Where gender non-conformity ends and Autogynophilia begins
"Wear what you want" doesn't mean that you can do so without criticism
It is a reoccurring event in the online GC community that there are conflicts over men in our midst receiving praise for questionable displays of gender. Of note, there was a huge dust up over Disney hiring a man to promote a Minnie Mouse outfit, and more recently a similar conflict occurred over a man promoting his AGP book at a GC event.
I posted a tweet saying that we need to popularize this conversation. Someone replied indignantly that we all know the difference between androgyny and AGP.
The truth is, many of us don’t. Not only do some GC people not see a problem with public AGP, but much of the general public at large don’t know about AGP. Some may sense that it is fetishized behavior, but many people don’t think past “they are doing their own thing, good for them.” Not everyone knows that some men become sexually aroused by seeing themselves as women. Or that part of the turn-on for many is forcing members of the general public-including women who don’t consent to participate in the fetish to be a part of it.
I’ve seen two major GC “feminist” accounts, in response to these dust ups complain that “conservatives” are taking over GC activism. They say that we are repressing gender non-conformity and ask “what happened to wear what you want?,” a phrase frequently used in gender critical circles.
The fact is, some people don’t believe in “wear what you want,” and their point of view is valid. Myself, I am a leftist, and a liberal, and I don’t want the government or puritanical people enforcing a dress code as they do in IRAN. But that doesn’t mean I think “anything goes.” People have a right to declare standards for public behavior. “Wear what you want,” does not mean that you should be free of scrutiny or criticism.
Criticism is how we establish boundaries, especially when we choose not to have authorities regulate these matters. All societies and social groups create rules that regulate public behavior. It’s not only okay, it’s important.
While these conversations have felt like pile-ons to the people involved, more introspection might reveal to them that these are important occurrences. These conversations help us establish boundaries, something which is sorely needed at this time. Nobody likes to face criticism, but when one does, it always is productive to ask if the critics have a point?
If you wear sexualized fetish-wear, children’s clothes, or exhibit AGP behavior in public that you will face deserved scrutiny. If you are promoting or affirming these behaviors, you might also face criticism.
This is not because people who complaining are control freaks or puritanical prudes-but because AGP is not harmless. It is a paraphilia that correlates with other paraphilias. Some of these fetishes correlate to disordered and/or dangerous behaviors. That is especially so when the arousal is heightened by making others participate in them against their will.
Importantly, when we have discussions about propriety, those who violate the clear standards become outliers. At this time that isn’t the case. Because we (as a society) have allowed extreme behaviors under the umbrella of genderqueerness, clear red flag behaviors are being accepted, normalized, and promoted.
The gender lobby and trans activists have muddied the waters intentionally by branding AGP as normal, unproblematic gender non-conformity. This has allowed it to go mainstream instead of staying at the fringes and behind closed doors.
It’s our choice to say no to that.
There are those who say that we need to talk about AGP honestly, so that boys who struggle with this don’t feel alone. I agree that the conversation is important-but so is making it clear to those boys and men that there are limits to what people will accept in public. Making those boys “not feel alone” cannot consist of telling them that it’s harmless to do whatever they want. It also is important to talk about accepting feminine boys or boys with feminine tastes without encouraging them to turn that into feminine sexual self-objectification.
It is also the responsibility of people who want to talk about AGP to also accept the fact that their “being honest” about it does not give them a free pass to engage in it publicly. Being honest requires taking responsibility for oneself and setting limits-and tolerating criticism.
Much of the public-at-large has been asleep at the wheel while this normalization process occurred. Even some so-called feminists don’t realize that we are not just talking about dresses. Many feminists have been watching and calling this out, but many people -especially on the left-have not really given credence to valid concerns being raised.
That is why we keep running into these controversies. Controversies and conflicts, while uncomfortable, are an important and natural part of clarifying the confusion that some people have on the topic.
The frustration of people who are trying to establish reasonable boundaries with those who want to sidestep the discussion is palpable. That can have the effect of making some people feel defensive. That is unfortunate, but perhaps it is somewhat called for at times. Women are correct in feeling that too much has been permitted and that we need to be firm in saying no.
Importantly, this blog post is not just about AGP. It’s about the valid role of debate and criticism in establishing boundaries in social groups.
Most of us don’t want a legislated dress code. But that isn’t what this debate calls for. This debate calls for creating social disapproval about behaviors that infringe on others. When social groups choose to regulate behaviors by social means instead of by legislative or religious enforcement, this is the process. There is room for discussion, debate, and mistakes. But we can’t be afraid to have those discussions and yes, some people will feel criticized. That doesn’t have to be the end of the world. We can learn from criticism.
In 1969 David Bowie was forced to agree to give up his appearance fee on a TV show (donate it to charity) if anyone complained about his long hair.
Nobody did. That’s because we have common sense.
Common sense is also on display when people object to men who have clearly crossed the line.
It’s okay to be critical. Keep calling out boundary violations. It isn’t mean, it isn’t oppressive, it’s part of a necessary process.
—
For a more in depth exploration of my experience with an AGP ex boyfriend and my thoughts on David Bowie, Liberace, Objectification, AGP, non-AGP and the in-between…
visit my previous post: