"I would say that, in my experience, these kinds of sentiments are taking hold once again among young trans people. I know both HBSers and self-identified HSTS and AGP who are my age. This comes with many online fights and flame wars, namely between those who identify as autogynephiles and those who identify as lesbians. Interestingly, the majority of the soi-disant autogynephiles in my generation (bear in mind I am quite young, going on 20 right now) seem to be exclusively attracted to other trans women. I have a boyfriend at the moment, but sometimes a relationship with a non-op trans woman does seem appealing. I am not attracted to genetic females or anyone with a vagina even if surgically constructed. I'm early in transition and still primarily present as a feminine male so I often simply say I'm a gay boy.""100% while I do believe that autogynephilic arousal is a real phenomenon, I have experienced it, I starkly oppose Blanchard's idea that its related to attraction to female bodies. I'm not attracted to cisgender women at all. Even within Blanchard's schema, its stated that the majority of autogynephiles are gynandromorphophilic (and thus the majority of them prefer trans woman/trans woman relationships). This is decidedly not heterosexuality even if you view them as men.I feel that Blanchard's strict two-type schema erases my personal experience, as it claims that all transsexual women who aren't hyper-feminine are gynephilic, and thus that I'm only "pseudo-androphilic". I begun as a nerdy gay boy, I was teased for being not masculine enough but it wasn't because I played with barbies it was because I played with telescopes. I also became aware of my transsexuality during adolescence, not early childhood as all the androphiles supposedly do. I was 13 when I realized I was a girl trapped in a boy's body. But I'm not gynephilic. I'd be open to a relationship with a non-operative trans woman but not with a cisgender woman or anyone who possesses a vulva really. Ergo I do not identify as gynephilic.It is my belief that the majority of "AGP" trans women are primarily attracted to other trans women, and only force themselves to sexually interact with cis women out of heteronormativity and internalized homophobia. You can see many cases where they divorce their cis wives if they had one and partner with another trans woman after transitioning, [various examples are named].Then there's those who were heterosexually married prior to their transition, but are androphilic afterwards. Examples include Lynn Conway, Canary Conn, Tamara Rees Stevenson, Nancy Hunt Bowman, Danielle Bunten Berry. I tend to assume they were closeted gays the whole time as men, but Blanchard would put them in the "pseudo-androphilic" category."
"Two trans women attracted to each other is a type of homosexuality. 'homo' = 'same' not 'male'. If they also self-id as AGP then they are homosexual AGPs, but Blanchard's definition of AGP (bi, hetero and asexual) is that AGPs are non-homosexual. So here we have an interesting contradiction of terms. Blanchard is apparently a closeted gay man who has made comments outside his theoretical works that are even more anti-trans. His whole schema is a cisplaining using insulting terms/exonyms derived from the dubious concept of 'fetishism', and he has even refused to restate it in more polite terms.Your homosexual AGPs are deconstructing his schema, and that is good in itself.It is also good that gynephilic (not 'autogynephilic') trans women coming of age and feeling accepted as such do not feel obliged to marry a cis woman and have children to prove something as many in my generation did. It was usually quite unfair to the cis woman who found herself in such a situation.
..."Take the "gyne" out of the word. "gyne' means 'woman'. Come up with better jargon."
Word games can so easily become sterile, but this suggestion is provocative. What do you think?