a stronger FBOE signal, Profile 2 had the highest gender atypicality (feminine behavior), of the four profiles.
The analysis shows that one does not need multiple factors to result in an androphilic male. Note that the FBOE profile is especially independent, yet present in all four profiles. However, this does NOT mean that the measured factors can’t co-exist in the same individual, only that they don’t have to. Nor does it necessarily mean that some factors may not interact to increase the likelihood of a male being androphilic. For example, familiality and excess left handedness might interact thus. Nor does it necessarily mean that any male with a high number of older brothers was influenced by the FBOE, nor that someone who was an only child or a first born wasn’t influenced by the underlying maternal immune system conflict that gives rise to the FBOE.
Taking all of the data together, it appears that the only factor that does NOT lead to HSTS outcome is the high testosterone in utero / excess left handedness. All the other putative factors may lead to HSTS outcomes.
For those at home keeping score: I evince both very low testosterone exposure in utero/perinatally (as evidenced by a VERY high 2D:4D ratio {that’s my hand in the photo above} and being very hypomasculine before HRT onset at age 18) and familiality (my father’s brother was gay), but was the first of four children and right handed (thus possibly influenced by the FBOE as being right handed and first born allows, but does not indicate it, while being several inches shorter than my brothers does indicate it).
Addendum 10/4/2023: We have a poster paper on the same topic.
Further Reading:
Male Androphilia Runs in Both Father’s and Mother’s Families
Common Correlations in HSTS Transwomen and Gay Men
2D:4D Evidence Supports Two Type Taxonomy
Gay Men’s Hands Tell Us About Their Erotic Role
Why Are Homosexual Transsexuals Short?
Fraternal Birth Order Effect Applies To First Born Male Children Too
References:
Swift-Gallant, A., et al., “Evidence for Distinct Biodevelopmental Influences on Male Sexual Orientation, PNAS (2019) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1809920116
Ray Blanchard PhD (2008) Review and theory of handedness, birth order, and homosexuality in men, Laterality, 13:1, 51-70, DOI: 10.1080/13576500701710432
Slabbekoorn D, van Goozen SH, Sanders G, Gooren LJ, Cohen-Kettenis PT. The dermatoglyphic characteristics of transsexuals: is there evidence for an organizing effect of sex hormones. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2000 May;25(4):365-75. doi: 10.1016/s0306-4530(99)00063-3.
Valentova, J.V., Fořt, J., Freudenfeld, P. et al. Different Subgroups of Homosexuality: Great Ideas, Little Evidence, Promising Future. Arch Sex Behav 52, 3013–3018 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02548-z Research Gate Copy
Comments Off on On The Etiology of Homosexual Transsexuality
Are Androphilic MTF Transsexuals Promiscuous?
In his 2003 book, The Man Who Would Be Queen, Bailey wrote that MTF homosexual transsexuals were a subset of gay men, and like gay men, were not limited by women’s lower sociosexuality, that they were more promiscuous than straight men “because they can”, as he recently quipped on twitter. But first, is the premise correct? Do gay men have more sexual partners than straight?
The “common wisdom”, another way of saying unexamined stereotype, is that gay men have far more sexual partners than straight men. And to prove it, some sexologist have conducted small convenience surveys. However, if one needs to reach out to gay men, the most convenient place is gay night clubs. And therein is the confound. If you go to cruise spots, one is going to be sampling the most sociosexulity promiscuous subset of any population. One needs to examine both gays and straights in the same environment, and get very high numbers to ensure the study has enough statistical power.
Enter OkCupid, an online dating site for both gays and straights. In 2010, they asked a simple question, “How many sexual partners have you had?” With three million users, they have the statistical power. Shown here is the result of comparing gays and straights. If the stereotype were true, the data should look very different. Only at the higher end do the diverge, giving gays a higher number of sex partners. But that difference is TINY. It likely represents those gay men who frequent cruising spots.
While it might be true that at the very high end, the lower sociosexuality of women does limit some straight men’s sexual contacts, the data shows that the number it actually effects is rather small. We can surmise that both gay and straight men actually prefer to have less partners and more stable relationships. Straight men can get married, of course. But in 2010, most gay men could not until five years later. Yet, they still had the same number of prior sexual partners when surveyed? This is strong evidence that gay men are NOT more promiscuous than straight, either by inclination nor by opportunity.
So what of MTF HSTS? Again, if your sample is garnered at night clubs or on the street, one is going to get a rather different picture than if one gets a better, more complete survey. If HSTS are a subset of gay men, we would expect that they would have the same desire for stable relationships and show no more promiscuity than straight men. However, there is a confound in the other direction. Natal male transsexuals are attracted to straight men, who are notorious for being squeamish about admitting to family and friends that they are in a long term relationship with a transsexual. Thus, many transsexuals, whether pre- or post-op find it difficult to maintain such relationships.
We do find them, but we have to kiss a lot of frogs first.
Further Reading:
Book Review of The Man Who Would Be Queen
Comments Off on Are Androphilic MTF Transsexuals Promiscuous?
Short Males Are More Likely Androphilic
From several studies which I’ve already written about, we know that androphilic males are more likely to be shorter than average, on average, than straight men. We also know that this is especially true of those males who have more older brothers, the Fraternal Birth Order Effect. And we know that this same relationship holds for homosexual MTF transsexuals vs. non-homosexual MTF transsexuals.. But what of the other way around, are shorter males also more likely to be androphilic than average height males?
We have data from a non-peer reviewed source, but one I trust anyways, OkCupid.com, an online dating website. They can gather data from a huge number of subjects, making it very likely more statistically accurate than most other sources, including peer reviewed science papers which may only have a limited sample. The data was gathered and published in 2010 on their blog.
As can be seen in the graph, those who are shorter than the average male height of 5’10” are more likely to report being gay or bisexual. Those from 5’10 to about 6’4″ all seem to have the lowest likelihood of being gay or bisexual. Interestingly, those above 6’4, which would only be 1% of the US population, show an increased likelihood as well.
Those below average are likely caused by the FBOE, while I would hypothesize that some of the very few that are on the tall side are possibly Klinefelter’s (47XXY) but not all, as it is too rare to account them all.
On a personal note, at 5’7″, I’m on the shorter side, and decidedly shorter than my two brothers.
Further Reading:
Why Are Homosexual Transsexuals Short?
Reference:
Shorter Men Are More Likely to be Gay
Comments Off on Short Males Are More Likely Androphilic
Are Drag Queens and Homosexual Transsexuals In The Same Spectrum?
Back in the ’90s, when I was teaching about our history, a gay man boldly asserted that since he had been an amateur drag queen that he and I were similar. I chafed at the suggestion that his dressing up in a costume for a few hours a week for a year was anything akin to my living full time as a woman since I was a teenager.
But recent online squabbling about the erotic role of “homosexual transsexuals”; HSTS being obligate bottoms and “avoidant” vs. a small minority claiming that HSTS can also be tops has me asking the question, “Are drag queen and HSTS in the same taxon / spectrum?”
There are those that would say, of course they are, because they are both “homosexual”. But given recent studies that very strongly show that there are two different discernable subpopulations of androphilic males, with different etiologies, biodemographics, behaviors, and even biomarkers, is this true?
Before continuing, if you haven’t already, please read the following essays so that the rest of this essay will make sense (Yes, I know that’s a lot of reading homework):
HSTS are more likely to exhibit the Fraternal Birth Order Effect (FBOE)
FBOE is caused by maternal immune system and does effect first born males
FBOE is associated with being shorter than average (on average)
Common Correlations between HSTS and Bottom Gay Men
2D:4D Digit ratio supports the two type taxonomy
2D:4D Digit ratio difference between Top and Bottom Gay Men
After reading this, it should be clear that there is significant evidence that at least the majority of HSTS come from the “bottom” subpopulation of androphilic males, which is very likely etiologically (perhaps even taxonicly?) distinct from “tops”. But what of Drag Queens?
Here, there is less published studies from which to marshal solid data and evidence. We are left groping for data from anecdotes and stereotypes, the worst and lowest form of evidence, if evidence it can be called. Yet, we can sometimes glean some indications.
One of the problems with delving into this question is that historically, HSTS often took jobs as “female impersonators”, performing on stage in a similar fashion as drag queens. Even today, some putatively HSTS use drag shows and contests (e.g. Ru Paul’s “Drag Race”) as a launching pad for careers as entertainers. But a key difference is that they choose to transition full time and upon casual observation, appear to fit stereotypical HSTS profiles while those that don’t fit a very different stereotypical profile.
So lets talk about the stereotypical drag queen. He is significantly taller than average for a man. He is also a “top”. Some even suggest that they are “catty” or “bitchy” (more so than an average gay man). Although perhaps this last is merely apocryphal.
Consider the ur drag queen, Ru Paul himself, who stands 6’4″ tall. This may be an outlier but examine the contestants of his show, many of whom are also well above male average (for the US, that average is 5’10”). Some are shorter, at about 5’7″ to be sure. So, it is true that drag queens tend to be taller than average? We simply don’t have any good statistical data.
The next question is whether draq queens are tops or bottoms. Here we have a very powerful community stereotype that the typical drag queen is most definitely a top. From an online article posted by a gay man attempting to dispel “myths” about drag queens,
5. All drag queens are tops.
OK, I’m hoping everyone reading this knows what I mean by “top,” so I’m not going to explain. Anyway, I never knew about this myth until after getting involved in the drag community, and it definitely is not true. I know several drag queens who are not tops. That’s all I’m going to say on this topic!
Ummm.. so he knows “several” who aren’t. That is another way of saying that most are in fact tops in his experience. Stereotype confirmed.
Getting back to the topic of whether HSTS and drag queens are in the same subpopulation. What scanty evidence we have says, no; No they aren’t. But what of those who claim to be HSTS and to be tops?
A few years ago, when I posted an essay on 2D:4D ratio showing that HSTS have very high ratios, an androphilic pre-op/non-op MTF transwoman wrote wrote to me saying it couldn’t be true because her ratio was very low, her ring finger being much longer than her index finger. It did not surprise me to later learn that, far from being “avoidant”, she was a proud top.
I’m reminded of something that I heard on occasion in the late 1970s (before the HIV/AIDS epidemic reduced their numbers), when HSTS gathered at various late night cafes and diners (some sex workers on a break, others just coming for the company), speaking of someone I wasn’t familiar with, “She’s not a transie… she’s just a drag queen!” At the time, I put it down to being a bit catty perhaps. But then again, perhaps it had a grain of truth. That some folk that better fit the category of “drag queen”, top, more masculine, taller, older when they began their career of dressing as women to enter the company of HSTS on the street… that perhaps even today, some “drag queens” seek to live as “trans”, get breast implants, perhaps facial surgeries (FFS), etc. and of course top men who seek out “girl dick”, for fun and profit. And perhaps some insist that they are HSTS, because they are in truth ‘homosexual’.
Further External Reading:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/10-myths-about-drag-queens_b_2979249
Further Reading:
Comments Off on Are Drag Queens and Homosexual Transsexuals In The Same Spectrum?
Why Are Homosexual Transsexuals Short?
It’s long been noted that “homosexual transsexuals” (HSTS) are shorter than average for males, and definitively shorter than non-homosexual transsexuals. It turns out, we may have a satisfactory answer; the Fraternal Birth Order Effect.
First, to review, the FBOE is the interesting finding that androphilic (gay) males are more likely to have older brothers than hetersexual men. That is to say, that for each male fetus that a mother has gestated, the higher the likely-hood that the next male will be androphilic. We’ve also learned that the FBOE effect is highly correlated with males who were more likely to be bottoms, physically more hypomasculine, and more gender atypical. Further, the FBOE is much more common in HSTS than the general homosexual population. And, “bottoms” have more (perhaps only bottoms) FBOE? Bottoms also show higher 2D:4D ratios. Now, allow me to share data on an older study that showed that those with more older brothers are also shorter.
From the abstract,
“A late fraternal birth order has been demonstrated numerous times in homosexual men. Body size has been less studied with regard to the development of sexual orientation and has demonstrated contradictory results. In this research, the relations among fraternal birth order, body size, and sexual orientation were examined in a Canadian sample of homosexual and heterosexual men. An interaction between fraternal birth order and height was observed, with a homosexual orientation most likely to occur in men with a high number of older brothers and shorter stature. No significant interactive effects were observed for weight. The results suggest that the mechanism underlying the fraternal birth order phenomenon has an effect on physical development that lasts and is detectable into adulthood (i.e., adult stature).“
This would explain why HSTS are shorter than average as well. Homosexual transsexuals are a subset of “bottoms” and share all of the biological effects.
Further Reading:
Essay on HSTS being shorter than AGPs
Essay on Bottoms having lower 2D:4D digit ratios
Essay on 2D:4D supporting two type taxonomy
Essay on HSTS having more older brothers than gay men
Essay on similarity between Bottoms and HSTS (including FBOE)
Essay on the fact that FBOE also effects first born androphilic males
Reference:
Bogaert, A. F. (2003). The interaction of fraternal birth order and body size in male sexual orientation. Behavioral Neuroscience, 117(2), 381–384. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7044.117.2.381
Comments Off on Why Are Homosexual Transsexuals Short?
Contrapoints for the Wynn
Even as Natalie Wynn (AKA “Contrapoints”) attempted, and failed, to “debunk” autogynephilia as a phenomenon and etiology, she elucidated the two taxons “homosexual” vs. “autogynephilic” transwomen perfectly. I don’t know who captured her descriptions of the two and put them into this wonderful photo meme, but thank you for doing it.
I want to examine each of the items and link to my essays covering the science that supports them. Oh, and as the meme asks, I will use it to “sort” myself according to them.
The first item is a separation on sexual orientation. This one is axiomatic in the Two Type Taxonomy. But is sometimes problematic in that many MTF transsexuals will falsely claim to be androphilic due to autogynephilic pseudo-androphilia and social desirability bias. But, we can sort based on sexual history using various clues like legal marriages to women and having sired children. Key questions to ask is if the individual has had sexual intercourse with a female person vs. having sex, especially as a “bottom”, with men, pre-op. Cluster A are very unlikely to have ever had Penis In Vagina (PIV) sexual intercourse with a woman. And Cluster B are very unlikely to have NOT (save for very young, pre-sexual debut and “assexual” behaving individuals) to have had PIV sex.
Essay on MTF transsexuals misrepresenting their sexual orientation.
Personal history:
I can say with absolute honesty that I NEVER had PIV intercourse with a female, nor did my ahem… enter any other orifice, period. (And had plenty of offers in high school and college years.) Yet, I was very sexually active with men, as an obligate “bottom” (and “avoidant”) pre-op. My sexual debut was at age 18 w/ a 25 y/o buff man. I then continued to date and have sex with a number of men, both while pre and post op. Jeff Elliott, my husband and I will be celebrating our 24th wedding anniversary in a few weeks.
So, one point in the Cluster A category.
Second item is about age of transition. Multiple clinical studies have shown that there is a clear bimodal distribution of age for transition that is highly correlated with sexual orientation. Half of androphilic transwomen socially transition and begin HRT before age 20, and almost never after age 25. While for Cluster B, the data shows that the median is around 35 and the average 40+.
Essay on study showing early transition for androphilic transwomen.
Essay on study showing bimodel onset of gender dysphoria and transition.
Personal history:
Starting in Jr. High, I wore girl’s style cut-off (“hot pants”) and girls shoes (moccasin flats). I began more overt social transition while still in high school, first beginning presenting as a girl with friends at their homes at age 15, openly in public, shopping, hanging out, etc. by age 17. Full time right after graduation the same week I turned 18. (I had to present as a “boy” at school since my two brothers were also students there and my ‘rents were VERY disapproving, etc.) I started HRT at age 18 as soon as I was legally of age to consent to my own medical care.
So, two points for Cluster A category.
The third item is about gender atypicality as a child. Clinicians have long noted that the two types are very different on this score. However, one can’t trust self-report as Cluster B types tend to “shade” their personal memories. One really should get that information from older family members (parents, grandparents, etc.)
Essay w/ data on self-report of gender atypicality.
Personal history:
Let’s review what my mother told Dr. Fisk at the Stanford Gender Dysphoria Clinic about my childhood behavior in ’75 (when I was 17): “I have known for years that he wanted to be a girl. But I thought that was [morally] wrong. He was very different than his brothers. All their friends were boys. His were always girls,” naming several of my friends over the years, starting with my pre-school friends, but couldn’t remember my friend who had been my only guest on my tenth birthday. “Marian,” I interjected for the only time during the whole interview. “He was always very prissy. He would walk clear around even the shallowest puddles. When he was little, I would put him in clean clothes on Monday and on Friday they would still be clean.” She confirmed that I had been sent to a therapist about my behavior when I was ten years old… and again when I was 15/16.
So, three points for Cluster A.
The forth item is about being bullied vs. being a bully. I have no solid data regarding this, but many clinicians have written about how classic / “true” transsexuals were bullied as children. I’ve seen little to no data on Cluster B types being the bullies, though anecdotal stories from clinicians talk about how many of their patients express misogynistic / homophobic attitudes. Goodness knows, some of them are serious bullies as adults post-transition.
Essay on clinical description of misogynistic attitudes in Cluster B clients.
Personal history:
One of the worse beatings I suffered was when I was 14 years old, when two older boys, who laid in wait along my path through a dark orchard one winter evening, just a block from my home, first taunted me, then beat, knocked me to the ground, and proceeded to kick me viciously, all the while yelling homophobic slurs. Their exact words included,
“FAGGOT!”
“PANSY!”
“PANTYWAIST!”
“YOU THINK YOU’RE A GIRL?”
“YOU MAKE ME SICK!”.
Our family moved from a solid middle class neighborhood to an upper middle class one nearby and we transferred to another high school nearby, Los Altos High, with a zero tolerance policy toward bullying. I was grateful for that policy, because it mattered. One day, during my Senior year (well after I had come out), a boy I didn’t even know (so this wasn’t personal) approached me during lunch while I sat with several friends on the Senior Lawn, began kicking me, yelling,
“GET UP FAGGOT AND FIGHT!”
I looked up at him and told him, “You are barking up the wrong tree, I won’t fight you.” Two of my female friends put themselves between him and me when he resumed kicking me.
So, four points for Cluster A.
The fifth point is Cluster A being confused for a girl while pre-transition, while Cluster B being thought of as an older man. This one is more anecdotal perhaps, but their IS data on differential passability which may relate AND I do have a couple anecdotes about my adopted daughter insisting that a post-op “Cluster B” was a man, but saw a pre-transition Cluster A teenager (19 y/o) as a girl even though she was wearing boy’s clothing.
Essay on differential passing ability.
Essay on w/ anedotes about a teen passing as girl pre-transition
Personal history: This one I can’t provide data other then I was successfully passing as a girl in public several years before starting HRT. It might have happened other occasions and I hadn’t noticed… save for the time I was 14, my first week of high school, when one boy asked another, “Is that a boy or a girl?” and the other just shrugged in indecision. I can say that NO ONE ever thought I was an older man. People often thought I was much younger than my actual age (until I transitioned full time).
Is that still four points or five for Cluster A? Definitely NOT Cluster B.
The sixth item is about how tall the two clusters are. Here we have many anecdotes from clinicians mentioning this difference, but only two studies testing it, which had conflicting results. One clearly showed that Cluster A was shorter (and lighter boned, which is item #13).
Essay on height and build differences.
Given that we also know that Cluster A types (HSTS) are “bottoms” and that as a class, bottoms are the ones who exhibit the Fraternal Birth Order Effect (FBOE), we have data that shows that there is a correlaiton between FBOE and being shorter than average.
Why Cluster A (HSTS) are short
Personal stats: I am 5’7″ and the day I turned 18 years old I weighed 130 pounds. The day I had SRS at age 23, I weighed in at 125 pounds. On my wedding day, I weighed 135 pounds.
So, another couple points for Cluster A.
The next item is digit ratio. This is referring to the 2D:4D ratio, the relative length of the index vs. ring finger. I have quite a few essays talking about this metric. This does seem to be true that Cluster A has a higher 2D:4D ratio due to feminizing hormones prenatally.
Essay on 2D:4D ratio supporting the two type taxonomy.
Personal stats: I love this one. Here is a photo of my hand. My 2D:4D ratio is “off the chart” high at 1.06 !
Chalk up another point for Cluster A!
The next two items are delayed puberty and weaker puberty. These are more anecdotal in that only recently have scientists been directly monitoring transsexual youths. But anecdotally, we do have some evidence for this in that Cluster A types tended to be older for each Tanner milestone and that they have less body hair and smaller genitalia. The same regarding Cluster B in reverse. I don’t have any essays or know of any good papers on the subject. But we’ve all seen it on each other.
Personal history: When I turned 18 and began HRT, I had zero facial hair, no “body hair”, my pubic and underarm hair was sparse, light, and in the female pattern (downward triangle). When I had my initial consultation with Dr Biber for SRS, he remarked that I had extreme hypotrophy (lack of growth) of my genitals. I replied, “Yeah, its always been that way”.
Funny story: One day, in my early ’40s, while in the waiting room at the Sea Horse Medical Clinic (Dr. Joy Shaffer’s clinic for transfolk), a 30-something transwoman with recent electrolysis inflamed facial skin noted my smooth and clear face, asked me, “How many hours of electrolysis have you had?” Clearly she was hoping to gauge how many hours she would need to look like me. Feeling mischievous I feigned ignorance, “Electrolysis?”. “Yes, how many hours did it take you?” “Electrolysis?” Hearing this exchange, Dr. Shaffer, who had been my college roommate intervened, “That’s her primary growth.” “I hate you!” the transwoman said to me in mock jealousy.
Add another couple Cluster A points.
Next item is muscle mass. Save for the difference in passability (linked above) and the body build (linked above) I don’t have much actual studies on the topic. But, hey, we’ve all seen the difference!!!
Personal history: My parents, especially my mother, was always concerned with the lack of muscle mass. But even one of our high school P.E. coaches was in on the act (not the nice one who later rescued me from boy’s P.E. my senior year, after I came out). That *&^%$#@! forced me to take a body building class for P.E. F’ck that noise! I refused to do the work. I mean, there was no F’ing way I was going to push to look like a butch man!
Funny story: All of the kids got standardized “physical fitness” tests in high school. The same tests for both boys and girls, but the scoring was different on each item. Girls were not expected to do many (or even one) pull-up but were expected to be able to do more sit-ups than boys. I scored as “unfit”… on the boys scoring sheet. But as very fit on the girls, unable to do a single pull-up, but far more sit-ups than any of the boys, right in the norm for girls, across the board. It got me some teasing from those that hadn’t yet figured out that I was androphilic/transsexual.
Another point for Cluster A.
Then we come to “soft”. This is a reference to the amount of subcutaneous fat, typically a female trait. Sadly, I have zero data on this. But c’mon, many of us were known for being “soft” like that as teens. I was, no doubt about it. It was one of the reasons I could pass as a girl before HRT.
Funny story: When I was 14, I was wearing shorts (hot-pants really) one summer day, as I passed my brother and his buddies in the garage. One of the boys looked up and exclaimed, “You have girl’s legs!” and the other boys sniggeringly agreed. Yeah, my legs have always been my best feature.
Let’s add another point for Cluster A.
Finally, we have a reference to facial shape, rounder, smaller. Again, this feeds into the differential passibility study, etc. (linked above) It may sound catty, but we can usually tell if someone is Cluster A vs. B (that is to say, HSTS vs. AGP) just from a photograph of their face. Facial Feminization Surgery has shifted this somewhat… but if one sees a “before” HRT and FFS surgery facial photo, there is no question that Cluster B’s look like masculine men.
The photo shown here is my Jr. College ID taken in the summer of ’75 at age 18. This photo was taken several weeks BEFORE I started HRT. That does NOT look like a butch face. Yes, I started living full time as a woman before HRT.
Add another Cluster A point.
Add it all up… add up all the points for the win… As they suggest, I fit the Cluster A very, very well.
Further Reading:
Magazine style quiz to access if one is HSTS vs. AGP
Comments Off on Contrapoints for the Wynn
On the Science of Changing Sex 
Comments Off on Hypothesis: Do Gynandromorphophiles (Chasers) Over-perceive Sexual Interest From MTF Transsexuals?