So if I have a sexual fantasy, and there’s a female character in it, and she turns me on, but she’s entirely being constructed...
So if I have a sexual fantasy, and there’s a female character in it, and she turns me on, but she’s entirely being constructed and performed within my head, does that count as autogynephilia?
“I refute him thus!” said Dr. Samuel Johnson, noted straight person.
> @cyprinodont That’s jusy gynophilia
> @cyprinodont Youve ignored the “auto” part in that blanchard thought lesbian trans womens sexual desire for women was *actually* a desire for themselves. Your thoughts and thought forms are not your *self*
I dunno I get what you’re saying like if I would be just as turned on by the girl if piloted by another will then “auto” isn’t really part of it.
And I mean “having a crush on a girl but really on the idealized version in your head” or “doing foreplay on a real live girl based on your mental model of her pleasure” certainly don’t feel like they should count.
But “your thoughts and thought forms are not your *self*” is a philosophical claim. And having gone through college when they still taught Derrida and Foucault and Butler as the key to everything, “you have a true and real self as distinct from the identity you’re currently performing” is NOT obvious, especially as the queer party line.
And in the end, like, I AM creating and inhabiting a female persona for the purpose of sexual fulfillment, not by modeling the development-from-scratch of a human *seen* as female, but by implementing an idealized female self-for-appreciation-by-straight-men as seen by someone who developed from scratch as a straight man.
And that’s really kissing cousins to “autogynephilia” as used by radfems as a dismissal of esp. late-transitioning trans women, the key distinction there isn’t the weight put on self-identity but the fact that I merely script and table-read the character rather than perform it live.